The Rest Is Entertainment - The Oscars: Does Anyone Care Any More?

Episode Date: March 4, 2025

Did Anora deserve its Oscars clean sweep, why are audiences switching off - and why did Adrien Brody chuck chewing gum at his wife? Richard & Marina share their thoughts on Hollywood's biggest night, plus dig into Jeff Bezos' new regime at the Washington Post. Recommendations: Richard - Toxic Town (Netflix) Join The Rest Is Entertainment Club for ad free listening and access to bonus episodes: www.therestisentertainment.com Sign up to our newsletter: www.therestisentertainment.com Twitter: @‌restisents Instagram: @‌restisentertainment YouTube: @‌therestisentertainment Email: [e-mail] Producers: Neil Fearn + Joey McCarthy Assistant Producer: Aaliyah Akude Video Producer: Jake Liascos Executive Producers: Tony Pastor + Jack Davenport The Rest Is Entertainment is proudly presented by Sky. Sky is home to award-winning shows such as The White Lotus, Gangs of London and The Last of Us. Visit Sky.com to find out more 🌏 Get our exclusive NordVPN deal here ➼ https://nordvpn.com/trie It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee! ✅ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The housing crisis in the GTA has reached a critical point, with more than two in three residents being affected. ... that almost nine million Canadians are living in food insecure households. Over one million people in the GTA now live below the poverty line. We're just out today. Mental health support is the number one reason people are calling 211 first. At United Way, we wake up to a different alarm every day. Help us end poverty and build a better GTA, any way we can. Donate today at unitedwaygt.org.

We are delighted to announce that our good friends at Sky are once again proud partners of The Rest is Entertainment. We are extremely delighted Marina. Sky has a huge 2025 planned and they're excited to share their unrivalled range of entertainment which has never been easier to discover. And there is no better way to enjoy their selection of new shows and films than by using Sky TV. Sky OS powers the Sky TV experience and it lets you control your Sky TV with your voice so you can find your favorite shows and movies from Sky and the other apps without lifting a finger, my favorite way. Oh I love not lifting a finger, I love

not lifting a finger. Just say hello Sky Oh, I love not lifting a finger. I love not lifting a finger. Just say, hello, Sky, followed by what you want to watch, who you want to see, and it'll be on your screen before you know it. Without having to lift a finger, you can get all your favourite entertainment quickly with both Sky shows and other apps in one place. Visit sky.com to find out more.

Hello and welcome to this episode of The Rest is Entertainment with me, Marina Hyde. And me, Richard Osmond. Hi everybody. Hi Marina. Hello Richard, how are you? Yeah, I'm not bad at all. Oscars. Oscars. It was the Oscars last night. It was. We're going to be talking all about that. All the stuff that you would expect us to be talking about. We are also going to talk about, you're going to explain something

to me, which is Jeff Bezos has banned All Opinion but his own from the Washington Post op-ed pages, you're going to explain to me roughly what that means. His starring as a Bond villain begins. Everyone talks about the streaming wars and how the streamers are killing BBC and ITV and what have you, we're going to discuss why, maybe that's not quite true, but also that a bigger challenge is coming down the track. Very good. Plenty to be going on with. Now, let's talk about the Oscars.

So, Oscars, yes, Richard, they took part. Heard of them? Yeah, I have heard of them. I've sat through quite a lot of them over the last few hours. I suppose we're definitely going to be talking what they tell us about the state of Hollywood. Spoiler, not great. But it was a huge night for Anura. Yep, Hollywood has gone Anura-batti. That's what again, the loss of what I say doesn't work for anyone under 45 does it? Can I just say to anyone who's 32 and just listen to this on the cross trainer, that

is a pretty good pun. Right. Yes, it certainly was hosted by Conan O'Brien, who I don't think did too many puns at the Oscars as far as I'm aware, but it could certainly have livened it up. He did a perfectly good job, very good, very competent, very whatever. I liked him on the Brutalist when he said, I loved it so much, I hoped it would never end. And it didn't. Three and three quarter him on The Brutalist when he said, I loved it so much I hoped it would never end. And it didn't.

Three and three quarter hours, The Brutalist. Very bold to say that during the Oscars telecast, I must say, very, very bold. Yes, which also overran by quite some way. Who'd have thought? Oh my God. I mean, honestly, honestly. Okay, I mean, and also, I mean,

I suppose the trouble in some ways with Will Smith's thing is that you do spend all the rest of all future Oscars thinking, is someone going to do something? Even if it's very bad and morally bad. It's really terrible when you're sitting there going, I wonder if someone's going to hit someone. Yeah, I hope someone's going to hit someone. Maybe one of the firefighters will hit someone. Yes.

So they had a tribute section at the start to Los Angeles, the city of dreams and all that sort of thing. And Adrian Brodie won Best Actor and did a speech that I am going to talk about later because I think it was one of the... You know what, as I was watching it, I was thinking, I would like Marina's take on this speech. I mean, well, that was longer than The Brutalist. And I'm afraid I'm going to have to be another form of brutalist about that type of speech.

Coming at this moment in the kind of Oscars history, because I suppose what we have to ultimately say about it is, as an event, it is 90% of the academies who decide the Oscars, 90% of their funding and probably about the same amount of their attention comes from this. The movie industry is synonymous with this. Fundamental question, does this, did that make you want to watch more movies or movies at all? I think that Hollywood's place in the culture is pretty difficult right now.

We know that they're in a period of sort of arguable crisis and definite contraction. Mainstream culture has changed. The monoculture, whatever, the shared culture is gone, is gone. And so movies that were the zeitgeist, were everything things that I've said it before in the podcast, but you know, The Godfather would now be a small art house film

seen by very, very few people in perhaps in the way that something like an aura or whatever is. And then I know it's not part of the point, but I think there's only two of the actors who were nominated were amongst the hundred, the highest grossing part of the point, but I think there's only two of the actors who were nominated were amongst the hundred highest grossing actors of the year, which in the olden days, you'd have had a few more, but I think it was just Zoe Sardegna and Timothee Chalamet. Last year, you had the Barbenheimer phenomenon. A lot more people watched the Oscars last year, on TV, by the way, because they had seen, I think, because they had actually seen some of the movies.

In that top 10, two of that top 10, the 10 best picture nominees, two of those had massive commercial success, which were Dune and Wicked. Six out of those 10 were definite art house niche, which, not delegating that at all, because I love the- No, you've got to have it, that's the point, yeah.

You've got to have it. And two of point. Yeah, you've got to have it. And two of them are in a foreign language. The Academy in recent years has tried to be much more internationalist because they felt actually that that would diversify in lots of different ways. Whether that is a total success in terms of promoting specifically what it's supposed to, the Hollywood film industry, I'm not sure. They always tell you when you're going on and, you know, if you if you watch any of those things last night,

you'll see that nothing has really changed in decades. There's a monologue at the start, then various presenters from the industry come on and do a little tiny rehearsed bit and give an award. And they used to tell you before you went on to be one of those presenters, a billion people are watching. Right, okay. We'll wait to see the ratings.

They take a while to come out for this, for various reasons. Last year, they had a boost where they had something like 19 million. And it's all in the US, by the way. 5% of the United States watches. Now, percentage-wise, and I've got to start comparing things to the Chase.

Although, have I? Have I? Why have have I have I know I think it's fine I I love you know, the chase is excellent and amazing and what are the Oscars if not a chase? percentage-wise The Oscars gets less than in our country percentage-wise the chase gets on like a Wednesday tea time Chase does not have wall-to-wall coverage for months. Elton John doesn't do a chase party at the end of episode. I bet he does. Maybe he does. You know, any excuse for a party. The Vanity Fair chase party is not a thing. The idea that this is kind of massively culturally relevant is sadly not the case. In many ways, it actively annoys the mainstream. They are waiting for someone in some ways to sort

of do, I mean, Darrell Hannah went on and said, Slavia Ukraine, you know, it's sentiment I agree with, but I don't need my politics from from Darrell Hannah. The one thing we can say these I want my mermaid movies from Darrell Hannah. Yeah, I do not want my mermaid movies from any of the political commentators at all. Yeah, any more than I want a mermaid movies. Yeah, I do not want my mermaid movies from any of the political commentators at all. Yeah, any more than I want a mermaid movie from John McDonnell. No, they are supposed to be the elite entertainment community.

And I find, I think the show itself, it is primarily a TV event. Remember, it's invented as a TV event to publicize the industry. You're supposed to be the ultimate entertainment kind of people. I think they have to change it. It's becoming, the Grammys are very fortunate.

The Grammys is hugely watchable. Things like the Brits, those sort of things. They're lucky because what they're promoting is little three or four minute things, songs. And so, and they can have lots of them and it really works. It's a spectacle. And they don't have to worry about actors turning up?

No, this is primarily an industry lots of them and it really works. It's a spectacle. And they don't have to worry about actors turning up? No. This is primarily an industry that produces IP-driven franchise movies. Most of its capital and most of its talent is turning up in these movies, and yet they can't be talked about really on the night. What does that say? That it's totally a prestige film night,

that they've kind of ghettoized this idea of things that might get us awards. I found it a prestige film night, that they've kind of ghettoized this idea of things that might get us awards. I found it a very revealing night and I think it's really brings the crisis into sort of super sharp effect. The thing I found most interesting in many ways, and I didn't watch the American telecast, I watched it on ITV, but thank you to the Ankler for pointing this out, there was one advert for a movie in the entire telecast. It's amazing, right? So the whole thing, the biggest night of movies of the year and nobody, none of the studios chose to advertise

any of their upcoming movies within the Oscars. There was a 15 second spot for the John Wick, the ballerina thing. You know, this is owned by Disney, by the way, this is as a TV event. So Disney pushed Disney television shows, lots and lots of different, you know, and Hulu and FX and all their different brands. But movies that are coming out, I don't know, like Snow White, Thunderbolts, under the Marvel

mark, are you not going to push them at all in the movie broadcast? And it is that thing of not being in the cultural conversation so much anymore. And it's happened slowly and not being in the cultural conversation so much anymore. And it's happened slowly and then very, very quickly. You look at the top 10 nominees there for best movie and some great films in there, by the way. You would not waste a weekend by watching most of those movies,

just like you never would. But if you imagine the top 10 TV shows of last year, you would have 10 shows that people had very strong opinions on that everyone had binge watched, that everyone knew they loved one of them and hated other ones of them, where there's incredibly powerful competition between the streamers and the broadcasters putting those shows on. It would have everything that the Oscars used to have in the 50s and 60s and 70s. That's where the industry is now.

You could still have those movies that everyone went out and saw even though they would now be completely regarded as art house. But some good news, I think Anura is a very worthy winner of Best Oscar, is one of those ones that I suspect won't. There's some Oscar decisions that have aged very badly over the years when you look back through the lists. I suspect this one won't. Sean Baker, who directed that, I think I'm right in saying is the first person ever to pick up four Oscars for the same movie on the same night due to the fact that he was the producer of the movie. So he picked up best picture with his wife, Samantha Kwan. Second year in a row where her husband and wife, by the

way, picked up the best picture Oscar he won best screenplay he won best director and he won best editor because he does everything on that movie he won all four Disney I think won four Oscars in a night before but for different movies he's the first person in history to win four Oscars for the same film on the same night that's some going Sean Baker who sounds like someone that used to go to primary school with, but turns out to have the most successful Oscars night of anyone in history. It's a wonderful film. I was happy that Mikey Madison won. That was a big shock. Everyone thought that Demi Moore would win, but it just goes to show. I predicted that Demi

Moore would win one of my many predictions that went wrong. But yeah, Mikey Madison took it instead. Well, that was a good thing that they did because I can tell you what the Academy did because honestly, Demi Moore's would have been like the equivalent of a participation medal. I don't think anyone should get, which they have done many times, by the way, a kind of tacit lifetime achievement award because people think, oh, they've just been around for ages and we haven't given them anything. Sometimes they do it with directors and you think, okay, of all the movies that Martin Scorsese was gonna win for, was the departed really it?

Of course, Michael Madsen far more deserved it over to me more. And it's good that they don't get into things like that. Where the buzz happens around this event is on platforms that are sort of not controlled or owned by Hollywood or the studios or anything, or even the broadcasters in any way anymore. It's all on sort of Instagram and TikTok. It does huge traffic on those

sorts of things, but they don't own that conversation. And so they can't monetize that conversation. To some extent, it's a sit that conversation can happen all the time, because you see pictures of celebrities all the time. and there are people talking about outfits and what have you all the time. But when this happens, they just can't find a way to bring it back in under their own aegis as it were. It is completely lost now to those platforms, these things that remind me.

And some events have just become like that, something like the Met Gala, which is just totally paid for in some ways, quite literally by things like Instagram and last year by TikTok. But I wonder if they're gonna have to lean more towards those kinds of platforms, if they try and modernize this in some way

that is going to try and get it back into the conversation in a way that they have a form of control over, I suppose. Yeah, I think you're a hundred percent right. I think that I've always thought, you look at the best actor and best actress actress winners, Adrian Brody and Mikey Madison. If you were watching any British chat show, and they were on, you would probably switch over, you'd probably think I wish this was Sarah Pascoe and Greg Davis. People are not that that thing of you know, when Parkinson would have been a Gregory Peck on those days are long gone there isn't there's a generation for whom film stars are not an exciting thing it's fun to see people as you say on the on the red carpet it's

fun to see what people are wearing but in terms of the allure of a movie star certainly on British television as I say you know Adrian Brody won Oscars for his first, you know, one best actor Oscars for his first two nominations. But if you were booking the Graham Norton show, you'd think twice. Well, maybe that's why he treated the audience, the TV audience as his therapist. I honestly, Richard, if I had to design the worst possible type of speech that an actor would give. I would love you to do that for one of your columns. I couldn't have done it as well as him.

He, I mean, I thought he was going to win it anyway. There was sort of something like, maybe there'll be an upset, maybe it'll be taken. I predicted that one at least. Yes, you did. I mean, the plot lines are somewhat hilarious. He's now in a relationship with Harvey Weinstein's ex, Georgina Chapman.

On the way up to the stage, he, before he's about to make, you know, of this incredibly and very much in his mind, the incredibly classy speech, he threw like a massive wadge of gum at her. And she caught it like, yeah, yeah. She caught it like it was a wedding bouquet. You know, maybe it is. And I just thought, oh my God,

this is everything about this. It's really interesting. There's a certain type of actor, and there's no, obviously his talent is not even in question, but they're able to sort of osmotically absorb the world around them in such an amazing way and to sort of then sublimate it and turn it into these great performances,

but they cannot read a moment. They cannot read a room. And I just thought, oh God, okay, you're throwing the gum already. Please let's do a quick and you know, slightly self-deprecating speech. But maybe all those interview, there's Graham Norton, etc. appearances he hasn't had, he told us, you know, it's been so hard for me. It's like, okay, you won an Oscar in your first nomination, as you say, all those, and now you've won another, okay? Youngest person ever to win a Best Actor Oscar. Yes, I know from people who've worked with him, whatever, he talked all the time during a lot of that middle period about how different, you know, how it's not like it used to be and how things aren't, how they were before for him.

And, you know, you had to hear that story, like the ancient mariner, wherever he went. Anyway, now he feels that he's got his moment. I think it is classier just to say a decent thank you, whatever, and sort of move on. One thing I noticed is that nobody thanks the fans in Oscar speeches, which I think is so significant. Musicians are incredible at thanking their fans. You won't see anyone on the Grammys

not up there saying, are my amazing fans, my movie, okay. You get like agents, producers, no people, no one cares about, and people who are probably genuinely terrible monsters being thanked at vast lengths. And no one ever says, thank you to the people who are still going out there and watching these things. Sean Baker, when he won, said, you know,

please directors keep making movies for the big screen, parents take your children to the movie theater. Some acknowledgement of the people who still actually turn out for these things would be quite nice. Because otherwise, what are the awards ceremony? Do you know the most thanked person in Oscar's speech history?

I would love to. I say person, it's God. Is it? Yeah, but the most thanked living person in Oscar's speech history. I would love to. I say person, it's God. Yeah, but the most thanked living person in Oscar speech history? Weinstein? Steven Spielberg. Oh is it Mr. Spielberg? They famously used to say that Harvey Weinstein had been thanked more than God, but he hasn't been thanked more than Spielberg either, so Spielberg still retains that crown. Michael Ovitz used to need to count at every ceremony how many times he'd been found at every single one. But it is fascinating that thing of if you have to understand that you know the Oscars only exist as an

entertainment proposition. I mean by the way they could absolutely still have the Oscars and recognize that you know the best in craft in every single area in Hollywood without this being this enormous kind of juggernaut but the fact that it is an enormous juggernaut means you do have to, as you say, read the room. You do have to think people at home are watching this. It's important that people are watching this because they're getting to see clips from movies they haven't seen before.

They get to see who we hope to be the stars of tomorrow. If I do do a speech that bangs on in this self-regarding, that's very, very hard for people to sit through. They tried to play him off, right? The orchestra started to play him off. He said, no, no, I am wrapping up. I've done this before. It's not my first rodeo.

Oh my God. I mean, don't worry. That is going to be clipped by every... I mean, it needed clipping, but that will be clipped by every single... And it will just go around, and it looks like the indulgence of Hollywood. So I'm afraid...

It needed clipping like a Randy Horst. will be clipped by every single, and it will just go around and it looks like the indulgence of Hollywood. So I'm afraid. It needed clipping like a Randy horse. When I see someone who, an athlete, who's track side, who's overcome a load of, who's, you know, maybe one earlier in their career, then has overcome a lot of setbacks. Why is it that I feel so much more, so much better disposed to see that? I'll tell you, it's a number of things. First of all, they all know how to do it in about 10 or 15 seconds. You watch someone like Keely Hodgkinson talk about whatever it is. She can do it very, very quickly. Second of all, you slightly feel like, yeah, but that whole time you were living in the lap of luxury and whether or not you like it,

that's what people think about people who are movie stars. It never got very hard for him. Even when they stopped getting attention, they were never really, really struggling and having to get up at dawn to train and having to borrow money from their parents in the way that athletes often do when they're trying to come back from those setbacks. I mean, listen, he's probably got an indoor gym

and a sauna, he's probably got all of that stuff. So, you know, how hard can life be when you've got a lat pull? And even if it is, you have to accept that that's not what people think. And you have to rise to that moment and just accept that there's no way to say, I'm struggling and it's very, very difficult.

When we hear athletes talk about it, I think they're so much quicker. We believe that they've accomplished something that they've had to work unbelievably hard for over a huge number of years. And we sort of, there's nothing to forgive. I feel you have to be very forgiving to get yourself through that much Oscars.

I would say this, I would say, if you see the extraordinary performances that some of these actors put in in these movies, genuinely sort of genre-defining, era-defining performances, and then you watch some of the speeches these actors give when they're being themselves, I think what it means is that the absolute top Oscar of all should be the screenwriters Oscar It should be the last one. You're so right. You know should be the writing one

You'll see they're so used the Adrian Brody's at this world and listen, we're not picking on him. Well done But Adrian Brody is that's all good. But this They're so used to being on a massive screen saying incredible things and making people cry but not something that they wrote. Yeah and crying from being moved rather than wishing it would stop. Exactly, talking of them my brother sent me a fact so Adrian Brody I think was the first actor ever to win from his first two best actor nominations. Can you name an actor who only appeared in five movies in his whole career and all five of those movies were nominated for best picture? Gosh, that's a great question.

It's a great question, isn't it? No, I can't. It is John Casale, who was Fredo Corleone in The Godfather. He was in Godfather 2. He's in The Deer Hunter. He is in The Conversation with he was in Godfather 2, he's in The Deer Hunter, he is in The Conversation with the late Gene Hackman and he is also in Dog Day Afternoon. He died very, very young. He was in five movies, only five movies, all five of them. Those are the movies all nominated

for a Best Picture Oscar. That's some going, isn't it? Well, that's incredible. I did not know that far and I love it. I would say that my takeout for this over the whole thing is that entire ceremony needs to be completely Rethought because honestly, you know, you can't argue with your own money Hollywood If you're not even advertising your films during it then what are you really saying about this if it's television and pharmaceutical companies? Yeah, then I think we're looking at a pretty necrotic Ceremony TV event whatever it is, and they need to completely rip it up.

What's the worst that can happen? I mean, I really think that they need to rip it up. Maybe they need to involve the other platforms, different platforms more, social media. They certainly need to acknowledge the people who actually go out and see things a bit more. And I think that is some way back to becoming a bit more culturally relevant.

It will never be the same as it was before, but I think you could become a bit more culturally relevant by just rethinking it completely. I think it's time. Can we talk about the goodie bag that best actors and best supporting actor nominees took home? I so want you to. I should have had that.

A million dollars worth of high-end personalized disaster relief to Bright Harbor. That sounds good in the wake of the LA fires. Oh my God, no, please. And $50,000 worth of project management services from a North Hollywood contractor. I don't know if it's an individual one. This is mortifying.

It gets more mortifying. $25,000 worth of liposuction. Just get the job. Yeah, come on guys. Do you know what? That's big liposuction thinking, why does no one love us anymore? Big lipo had a terrible night. Yeah. These liposuction surgeons just- Some of these dead women yeah, these like a suction surgeon. It's just now it's painful to look at this sitting there drumming their fingers. Justin can. Yeah.

Elaine, can you check the phone again? Is it definitely working? Um, a $240 chopping board. Okay. But better be some chopping board. Oh, that'd be nice for the help. $750 worth of pre-rolled joints and edibles. Okay. You wouldn't have had that in the 60s, would you? A $3,500 voucher for a virtual wellness retreat that is accessible from your home. Wow.

Well, that also tells a story, doesn't it, Richard? Yeah, doesn't it just? Yeah. But listen, it's, you know it, Richard? Yeah, doesn't it just? Yeah. But listen, it's, you know me, I love people in the entertainment business and that's what Hollywood's supposed to be, but you're absolutely right.

That is not an evening you would sit through for any other reason than you used to sit through it in the good old days. Yes, it's interesting. That's one thing I would sort of play out with is there are certain events that were always like the unmissibles of the year in American culture and then the Super Bowl, obviously, the Oscars and funnily enough, the Miss America pageant. It was rated, everybody watched it. Now they no longer even broadcast it. You have to watch it long on sort of missamericagent.com or whatever. And it just shows the way it can go. Ironically, we all now miss America. And a shout out to Diane Warren, who 16th nominations, 16th loss as well. She's got one more to go to beat Greg P.

Russell, who's a sound recorder. She's had 17 nominations without winning. But listen, she wrote, if I could turn back time, how do I live? And I don't want to miss a thing. So again, she's doing okay. I bet she'd like an Oscar and she would do a better speech than Adrienne Brodie. Richard, then I think we now need to proceed to a break. As we mentioned earlier in the show, we're delighted that Sky are once again proud partners of the Restors Entertainment. Sky's full of unmissable shows, including the brand new series, season three of The White Lotus, which we have enjoyed very much indeed. We've spoken about it before

on the show. We love The White Lotus and our regular listeners will remember we have talked about it on the main show before. Following the massive success of the first two seasons, The White Lotus series three is already one of the most talked about TV events of the year. Jason Isaacs is in this new one, Amy Lee Wood from Sex Education is in it, Walton Gognos is amazing in it. I love him so much, Patrick Schwarzenegger. Patrick Schwarzenegger who plays the single most annoying character ever in the history

of television. It's so brilliant. In the history of White Lotus means something, but in the history of television, I agree. And the setting is absolutely gorgeous as always. And of course, like all good TV series, Richard, it contains a murder. Starts with a murder. You've got to start with a murder created by Mike White Luxury Resort in Thailand. Even though there are murders and all sorts of things going on,

like ratings and bookings have gone absolutely through the roof for that place. But we loved The White Lotus, all three seasons available on Sky right now. Watch the brand new series of The White Lotus on Sky. Search SkyStream or Skyglass or visit sky.com to find out more. Welcome back everybody. Now Marina, Jeff Bezos has been on, friend of the podcast, has been on Maneuvers this week. He has been. He's owned the Washington Post for some years and previous editors have said, oh, he doesn't want to get involved in the newspapers. This billionaire doesn't want to get involved.

This guy who has presumably just bought this title for the love of newspapers. Okay, well wake up because last week he has announced that only opinions that support personal liberties and free markets will be allowed in the comment section of the Washington Post. This is famously the newspaper that wrote Watergate. If you remember that American journalism, as discussed previously in this space, takes itself extremely seriously, which is a shame because there's often so much to amuse one about it. The only things you're allowed to write about are things that support support personal liberties and the free market and he says viewpoints opposing those

pillars will be left to be published by others. Now the senior opinion editor has already resigned. You shocked me. A little bit of background to this actually because it's not his first sort of foray into suddenly doing stuff to do with this title that he's owned for quite a long time. Just before the election you know that ridiculous thing and I do find this ridiculous by the way where newspapers write a leader around the globe and say who we would back in the American election. I personally have I think it's absolutely fatuous and would have you ever voted because what the leader column of the newspaper you happen to read says me yeah yeah always I

literally I pay very little attention to anything. Then the day before the election, read the Express and there I go. Huh, so that's what I'm doing today. Always have done, always will do. Having said that, all newspapers do it. I think it would be great if all newspapers stopped doing it and trying to make things slightly less kind of obviously biased. Having said that, doing it just a few days before the American election, let's be real what his timing was actually about. In very short

order, I mean, they lost... So what... Yeah, you haven't said what you did. He said, we're not going to endorse presidential candidates because I want to bring back fairness into the news reporting into the mainstream. And it will make trust in media higher, which is important. Which, yes, I agree with you, Jeff, but that's not what you're doing in this case at all. Anyway, in fairly short order, they lost many, many, they lost 250,000 subscriptions, I mean, in days, as far as people could work out.

Then just before Christmas, there was the cartoon, one of the cartoonists did a cartoon of various tech guys and Disney in the form of Mickey Mouse sort of being like the wise men or otherwise offering gifts to Trump as he was coming down the, you know, a cartoon of that. That wasn't run and then the cartoonist resigned. So there's been this sort of, and Bezos was one of those wise men sort of offering things. So there is a sort of sense that he is having said, he lulled everyone into a sort of sense of security and saying, oh, there's going to be a wide variety of opinions for years.

I'm going to be a hands off owner, he said. Okay, newsflash, and it shouldn't even need to be. When a guy like that buys a newspaper, he doesn't care about newspapers. He literally, he certainly doesn't care about profit, because I can tell you this thing lost about 100 million last year. So why is he doing it? He is doing it for power and influence. Same reason Musk bought Twitter. Yeah actually all of these all of those tech guys all of the America what we now should really call the American oligarchs because think of why they were sitting at the inauguration of you know a row in front

of the cabinet all of them need a form of media, be it social media, be it legacy media, or in a kind of futuristic kind of AI form of media. They all need something like that. Because by and large, they are all snowflakes. They rally against snowflakes, but they don't like to be criticized. But are ones. But of course they are. But I mean, listen, we always accuse other people of being the things that we are. That's human nature. But yeah, certainly, you know, they like to have something that they can completely control and sounds like a big news organisation is supporting them, whereas they are the big news organisation.

But it is also a lever to get them what they want in their business interests, which is kind of, I think, the number one thing, the reason they do it. If you think of all those guys, think of how many of them are in competition with each other. You know, Musk has been at loggerheads with Bezos before. They've got, he wants to protect Amazon and he, which doesn't, don't forget, which doesn't just like sell you products. He's like Sting in the 80s. Exactly. Just like that. Just like that. Hopefully he'll start releasing some music soon. That'd be nice. But he wants to protect Amazon, which don't forget is involved in healthcare, which is involved in obviously cradle to grave sort of insurance stuff, military contracts, Blue

Origin, the space company, which has got lots of significant contracts. He wants to protect that and therefore he has to do stuff for Trump. So the best way to do stuff for Trump is not to just like buy him a load of products on Amazon, which is what I do when I'm trying to impress somebody. He wants to, he is to do things like this to say, we're only going to publish this sort of opinion. Therefore, if you're attacking Trump on any of those things, you can't really appear any longer in the Washington Post opinion pages.

So this is a big move. Yeah. And it's essentially, instead of saying you cannot criticize Trump, he's saying you can only write about personal liberties and free markets. He's sort of a backdoor route into saying please stop criticizing him. It is and it's interesting I mean it's to me. It's he's becoming such a sort of you know He really does he's always looked like a sort of regional Vin Diesel look alike, you know, do you get a lot of work? No, it's something about acquiring bond in that same week. Yes, and then tweeting which is the oh my god

That that really depressed people in the bomb family already that Jeff Bezos Was already tweeting to people who should be the new bond You're not the radio box your breakfast show mate come on But then I got it reminded me then of that photo shoot that were on almost the first episode ever of this podcast Maybe or one of the very early ones We did something on that funny vogue photo shoot that Lauren Sanchez did. And I thought, I've got to go back to those pictures. On that text, wherever it is in West Texas, that kind of space ranch or whatever it is, they've got something called the 10,000 year clock. Yeah, it ticks once a year to make some point

about something rather, I don't know what. But it bores right, it's a great big subterranean thing. I mean, if you look at it, it looks exactly like the sort of thing you would find in a Bond villains lair It goes down multiple stories for the purposes of this photo shoot Lauren was sprawled across a section of it in Red Seat Quintoccio Gabana making a different point Making a different make again a point itself that was slightly obscure, but that's clocks for you Yeah, he has got that sort of bond let and now he's doing it. I mean, he's this is the villain. Why are they all such bond villains? It's so weird. It's like, real knockoff. Yeah. But it's like, you know, they said that the mafia really changed after

the Godfather came out and they started behaving like the people on the Godfather did. They've all got space rockets. They're all trying to take over the government. You think this is, but you're literally behaving like super villains. You're literally doing the thing, you think this is but you're literally behaving like super villains, you're literally doing the thing that you've seen in the cinema so many times. Yeah, so op eds is essentially the part of a newspaper where some very august people of the day, write their opinions on various things, various topical things and give, you know, pronouncements from the mountaintop about what they take is, and in newspapers,

they've always been sort of sacrosanct and they've always been to be a leader writer, a comment writer has always been a huge deal and a huge privilege. Is that something really though that has disappeared? It feels like, in fact, Bezos said, you know, a broad based opinion section is it is now the job of the internet. And, you know, it's based opinion section is it is now the job of the internet and You know, it's trite, but it's sort of true as well. Is the op-ed thing? Is that still something that people read? I mean, you know, I write Do you yeah, it's your column op-ed. Yeah, is it that's what it is newspaper columns are open I totally agree with you in terms of like the significance of them. By the way, op-ed is opinion editorial Yeah, on any of the pages you'll have some people who you're kind of returning

columnists, you know, your staff columnists, and you will also get columns in to address the issues of the day. I don't have a problem with it. It's obviously far less significant than it was because as you say, the internet has completely taken over. But also most people would not experience your column as part of the Op-Ed pages of The Guardian. Most people would see a not experience your column as part of the op-ed pages of The Guardian.

I agree. Most people would see a link to your column in lots of different places, click on it and read it. On social media possibly. They might sort of have a way of, you know, I mean I don't know all these things but sometimes people say, oh I have an alert set up for certain things or whatever it may be. But in general you don't necessarily experience them in that same way. And that still feels like a relic of newspapers handing down their opinions to you, and there

being no blowback and no comeback. So this would also affect, you know, anytime you were to read a Washington Post columnist, that would affect those people as well. It's not just like one article a day in the newspaper, their view of the world. It is all the regular columnists for the Washington Post would not be allowed to expel views that weren't to do with personal liberties and free markets. I have to say it's quite hard to see how it works in practice. If you're say like someone who I think is so brilliant that you know, she's a human economist in the Washington Post, Alexander Petri, if she's not, can she take the piss out of Trump anymore? I mean,

because remember they didn't really have sketch writers, which is such a shame because they have such incredible raw material. But can she take the piss anymore? What are the parameters? Is every column going to be interrogated for, you know, is clearly in support of the endless sort of taxonomy? Is it in support of is it not? It's quite hard to see how you actually do this on a practical day to day basis. Yeah and it's a shame because she presumably can just take what she does elsewhere anywhere and if she's loved by people then people will pay her more than the Washington Post. So actually the Washington Post gets hollowed out but that's not really basis.

How many columns do you want to read about the same subject every day? Me? Eight? Yeah. It absolutely depends what the subject is. You're very idiosyncr is. If it's how well Calvin Bessie is playing at Fulham, eight, nine, but anything else, no, not so much. So I think it's quite difficult to say, I mean, are you going to just cut the section by a lot, which maybe they're going to have to do, because again, as I say, they're losing lots of money. But it's interesting to see how it will be rolled out practically. And also, they have lost a lot of people because a lot of people have decided to leave. Whether people will stay and at what point it just sort of becomes hollowed out into something else completely. I don't think it's going to make him any extra money.

I don't think people are going to say, oh, I must subscribe to the Washington Post now because they're doing that really great thing about the pillars of liberty and what I mean, you know, no. It's just it's it has one there's one pair of voices interested in and that's Trump. Yeah. And that's all. Yeah. And that will make him more money than those quarter of a million subscribers. He has to, he has military contracts and that's, and that's democracy. Yeah. One thing I would say is that, you know, what happens now at the Washington post, does everybody resign, which probably isn't going to happen, but there is something I think it's worth thinking about with liberal newsrooms. All liberal newsrooms over the last, I think, you know, the last 10 years have had some, lots of, many or a few at least, blow up some kind of identity politics grounds. And I really do think we're

going to come to look back in lots of ways about all sorts of behaviors during that decade as a kind of detour in cultural philosophy. And people resigned because I remember the New York Times ran an article by a senator, a guy called Tom Cotton saying that they should have used military force during the Black Lives Matter protests that were becoming violent. And this, this blow up, this identity politics related blow up caused the resignation of the, or the sacking I think of the commentator of the New York Times, the deputy commentator had to be moved back onto sort of newsroom duties. The real gains were not being made by the people who were thinking they were having all those culture war arguments, you know, within newsrooms and having these kind of huge bluffs.

They were actually being made by the right, they were being made by all people like, all the sort of libertarian right, like people like Jeff Bezos. And it used to be said back in the 80s when we first started hearing the phrase culture war, Oh, conservatives start culture wars and liberals end them because that tended to mean to mean was that yeah and then liberals bring us a market equality legislation and you know this thing we don't talk about this thing anymore but I have to say now that I'm starting to feel that there's been a 180 on that which is that liberals started all these culture wars and now conservatives are just ending them and I wonder whether that the last decade has been usefully spent in having all those kind of silly little blow-ups in newsrooms when you think this was the real problem,

okay? And now it's coming home to me. Now your face is being eaten, as it were, and there's not a lot you can do. And I think that people might come to realize that those kind of particular arguments and kind of detours were a waste of time and actually the payoff is this. Yes, there's a particularly specific thing I think you're talking about, which is we are of course allowed to disagree with things and we're of course allowed to say, I don't agree with this being in my newspaper,

I don't agree with the thrust of this article. That's absolutely fine, it's always going to happen because we all have different opinions about things. It's when you start demanding that a plurality of voices are removed from a newspaper, because you don't deem that they fit whatever orthodoxy you agree with, it is very difficult then to argue that what Jeff Bezos is doing is wrong. Yeah, you're next. Because he's doing the same thing. He just, he completely disagrees with you. So, But also he owns the paper. Yeah, exactly. For some reason. Yeah. But you know, it's it's you have to be able to give your view and to and to stand up for what you believe in a fight

for what you believe in. But perhaps the yes, that idea that this should not be allowed in our newspaper, rather opens the door to other people saying, this should not be allowed in our newspaper. And as you say more specifically, this sort of thing should not be allowed in my newspaper. Yeah, I think the wrong battles were fought. And now the big battles, the much more serious things of the tanks are sort of steaming in and they can't do a whole lot about it. So I think tactically, in lots of ways, once again, journalists haven't played it brilliantly.

Shall we talk about, there's been another war that's been going on for the last 10 years or so, which is the terrestrial broadcast as BBC ITV Channel 4 against the streamers. And it has become absolute received wisdom that streamers are destroying the terrestrial channels. Now, I have been, last last week looking into all the data of just streaming ratings.

So forget what the BBC get during the day, forget what ITV get on the day itself, just streaming ratings, not stuff you're watching on normal television, just stuff that you have to click a button and then click another button to watch. And I think the picture tells us that BBC and ITV particularly have done incredibly well in the streaming era is the truth and they've delayed the end of terrestrial television by years and years and years. If you want

to look at the top 100 shows of last week, this is just streaming. So this forget people watching EastEnders or whatever on an actual channel just streaming the top 100 shows on streaming Last week it won't surprise you to learn that 60 of them and Netflix shows 10 of them are Disney but 10 of them are BBC 10 of the top hundred nine of them are ITV one of them is channel 4 and Given that those channels are dwarfed by the budgets of Netflix and some of the other streamers, I would say that is pretty good going. The top three shows last week, number one was American Murder,

the Gabby Petito documentary on Netflix, number two, Reacher, which is on Amazon Prime, and number three, The Unforgotten, the ITV drama. When you look through that top hundred, and Amanda Land has six episodes in that top hundred, the BBC sitcom with Lucy Punch written by Holly Walsh and others which is terrific East Enders is in there Amanda and Adam Spanish job is in there there's there's there's lots of shows that are being watched a great deal and to be very

clear also this doesn't even take into account people who are watching appointment to view which and which the top 10 shows on that without any question Always terrestrial I rule it out because that's not gonna be the case in ten years time, right? It's just not in ten years time is all going to be streaming There'll be some live broadcasting, but it will all be streaming and I would say that When you look at the numbers the BBC and ITV have done Incredibly well with the budget they haven't. Charlotte Moore, who

was running the BBC, who's left this week, and Kevin Ligo at Channel 4, they've done an awful lot of good stuff. Netflix obviously have dominated this year. Squid Game has been this year. Black Doves, Zero Day, Celebrity Bear Hunt. So there's lots and lots of Netflix things in there, but the BBC and ITV are really, really really punching above their weight and I think perhaps sometimes we don't I play particularly Appreciate that the time spent with iPlayer is bigger than all of the streamers combined Yeah, iPlayer is is we forget because it hit the ground running such a long time ago with such quality and such usability we forget quite how brilliant that is you would think that a venerable British institution that if you were to read the tabloids is constantly on its knees and run by idiots.

You would think they would run a really bad streaming platform and they don't. They run just about the best streaming platform in the world and it works. It works. It's growing all the time. It grew much quicker than Netflix last year and it had something like 16% growth last year and Netflix had 7% growth in the UK so it's growing all the time. So have the streamers destroyed the BBC and ITV? I would say no, they haven't. I would say they've both been incredibly resilient. In the future, we are not going to be watching BBC and ITV when it goes out. We're just not. It's just, you know, in the same way that

we are going to have self-driving cars, We are going to be a streaming nation is the truth. And you look at any of the statistics about people under 16 people under 35, that the BBC, the terrestrial stuff is meaningless. They will watch those things on streaming, they'll watch BBC shows, ITV shows on streaming, but they will not watch it at the time. And that's that's not going anywhere. Millennials as they get older, their habits are not changing. They're not suddenly going now we're a bit older we're going to start watching scheduled television they are bringing their habits with them through the ages but a couple of observations about that top hundred okay in the top hundred 53 of the top hundred streaming shows last week were drama 19 were film 12 entertainment seven documentary six sitcom episodes all amandaland two kids shows

on one sport there is on that list not a single quiz there's not a single studio entertainment show there's not a single panel show there's not a single chat show a single antique show a single cookery show all the stuff that's filled the schedules of BBC and ITV and Channel 4 for so many years and none of that is particularly working for them in streaming none of that is working for them in streaming so those shows are going to disappear unless there's another platform that takes their place. And interestingly, there is another platform that is going to take their place.

And that is genuinely, we can forget terrestrial versus streaming. We really, really can. It is done. The argument is over. BBC and ITV have held their heads above water for a very, very long time. YouTube, and particularly YouTube watched through the television, is far and away the biggest growing sector of television, by an absolute country mile. YouTube itself used to be huge, but now YouTube, even on television, for under 16s, that is where they are watching

most of their television, by quite a long way. YouTube, TikTok, I mean the then, you know, ITV and Channel 4 are a long way behind. So forget the streaming wars. It is now the YouTube wars. And to their credit, Channel 4 are ahead of the curve on this. They've started licensing things to YouTube a little while ago and have like a very strong YouTube strategy. ITV do too slightly harder for the BBC with, you know. I don't think it is a good strategy. You don't think it is? No I don't. Go on.

I'll tell you why. Okay, Netflix, they didn't put their stuff on YouTube, did they? Well, that's, I think... Why doesn't Amazon? Yeah, I think Netflix and Amazon are going to have trouble because they can't put their things on YouTube, but I think that the BBC... Well, I think Netflix are going to have to license some of their stuff out anyway. 100%.

But what happens is that if you put stuff on YouTube, the service gets the credit, right? It's YouTube gets the credit. It's a service. It's not a platform, whatever it is, but you know, you're commissioning content, you're paying for it, and you are giving it to that service. I think something different needs to happen. And I know that you think is I bet we don't necessarily think the same on this. But firstly, I think I think if you're channel four were ITB, I would do what they're doing and

license stuff to YouTube. I don't think it cannibalizes your terrestrial output. I just don't think it does. It turns you into something different, which is a content provider and actually there's a million content providers. It turns you into a wholesaler. So why do we need you? But in terms of what you do for the next five years, I don't think you can have a strategy

that doesn't include YouTube. I think it's absolutely impossible. I think what is definitively the case going forward is the BBC ITV channel for they have to be allowed to be a joint venture at some point. Okay. They have, they, they, they have to be the stuff that is really, really popping everywhere in terms of the streamers is absolutely huge budget. You have to be allowed as a BBC and ITV to team up

because the BBC is teaming up with Australian broadcasters and Brazilian broadcasters and Japanese broadcasters to make money. ITV is having to do the same thing. They're all having to go out of the country to raise money for every single big show they do. Let them just talk to each other. It's interesting.

I think, definitely I think they should talk to each other. And I don't think that is a bad idea at all. What they all have to realise is that you've got to produce and package stuff in a way that young people want. I can't just like stick traitors on YouTube and think... And by the way, this is not young people are stupid, this is... No, no, no, not for one second. Young people have grown up watching their media in a certain way, in exactly the same way that we did, and it is natural to them in the same way that we watched it was natural.

And you have to go where the audience is. But it's, it's different. Okay. So you're thinking where, where are young people all day? They're on their phone. Okay. Why, why is the PSB, the public service broadcaster offering for mobile, basically just the broadcast offering TV, but on their phone, okay.

That's not right. Okay. Public service broadcasters are not in, they are in the TV or radio business, but number one, they're in the public service business and TV and radio just happens to have been a great way to deliver those particular aims, which are, you know, doing good for democracy, creativity, understanding, all those sorts of things. Educating, form and entertaining. Yeah, okay. But if things have changed, then just adapt what you do to provide the same public service,

okay, which is the number one objective. Strangely, it doesn't have to be a 60-minute hour of television. It can be anything. And you've got to adapt because otherwise YouTube will win. And I totally agree with you. Funny enough, if you don't work together, I'm sorry to have to do this twice in an episode, but look what happened with newspapers, okay? I forgot, I literally forgot what happened with them. Last thing I heard was like Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post and everyone's happy.

Okay, if you listen to someone like Scott Galloway, he's brilliant, he's a sort of tech professor and an entrepreneur, he's really really clever and he said quite a while ago, he was on the board of the New York Times for a while, and he said on almost his second board meeting, you know, back in the day, he said, I think we should just switch off Google, I think we shouldn't be part of Google. And everyone's like, that's really, you know, how stupid, because, you know, they want to look with it and they understand where the world's going, okay. The worst business decision made in the entire last 50 years,

which is by the way some competition in print media, was allowing Google to have their data and their stuff, okay? They should, Google was the beneficiary. Look what's happened to them, okay? They should have worked together all of the titles across the globe. They should have globally worked together. Instead, they wanted to be like first out there in that they felt they were being buccaneers and in fact what's happened is you know they've had their faces eaten and there's no good way back. Listen I absolutely agree with you. So I agree with you on the on the PSP's working together that's absolutely vital. I think it absolutely strengthens it I think if we think of ITV BBC and Channel 4 as broadcasters

right that is not a thing anymore by broadcasting we mean this is on at this time this is on at this time if you think of themV, BBC and Channel 4 as broadcasters, right? That is not a thing anymore. By broadcasting, we mean this is on at this time, this is on at this time. If you think of them as producers of content and as people in the business of public service, if you think of them as producers of content, but they are producers of content who have certain expectations of the sort of content that they're producing, then I think put your stuff anywhere. That's the truth. Monetise your stuff anywhere is that thing. The thing with the BBC is

The Google will win if you put it on YouTube Google will win just like just like they did before well you already know what will happen Which is Google will win and it will be a mistake There are other ways to go about this go on as an example You need a level playing field and the government can help in this by the way I You know prominence on the home screen when you turn on, every smart TV you get now has got a YouTube button, because YouTube have found a way to make that happen. Why can't the government get its act together to make, there's like a freely button, that

there has to be a freely button on any remote control, smart TV remote control sold in this country. This is something that can be done. Instead, I mean, and no disrespect to, you know, people who uncover the Gino Di Campo revelations. I was hearing like Lisa Nandy's doing an interview saying, the government's going to intervene in the TV industry over this sort of thing if the TV can't get the house in order. And what are you going to do? You're going to have a phone line? You're going to intervene in individual productions? This is not the job of government, okay?

This is much more important. You know what I'd love for her this year? I'd love for her to get a spad who understood television, Richard. Mm-hmm. Please, let this year bring her this, okay? And that's what she should be... No, as again, I'm sorry that the Gino Ducampo revelations happened. If Lisa really cares about cleaning up, you know,

workplace sexual misconduct, then her own workplace parliament is absolutely crawling with it and it has very, very bad procedures in place. So I would do that first before she gets TV's house in order. But much more important is stuff like this, is giving a leg up to the public service broadcasters and why can't they make sure that there's a button on every remote in this country? People are quite lazy, you know, and I'm one myself. Uh, you, if you can press that, that's something that there's the things you can do, but yes, people working together is going to work. But giving it to YouTube will result in Google winning again, just like it did with newspapers.

I don't understand why, why Google would win because you're giving your content to them. You're paying, you're paying for your content and no one is saying, oh I saw this great BBC show on YouTube. Yeah, but they're seeing something that has public service credentials on YouTube. Oh that's nice, you're paying for some people in California to make some money out of something. No. They're not going to go to the BBC then no one's going to switch that button on. Okay, but that's not going to happen.

So that's what I said earlier. Either they don't see it at all or they see it on YouTube. I think there might be a point where you have to accept the ubiquity of YouTube. I agree, but maybe you change your offering. The BBC changes its offering. Maybe all the public service broadcasters get together as you say and they think about different ways that it doesn't have to be in a half hour tele... Maybe all sorts of other things. We are absolutely on the same page there. I think they have to team up to make big dramas and the sort of stuff that really pushes

through the stuff that really takes on the streamers because they cannot afford it and they're all seeking the same partners in other countries so why not just seek each other? Definitely have to do that but also I think they all need somewhere where they can do short form stuff they do four minutes stuff 10 minutes stuff 20 minutes stuff yeah channel four um freeman till have just signed a big deal with the Sidemen to do lots of their formats. You know, there's huge back catalogs here. There's huge amounts of talent in all of these organizations. I think there's also the will, certainly the BBC and ITV, to work more closely together

because we are not in the 1980s anymore, or even the 1990s, where, you know, ITV is a 24-7 channel and so is the BBC. There's about a third of a week's content on each of those channels at any given time. Stick them all together. You know, you have real strength in numbers. You've got great people. You've got people who've got great, you know, relationships with YouTube. You've got people. It's just there is not enough money and there are not enough eyeballs to support all the public service broadcasters that we have. It just doesn't it doesn't work at some point. They are all

going to have to team up. So streaming, honestly, I think, is now a red herring. But this idea of YouTube and this idea that everybody under 16 is watching YouTube and they're watching on television. And this is not just all this 21% for them and 20 for the BBC Is the numbers are huge the numbers are huge and also all the evidence points that as people are getting older The way they're watching television is not changing. They're sticking with the streamers They're sticking with you know to television on social channels as well That is where it is all going but we still come from a generation Who are in love with the media that we had and the television that we had and of course I am because what I grew up with is my whole career was in that but you have to let it go, you have to let it go and in order to

do that you've got to let the big beasts of British television team up. Assemble. Assemble, exactly. But also it would be great for the government to realise that that's actually a prime thing for something it could do to help in the interest of public service? Yeah, we have to stop thinking about what television was and we have to start thinking about what television is. We just have to, because if we do that, the one thing we know about this country is we've got some of the greatest creative minds in the business, we've

got incredible skill sets over here, the crafts we've got over here. It's just we are absolutely jam-packed with Tannin, which other people are taking advantage of. You could so turbocharge this entire creative economy. It's an easy win, but the one thing we have to give up is our cultural memory of what we thought television was when we grew up. I definitely think all these adaptations should take place, but we also have to remember one thing about tech companies. The one thing we know, they're not going to save you. Recommendations, Richard? Recommendations, I am just slightly off-brand going to go for a Netflix show, which is Toxic Town, which started last week and is absolutely terrific. It's about the poisoning of Corby

when the steelworks were being redeveloped and birth defects and it is an incredibly tragic story but it's just brilliant. The cast is brilliant. Jack Thorne has written it. Annabelle Jones has produced it and they're both absolutely at the top of their game. It's really, really a terrific watch. It feels very, very important. It's one of those things where they said, Netflix would never do something like Mr. Bates versus the post office. And of course they would if it's something this good. It's you're in such safe hands and telling a story that I wasn't aware of. But that's one of those things that you are not going to forget. Well, thank you very much, everybody. Is that us for today?

That is us for today. A bonus episode on Friday as well, the part two of your The Ryan Murphy story. The Ryan Murphy story. Where things go downhill. It takes a dark turn. Yeah. Like many Ryan Murphy things in the first two seconds of the show. But yeah we'll be doing that for our members which you can join our AAA club of therestofentertainment.com otherwise the podcast remains as always on Tuesdays and Thursdays and we will see you

on Thursday. See you on Thursday. See you on Thursday. This episode was presented by Sky, proud partners of The Rest is Entertainment. Sky has a huge 2025 planned and they're excited to share their unrivaled range of entertainment, which has never been easier to discover. And there is no better way to enjoy their selection of new shows and films than by using Sky TV. SkyOS powers the Sky TV experience and it lets you control your Sky TV with your voice

so you can find your favourite shows and movies from Sky and the other apps without lifting a finger, my favourite way. Oh, I love not lifting a finger, I love not lifting a finger. Just say hello Sky, followed by what you want to watch, who you want to see and it will be on your screen before you know it. Without having to lift a finger you can get all your favourite entertainment quickly with both Sky shows and other apps in one place. Visit Sky.com to find out more.