The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway - The Crackdown on Free Speech, How to Handle a Bad Boss, and Why Scott Took Down His AI Clone

Episode Date: October 24, 2025

Scott Galloway answers listener questions on the rise of free-speech arrests in the UK, navigating a toxic boss, and whether AI can (or should) act as a therapist. Want to be featured in a future episode? Send a voice recording to [e-mail], or drop your question in the r/ScottGalloway subreddit. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Not too long ago, everyone in digital media had the same idea. Get really big, really fast, with help from Google and Facebook. Turns out there was a problem with this plan. There was no loyalty. These audiences were not really the media company's audiences. They were truly rented from Google or from Facebook. That's Brian Morrissey, the Super Sharp Media Observer and Media Operator. And this week on channels with Peter Kafka, I talked to Morrissey about,

how to run a media business without getting big. What happens to the industry next? That's this week on channels wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts. Giving up is unforgivable. So whether we're reading more serious books about democracy in our book clubs or talking about it family gatherings, I think Thanksgiving is going to be lit for a bunch of families this year. That's something that we can all do.

I'm Preet Bharara, and this week, former U.S. attorney and author, Joyce Vance, joins me to discuss her manual for protecting our democracy and the rule of law from President Trump's overreach. The episode is out now. Search and follow. Stay tuned with Preet, wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Office Hours of Prop G. This is the part of the show where we answer questions about business, big tech entrepreneurship, and whatever else is on your mind. If you'd like to submit a question for next time, you can send a voice recording to Office Hours of Prop. property media. Again, that's office hours of property media.com. Or post your question on the

Scott Galloway subreddit, and we just might feature it in our next episode. First question. Our first question comes from user Armadillo Can on Reddit. They say, Hey, Scott, with a pressure on free speech in the U.S. lately, and you living in the U.K., what are your thoughts on people getting arrested in the UK for social media posts? So around 12,000 people a year are detained in Britain for online speech-related offenses. That's more than 30 arrests a day under the 1988 Malicious Communications Act in the 2003 Communications Act. Under these laws, it's a crime to send messages deemed grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, or intended to cause distress or anxiety. The original laws were written before social media and are widely seen

as outdated. One clause written to stop nuisance callers is now being used to monitor private WhatsApp messages since there is technically no concept of a private conversation online in English law. Okay. So I am blissfully ignorant of U.K. politics. I see that Joey Bagged Donuts idiot, Nigel Farage, who scored the biggest own goal in history with Brexit. And then I hear about non-DOM where theoretically it makes sense to charge people who are, you know, moved here for tax avoidance, increasing their taxes. But guess what? 10,000 of them have left and your treasury is going to be smaller now. And you know what? I mostly don't care. I'm here sort of as an extended tourist and I like the break of not thinking about politics every fucking minute, which I do

anyways because unfortunately I have the internet and I see the shit show dissent into fascism that is the United States. Okay. I generally think the hallmark of a democracy is that almost anyone should be able to say almost anything about almost anybody. In the U.S. there's some laws you can't defame somebody. You can't say that somebody is a pedophile when you know they're not or there's no information that they are which decreases or harms their ability to make a living. That's defamation. You also can't incent violence. You can't spread rumors saying, oh, so-and-so is the head of a rape gang and this is his address.

And if people show up and harm that person and that was a false statement and you incited violence, you know, yelling fire in a theater. that's wrong. Ninety-nine point nine percent of speech does not qualify as that. Saying offensive things online, I don't think, in my view, that warrants a police response, even if it's ugly, even if it's vile. Now, having said that, I think 90 percent of the problem, what's the problem? The problem is it tears of the fabric of a society. This weekend I got very upset. Someone said something so wrong, false, and incorrect, and just mean about me. And if you didn't know me, you would have taken this teaspoon of propaganda and turned it into a tsunami of bullshit lies. Who would have thought, wow, what a bad person this guy is. And I wanted to weigh in. And of course,

you don't want to weigh on because that's what the algorithms want. But they, I believe they should have the right to say that. Now, having said that, where I think 90% of the problem goes away is that, If the platforms or all this shit is taking place, no longer are protected by Section 230 for algorithmically elevated content, I think 90% of it goes away. If we just hold these platforms to the same standards, we hold the BBC or the Times of London. So what is the answer here?

I believe that free speech is a function of when people are allowed to say really offensive, fucking stupid things. And falsehoods. You can circulate, conspiracy theories, because sometimes the conspiracy theory ends up being right. What you shouldn't be able to do is that if somebody says MRNA vaccines alter your DNA, which they do not, if the platform wants to elevate that content beyond its organic reach, then they should be subject to the same standards as traditional media companies. But where I ultimately net out on this

is that I think you err on the side of free speech. Platforms shouldn't engage, shouldn't connect profit to elevating this stupid false and defamatory content beyond its organic reach. I think there are easier ways to reduce this while not encroaching on people's free speech rights. Thanks for the questions. Question number two comes from user don't care,

one, two, three, four, five on Reddit. They say, Scott, at the beginning of the year, I was moved out from under my long-term manager and mentor of five-plus years due to an organization flattening. My new manager, I feel has it out for me. For context, I have eight years of this company under my belt, and I'm a strong performer, recently promoted about a year ago under my old manager. I punch above my weight with no history of performance issues. I feel my contributions are acknowledged from top to bottom and am well-liked. Is there any way to successfully navigate these waters?

I am in my 40s and still ambitious. I feel like I don't have the time to treadwater under someone who isn't going to be my advocate. Oh my gosh, welcome to the work week. Your ability to navigate assholes or bosses or people who don't agree with you or maybe they're right and you're the asshole, who knows. But your ability to navigate and learn from these issues is really important. I think there's a couple things.

One, I think you continue to perform strong. And also at some point, I think the truth has a nice ring to it. I think it's okay to sit down with this person and say, I feel as if some of our interactions or the way you approach me, it feels biased and it feels unfair. And highlight in a very sober, unemotional way, some examples of that and say, is there something I can do to improve this relationship? This job is important to me. I've been here a while. I like it. I want to succeed here. but I think the, you know, I think important relationships need to be open and honest, and this is an important relationship. At the same time, keep your eyes out for an opportunity to move to

another manager, right? I mean, if this is a dynamic situation and you're probably going to have another manager in a year, you may not even want to have that conversation, you just may want to suck it up. Everyone has a bad boss. That's the only, or at some point, we'll have a bad boss. That's the only thing I can guarantee you in the corporate world is a series of injustices throughout your corporate life. And your ability to navigate them is kind of as important as doing a good job almost. So see if, in fact, how long you're going to have to endure this. Consider having a very open, honest conversation with them. Make sure you have an open and honest conversation with them before you ever go to someone senior to them. Otherwise, they're really going to have a bias against

you if you sort of go behind the back or tattle on them. Be honest and straightforward to them. I think people appreciate it. And if it's true, it will hit hard and they'll probably check back a little bit or reconsider. I don't think it's, if you're doing well after eight years, I don't think it's a bad idea to a market check and see what else is out there. People tend to advance further, faster, make more money when they job switch every kind of five to seven years. But what you are going through is what I think almost everyone goes through at some point in their career. And the fact that you've been somewhere for eight years and have done well means that you're in a position of leverage

because you've done well there for eight years. They don't want to lose you and you have currency in the marketplace. Very much appreciate that. the question. We'll be right back after a quick break. Support for the show comes from Nutraful. When it comes to hair issues like thinning or shedding, you want to choose a product that's been put through the paces. Nutriful is the number one dermatologist's recommended hair growth supplement brand, trusted by over one and a half million people. You can feel great about what you're putting into your body since Nutraful hair

growth supplements are backed by peer-reviewed studies and NSF content certified, the gold standard in third-party certification for supplements. Nutraful clinically test final formulations to ensure their efficacy using a variety of hair measurement tools, including hair counts, and pull tests to assess growth, quality, shedding, and texture. And with a Nutraful subscription, you can save up to 20%. See thicker, stronger, faster-going hair with less shedding in just three to six months with Nutraful. For a limited time, Nutraful is offering our listeners $10 off your first month subscription and free shipping when you go to Nutraful.com and enter the promo code, Prof.G. Find out why Nutraful is the best-selling

hair growth supplement brand at NutraFol.com, spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L.com, promo code prop G. That's Nutraful.com, promo code prop G. Support for the show comes from Anthropic. Cloud is the AI belt for people who don't settle for good enough. It's not just a chat bot, it's a true collaborator that works with you, not instead of you. Whether you're debugging code late at night, drafting a client proposal, or mapping out your next big business mood, pot helps you think deeper, sharper, and faster Instead of handing you answers, it engages with your process, helping you reason through problems and uncover smarter solutions. What makes Clod different is its ability to combine context and research in a way that actually saves time. Its internal and external research tools go far beyond basic search, delivering comprehensive, trustworthy analysis with citations you can share directly with clients or colleagues.

Ready to tackle bigger problems? You can sign up for Clod today and get 50% off Cloud Pro when you use the link, clod. a.ai slash prop G. That's clod.a.ai slash prop G right now for 50% off your first three months of Claude Pro Pro. That includes access to all the features mentioned in today's episode, clod.aI slash prop G. Support for the show comes from Rippling. Is your business paying for 20 tools to do the job of one? That doesn't exactly sound like it's software as a service. It actually sounds. actually sounds like it's sad. Software as a disservice. It's time to replace your stitched

together tech stack with one platform for all your departments with Rippling. Rippling is the unified platform for global HR, payroll, IT, and finance. They've helped millions replace their mess of cobbled together tools with one system designed to give leaders clarity, speed, and control. By uniting employees, teams, and departments in one system, Ripling removes the bottlenecks, busy work in silos your software can create. Automated perfectly in sync and seriously simple to use, Rippling gives your company one source of truth for your people, their data, and everything they touch. With Rippling, you can run your entire H-R, IT, and finance operations as one, or pick and choose the products that best fill the gaps in your software stack. And right now, you can get six

months free when you go to Rippling.com slash prop G. Learn more at R-I-P-P-P-L-N-G.com slash profji. That's rippling.com slash profjee for six months free. Terms and conditions apply. Welcome back onto our final question, which is from Reddit user DC10-50, who says, Hi, Scott, I'm curious what insights you have into the emerging trend of AI's role in providing relationship advice or acting as a replacement for a human therapist. I recently discovered my partner of over 10 years engaging with chat GPT as a way to seek help with an internal conflict she was facing. I'm concerned this addictive godlike technology will drive people further into isolation and depression. How would you recommend bringing this up with my partner? Oh my gosh, I'm dealing with

this firsthand and I'll come back to that. So some data. Open AI says chat GPT now has nearly 700 million weekly users, more than 10 million people pay $20 a month for it. It's not clear how many are using it for mental health, but for a lot of people, it's become the easiest kind of support to access. Actually, I've heard the number one use is therapy. Important to note, the U.S. currently faces a widespread shortage of licensed therapists. So I have some personal experience with this. About a year and a half ago, maybe it was two years ago, a guy came to us and said, I can build a prof AI on top of an LLM. Now, I get about 10 to 30 emails a day from mostly young men, sometimes their mothers, asking for advice. It's almost so as professional or

investment advice. And I got a very long thoughtful email. And I think that's such a nice kid. I need to respond. And I can't. I just, I, if I had 2,400 or not 20, if I had 72 hours in a day, I still couldn't get all these emails. So great. Built a Prof AI. It ingested all of my blog posts, my books, my podcasts, my media experiences or appearances. And then it gave what was 70, 80% of the answer I would give. And so I thought, this is great. It was used, I think, a couple hundred times a day, we ultimately decided it was an experiment, we took it down. And then a graduate student instructor came to me, or who was my TA at business school, who works at Google, super smart, impressive woman came and said, we're doing something to Google Labs with

characters, and we want to launch Prop GAI. And we'll do a much better job than what you did. I said, great. They spent about six or eight months developing this thing, getting my voice, an avatar of me, right, et cetera, et cetera, and they launched it. Now, between the time I thought this was a good idea about nine months ago and when it launched earlier this week, my view has entirely changed on this. And that is, I worry that these synthetic relationships are making us less mammalia, that they are sequestering us from each other, in that as people are going down a rabbit hole and leaning on AI for things they typically lean on other humans for. And the idea that I had these kind of horror fantasies

that I would read about some young man who hurt himself and he had, he had sequestered from his parents and role models and teachers because he had a series of synthetic relationships, and I don't want to be on that list. I don't want to participate. On a less evil level, but equally frightening from me, is the idea that young men are going to use synthetic relationships to replace real-world relationships and that it reduces their mojo and motivation to establish a relationship with a coach, their dad,

dad's friends, go to their friends with concerns. And I see a little of that happening, it sounds like, with your partner. So what do I think? I think a lot of it is age. I don't think anyone under the age of 18 should be allowed to enter into a synthetic relationship.

I don't think they have the maturity to handle it. I think there's a lot of, a really horrific examples of self-harm where people thought they were in a relationship and that person or that synthetic relationship gave them permission to harm themselves, easy to sequester from friends. So I just hate synthetic relationships for anyone under the age of 18. I think that what I have found about when I go down a rabbit hole and start asking these things for advice on issues, they're way too supportive, empathetic, and don't give

it to you kind of real. Don't say, oh, shut the fuck up, buck up. Welcome to the real world. I think occasionally you need to hear that. And while I, it's important they're supportive, I don't know, I wonder if we're just going to become less depressed. And that is, real victory comes from the complexity and difficulty and friction of real world relationships. It is difficult to establish or figure out or navigate the pecking order of friends and approach people in express friendship. It's hard to figure out the corporate bullshit you have to navigate and get good at it. It is really difficult to establish a romantic relationship with someone and maintain that type of commitment. People are messy, complex, and that is why it is so fucking rewarding, right? To figure out

how to navigate all the bullshit of work and get promoted, it feels amazing. To have a good group of friends and put up with their shit and they put up with yours and you get to my age, I can't tell you how much joy I get from my friends, even the ones I didn't get how much joy from when I was in my 20s, I just get so much reward for them. And my God, figuring out a way to want to hang out with someone and make them feel loved and supported and make sure that they want to love and support you and figure out a way to have sex with them and then have kids with them and that support that kid. And so hard, right? So much friction. And when you figure it out, it is like, the universe just says, all right, you matter. This all makes sense. You're here for a

reason. So what I would do is I would have a very open and honest relationship and just say, look, using this as a resource is fine. Using it as a relationship is not cool. And it's dangerous. It's dumb. And you're going to be more depressed. I genuinely think that. I would be wary of the fact that you don't want them going down a rabbit hole and deciding their relationship with someone and start taking that advice over the advice of real world, people who understand them, care about them, care about them enough to say, no, that's wrong, or you're not thinking about this correctly, or stop this, I love you, I'm worried about you. Thanks for the question, and by the way, I decided to take down my character AI after 12 hours. I just got increasingly uncomfortable

with it. I want young men to figure out a way to engage with other men. That's all for this episode. If you'd like to submit a question, please email a voice recording to Office Hours at Propgeummedia.com. Again, that's Office Hours at Propggymedia.com. Or if you prefer to ask on Reddit, just post your question on the Scott Gallery subreddit, and we just might feature it in an upcoming episode. This episode was produced by Jennifer Sanchez. Our assistant producer is Laura Jenner. Drew Burroughs is our technical director.

Thank you for listening to the PropGPot from PropG Media.