The Watch - 10 Things We Like (and Don’t Like) About ‘Euphoria’ This Season. Plus, “The Feed Is Fake” With Lane Brown.

Episode Date: May 18, 2026

Chris talks about what’s new on TV this week (1:25), before briefly reacting to the ‘Lanterns’ trailer (3:01). Then he breaks down ‘Euphoria’ Season 3, Episode 6 by way of a Zach Lowe-esque 10 Things list (4:27). Later, he is joined by Lane Brown, a feature writer for New York Magazine, to talk about his piece “The Feed Is Fake,” which unpacks how stealth marketing campaigns are powering the hype behind some of pop culture’s most viral moments (26:01). The Feed Is Fake by Lane Brown Subscribe to the Ringer TV YouTube channel here for full episodes of The Watch and so much more! Email us! [e-mail] Host: Chris Ryan Guest: Lane Brown Producers: Kaya McMullen and Kai Grady Additional Video Supervision: Sarah Reddy Order and it will come. Like today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This episode of The Watch is presented to you by Amazon Prime. Ever have a plan come together out of nowhere and realize you're missing something? Like a last minute beach day, a spontaneous hike or an outdoor movie night you didn't plan for. That's when Prime Same Day delivery has your back, getting you exactly what you need, fast and reliably, so you can actually join the moment instead of watching from the sidelines. Same day delivery, it's on Prime. Visit Amazon.com slash Prime to find millions of items delivered fast available in select areas

terms apply. I need supports to have to clear the room. Stand up and walk now. Hello and welcome to The Watch. My name is Chris Ryan. I am an editor at the ringer.com. And joining me in the studio today is me. No, Andy today.

It's just Prince Alone in the studio. I am, however, joined remotely by Lane Brown from New York Magazine today. He's going to talk to me about his incredible piece in New York Magazine called The Feed is Fake, which scratches an issue. itch that I've been having for a long time, especially ever since the whole is geese a sci-op debate raged online. And yet, I don't really know if it raged anywhere else. And that's sort of what Lane's pieces about is why it always feels like everyone is talking about something, but nobody is actually talking about it. He gets into the exploding industry of clipping for

social media feeds, but also narrative manipulation. And then his piece is also like, a much larger kind of essay about the current state of our cultural conversation and our understanding of what is popular and what matters, which is something that I think Andy and I always grapple with on this pod. But I am going to talk a little bit about some TV news

and also give you a few thoughts on last night's episode of Euphoria. As far as like what's coming out this week, as always busy week in new television, but I didn't get a chance to watch any of Dutton Ranch. And I have to be completely honest, like Beth and Rip when it comes to the Yellowstone universe

this is a Yellowstone spinoff starring Kelly Riley and Cole Houser, their characters were beloved on Yellowstone. I think that they worked really well as supporting characters. I'm not so sure I want to watch a television show entirely dedicated to them. And you don't have to because Annette Benning,

amazingly, is also on this show as is Ed Harris. But I will try to get to that at some point. Other new releases this week include maximum pleasure guaranteed, which as a new series on Apple TV with Tatiana Maslani. And it seems like it's a little bit of a normal suburban woman, goes down a crazy rabbit hole when she witnesses something she shouldn't.

Looks like a thriller with some social satire. I'm interested to check that out. Also, we have from Netflix, I believe this week, is the Burroughs, which is being kind of dismissively or casually referred to as old stranger things or new cocoon, but it is about a retirement community and an incident, possibly supernatural incident

or extraterrestrial incident. Always had problems with that were occurring at this facility. So great cast, Alfred Malina, and Alfre Woodard in it, but haven't got a chance to check out any screeners of that. That comes out this week,

and I think Eddie and I will probably hit both maximum pleasure and the burrows at some point. As far as like TV news, I mean, they're really the biggest thing that the lanterns trailer dropped. I know Andy talks about Lindeloff last week in my absence.

This trailer is awesome. The pairing of Kyle Chandler and Aaron Pierre is the backbone of... That's like how a great TV show gets made is you find the right two people and you fit them together. And Kyle Chandler as this kind of rugged and, you know,

sort of self-involved version of Green Lantern and Aaron Pierre is the up-and-coming one who wants to do everything right. It's like a very solid basis for a show, and there are Watchman vibes in it. There is more special effects than I think I was expecting from the trailer, and maybe they're putting that forward a lot in the trailer just to bring in the DC heads,

but it was a little bit more comic-booky than I thought, because I think the original sort of understanding of this show was that it was essentially like a true detective, but happened to be set in the DC universe. It would be great to see how it actually, actually shakes out. I'm super excited for this for this series. I think what we're going to do with Widows Bay, obviously the last episode, the one that focused mostly on Patricia, Cato Flynn, we've been singing her praises all season, but this is her standout episode. I won't give anything

away if you haven't gotten a chance to see Widows Bay yet, but we'll talk about a couple, a brick of episodes together. Maybe on Thursday show, what we'll do is do four and five together. I do want to talk about Euphoria, though, and in honor of my colleague Zach Lowe, I put together 10 Things I Like and Don't Like About Euphoria Episode 6, Stan Still and C So for those who don't know, Zach Lowe, obviously

Now has his own podcast With the Ringer podcast network. I worked with him at Grantlin and now at the Ringer And while he was at Grantlin and at ESPN, he had kind of like a great column called 10 Things I Like and Don't Like, which was his notebook dump on the week in NBA that he had been watching.

This is similar for this episode of Euphoria. I just thought it would be an easy way to kind of move through what was not necessarily my favorite or least favorite episode of all time. I thought it was like a needed setup for what is obviously going to be

incredibly cathartic last two episodes of the season. I would imagine it's in play of the series, but we'll see. First of all, I would say I loved, number one, I love the collection of images that he put together charting Rue's longing

and receiving of her, her sign or salvation. I mean, in the church, like Zendaya, well lit in a church praying, hearing a call from her mother, you know,

her face looks like Passion of Joan of Arc. You know, like this, Sam's got a bag and he goes into it. And I think especially in the, the Rue sequences about her trying to save herself is where the show is still at its best. And I think that her experiences over the course of this,

series are the most easily legible from the outside where you're like, I can see what happened to this person and I can see what this person wants to become. The images at the end of the episode, she's listening to her book on tape Bible and it starts skipping and she almost crashes. She sees the bright light of the incredibly well-lit monster truck or 18-wheeler coming towards and crashes her car or pulls off the road and a spark gets on a tree and lights this burning bush and you get this incredible biblical image of this woman finally, finally hearing the voice of God, you know, and the connections to, the words of Damascus, the connections of Christ and the burning bush. Like, it's obviously rich with that imagery. It does it,

play fast and loose with it, I think with the ruse stuff, it doesn't. Because so much of what addicts go through in recovery and in trying to save themselves comes from this relationship to a higher power. And that may or may not work for all addicts. And there are plenty of people who get clean without it. But obviously, it's something that Levinson is deeply fascinated by. And it doesn't even have to come down to any specific dogma of something you'd find in the Bible or something you'd find in the Old Testament or whatever, it's just about believing that your life has value. And that's obviously something that Rue is looking for.

And it leads me to one thing that I don't really like, which is what we've kind of done with the Jules character. Rue goes to Jules at one point in this episode and kind of makes her pitch for starting a family together and be finding new problems to have. and more classical American suburban concerns of, you know, what to do with your kids and stuff rather than fentanyl and sex work. And I think that Jules' reaction to Rue was good.

I liked the slap. I liked the get out of my painting. If you think about this show as these people existing in their separate realities, I liked the idea that Jules was sort of snapping Rue. out of whatever dream she was having and was like, you know, you don't actually have anything to trade here.

Like, we are not gonna go off and ride into the sunset. This is not the love story. Whether or not that remains the case for the rest of the series, I don't know if I believe that, you know, to the extent that you care about something being endgame

on this show, but like, are ruined jewels like meant for each other? I don't know. I don't know if it's actually germane to the actual show itself. but I did like that scene. I don't really know what they're doing with Jules. And I don't know, you know, this was a,

the things behind the scenes in this production of this show and what it required to get people in the same room to shoot it. I think I sometimes allow myself a little, to get a little distracted by that because I'll be like, oh, you can tell this person wasn't available and they had to shoot all their scenes in like a hotel room. Like, I don't know if Hunter Schaefer had more, or less time than usual to shoot

or whether or not there was like discussions about what to do with the Jules character but I find like she had her artistic breakthrough on the set of L.A. Knights and now seems to be in her I am going to do a body study figure and then paint over it as like her new

like art phase that she's in. I don't know if that's like really that compelling television but I like Hunter Sherfer as a performer so I wish there was more for that character to do. As far as more things that I liked and didn't like, look, I love the high and low

and I love the sacred and the profane. I love the church and the only fans and the spaghetti westerns and the Polansky dread, the Hitchcockian moments, the 70s noir, you know, I think that Levinson moves pretty easily

between those, and if anything, I think I've oft repeated, I'm never bored watching euphoria. It's because of those tonal shifts, which even if the transmission really grinds sometimes on them. I still welcome them. It's still fun to have a completely different feel from scene to scene. You could say that it's mimicking kind of like our feed.

You know, it's like when you flip through social media videos and you're kind of like going from one thing to another without any kind of transition. That would be one way of looking at it. Another is just that he had several different. shows that he wanted to make and he's just going to make them and then stitch them together. I think that's also you could make a criticism of the show. But in terms of like the spectrum of tone that he's playing with and also like reaching very, very, very high and then also wallowing around in the grime and the grit of something exploitative, I think is pretty fascinating to watch.

I also think it's really interesting and I really like the tension between cinematic and TV storytelling. I thought it was very funny. when Sidney walks onto the set of L.A. Knights for her one line, pretty much throw away day player part and starts improvising or disassociating

with the actor who's playing opposite from her and that she obviously is kind of thinking she's talking to Nate and she does this kind of riff about how you know scared she is for her life right now

and the guy is kind of playing along with her and it's then shattered by the character of Oceana walking onto the scent and saying, like, are you going to cue me up or what? I was very, very highly amused by Colleen Camp saying, ah, yeah, this is giving a real clout vibe because I think everybody is always, like, in their mind, they're making clout, you know?

Like, in their mind, I'm sure everybody would love to be Alec Kula in the 70s and that for clude to be what everybody was watching. But obviously, they're making L.A. Knights. and I think that there's almost a sly commentary happening there where it's, yeah, like, Sam Levinson is making, like, an episodic spaghetti Western opera, but he's also making a soap opera,

and he's trying to sort of pay both Piper's there. And I like the effort. You know, I don't think it's successful for everyone. I know that Andy has both rejected some of the storytelling and also the interests that Levinson obviously. he has, but he's also given it the college try, so I really appreciate him doing that for me, because we're

enjoying talking about the show. I think that Levinson, for as much as he's interested in high and low art, he's also interested in television and cinema, and whether or not you can bring the feeling of cinema, the cinema that he loves, and Sam's actually programming a festival

out here in Los Angeles over, like I think it started last Friday, and it's going through this week, where he's showing a bunch of movies that he says, influenced season three, and he's showing like Dirty Harry and Candy Snatchers, which is like an Agfa movie that you should check out.

And he's showing Freeway, which is like the Reese Witherspoon, 90s thriller. So he's like throwing a bunch of a different things up on the mood board. And it's hard to take all those cinematic influences and consistently make a television show. And maybe that's why the production of Euphoria is

inconsistent because it's difficult to translate all of that stuff. But I am enjoying it. I will say that one thing I also enjoyed was Daniel Deadweiler as Alamo's mom. The character introductions on Euphoria, a hallmark of Euphoria, the sort of backstory flashback moments. People, your mileage may vary on these, but I don't know that I necessarily walked away from that scene,

truly understanding Alamo anymore than I already did. But I did think this little message in a bottle from 70s grindhouse movies or actually wasn't really like that really what was it it was more like

an LA noir set in 70s black Los Angeles and some people might be like the temerity of Sam to do that I don't know

I thought it was pretty cool like it looked great Daniel Deadweiler I will watch read a phone book but seeing her play this Alamo's mother

who essentially runs a long con on a kindly but you know disfigured man to set herself up with her boyfriend is awesome. It was a cool little snatch of time. And obviously, Levinson had a blast making it because it just looks great. It told me nothing about why Alamo was riding at Rue with a polo mallet while she's buried up to her head in sand and told me nothing about why he doesn't kill her.

So I enjoy Daniel Deadweiler. I don't know if that segment necessarily was necessary, quote unquote, but it was. was very cool. I think it's also cool that we're returning to meta euphoria. This is a degree of playing the hits,

but one of the season two highlights for me was the show within a show within a show of Lexi's play depicting on

and off-screen events. The LA Knights thing has potential. It's coming, they're calling this picture in at the seventh inning. I like the idea

of Lexi being responsible for writing Cassie's arc on L.A. Nights And also, Lexi perhaps thinking of how to kill off Cassie's character and that little throwaway line that Lexi has where she's just like, you know, what am I going to do?

I'm going to kill her. And then I think, I can't remember. Is it Gideon Adlon who's playing that friend? I can't remember. But she's just like, you got to kill somebody every once in a while or else people get bored. That does not bode well for our ensemble. Somebody may pass away in the last two episodes.

I like that return to meta-euphoria. If that was sort of Cassie, long-term goal was just like fame no matter what instead of making tons of money to help Nate. I think that this arc for her would have been kind of interesting. Unfortunately, and this is my sixth thing, Cassie's only fans modeling is kind of getting in the way of this show being legible to me. The further out we get towards Cassie and Nate, that's where the show gets really muddy. And on its own, it's kind of amusing. And I like how every scene with Sidney-Sweeney seems to be from another universe.

whether it's like that Hitchcockian kind of tension of whether or not she's going to delete only fans. We talked about the sci-fi B movie stuff of a 50-foot woman from a couple episodes ago. Earlier in the season on the wedding night, the kind of almost R.E. asterish horror of Nate's, you know, being, getting his pinky toe chopped off. Nate is shrinking.

Cassie is growing. But this leads into my seventh thing, which is unfortunately also something I don't like, which is just Nate. I think they're leaving a lot on the table here because Nate is actually closer to Rue than anyone else. I mean, he's looking for redemption. He's trying to find a piece of the American dream.

He's trying to shake off his past, which we get a glimpse of the old Nate as he stomps on the protected flowers that have held up his retirement community construction. But we get so little time with him and he gets almost no time with anyone of consequence from the show that it's kind of hard to tell how he got there.

and where he wants to go. And now we're in this ritual humiliation phase that's lasted the better part of the season. And this is my biggest question mark about where they want to go with this character. You've got Jacob Allorty. It doesn't really matter one way or the other if he's having fun.

I can't tell. But give him something to do, please. Let's do something with Nate. Can Nate interact with anyone else from the show aside from Sidney's sweetie? I don't know. But it would be nice. It would be nice to get him,

I love that moment with him and Under Schaefer at the wedding. That actually had a charge. Let's do more of that. Kind of don't know where I'm at with Maddie. Eight is not a thing I don't like. I just like Alexis Demi and I love like this character historically on the show.

Her being a shadow madam of only fans' models who is now curious about Alamo's business and her pursuit of like financial gain for security to like gird against like, everything that's happened to her life, not similar, not dissimilar from Alamo, I guess. Her reactions to things, I think, sometimes are a little convenient for the television show

and have nothing to do with the character. I think that that's understandable in terms of writing a TV show. You have to have people just kind of go along with stuff, but we're getting towards the end of this season and series, and I'm not exactly sure how they're going to bring together like the Alexis Demi part of this show, the Nate part of this show, the Jules part of the show, with the thing that's the most successful, which is the Rue part of the show. Though there is one thing that's starting to bug me about the Rue part of the show. And after I've sort of like waved away

every criticism about like, but what about this and what about that when it comes like talking with Andy about euphoria this season? And I'm like, you don't get it. It's a vibe. It's a feeling. Just go with it. The crime plotting is starting to get to me. That's, I don't know if this is actually 10, but I'm calling it 10. We're doing too much and explaining too little here. Lori is going to give up Alamo to the FBI, thus forcing him to work with her and allow her to use his, I guess,

ambulance service to bring fentanyl from Mexico into the States because the border is closing. I'm not sure I buy that. Typically, like in crime dramas, like the threat of revealing someone to the FBI is more of like a, marking your reputation and I think that Alamo wouldn't be

just so like, ah, checkmated by Lori. Now, I know Alamo has ulterior motives here where he's also trying to get his stuff out of Lori safe and perhaps everything else that Lori has, but this seems like

it's one extra like a hat on a hat. Like, Lori and Alamo's collision course and the presence of the DEA on the outside via Rue is good. That's a good beef. They should have a shootout

and work this shit out. You know, like, whatever. Let's get, let's get these characters getting after it. Now being vaguely in business with each other while also intending on

killing one another and robbing one another is a little thin. And then, you know, I'm not so sure why Rue is being given all these important gigs if, seemingly everyone in Alamo's crew knows she's a rat.

So we obviously end with the rat, we have the rat and the snake for Rue before she goes on the road. She's terrified because her mother is now in danger. You know, we know that Alamo never lets a woman get over on him, but I don't really understand why Rue is now becoming the, you know, the agent of revenge against Lori. It doesn't seem like she is the most dependable person.

It's not like she's not a burglar. She's not a gunman. She's just a convenient person to work in a strip club and manage the girls until she wasn't. I don't really understand why not. Like when everybody shows up at Alamo's house with guns, I don't really understand why the shootout probably should have happened then. And now we're off for another element of this. This was among the more amusing parts of the show for much of the season.

So I hope that they tighten the screws a little bit. I have a feeling based on what we saw as the trailer for next week, that next week is going to be largely focused on Coleman Domingo's Alley character and how that, seemingly his health incident impacts her. So I wonder if I had to guess it's like take a beat and then the big crime happens in the finale. I don't know. I don't know when the the moment is.

And I don't know how much it's going to feel like a series finale versus a season finale. those are my thoughts on euphoria. I want to get into my conversation with Lane Brown. So I introduced Lane a little bit in the beginning of our combo, but I'll just tell you I've worked with Lane about 15 years ago when Grantland started. Lane is somebody I've always really admired, and he's now a features writer at New York Magazine

where he does some really, really, really great reported pieces. And the thing that makes this feed is fake piece. So fun to read to me is that it's really, really deeply reported and it's really fascinating to read about all these different methods that digital marketing companies are using to populate our feeds with clips of shows and

music and movies that we're then supposed to be talking about, supposed to be ingesting, but it's also about how the narrative around those things get shaped and then really more it's Lane kind of writing this, you know,

awesome rant about like how do we even know what things are actually popular, and does that even matter anymore? And we had talked about the geese sci-op controversy on this show, and I'll wait a second a couple of weeks ago when it really popped off. And that's what really got my interest in this going,

but I've also had this nagging feeling for a while. I've noticed a really perceptible change in the tone of online discussion, like no shit, but not in the way that you think, not in like this, everything is getting angrier way, but that like everything kind of is starting to sound the same. Like it's, I'm starting to just be like, I can't tell the difference between the post above and the post below.

If you read on Reddit or, you know, everybody's Instagram is starting to kind of like merge into one Instagram and this kind of, everything is being optimized for engagement because I think that this is like become way more important than connection with other human beings. Like, yeah, in your stories, you might, you know, be following what your friends are doing at any given moment. And that's kind of like my primary use of Instagram,

but that whole other side of it with Reels, and then I think especially for TikTok, where people are making content, more or less, has led this to our phones being like our new connection to what we think a conversation is about culture in the world. And Lane writes about that beautifully. And I really wanted to talk to him about this piece. It's kind of a different look for the pod,

but I thought it would be fun on a random Monday to do this. So thanks so much to Lane Brown for joining me and thanks to Kai and Sarah and Kaya for producing today. I'll be back on Thursday. We're going to talk about Widows Bay. I'll have a guest, and I'll get into Deep Widows Bay lore then.

But thanks to everybody for listening, and let's get into my conversation with Lane Brown. My guest is my former Grantland colleague. I should put that first. And current New York Magazine features writer, Lane Brown. Lane, it's so great to see you, man. We were just remarking that I think the last time I've seen your face is as you were leaving

Los Angeles and I was arriving in Los Angeles. Chris moved in and I moved out. And it is an honor to be here on my favorite podcast, the only organically popular podcast in the world. And also maybe perhaps the least clipped in anybody's week. No, actually, we are doing more clipping. Last week, New York Magazine published Lane's article, which is one part deep dive into the exploding clipping economy that has taken over algorithms. And one part, Jeremiahd, about how this

shadowy industry has distorted our understanding of the conversations taking place within our culture. I think that's if I had to pitch it to anybody. I suppose that's what I would say. And for people have been listening fairly closely to the watch over the last couple of weeks, this stuff has come up in conversations, even though we haven't known it. I think most notably, Andy and I, more or less jokingly talked about the stuff that happened with Geese, the band Geese a couple of weeks ago Wired Magazine wrote an article about

Geese's marketing company or the marketing company that works on behalf of Geese that Geese is a client of. And John Semley wrote an article called The Fanfare Around the Band Geese is actually a sci-up, actually was a sci-up. And the piece is largely about the unorthodox practices that cowed a good use

on behalf of Geese. but this is like Lane I wanted to know that's like sort of my in on this article I saw this there's a funny story I have to tell you like after I hear from you for a little bit but you know

I think that that was sort of my in on your article but what was the thing that kind of was like the kernel of the idea that got you to write this piece? It's sort of a two-parter basically I feel like I have been noticing things

just every story I try to write just in my sort of daily intake of information. You know, I'm looking at Reddit. I'm, you know, I'm seeing, you know, what the voice of the people is on, you know, in the Internet comments. And I don't know, I've kind of noticed just sort of more and more things, I don't know, a little strange. And so I did a story in real estate a couple of years ago.

It was all about how New York City rent prices were just sort of exploding at a time when basically people were leaving the city. and just in these New York City apartment Redits and just there would be full of people saying like, oh, you know, this is not happening. Nobody's leaving. People are moving in. People are flooding back. I was like, this is just totally not the case.

So I sort of noted that. And I saw kind of the same thing over and over again as I was working on some other stories. And then I found this service. I'm not going to say the name of it because I maybe don't want to give them, I don't want to do any product placement here. But basically, there are services that will essentially advertise. your product within Reddit comments. And I thought, oh, this is really, you know, they've really figured something out here and they've got me.

And so I've kind of, you know, I've been begging my poor editors at New York Magazine to let me write a version of this for so long. And finally, the sort of the, you know, the geese thing came up. And suddenly this was a thing that was, you know, sort of in the conversation. And I was finally able to break them down. But after years of sort of twisting their arms, and so they finally kind of let me let me take a couple of weeks and sort of dig into this. The other thing, too, also, is I have no idea what's popular anymore.

Is somebody that cares a lot about culture? I was the culture editor in New York Magazine for a long time, and my job was kind of figure out who people are going to care about in six months so we can put this person on the cover. And it used to be kind of simple to do that. We had things like ratings back in the olden days. And so, you know, that was fairly easy to. do. And it got harder and harder and harder. And now I just have absolutely no idea. Like,

I was thinking, do you have any idea, what is more popular, the bear or the pit? I don't know. I mean, I think definitively in this case, right now, the pit. But I think cumulatively culturally, when you think about the like footprint of the bear, people saying, yes, chef, like the way people maybe started dressing because of the way Jeremy Allen White dresses on that show. It's a different kind of influence. It's maybe people saying things and not even knowing that yes, chef is from the bear, you know, right, right. But it goes hand in hand with there's different kinds of impact that shows can make. And I think, you know, over the course of our lives and, you know, especially working in music, there are bands that are important and there

are bands that are big. And that's always been attention in the media is to like, you know, are we making too big of a deal out of a band just because we personally like them. So we're going to fashion some narrative about why this is the only band that matters. When there is objectively in sync or somebody who is like

exponentially bigger than the white stripes or something like that. And that kind of back and forth has always been really fascinating. And like you, dude, I don't think there's ever been a time where I've been less certain of not only how many

people are watching something. And you get at this in your piece where you talk about when you really start to go in about like, you know, all of this stuff being made by companies that have no incentive to share how people are watching it, how deeply people are watching it, how much they're paying attention to it. It's so complicated now. I'm sure you've had this experience now when you're like even talking with friends or if you go to a bar and TV or movies come up. And the the amount of siloing that's going on now where somebody is like, yeah, man, I am like a for all mankind,

every scene completest. And then the next guy over is like, I don't even, I have no idea what you're talking about. And both are conversant in television. Right. Yeah, it's like every conversation about culture has to have that sidebar about like where you sort of justify how popular you think a thing is.

And it's like, oh, I was talking to my niece about this. You always bring in, like, this, as your evidence, like a cooler young person that you know or something that is somehow more tapped in than you. Or, you know, yeah, I was at brunch and I overheard this and everything. And it's it, in theory, we should be able to track this stuff better than ever. Yes. Everything is, and, but yes, there is no incentive on the part of these companies that are, you know, making this stuff to actually share that data with us.

And so we are just, you know, trying to look for every sort of strange little signal that we can find about how big one thing is And kind of unfortunately, in this vacuum that we have now, it's become really, really easy to sort of fake these signals of popularity. And so I feel like we do not have a very clear view of reality, which is kind of, yeah, kind of strange. And so I wrote mostly about, you know, TV, pop music, sort of celebrity gossip, like the frivolous stuff. But it's like you can obviously see the implications for everything here. It's like we're getting, you know, all of our information right now through the same, you know, sort of rectangle in our pockets through social media. And it's so easy to sort of get a distorted look at just reality with this. And so it's kind of terrifying.

And what creates an ecosystem in which I think that I'm sure you find this challenging as a reporter and as a features writer where I think in my romantic concept. of what my dad used to do as a newspaper journalist, you know, even though he was a film critic. But, like, he would still have to gather a lot of information, especially when he was a crime reporter, the crime reporting happens in the courts, you know, like you would go down to the courthouse and sit there and wait for an interesting case and then be like, oh, this is good. This was a rich kid got into a car accident and was trying to get out of it. This is a good article. This is a good hook for a piece.

But we're deriving, deriving a lot of our concept. of what is popular or what is unpopular or what is beloved or what is being said about all those things from online platforms that are very susceptible to the kind of

manipulation, data inflation and also narrative construction that in some ways I'm like the game is the game and I think you've probably heard some pushback about this piece where it's like how different is this from say payola

how different is this from street teams plastering stickers all over a city for a band in the 90s? I was wondering if you could give our audience without aggregating yourself, because I do want people to read the piece. Just an idea of what clipping is and how it maybe is a little bit different from, say, a digital marketing campaign for a band, a TV show, a movie 10 years ago. Basically, if you've got a song or a movie trailer or a TV show, you take it and you cut it into social media-friendly clips, like short 20-second clips, and then you find a bunch of dummy social media accounts that will post all of this online at huge volumes.

And essentially, as you do that, you are tricking the social media platform algorithms into interpreting it as a, basically a sign of organic interest in this thing. And so when that happens, the platform sort of push these videos far and wide to users who ordinarily wouldn't have seen it. And then sometimes they will kind of engage with it. And that will sort of add even more fuel to the fire too. It's, yeah, it's a thing that started only not too long ago. It's probably at this point four, five years old. But really kind of in the last year, it's really sort of become a thing that everybody is doing.

And, you know, it's like, yeah, it's from geese, although up to Justin Bieber to Bad Bunny. And so it's tiny artists and big artists and everybody in between are doing it. feel like it grew out of something organic. So, like, obviously, TikTok and Instagram Reels, one of those, like, sort of pillars of how you make stuff on there is to soundtrack it or interpolate clips of things. Like, I follow a Thick of It memes account on Instagram where it's just scenes from the thick of it, you know, being posted all day long.

And I'll just be like, oh, that's a funny line. That's primarily how I've, like, rewatched that show. in the last two years. I don't really know that there is a lot in it for the thick of it producers to have that still on my feed, but I'm curious whether you think that this has become a weaponization

of organic fan interaction or if it's something different than that. That's a good question. It is really, really hard to tell, and I feel like that's kind of the point. I think that the people doing this probably learned from things that actual fans were doing and they saw that it, you know, worked in one way.

But now it's like the volume is different. It's not just a couple of fans making, you know, adding a song to a clip of euphoria or something. This is like 50,000 videos of the same thing being sort of dumped into social media all at the same, you know, over the same weekend to basically kind of like overflow the toilet and sort of get this, sorry to be scatologic.

Obviously, as a watch listener, you should know that's fine. I think why it's different from, you know, Sure, there are people that say that, you know, this is the pale, the fine has always kind of existed. The fact that we don't have any trusted culture metrics at all anymore to tell us what's actually, you know, popular or not is sort of one thing. And so we, you know, in the olden days, you could check a street team, you know, people putting them stickers or something against like sound scan stales and you could kind

of see the Gulf. But now there's just nothing to sort of check this against it. It is just trivially easy to do. It is like so simple. It's everybody's doing it. It's at a scale that I think is different. It's like it's not just in one city. This is, you know, you're putting up posters.

This is like you're blasting this out to the entire universe of, you know, TikTok's user base really, really quickly. And so the, you know, the scale of it is pretty different. So the clipping stuff happens obviously on video, but you were talking a little bit about the feeling you were getting reading Reddit threads. and I certainly agree that there seems to be over the last couple of years, I can't really pinpoint the moment, but it reminds me a lot of like, you know, Twitter, I think, went from this thing

that was sort of everybody's running, like, gag journal over the course of a day and was very much directed towards, like, a select group of followers. And then, like, right when we started working at Grantland is when I think it became the primary promotional tool for journalism in the world. And there was that, that had its benefits and obviously also, I think, made everybody slightly insane.

And then now it's kind of like a rage factory where you go and if you look on your 4U page, at least when I do, there are people having these like insane arguments about things that I'm like, why are you guys even fighting about like how my bloody Valentine isn't that good? Who started this fight? Why is this now like crossed over to six different friend circles that I'm? seem to have and or businesses, you know, and like some guy from Bloomberg is like, actually my bloody Valentine is the best. And I'm like, why are you commenting on this? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

There's this. So I digress just to say, with Reddit, I noticed a real collapse of voice. Like, everything started to sound exactly the same. And obviously on Reddit, you can comment anonymously. And if you click on someone's user profile, often they'll be like, this person is hidden their activity. How much of what interested you about this project was not only like the obfuscation of data, the inflation of the sense of popularity that people can have, but also the shaping of narrative around cultural objects. Clipping is sort of one technique.

The other thing that they're doing now is this thing, Keatic Good sort of put a name on it. I don't know if this is the name sort of used by everybody, narrative campaigns, where they are basically, yeah, using Internet comments. using dummy accounts to comment on things in a way that makes it seem like, you know, everybody is talking about a thing in kind of the same way. And so you see it on Reddit. You'll see it happen on Twitter. A couple of people that I talked to, I thought this is sort of interesting.

It's like clipping is something that you want to do at, you know, huge volumes because you want to push this out to everybody. Narrative campaigns are a subtler thing. You actually don't want that many people to notice this. You want kind of the right people to notice this. you want you know it's sort of a light sort of sprinkle of

sort of like narrative juice on a on a story to kind of shape something and then you know once you do that you can then there's these other kinds to like amplify certain arguments too and so yeah it is it is really interesting because it's like it seems like a lot of the pop culture fights that we've had

over the past you know I don't know how many years have basically been seemingly the result of some of this some of these techniques. And so in the story I talk about, you know, one example is like Bad Bunny in the Super Bowl. Yeah.

For a month, this was the loudest argument in America. You know, the NFL has hired this Spanish-speaking artist to perform. And then, you know, people are upset about that. And other people are sort of defending this.

And, yeah, it turns out that basically these bot detection firms that track this kind of thing found that basically the shape of the argument was exactly the same on both sides. Yes. And these accounts were basically posting at the same time, maybe in the same time zones, which is sort of suggestive of something coordinated. And so, yeah, when you think about that, it's like all of these things that were just,

you know, at each other's throats about all the time. It's like, you know, how much of it is real? We have no idea. I was talking to a friend of mine who's a lawyer in the music business about your piece and about the wire piece about Chaotic Good and Geese. And he was like, I wonder if the guys who did Cambridge Analytica knew that the end point of this was to get a geese song on a montage of Sixers highlights.

You know, it's like... Dreams come true, yeah. But the bad bunny thing is a really good segue into the thing that I wanted to ask you about, you know, I was talking with, well, I guess your former colleague in a sense, at Grantland, Kirk Goldsbury, he works with us at the Ringer now, and we were chatting about,

for some reason he hit me up about, like, why is everybody talking about the Kevin Hart roast? And I was like, yeah, me too, although I don't know who's talking about it, because really what's happened is it has been atomized down to its 30, most important 30-second clips, completely decontextualized from like

the fact that that was like a three, hour show on Netflix that I find roasts like super uncomfortable to watch. Honestly, don't understand them at all. And yet it is, I think Kirk called it like my junk feed where there's all these things that everybody I talk to seems relatively conversant in, but you can't find a single person who's like, I absolutely made time to watch a three hour roast of Kevin Hart and have an an opinion about it. And there's tons of stories like that.

Like, I am a person who likes the bad bunny I have heard, does not give a shit who plays the Super Bowl halftime show. And, like, was very aware that that was, like, a weaponization that worked for both parties. Like, whether or not Bad Bunny or Bad Bunny's label or Bad Bunny's marketing company participated in that debate, I think it's actually, like, important that he gets, to play the halftime show, but it can't, you know, and I thought his performance was really good,

but it's like that kind of thing where I'm like, how fuck are we talking about this for a third week? Like, and who actually is like every day I wake up and go to bed thinking about the Super Bowl halftime show? You really do have to wonder how many of these people actually exist. Who gives a shit about anything? Like, people have enough on their plates. I would think, I don't know. I can't imagine being upset about, you know, enough about anything to, sort of long on and go off anymore. I talk about Justin Bieber using this for Coachella. At least

we think so. Somebody paid to clip Justin Bieber's Coachella performance. And I really thought, you know, I don't know if I have to go into witness protection after this. Like, am I going to be, I mean, is this going to be, you know, are people going to be after me this weekend? And, you know, I was out walking around. I didn't hear from one believer. Yeah. And so it really, it's like just how much of this is, how much of this, how many paper tigers are there out there? It, you know, how much of this is real? It's like we hear about, you know, these fan armies that are supposedly just, you know, burning people's houses down every time you say a negative word about whichever pop star. And it's like, how much of that is real?

Or how much of that is just bots sort of, you know, bullying, you know, people into, in the submission. Who knows? It's really, it's a, yeah, strange, strange world out there. But there is, like, real world implications to it. I mean, obviously, like, our political landscape is completely, like, shaped by this kind of online discussion. I mean, going through the Los Angeles mayoral race here now, and you can see a lot of the old positions being taken, the same ones that have been sort of, and people have been manning since 2016. there's like a sort of progressive spoiler candidate. There is a far right wing reality TV like candidate.

Like there are two people kind of in the middle trying to scrap to see who's going to get into the runoff and watching people talk about it online. Even sometimes people I personally know, I'm like, oh, it kind of feels like you, if you're going to actually take the indignity of posting, you are still parroting one of like seven pre-agreed-upon positions, right? And most of the time, I think it's almost reflexive now that people say things.

I find this sometimes even talking to Andy, I'm like, I don't know how to make my point without making it in an extreme way, right? Like, I don't know how to say, like, I acknowledge this without saying I hated it or I loved it. and I think that that's something that I see a lot in criticism and in online discussion of culture now where it's like the idea of something being like a two and a half star three star out of five star thing has completely vanished you know because even if you think that there's like a really vocal contingent of people somewhere online or quote unquote people who are like this is actually the goat sci-fi show this is this is better than 2001 and you're like uh gosh gosh

man, I really, really don't think so. But that doesn't mean I think it's an unredeemable piece of crap. I just don't have been 30 hours watching it, maybe, yeah. The negative engagement, the stuff that starts arguments is the stuff that sort of goes further. And so I think that's more kind of more of what you see. Well, okay, Spencer Pratt is obviously clipping it up. Yes.

Like he's got clipping events going going full time. Although he is to, to his credit, at least, I think he's because of election laws, he's got to disclose it. And so he's the rare, you know, sort of clipping event that actually you sort of know where it's coming from. Most of the journalism in the world now has sort of disappeared behind paywalls. And so we are getting the TLDR version of stuff for the, you know, the stories that we're not subscribers to from the, you know, the tweet about it, you know, the quote tweet or the, you know,

the comment in... Or the argument about it afterwards. Yes. Yeah, exactly. And so the terms of the debate are basically set by whatever that argument is, which is really easy to, you know, sort of amplify a real thing or just completely astroturf it from scratch. And so it's, yeah, so I think that's probably another reason why you're seeing. It's like everything is the most extreme kind of, you know, fight that it could possibly be because that's,

you know, it's somebody benefits when that, when that happens. Yeah. And you see, I mean, this has been going on since we were kids, but you see all the time on the left and the right political candidates, television shows, pieces of music, movies, TV, you know, whatever. are essentially rejected from trying to occupy some sort of like middle ground. You know, like the stuff that really kind of at least drives conversation is the stuff that's going to be and increasingly the more extreme kind of version

of whatever we're talking about. You know, I always try on this show, Andy and I always have this kind of running conversation about doing something because it's doing, like covering a show because we think it's popular. And there are shows that are hugely popular, but not necessarily within the algorithm that we follow. So something like, say, I think the Sheridan shows,

Taylor Sheridan shows are a good example of something. I cannot honestly say that we would do as much Taylor Sheridan coverage if those shows weren't obviously very big. Right. Taylor Sheridan also would not have made 13 shows in four years if he wasn't big and if Paramount and hadn't decided, like, this was what we're going to bet the farm on. By the same token, you know, we cover Euphoria on a week-to-week basis.

I think that's a very big show. Most of my friends have stopped watching it. You know, like, so it's always this murky thing feeling around in the dark for a light switch. And the thing that's funny about what you were writing about, especially like, you know, when you're talking about geese, which is a band that I like, and I kind of wonder if you don't based on your description

of how Cameron Winter sings. I like a good, yeah, catarwal. But I was like mildly offended by like, I'm not being manipulated, man. Like, I like geese. I like, you know, I started liking geese two years ago. Do you, did you come across anything in your research or in looking online and seeing these Discord servers

where people are, you know, begging someone to clip Apple TV shows or what have you? where you were like, oh, well, I like that thing, though. Chaotic goods roster has got some good stuff on it. And so it was kind of maybe a little bit, yeah, disappointing, I guess, to see that. But I also, you know, I also understand. This whole system is so broken that, like, you kind of need to do this. You're either in or you're out.

And so being in means, you know, sort of resorting. to some of these sort of shady techniques. I was in these Discord servers for three or four weeks, and basically I would ask the publicists of the people being clipped, you know, is this something that you, you know, is this something that was paid for by the, you know, the artist or their team? And nobody wants to talk about this.

Everybody's doing it. But I think, you know, for understandable reasons, they don't want to talk about it because it is just kind of lame, I guess, would be the, word. It's really sort of a bummer that this is what we've come to. But at the same time, I totally understand why Geese or

McGee or whoever has to do this. Because one of the things that this does, it's not just, you know, the artists that do it are sort of in the conversation. It's basically, everybody who doesn't do this is sort of left out of the conversation. You can't hold it against too many of the artists themselves.

I feel like it's more of a information ecosystem problem that is complicated. I blame the platforms, I think, more than anybody. At one point you mentioned one of the chaotic chaotic goods narrative shaping tactics was if an artist

has a performance on Saturday Night Live at midnight, you're posting it and the narrative, the comments under the video should be this is the greatest live performance I've ever seen. This is the best live show I've ever seen on Saturday Night Live. We have our new strokes. We have like,

there's like an obvious like echo of like there's this uh a sort of excellence or supremely like amazing thing that's happening rather than like cool like they played on s andl or whatever geeky thing some fan would say if they saw their favorite band playing on s&l i was wondering whether or not you felt like you know you kind of mentioned this with the paywall media traditional media sites but whether or not you felt like this had kind of filled this vacuum where i don't even know where i were going out to find out what someone thought of an S&L live performance anyway. I mean, when we were coming up, there were plenty of things that recapped Sire Night Live on Monday.

There were plenty of articles where it was like, it sure seems like this band is having a moment. That would kind of shape maybe a narrative around it. But that's not in the artist's hands. The artist is hoping that John Porellis at the New York Times or somebody at Rolling Stone is like into them enough and is like, yeah, that was good. But, you know, it's easier maybe to say, have a lot of like a Stan army of Ashley Padilla fans who were like, this is the new Kristen Whig. I don't know. It is really hard for for culture journalists and I think just journalism in general to to know anything anymore. I think that this is like I don't know where to go to find out

you know, what's actually popular. I used to think that I had my my finger on things, but all of the advertising sort of moved to short form video. Yeah. Yeah, the websites that you would sort of go to to, you know, find out what a, writer sort of thought about this stuff have, you know, some of them are still hanging on, but it's like quite a lot of them have disappeared. And so it's, yeah, it is, I don't know, it's really tough. I don't think, you know, I am no better at anybody else than anybody else at figuring this out. I'm like just, you know, fumbling around the darker. Yeah, I mean,

it's also like there's a degree to which there's like, I would actually be curious to get feedback from this conversation from people who are not necessarily working with it. within the media or are not handcuffed to their laptops 12 hours of a day and kind of working for seven of them but also like ambiently looking online at stuff because I do think that that phenomenon while it gave us careers it also is kind of why sometimes it's really hard to tell

like is there a whole world out there that doesn't give a shit about X, Y or Z thing that we're writing about or arguing about I know there is but what are they what do they care about? You know, because it's, it's, maybe they are not watching as much TV or listening to as much new music or care about whether obsession made $15 or $16 million this weekend. But they're engaged with culture on some level or else, like, we cannot be propping this

entire thing up. So how do they get their information and how seriously do they take what they see on their feeds? So it's an impossible question to answer maybe. Sort of a culture emergency. But the people I worry about maybe the most, though, are the artists and themselves. Because nobody has any idea what's popular. Nobody knows what people are actually responding to anymore. This is, like, we talked about, okay, like in the old Grantland days, we covered a show like Mad Men, which 200,000 people watched. But we understood that the people

that watched that show would maybe come to our website and read about it. But now it's like the, and we knew it wasn't as popular as Big Bang Theory, for example. But I feel like that, yeah, It's impossible to compare something like, I don't know, beef to House of the Dragon. I have no idea which has sort of more of an impact. You know, you just think of an artist trying to pitch something right now. And it's like, I don't know what, you know, they don't know what kind of feedback they're getting. Their market research has just sort of been run through this whole, you know, sort of distortion pedal of social media that really kind of warps everything. Yeah.

So, like, it's just, it's hard to know. And so I feel like, you know, I think about how the fact that, you know, every show on TV lately seems to be sort of derivative of like the White Lotus or it's like we had a, I know a couple of years ago, like the agencies were telling, you know, telling everybody, it's like, all right, no more knives out riffs. Yeah. And it's like, I kind of wonder, were those like the last two shows or the last two like culture products that we sort of had hard numbers for? for the, you know, original things. And now, you know, we're just sort of reinterpreted them into perpetuity because we have nothing else with, like, real data on. It's so hard because, like, back when you and I were working together,

like something like Homeland would come on. It would be a sensation for two years. I mean, it was a very popular show for its entirety. But, like, those first couple of seasons of Homeland were, like, it felt like you would come in on Monday and people would be like, let me know when you're ready to talk about Homeland, you know? Right, right. And that's what this, like, literally,

this podcast is built off that premise, that there are these five, ten shows a year that yes, Andy and I are happy to recommend 100 shows or 20 shows in a year, but there are going to be five or six that we feel confident that that mad men group of people

are going to be, like, I want to talk about this or hear people talk about it. That homeland thing would then lead to 10 homeland ripoffs that would have varying levels of success or critical appreciation, and then they would kind of shed

that and get out, but you're right. It's like, I don't even know what I would try to imitate now. Like, I don't even know what a show, like White Lotus is a good example. I think that there's a lot of reasons for that. One is, I think shows TV networks maybe are like, this is great, because this is like a very controlled environment. You can isolate people. So that's essentially like, we don't have to worry a lot about extras. We don't have to do a lot of set pieces. Like it's just find a good location. a mystery and then have people portray one another and that's great for us. But I'm not sure

what is shown now. The pit, I think would be the best example of I think that Max and other places will start to try to say how do we get a 16 episode procedural up yearly but have it be stickier

and more maybe long lasting in the psyche than say the Chicago Dick Wolf Empire or a procedural on a network. But I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if you can recreate that magic. And by the same token, if you clipped it enough,

and if you had the faction of Pitt fans who seem to be talking about these people, like they're actual humans instead of fictional characters, maybe you could manufacture like an illusion that your pit rip-off. police procedural or pit rip-off family drama was actually as big as the pit. I'm not sure. Talking to some of the people I've talked to, I believe you could. Obviously, shows fail all the time. Obviously, things get canceled all the time. Things just don't work. Things, you know, don't catch on.

It feels like there's a way to sort of put your finger on the scale a little bit more than there once was, and you can sort of declare a hit by Fiat a little bit. I don't know. I think you guys were having a conversation the other day about Apple shows. And it's like a hit on Apple is different from a hit on obviously Netflix or any other service with more subscribers. And so you're dealing with things at totally different scales. And so if show without a lot of viewers, it's survival prospects on Apple TV are probably better than they are on Netflix. There's something to Apple's volume play is still modest compared to Netflix.

They seem to be way more willing to bring shows back. I don't know what their budget and model is. and if it's different from show to show, like I will routinely see renewal announcements or a new season of something that's in season four or five. Traditionally, a lot of these places, they wrap things up by season three, either because they see like an attrition in viewership

or because that's when contract renegotiations come up with cast. And I don't understand the economics of what Apple is playing at. It's pretty much a write-down for them in their larger business. So I'm not sure. And then you get into something like Netflix, like you're saying, where their data, to me, is incomprehensible. More people watch Bridgeton Season 3 than watch the moon landing. It's like my favorite stat.

Yeah, none of it makes any sense. Everything is incomprehensible. Who knows? But interestingly enough, one of the things that I mentioned in the piece, the Knight Agent was something that was being clipped. And yet, if you look at the numbers they released, that show is massively popular. It's like every episode has watched more than the Super Bowl or something,

at least in season one or two, I think. I guess. So then why do we need Clippers at all? So it's, yeah, I think we have a, I don't think we have a clear view of any of this anymore. And it's getting, I don't know, it's getting a little scary. So, yeah, I'm a single issue voter at this point. Real hard culture metrics. Bring back Nielsen ratings.

Yeah, I think that would, exactly. That would fix a lot. Let's wrap it up by discussing where you see this is going next, because this piece begins and ends, if I remember correctly, with was it Joe Lim, the guy from Flutify? Joe Lim, yeah. Who, your piece starts with an assertion from Joe, that 90% of what you're seeing on your feeds

is essentially fake advertising or shadow advertising. It's essentially like there is like some, hey a dollar per every thousand views incentive for somebody to post it and he that statement kind of chilled me to my bone because if I kill 25 minutes looking at my phone

I'll have one part of my brain that's like just smoothed out and is looking at cats and soccer highlights and whatever and then there's the other part that's like isn't it weird that like I've just gotten 11 videos that are the same template or have the same similar prompt or like something like Topjaw will be popular and then 150 Topjaw style shows will be in my phone all of a sudden

of like guys getting interviewed on the street about what their favorite something is. But Joe seems to be suggesting at the end of this piece that this is all coming to an end. Can you tell us a little bit about that? So Joe thinks that basically, he thinks eventually people are going to stop trusting what they see in their social media feeds. He thinks this has gotten so bad. And I kind of, I think I sort of agree with him. This is, it's so clear. I think people that really are noticing this more than they, more than they used to that, you know, there's just so much, so much astroturf that he thinks eventually people will be turned off from this.

But he thinks that the, you know, the clippers, at least the people that are doing the clipping now, they're going. to basically be sort of directing all of this content at AI. So soon, you know, maybe we're not going to open social media apps. Maybe we're just going to have our AirPods in and it's going to, you know,

Claude or chat GPT is going to tell us what TV shows to watch or, you know, what music to stream. And he thinks that if, basically, if they hit these LLMs with enough sort of volume of, you know, stealth marketing, that that will

you know, basically sort of trick the LLMs instead of tricking. Yeah. Even now if you, okay, so like the other day I was like,

I think I, who was I thinking about listening to? It was some, some band that had 12 albums and I was just kind of like, I'm not quite sure where to start and I just, you know,

did a usual Google search of X artist ranked, which gives you a Gemini summary of what the two or three peak albums are in terms of like critical appreciation, but also these are the cult records. And then obviously there are the Reddit threads

where people are ranking them. There's like rate your music threads. There's all these things where you can kind of find that information. But I noticed, and I think everybody has this experience now, that they're very rarely going past that Gemini summary

of the answer to your question now. And so that vision of the future, that idea of basically your Google result being a prompt you give your AI agent, essentially, where you're just like, hey, I want to listen to Salem. What's music like, what are the best, like, witch house songs? And it creates a playlist for you or it tells you, like, people like this. It's like, well, where are they getting that information?

Like, where is this, where is the learning happening? And I would imagine that there is also a worry that, like, AI agents probably already are operating multiple, like social media feeds and just working from a prompt from an actual human owner are populating our feeds with this kind of stuff. This happened to search first. It's like where search has just been

completely sort of overtaken by spam. And that's, I think, where we're headed with social media. And so people, I think, are eventually going to escape. I do kind of wonder if it's like, you know, some of this is purposeful. It's like Google is, you know,

they want you to use Gemini. They don't want you to use their search engine anymore. And so maybe they're tanking, you know, on purpose or pushing you to, to Gemini. And so, you know, then Gemini will then take in this, you know, huge amount of undisclosed advertising and then sort of spit that back to you in the form of, you know, supposedly personalized recommendations. I find it too. I ask chaty-pdil all the time. It's like, what are, what are five, you know, albums that I've never heard before that sound a little like, I don't know, alligator by Echo and the Bunny Men or something.

Yeah. You just put me back. Like incredible recommendations that, you know, I never would have found any other way. And yeah, I feel like this is, this whole thing is sort of coming for that. Somewhere a bald record store employee is like, I could have told you if you would just come to me. I would still have a job. Oh, man. Lynn, thank you so much for joining me today.

this has been awesome and this piece is incredible. We'll link it in the show notes, obviously, and you can read Lane's writing on New York Magazine. I would tell you where to follow him on social media, but you're probably just an open-claw agent

looking to blasting with geese propaganda. Lane, great seeing you, man. Thanks again to Lane Brown. You can read his piece in New York Magazine. We'll have that piece in the show notes for the pod on Spotify. As always, you can watch us on Ringer dash TV on YouTube. You can write us at

the watch at Spotify.com. Follow us on Instagram at the watchpod underscore. It's very funny to say these things after having this conversation with Lane. I wonder if Kai feels any extra pressure with clips this week after, you know, can you put up geese numbers, dude? Thanks to Kai and Sarah and Kaya for producing and we'll be back next on Thursday. Take care.