Ep. 161: Emergent Hunters are Badass, Cultural Division in our Pursuits, and the Taibbi Paradox with Miles Nolte

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
I guess I grew up on an old role. The
engineers say, what's up Phil? Hello, this is filthy Phil.
I'm on it today, buddy. I'm fired up to yerba
mates this morning. Then yeah, one and a half feeling
feeling introduced? Is this is something you think? People make
fun of me that I drink this? What's this ship
called urba mate? Mate? I mean I can only speak

(00:36):
for people I know, and the answer is yes, that's
all we talk about. Yes, we just make fun of
you exactly. All right, Well, we're gonna moving on from
that because I am a very fragile, very fragile ego. Um,
we got a lot, a lot of things to cover
on the show today. I'm excited about all the emails
that we got from you. I'm excited about some of
the conversations we're gonna have. I will admit to today's

(00:59):
podcast part of today's podcast being a bit self indulgent,
overtly political. There's a lot some stuff I want to say, uh,
some stuff I've been inspired to say by one of
my favorite writers. So we're gonna we're gonna go over
that here with our buddy Miles and ult the director
of Fishing one of the hosts event podcast, but also
one of my favorite people to to politely argue about

(01:19):
politics with, respectfully argue about politics with. So something we're
gonna cover this is coming out. I think this is
coming out what Tuesday? So this will be what right
after inauguration one? Inauguration? What's the now it'll be it'll
be the day before, the day before, So this that
it'll be given there'll be some heightened sense politically, um

(01:41):
something I think that hopefully you guys will like to
hear before we get to that. Uh one myself. I
bet Eric's got his own reasoning, He said, why emergent. First,
it's technically correct. Emergent is defined is coming into view
or notice, issuing rising from um a surrounding medium, coming

(02:01):
into existence, rising casually or unexpectedly. As we just said,
those of us who chose to come to hunting emerged
from an ordinary life into a life of hunting. Second,
and more importantly, it sounds badass. When you hear something
like emergent technology, you think, damn, that's gonna be some
cool ship coming down the pipeline. It's the same for

(02:22):
us emergent hunters. He said, I've been working on an
article in this topic, but I'll share a few thoughts
about emergent hunters and why they're badasses. We aren't part
of the tradition or patrilineal descent. We aren't conscripts to
the cause. Were volunteers. We chose hunting. While most hunters
learned through us Moses as kids. We had to piece
together all the myriad of skills it takes to hunt

(02:44):
as adults. And when you think about it, the amount
of knowledge and skills you need to be competent wherein
to hunt is pretty damn overwhelming. He said he started
hunting around eight years ago. He's from Los Angeles. I
grew up as an eagle scout and then got into
hunting and is now cranking uh and now calls himself

(03:07):
a hunter, not an emergent hunter. So maybe there's some
sort of graduation process we can put it in UM.
He also says, PS just want to give a shout
out to fill to give UM some confidence. I to
love video games and Star Wars and stuff, and I
have a wife and two young kids, but I am
also a hunter. He can do it too. Plus hopefully
he'll get to kill a turkey, which I still haven't done.

(03:28):
So there you go. Phil thoughts Emergent Hunting. That was
a pretty good I mean, I couldn't I couldn't have
put it better myself in terms of MS hunting. That
was a very That was an eloquent statement there. Um yeah,
I like it a lot, Ben i'd I'd say the
one thing that kind of that made me chuckle was
that he was like, you're emerging from your previous life
as if somehow you're being reborn, or you like you're

(03:52):
or like you're you're you're you're waking up for the
first time. You're a caterpillar, red pill, Bro, you're a caterpillar.
You're emerging into a butterfly as a hunter. I like
that he takes it that seriously. Man. I like that
he's he's thinking of this stuff is really a life
changing deal, which I do believe it is. So, um,
I'm gonna go with it, man, I'm gonna go with
emergent Hunters. We're gonna we're gonna penalize anyone that says

(04:12):
adult onset hunters. We will cancel you if you bring
that to this table. Um canceled, canceled, Yeah, cancel culture.
Um so we're gonna go with it. So thanks, Thanks Eric,
I really appreciate that, man. And if you write that
article us, no, we may share it with the folks.
He's also losing California is a board member of the
California Chapter Back on Shouters and Anglers. So he's not

(04:35):
just writing about it and talking about he's doing something
about it, which uh, I can respect all the way around. Um,
you know, to to this idea of new hunters, Uh,
this being the year of the new Hunter, you know,
I liked giving everyone that an idea of something they
can step into that's a little bit more important than

(04:57):
just something you do on the weekends. So do you
feel feel that, Phil, you feel like it's going to
change your life? Uh? To be honest, no, I mean
I think I think the experience of going out and
and taking a life and and you know, harvesting, harvesting
the meat and consuming it. I mean, that's that in

(05:17):
and of itself. And I think, yeah, I mean that's
like a that's a life event, that's a life ten
of experience. I don't see it changing the way I
live day to day or stuff I think about. I mean,
I think it will be like an occasional weekend activity.
That's how I'm I'm seeing it somewhere out there, air
calls turning over in his truck driving to work over.

(05:43):
Uh So you know, Eric said to all your emerging
hunters out there, Phil included, you are badasses and be
proud of it. So so be proud of it. Don't
be ashamed. Not that you would either way. Okay, So
the next email, Yeah, you know I would. I would
again say I'm always I want to do this one
when I can. The the th C inbox after almost

(06:04):
two and a half years of doing this is still hopping.
So I'm assuming that means you guys are still loving
what you hear. If you are, give us a review,
give us the five stars, right, a right review of
the show, do all that stuff. Um, but you know
what gives me the most satisfaction is reading these emails.
And now this one comes in from Zach and man,

(06:25):
it's a long one, but it's important, I think. And Phil,
can you put on your doctor Phil hat this one.
We gotta help this man solve a problem. Yep, it's
on there, it is. How does it like? Wow, it's beautiful.
It's beautiful. So Zach says, I have been listening to
TC religiously since the summer, but this is my first
time write again. I started to listen to this podcast

(06:46):
as an intern for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Park while
driving for hours on end mapping fences, and I was
drawn into the philosophical conversations about the outdoors in our
food system. This podcast is truly one for people who
think about hunting deeper than it's face value, which should
include all hunters, anglers, hunters, bikers, and people who eat anyway.

(07:07):
Sorry for the long email, but I had it right
in about a situation I'm facing. For some background on
my plea for advice, I'm a junior studying Wildlife Ecollege
and management at Oklahoma State University. I consider myself a hunter,
though I can count on one hand the amount of
times that I have gone out on just a day
hunt this year. What can I say? Video games are easy?
Why is this happening? I don't think. I don't think

(07:31):
you understand how video game culture and games in general,
have you know, with what's the word proliferated? Yeah, apparently don't.
I thought we were in a safe space. I thought
we were in the trust tree where we all go
outside and we don't worry about video games. But apparently
I'm wrong. There are dozens of us there. There are

(07:52):
dozens of cult members. I consider myself fairly savvy, says
Zach on the outdoors, and try to keep up to
date on conversations and kind servation issues throughout my state
in the United States. It is my dream to one
day work as a wildlife biologist or a game ward.
I am in need of a bit of a sage
wisdom about a situation surrounding my current roommate. I live
in a single wide trailer on a thirty acre piece

(08:13):
of ground with a great fishing and a duck pond
attached outside of my college town. This land and trailer
is owned by one of my roommates family members. My
roommate on the outside is a die hard redneck hunter.
The majority of his wardrobes camouflage. The house is decorated
with Turkey fans and painted European mounts, and his ammunition
is strown about the house to underscore his lack of

(08:34):
firearms knowledge competence in safety. Hunting appears to be his life,
as he historically skipped some of our shared classes because
he was out hunting or drinking the night before. Ron Bam,
friend of the media, Ron Bam, friend of the mediater podcast,
and uh badass fellow. He says on the Hunting Dog podcast,
it has a term for this type of hunter that

(08:56):
really describes my roommate, Joe twelve Gage s seaking the
Hunting Dogs. He has a one year old black lab
that he quote unquote trains as a retriever. The irony
in my roommate is that he and I share a
major passion wildlife and hunting. Why is this ironic, Well,
my roommate does a lot of hunting. During dof season September,
he hunted every afternoon of the first couple of weeks

(09:18):
of this season. He put me on my first ever
ducks this year on the duck Opener. He helped his
younger brother harvests first year back in November, and has
absolutely provided access to his family's ground and a family's
friends land to help some of his friends limit out
on ducks and deer. This in and of itself is
absolutely awesome and taken alone, is nothing but an advancement

(09:38):
of the hunting community. And this one indeed be the
case if he didn't ignore hunting regulations and our values
with reckless abandoned. He does not treat at life with
the respect they are due. When he shoots an animal,
he will wait for hours or even days to process it.
This is not dry aging either. He leaves their carcasons
out in the rain, exposed and on refrigerated, often on

(10:00):
at it. More times than not, he includes a drink
or two or seven before he starts a hunt, often
on the drive over. He has set and hunted over
bait for migratory birds several times. He has exceeded aggregate
possession limits on waterfowl, ignored means of take hunted outside
of shooting light hunting from a moving boat, and his
most recent offense has been shooting a limit of ducks

(10:20):
and leaving it on my porch for three days so
far in fifty degree weather. I have done my part
to advise him and the people that he hunts with
that they are not in full compliance with the law.
I have also excused myself from hunts that may be
illegal or unsafe. A mega nerd move, for sure, but
they're right move. Nonetheless, Here in lies my moral dilemma
and plea for advice I do not know what to do.

(10:43):
He cannot continue operating like this. He is liable to
get himself or others hurt. There are several times where
I have told him to watch where his muzzle is
pointing as he flagged myself and others in our hunting party.
He's also going to catch charges at some point. Getting
away with these relatively small violations now is only going
to embolden him to start blatantly poaching in the future.
I know I cannot enforce my morality of my roommate,

(11:05):
but it's hunting style during and especially after the shot
go against my true values. Any advice on the situation
would be greatly appreciate it. I did not know whether
I should contact the game warden, give him a come
to Jesus meeting, or do nothing. I'm very hesitant to
take any action, but I know something should be done. Okay,
Phil that yikes, yikes, yacks, yis. I'll let you go first, there, Philip.

(11:30):
Dr Phil, Wow, it's so kind of you. Give him somebody.
I mean, I this is just tough for me because
I don't really know that the culture. I've never been
in it from an outsider's perspective, though. I mean, like
I've said this before, these are the kind of people
and stories that non hunters here, and it just sets
it gives you all a bad name like like this,

(11:52):
that's the stuff that like, it discuss you. It turns
you away from hunting and hunters. It it sets stereotypes up. Um,
it's not good. It's I mean, it's like not good
for conservation, but it's also not good for the way
hunters look in the public eye. Uh. That that being said, like,
I mean, what like if it's really easy for me

(12:13):
to sit behind this mic and be like, oh, you
should call a game warden and turn them in. Uh,
but I mean I don't know, Ben, is that something
you would do? Like I don't. I don't think sitting
him down and having an intervention is going to help anything. Yeah. Man,
this is why I think this is tough. And again,
I I there's so much nuance in this, and you

(12:34):
got I know everybody likes when I use that term now,
but there's so much nuance in this, And I would
just just say this, they're assholes and every line of work,
and they're assholes in every pursuit. Their asshole golfers that
cheat um, their asshole hunters that poach and break the law. Um.
The difference in golf is you're probably not hurting anybody.
You might be stealing somebody's money, um, in a gameling situation,

(12:56):
but you're probably not hurting anybody by you know, doing
a Donald Trump picking your ball up and throwing it
toward the green. Nobody's looking, So you're not hurting anybody.
But in this case, you are. You're doing damage to
to everyone around you in in and of the fact
that you're um breaking the law. But also, you know,
as Zack said, they're disrespecting what we all do and

(13:20):
what we've collectively determined to be a valuable part of
our lives. And then also you have the part for
wildlife management conservation that gets big into that. But here's
the other deal, Phil, Let's just be honest for a minute.
Social pressures, most people. Illegality is based on for a
lot of really good folks that get into really dumb situations,

(13:41):
it's based on social pressures. Would you agree with that?
I mean, you're you're you're right, It doesn't. The thing is, like,
I totally get being in those social pressure situations when
you're younger, like when you're in high school or in college.
Your hell, I mean, I'll I'll even give you like
mid to late twenties, but I mean like it's a
point you realize what kind of a person you are

(14:02):
and what you want to be and you just stop
hanging out with those people. Uh. That's yeah, dude, That's
where I'm at. Man. So it's like like, I mean, sorry, man,
but if this guy is like still your friend and
you're still hanging out with and like I know you
said that you've expolitely excused yourself from the huntset might
become illegal. But it's just like I I it's it's
it's tough, man. Like you get to an age year

(14:24):
old enough and you just gotta make big boy decisions.
And he's he's cut these people out of your life. Yeah,
that's yea. As always, Phil brings the heat um And
you're right, man, You're absolutely right. You know you gotta
make Zac in this case has to make a decision
um to put himself in a situation where he's never
going to be influenced in that way. Uh. And that's
I've had I I will personally, I'm not gonna name

(14:46):
names or get into this, But I've had situations within
the hunting industry where I felt like that's something I'm
not gonna do again, um and and excused myself from
that situation and in some cases cut that person out
of my life where I felt like it wasn't good
it um. And so that's what you gotta do, I think, UM,
often people would respect you more if you do that.

(15:07):
You know people would would find a way too. You know,
have some self awareness. But if you just don't think
your roommate's gonna do that, you may not just waste
your time and just remove yourself from the situation UM
and move on. But again, if you're a party to
something illegal, you also have the you know, you also
probably have the responsibility to call it in UM if

(15:30):
it's continuing, and you may save someone's life. I mean
we had we talked about last week at death in
the in the duck line with remind of vented tozie
I I feel we could probably just dropped out of
what you said last time. Man, remove yourself from the
damn situation and UM, continue to be a positive influence.
It sounds like you are, so we'll move on from that.

(15:51):
But you know, as we go into the year of
the New Hunter here, and we talk about emergent hunters
as we go forward. This is something that everybody may
have to deal with, and it's certainly easier to deal
with if you are a new hunter. If you're an
emergent hunter, you're an adult. You know, you can make

(16:12):
those decisions, as Phil just said, And it's a lot
different if you're a ten year old boy and some
some of this stuff is going on and this is
the culture of your family, you're the culture you're growing
up and man, you just go along um and almost
every situation. So this is something that I think emergent
hunters are going to deal with more and are more
equipped to deal with obviously, um and something that as

(16:33):
you as folks crack into the hunting world, if they
see that, they're going to have to deal with it. Um.
And so it's good. I appreciate you're putting it out there, Zack,
and so we can talk about it a little bit.
Anything else, Phil, you want to drop us just drop
a knowledge bomb at the end of this, really walk away,
because because stands of this ship. Uh Nope, no, I

(16:54):
feel like that's that's the that's the most authentic Costanza
moment is blowing it at the end. Yeah no, I'm nope, perfect,
all right, all right, Now we're gonna get into what
we want to talk about today and and there's a
whole lot that goes into what we're talking about with
Miles and all day. But first I want to read
an email from Russell Edwards, Victoria, Australia, one of our

(17:16):
many Asse's and New Zealanders that listen to this podcast,
shout out that you guys, we love you. He guys
always are are seemed to be the most opinionated and
the most well educated on wildlife issues. Maybe because it's
where you live, or maybe it's because you're all badasses.
I'm not sure, but thanks for listening. Uh. Russell said,
where I come from and Victoria, Australia, we literally have
protesters on the marshes during duck season. He said, it's fucked.

(17:41):
I don't and by the way, you know on the
on the term fuck phil. Uh. Have you watched the
Netflix documentary The History of Curse Words? I haven't know.
How is it? It's fantastic. Nicholas Cage is the host
of it. It features many uh my favorite comedians, it's
just fantastic. They just I just watched the one last
night on the term fuck, the history of the term

(18:02):
fuck and the relevancy of the term fuck, and it
only emboldened me more to include it in this podcast wherever,
not wherever I can, but I need to probably get
be a little bit more tactile in the way that
I use the term. But it the celebration of the
word just embolded me a little bit more so anybody
that ever wrote in and said, hey, stop cussing, it's

(18:22):
not looking good for you. Truck to restruct all right,
Russell said. He said, I don't think it's a case
of a slippery slope fallacy, and I don't think there's
some quote unquote middle ground that is occupied by less
controversial honey methods. I think these hard nosed campaigners look
for what is the most alien seeming practice and they

(18:44):
target that one in the hope of recruiting the most
number of people, even KFC munchers, to their cause. It
is a form of culturalszenophobia. It may even be the
case there's no grand conspiracy and may be simple a
process of blind selection. People get upset about all kinds
of things, but the ones who most successfully provoke a

(19:05):
xenophobic reaction are the ones who build a movement. I
fully stand with our buddy Clay Nucom and his guard
the gate mentality. In fact, my concern was one of
the factors leading me to take up duck hunting after
many years of deer hunting. Duck hunting is the pin
up anti campaign here, mainly because they are the only
non fish native game species, because apparently fish don't have

(19:28):
feelings and foreign animals should be exterminated, although preferably by
professionals who don't enjoy it. But yes, we have hound
hunting for deer here, and those guys will absolutely be
next in the firing line. Ever since your interview with
fellow Victorian Paul the sheer Ben, I've been struggling to
be patient with these people. They are, by and large,
so fucking dumb Russell Edwards, So this leads me into

(19:51):
lots of things. Certainly leads me into our a little
bit of our conversation with Miles today. But um Man,
I don't know, Oh, we're We're definitely gonna take a
different tech than Russell. And in this case, I don't
think all these people are dumb misguided surely. Um. You know,
activism can can become a lot of things. Um, So

(20:14):
I'm sad to see that there are people protesting your
duck hunt in the marshes before it win your head. Now,
I've never experienced that, but you know, if I was
bear hunting New Jersey, I probably would. So we've seen
that in this country as well. But part of what
we're talking about today is this idea of hate based media.

(20:35):
And I and as I said earlier, Phil, this is
maybe a little bit self indulged for me. There's a
lot of things we want to talk about this year
with new hunting and and trying to bring people along,
but I think this, this, this applies to that topic
and and the this is the idea that are the
the national media, most types of media, social media. A

(20:55):
lot of the communication of this country is based on
hatred and division, uh and is based on a lot
of what Russell just mentioned here in terms of cultural xenophobia.
He mentions people get upset about all kinds of things
he wrote in there, but the ones who most successfully
provoke a reaction are the ones who build a movement.
We've talked about that before on this show. In terms

(21:17):
of making fun of the term cult. We've talked about
that in terms of approaching vegans and anti hunters with
an open mind and open arms at some level, but
then objectively taking in their information and trying to suss
out what's really going on. We've talked about that. Maybe
that's the value proposition of this show as we've as
we've gone along, it's I think it's something we certainly

(21:39):
need to dig into. Miles and I were able to
to unearth some examples. We felt like we're very relevant
in in this in our hunting and fishing culture, and
I think when you hear from some of the listeners
this show, some of the New Hunters people are still
struggling with the ways to approach um the cultural division

(21:59):
even within our own our own pursuits so important conversation.
We're gonna have it right now with Miles Nold, Tay
Myles Nte. What's up man, Happy to be here, brother,

(22:21):
happy to be here, as always, Happy to have you
as always. Um, we need to hear a little bit
about the podcast, how it's going bent. We haven't really
talked about it that much on this show. I know
we did when it it launched, and we've been advertising
in and pushing it. How is media just first ever
fishing only podcast. I mean, I'm a pretty biased source. Uh,

(22:42):
I think I think it's great. Um, but I will
I think I can be an honest critic of my
own work. I think it took us a couple of
months to really find our stride with the show, and
I think I think the first few months were good,
but I think what we're doing now is much better,
and we just got a better rhythm and we're flowing in.
Like we've said before, we're trying to give a good

(23:02):
balance of valid information, interesting stories, and humor. And one
thing that we definitely don't do is take ourselves too
seriously because there's way too much of that going on, uh,
in outdoor media in general and fishing media specifically, So
we don't we don't do that. Yeah, you guys, I
mean fishing is fun on your show. It's not always
fun other places. Sometimes it's boring. And now I'm not

(23:25):
looking at you, Bill Dance God, No Bills never boring.
Bill is the man. But yeah, it's you know, when
you take a bit of a chance to put out
something like you guys have, and if you haven't heard it,
Go listen to it. You'll know what You'll immediately know
what I mean by this. You know, take a little
bit of chance to do something different and follow your
own you know, sensibilities and personalities of you and Joe Surmalley.

(23:46):
I mean, you know, it's it might it might be
a home run right off the bat, or it might
take some time. So I'm glad that the old meat
eaters are given you time talking too much. You want
to talk about man me too, And I think, uh,
I think one of the pieces that show that that folks.
You know, in addition to some of the stupid humor
that we do, which is there, uh, there are some

(24:06):
significant bits to chew on as well. We do a
fish news every week where we really dig into anything
fish related in the news and try and chop it
up and and have some analysis of it which will
tie into to what we're about to talk about. And uh,
and you know, it's is a mixture of high low
We have like really dumb poop jokes and then we
have book reviews of like elevated Hemmingway literature. Like we

(24:27):
we try and hit all the angles, sounds familiar. We
have you know, like when I first started this show,
I didn't I didn't think it through that thoroughly. Um,
to be honest, I was just copying Steve and Allen,
Joe Rogan, you know, And I feel like there was
a lot of people in our space that just that's
what podcasts were, because that's what had vaulted to the
kind of the top of the heap at that time. Um,

(24:48):
you know, just casual or at least pointed conversations that
that could go any direction. They're very organic in nature,
and that's what I think all of us kind of
started with. And what's cool about about Bent and some
of the other shows that we're working on a meat
Eater is that we're you know, we're starting to turn
from that a bit now that now that that's saturated
our space. Yeah, I mean there there's just not that

(25:10):
much room for Steven Ronella's and Joe Rogan's in the world.
And there are very many of them. So if you're
trying to beat those guys at their game, you're gonna lose.
You gotta do your own thing, man, Yeah, for sure.
And like I said, I mean, it's it's there's a
space podcast that are maturing into a big damn business now,
you know, all these these big carriers are jumping in
and turning it into something that it wasn't even five

(25:31):
years ago. UM. And so who knows where the next
five years will go. But any we're not here to
talk about all that. Listen to Ben, if you had
any dumbasses, get on it, get on it right now now.
Like when I think you were the first person, Well
let me start this way. It's probably better start this way.
I didn't you know, as we talked about last week
in the show, we want to focus a lot on
new hunters and and teaching people and learning from folks

(25:54):
that are new to our pursuits this year. Um. And
we talked a little bit about, you know, kind of
the tenor of the moment, you know, some what was
going on in the country last week, but we didn't
touch on it directly. UM. And I think Miles, I
think you were the first person to that I talked
to this about because we were on the phone about
something work related and it was like wait, wait, wait, wait,
turn on the TV. Uh, there's there is there is

(26:16):
an event going on, something is happening. And and then
we both you know, proceeded to watch in horror, uh,
and what unfolded right and I'm you know, to break
down that what actually happened there is not for a
podcast like this, but what we are, what we you
and I do for a living, and what we're very
invested in is is the role of media in all

(26:36):
of this and the role of people who have opinions
and are people that are journalists and report the news
and how those cross sections affect us all. And I know,
and the reason I wanted to have you on just
kind of talk about this because I know you're invested in,
you know, the role of politics in you know, what
we do and enthusiast spaces like hunting and fishing, but

(26:57):
also how we think about critical issues and how we're
able to objectively seek truth and how we're able to
reason things out in a way that's healthy for all
of us, you know. And you and I don't always
agree on everything, but we're able to have conversations that
are respectful, um and seem to go somewhere, you know,
look and learn from each other. I think that's you know,

(27:19):
that's part of the reason why I was I was
excited to have this conversation with you because you know,
just just as buddies. We talk about things all the time,
and the tone and tenor of those conversations is so
much different than the way I see debate or disagreement
reflected back almost anywhere in a public or media based space.
Right Like you and I disagree on a lot of

(27:39):
things politically, but through through talking that stuff out, we're
never we're never attacking one another, we're never trying to
undermine each other in a in a personal way. And
I usually end up learning something from that or coming
to at least be able to recognize a different perspective
that I hadn't seen before, whether I end up agreeing
with it or not. And it's it's hard to try

(28:00):
to overstate the value of that, right, it really is.
It really is like a foundational respect for the for
someone else's humanity, you know. And they're right and privilege
to have to develop opinions in the way that they
do from their own life experiences and perspectives. You know.
We we we're at this position right now where a
lot of people, not everyone, but a lot of people

(28:21):
are shutting themselves off from you know, from differing perspectives.
And and look, I know this sounds like overblown and
maybe a little megalomaniacal, but like the part of the
reason why I wanted to get into and why I
believe in outdoor media is I feel like it has
the possibility to be one of those few areas where
people who disagree about just on just about everything else

(28:43):
can find some common ground. Like we care about outdoor spaces,
we care about access to healthy lands and waters, we
care about our ability to maintain the cultures that are
so important to us. Like let's set everything else aside.
Let's let's just say we we hold those few things together.
And that's that's certainly idealistic, it's not always true, but
it's one of the things that I love or want

(29:05):
to love about the media that we get to create
is that I can bring in and speak to people
with whom I made disagree completely politically, but at least
we got these spaces so we can still talk to
one another. Yeah, And that's one of the first questions.
And and I want to get into kind of what
really spurred this on. It was a Matt Taiebi article.
But we'll quote Matt a little bit here, but that

(29:27):
that is a good point, you know, starting from and
I often we often do this on the show, like
we even with animal rights activists and even with vegans
and people that were supposed to not agree with we,
we do start from a similar value proposition with wildlife,
like I appreciate wildlife, I want them around. Someone who's
an animal rights activists definitely, definitely and very tangibly says

(29:51):
that they appreciate wildlife and one them around. We just
have different tactics to get to that end result in
management and and the way that we wrap our heads around,
you know, essentially cohabitation. So even in those conversations, I
realized a shared set of values, and in the broader
political conversation, and certainly in the way that the media
is set up now, people are losing that starting point.

(30:14):
They're losing this idea that we are there. Way, there's
so much we agree on. Let's start from there and
then we can work to where you know, respectfully we
disagree on something that that that respectfully word is a
hard one right now, But yeah, nope, I agree. So
I sent you a link to this article and and
I and to be quite honest with everyone listening, I

(30:37):
don't know how to address something like the Capitol riots.
I don't even really know what to call them. And
because there's so many weighted words and so much semantics
at play and how we present these and we'll discuss
that here in a minute. But I don't even I
don't know how how to address that. It's so waited
for me. I haven't had enough time to process it.
I can only say that it was a disgusting act

(31:00):
that I hope we never see again in American history.
I hope it is. It is something that we all
learned from and we don't repeat. Um. But again, um,
what we're about to talk about it, and in terms
of our news media has me thinking that we might
be doomed to repeat it again in some form in
a very short short time from right now. And so
mine as well talk about it, might as well crack

(31:20):
open some of the how the media plays a role
in this, because they play, in my opinion, quite a
huge role. So there's a and and let's be fair,
we can't say they when we talk about the media,
because even if we want to wall ourselves off into
outdoor media, we're still media man. So we have to
recognize that we we have some responsibility to own for sure.
For sure. Um yeah, and that that's the fact that

(31:40):
anyone who's listening to us talking means that we have
a chance to contribute to what's wrong or or be
agent for change at some level. Um, if you go,
you know, there's a website called sub stack dot com
that hosts a lot of independent journalists and a lot
of independent voices, and one of those voices is Matt Taieb.
Um you have a lot of experience with Taieb. I don't.

(32:00):
Actually I will. I will admit that this this article
you sent me was my foray into his writing and
his thinking. And uh, I am, I'm I'm intrigued. I'm
gonna check out more. He He is one of my favorites. Um.
He you know, the way he breaks down the way
he breaks down the media number one is huge. But
just the way he understands culture and in his bend

(32:23):
toward investigative journalism and objectivity is something that obviously is
rare uh in this space. And so you know, if
if you haven't read Matt Sabby, read him. I'm not
saying you have to be as in love with him
as I am, but certainly check him out and make
that choice. Sit around. But he wrote an article called
we Need a New Media System, Um, and this the

(32:43):
header here is if you sell culture war all day,
don't be surprised by the real world consequences. We're gonna present,
We're gonna reverse engineering this article. We'll present the ending
paradox and kind of work our way through what's going on.
But something I've been been calling to tie you, it's
I'll just call it. We'll call it for this for
this example, that Tye be adox and what he says
at the end of this article entitled we need a

(33:04):
New Media has what we've been watching for four years
and in this in this case he's talking about the
Trump presidency and what we saw explode last week. And
in that case, the capital riots is a paradox, a
political and informational system that profits from division and conflict
and uses a factory style process to stimulate it. But
Professor's shock and horror when real conflict happens, it's time

(33:26):
to admit this is a failed system. You can't sell
hatred and seriously expect it to end. Um, what's your
action to that? I mean, so my my reaction to
that is that it's it's spot on the I think
that the key words in that our profit and sell. Yeah,

(33:48):
as we as we dig into this conversation, those are
the two two concepts I want to I want to
keep to the four because I think they're very important
as we sort of untangle all of this. Yeah, And
I think a key to the you know, the way
that why we're talking about this kind of like the
way that I want to look at it is what
is the media's role overall? But then what's what's our

(34:09):
role in the media for for niche spaces like hunting
and fishing. Um, we have definitely And what Taibi is
saying here in many ways is that the media has
taken polarization and sold it in polar Polarization is often
coupled with the flaming of hatred, you know, flaming the
fanning the flames of hatred, is what I'm trying to say, Um,

(34:32):
And and that has affected how we reason and our
collective ability to seek truth and find objective truth. And
we're stuck with a very toxic way of looking at
the world. And that's a narrative base way of thinking
and a ship ton of confer confirmation bias. Um. Not
only in politics, but in our own lives. I mean,

(34:54):
I I totally agree with you there, I got I
gotta say to you things. One I I'm skeptical of
the way the concept of getting away from narrative, right,
because I think no matter even in the most quote
unquote objective sense, the way that we organize information of
of like what causes what is a narrative? Yeah, it's
the wrong term. Like, I don't know that we get

(35:15):
away from narrative. It's just that we need to to
think about narrative and less polarizing ways. Sure, Yeah that
makes sense. Yeah, Well, it's just kind of like the
weaponizing of narrative. You know, it would be it would
be the issue. And and an example of that, obviously
is if if you're told something, and in the case
of the Capital riots, if you're told you know, there's

(35:37):
a fraudent election and one side is stealing this election
from another, You're gonna be looking around and trying to
confirm that bias. You're gonna be trying to you know,
if you if you're told you that you believe in
this so fervently, your your way of reasoning is going
to be based on that confirmation. Bias that you now

(35:57):
have that one thing is evil and one thing is good.
And and often say that you you know, to create
a movement, you do not need a god, but you
do need a devil. And and certainly we are creating
devils out of each other. And you know, in in
the grand scheme of our national conversation, and that I
mean that that really that that was well put. And

(36:20):
I think that, look, it's kind of basic human psychology
right there. There are things that work more quickly in
our brains than others. And by things I mean, I
mean narrative triggers, So fear and other emotional responses immediately
elicit a response like or a change in the way
we think about something, whereas something that's much more methodical

(36:43):
and based on you have to ration it out. That
takes time, and it takes effort. And if you're trying
to sell people a media product, the fastest way to
get them to consume it and really identify it and
go all in on it is to pull those emotional
strings and pull those levers and fears a real strong one. Yeah,

(37:05):
and this I mean We're gonna get to some other examples,
but this is something in my work and conservation what
I do sitting on the board for backlud raters and anglers,
and even even when I was employed at the n
r A National Rifle Association, you could see, you know,
I think one is a more stark example than the other,
but you can see this type of like you could

(37:26):
see the pool of this of creating you know what
we'll call the slippery slope here, which is creating a
battle for something. Public lands are under attack, your gun
rights are under attack. There's more fervent support for things
that are under attack, things that may go away. And
so are we creating these false narratives in our own

(37:47):
spaces about what happened might happen to our guns, what
might happen to our public land, and use in those
same mechanisms to incite support for the things that we
care about. And it means a lot to me to
be able to say I I do believe in gun rights.
I do believe in protecting the environment and access to
our public lands. But I'm not willing to travel down

(38:08):
the path of inciting or at least invoking some fear
and the people that have joined my organization just to
get the end result like that is it becomes a
toxic environment if he if it goes too far, And
that's kind of where that slippery slope comes in. It does.
And man, here's here's where I want to get into
to the to B B article you brought up, because he,

(38:33):
you know, ultimately he goes through he lays an elegant,
elegant description of the problem. I give him a ton
of credit for the way that it's worded and the
way it's put together. I think he's spot on in
describing the problem. Um, you know, he he And then
but then he gets to the end where he tries
to to give a prescriptive solution. And this is where
it is problematic for me, because you know, he says,

(38:54):
media companies need to get out of the audience stroking
business and we need a new media channel, it press
version of the third party, where those financial pressures to
maintain audience are absent. Right, And that's great, but how
do we do that right? And and this is the
that's where I feel like it's a little bit of
a cop out because who's gonna who's gonna who's gonna

(39:16):
build that? And how is that going to be incentivized?
And this is gonna get a little heady, but I
think it's important to recognize that, like the granularity of
information that he's talking about, like that that ties into
the new landscape of targeted marketing. Right Like we're getting
customized news the same way that we're getting customized banner
ads every time we open the Internet. It's all in

(39:36):
the same algorithms. And and since that marketing that I'm
talking about right there is is what pays for the news,
I don't I don't get how there's a solution other
than some kind of a third party, like which would
have to be the government stepping in and creating this
new news channel, at which point we just have state

(39:56):
sponsored news. And that's not a solution either. So that's
where I run into a wall on this thing, man,
because I totally agree with him, and we live in
a free market system, and that free market extends to
our media, and right now the money is in that
micro targeting and by separating people whose tina little silos
and feeding them what they want to see. So how

(40:17):
do we get out of the attention economy? That's the
real question. I mean, the core of this is how
do we get out of the attention economy in the
way that it's the attention economy isn't the problem. The
way we weaponize the attention economy is the problem. Right, Like,
we're gonna have to continue, you know, from the from
the printing press on the intention economy grew, it's only
become more sophisticated, right in the way that it's been

(40:38):
been targeted. But Taibi says, um, there's a couple of
other things that he says that will help us track this.
He says, uh. Specifically speaking speaking about news organizations mainstream,
he says, media firms work backwards. They first ask how
does our debt target demographic want to understand what's just unfolded.
Then they pick the words in the fact acts they

(41:00):
want to emphasize. Um, this is my favorite. This is
really one of my favorite analogies, he says. News companies
now clean world events like whalers, using every part of
the animal, funneling different facts to different consumers based upon
calculations about what will bring the biggest engagement kick the
microt caravan. Fox slices off comments from a Homeland Security

(41:20):
official describing most of the border crosses as single adults
coming for economic reasons. The New York Times counters by
running a story about how the caravan was deployed as
a political issue by the Trump White House, staring at
poor results in mid term elections. Certainly, um million more examples.
That's just the one he chose in that particular paragraph,

(41:41):
but there's a million more examples. But I think going
returning to kind of the tactic here is to look
at a is not to look at an event and
its totality and try to dissect it in a logical way.
It is to use the narrative that you've built and
then take parts of what's happened, you know, in this
case immigration, and apply it to the narrative that you've

(42:02):
already established with your audience, and the audience comes right along.
But I mean, I think, I think you're absolutely right.
But I also think that the reality is that that's
what feeds people like we have now unfortunately proven that
what gets people riled up and gets them to really
have allegiance to a media brand and that allegiance then
translates into sales and effective marketing is that that picking

(42:28):
and that choosing and that feeding of what feels comfortable audiences.
And this this goes for all of us. We don't
like to encounter what's uncomfortable. That's that's We're not gonna
keep coming back to a source that makes us feel uncomfortable.
If we can go somewhere else that makes us feel
warm and fuzzy and comfortable, that's exactly. Yeah. When I
made a post earlier this year, before I got off
Instagram altogether, that was making a joke about a dilapidated

(42:51):
falling over ability and where I was hunting in eastern
Montana with a Trump sign on. I thought, that's hilarious.
I'm like, oh, how analogous is this? Like, that's it's
just hilario is to me, the satire, It's like thick
this is, you know. And so I post this and
in two things happened that really lighted me up. One
people that I actually respected, who are fans of this show,

(43:12):
who right into our TC at the met eat or
inbox all the time we're in the comment threat saying
they would never listen to me again, right because because
they believe one thing or another. I thought, wow, you
know that is we're in such a heightened state right now,
and this is right before the election, so it's just
it's it's I would say, it's a different time, but

(43:34):
maybe not because people are storming the capital the see
the power in our in our country. But at the time,
what struck me as one how the polarization in the
comments section fueled the Instagram algorithm. I bet more people
saw that post because of the engagement quote unquote than
anything I posted ever about anything, because of the way

(43:56):
it made people feel and the fact that it fired
them up, and the fact that they were oralized on
that position. So it was like an illustration of social
media algorithms of what they do right, how they how
they kind of capitalize on that. And the other thing
I told people in that of all the people who said,
I'm I'm un following you, I don't want to see this,
I said, if if you are made uncomfortable to your

(44:18):
your the point you just made, if you are made
uncomfortable by by points of view that are not your own,
please leave. Now see yourself out like this is this space,
this podcast, and the other things that we mentioned here
in the people that we promote, hopefully are not going
to be engaging in this kind of bubble think, this

(44:38):
kind of creation of ideological corners. Um it's just boring
to me, boring. It's I mean, I would say it
goes beyond boring to be like, you know, massively problematic.
But you're absolutely right. And the idea, the ideal. One
of the things I like about what you do and
I really respect about your show is that is your

(45:00):
idea that like, look, we're we're primarily this this podcast
that covers topics interesting to hunters and people who enjoy
wild spaces. Uh, And therefore that gives me the opportunity
to kind of chop up all these other things because
I'm going to get people who disagree on those other
things into the same space at the same time. Right.

(45:20):
So theoretically that should be an opportunity to be like, look,
you gotta you have to see all these all these
different ideas. You have to be confronted with them. And
if the reaction is wait, I think you might be
on the other side. So I'm out. I don't know
where we go from there. Yeah, there's nowhere to go
from there because you're now to the point where you

(45:40):
can't you have such and this this goes back to
Taibi's point, where we've hate incorporated and we've we've so
commoditized hate. That that's what people feel when they when
they see ideas, even ideas, even it's the suggestion of
idea that's the antithesis of what they've come to believe
for the narrative that they've painted for themselves. It's not
that when when when that narrative comes about that you say, mmmm,

(46:02):
well I don't agree with that. Let me break down
why that person thinks that I respect them, I trust
that that they're not a bad person. Let me figure
out what how they got to where they are, and
and and along the way, hope to become a better
person myself, and to be educated by how they got
to being an anti gunner or an anti hunter, or

(46:22):
an animal rights activist or whatever they are. And then
when I go back to defend the thing I'm really
passionate about, I now have more ammo in the gun
I am because I have looked at the dogma in
my own space, Because I've examined my own preconceived notion
of what's true, I can now objectively say I'm doing better,

(46:42):
like I have a more like, a healthier, a healthier
view of why someone might not want to do what
I do or might think what I do is awful. Yeah,
I mean, look, I think I think a particular and
I think it's helpful for us to work off of
like specific in person all examples with this, right, because
as you start to spread it out globally, it gets

(47:05):
really muddy and and then you're just painting people with
a really broad brush, which is part of the reason
why we're here. So like, let's let's look at a
specific example. I remember once ago you put something up,
uh somewhere. It might have even been that same post
where you you said, you know, I'm gonna I'm gonna
vote for Trump. That's what what I think I'm gonna do.
And I picked up the phone and I called you.

(47:27):
Do you remember this because because personally, and I will
admit this, that was not a that that was not
a choice that I was comfortable making. That you weren't
the only one that got got a phone call. I'm
sure you did, man, And and I I what I
I didn't call you, if you if you remember, I
didn't call you to be like what the funk? Man?

(47:49):
That was not the way that that conversation went. What
I called you, and I think what I remember saying
was help me understand what what What's what's your logic here?
Because I really were expect the way you think. And
I know we don't agree on a lot of things,
but but this is one that I don't understand. Please
help me understand it. Yeah. The other thing that that

(48:10):
that bothered me about that and this this happens across
the board, is that it's it's somehow takes people see
it as courage. I even I know it to be
courage because you you do have something on the line
when you say I'm going to vote for X. In
the public sphere, because cancel culture being what it is,
audience support being what being needed to do what we
do UM, some level of reputation, and for honesty and

(48:33):
respect and integrity being needed to do what we do. UM.
All of that is at risk if you say who
you voted for, or you say what your religious beliefs are,
or if you or if you say what your sexual
orientation is, or if you say, UM, any of the
really important foundational things about you. UM, you're at risk
of alienating some percentage of your audience because of hate incorporated,

(48:56):
because of people are being trained to hate the other. UM.
But in the case of that maybe get the strength
way far from from the point where where so I actually,
I actually don't think it is. Let me, let me
try and tie it together for you, because as people
who work in media, we have that pressure. And part
of the way that we survive, the way that we
get to keep our jobs is by having enough people

(49:17):
like us, right, and if if we step outside of
the space of what we think our audience wants to
hear and announce something that could be challenging or problematic,
we were literally risking our livelihoods. So I will agree
that that was a brave move that you pulled there
um too, that I after and after no influence by

(49:39):
by you other than just talking it through with me,
I voted for Biden. Like I got to the I
mean and and people were people in my family were questioning, like,
how could you be so wishy washy, And I said,
it's a hard decision for me. It was a hard
decision for me because I care about so many things passionately.
And I got to the voting booth very nervously, stood there,

(49:59):
looked around, I went for the you know, put the
pen towards the Trump bubble and took my pen back
and then I thought, hmm, I can't vote for I
can't vote for this guy. Just can't do it. And
then I bubbled in. I thought about writing in someone
I really wanted to be present. I thought, now that's
a waste, and so I circled Biden, like I don't

(50:20):
you know? And then I held my breath, thinking did
I make the wrong choice? Um? And so the fact
that I was struggling with that and very and I
would very honestly tell anyone I struggled with it. And
I'm not a Zealott for Trump or a Zellott for Biden, um,
somebody who was confused and but also knew this was
a very important vote and also knew this was something
that I had to think about and do right. And

(50:40):
and I have kids, and I thought about them, and
I thought, what am I gonna prioritize for my children
in the society I want them to step into. And
it was tough, man, it was really tough, um, and so,
and I don't know in their polarized times that there's
room for it to be tough, like let's just let's
just throw throw this out this way, and and and

(51:00):
to contextualize what we're talking about to bring it back
to where we started. If you and I happened to
be working in a different media, let's let's let's use
Fox News for example, and maybe maybe you had a
similar difficulty in in in the decision that you were
faced with. If you actually had to recognize that this
is not a simple decision, wow, and you made that public,

(51:23):
you would lose your job. I think that's right. New
York Times be the same way, exactly used that exactly. Yeah.
What but if it were the other way around the
and you you you wrote for or you worked at MSNBC,
you'd be you'd be painted into the same corner. Yeah, yeah,
it's it is. I mean there's a line in in

(51:45):
this in terms of Trump in the Tybee article everyone
monetized Trump and when he when he said that, I
I just I was like, that's one of the more
poignant lines that it is. I can think of everyone
monetized Trump, they monetized hatred of Trump or love of Trump,
but every you know, both sides dove in head first
two this polarizing character because it fit into this hate

(52:11):
incorporated way of making money. You know, either hate him
or hate him or love him as long as you
do it intensely, we can make money off you. You know,
as long as you feel strongly about it, we're good
to go. You'll keep watching. Um. And that's dangerous, man.
It's like it's just a dangerous premise all the way
around for all of us. Um. Again, Like, I think

(52:32):
I could not agree with that what that article's premise
was more and I think I think he said it
more eloquently than that I've read it elsewhere. Um, I'm
just stuck on within the constraints of how our consumerist
media works. Like, I don't know how you break that. Yeah,
I don't know how to break it either. I mean
it really, you know, his suggestion hints at something. But again,

(52:55):
I don't want to be trite and bringing up Joe Rogan.
But here's a guy who, uh really doesn't do anything
unless he wants to do it. He's not owned by
any media company, he's he doesn't have any agenda that
I know of knowing him and haven't been on that
show a couple of times. He doesn't have any agenda
other his own curiosity and his own need to seek

(53:18):
out things that he is interested in and are relevant
to him and staying true to that has allowed him
to grow that that show into some astronomical m heights
in terms of how many people listen. So that's that's
one example. He is one example I think of of
someone who's been kind of outside the fray in terms
of big media and the corporate interests and some of

(53:40):
the political interests and things like that. But he's still
not I mean, he's still in it at some level.
I mean, he's not immune to it. But maybe you know,
maybe a shining light of an individual who kept it small,
kept it uh real and original and tried to present
information on his own bend. But certainly not a journalist,
not an expert. And that's that's the problem there, right, Like,

(54:02):
as someone who who does have kind of a journalistic background,
that that's where I run into a problem with that
because he's not trying to report any news, and and
the other thing like it's tough to draw too many
conclusions from a sample size of one. Yes, yeah, that
would be the other place that I stumble with that one.
Those are the but and he is the exception, right,
And you I've seen a lot of people and heard

(54:24):
a lot of people on his show, Marvel at his
ability to stay out of the corporate cycle, to stay
out of the investment cycle, or to you know, not
get bought up by UM something that would influence the content,
and people marvel at that because that's the way it works, UM.
And to your point, I don't know how you change
that UM going forward. But Taibi goes on to to quote, uh,

(54:48):
Mitch McConnell. He said, uh, he says, in reference to
what we've talked about earlier, to repeat this info sifting
process a few billions times. And this is how we became,
as none other than Mitch McConnell put it last week,
a country that quote is drifting apart into two separate tribes,

(55:09):
with a separate set of facts and separate realities, with
nothing in common except our hostility towards each other and
mistrust for the few national institutions that we all still share. UM.
That's pretty well well put, Mitch. Um. The last part
is what got me mistrust of the few institutions that

(55:30):
we still share, UM, and into two reverse course to
your point earlier, Miles, when we get into kind of
an enthusiast space, like we're in everybody listens podcasts, we're
assuming everyone listens podcast shares a value system around hunting,
and even more shares like a specific value system that
we discussed here quite often, right, a value system that

(55:51):
got him in the door and is keeping them around. Um,
there's probably a plenty of people that listen to this
just to hate it. But I would hope that the
balk of people are are learning together and sharing sharing
the ideas that are presented on a show like this.
But but back to the mistrust of the few national institutions.

(56:12):
Mitch McConnell's right, you know, he's he's dead on And
I don't usually like what Mitch McConnell has to say,
but in this case, yeah, I made his his the
statement there is accurate. I'll just I'm pretty over representative
from both sides. I'm not pinning this to one side
of the other, ratcheting up the the division against the

(56:35):
other side and then turning around and screaming like this
is exactly why we're also so against each other. Like,
I don't think one day you can be fueling those
fires and the next day being like, hold on, guys,
we can't keep doing this. Like that's a good point, though,
I listened to guys like Ben Shapiro and then like
political talking heads, and this is what they do though

(56:56):
they've become it's become such us versus them mentality that
that we could play the paradox game. We could present
all paradox like everything has become a paradox and also
a parody of itself, you know, by like you are
presenting a narrative based way of looking at the world,
like you've you've decided on we are you know, the

(57:16):
conservative republic republican ideals or in the case the liberal
progressive ideals are the way forward. They're evil, we're good.
And so every show is is just affirming that thing.
Look at all the evil things that they did, Look
at all the things they did wrong. Even if you're
aware of some hypocrisy, you know that that you've also

(57:41):
done this. And again we may start playing in a
paradox game where we're just like watch the news and
write down all all the things because it's but you know,
the false equivalences and the way that people rationalize things
now is and is in and us versus them paradox
And if you do it's not bad. If they do
what it is, and then they're just round and round
and round we go propaganda one on one man, and

(58:01):
that's what it is. And to to to bring this
to to our own personal space, right because I'm sure
there are a lot of people out there right now
are like, I don't really give a ship what these
guys think about national politics. There I go to them
for hunting and fishing, and valid totally get it. But
the point I think I want to make is that
we're we're we're borrowing some of these same techniques that

(58:23):
we see in national media and we're applying them very
successfully in our niche media. Um. I mean I see it.
I see it in phishing media all the time. And
and there are these relatively popular phishing meme accounts, and
the way that they get big is by pitting different
you know, regional subsets or stylistic subsets of anglers against

(58:47):
one another into these comment feuds. And it just kind
of it just makes me sad, to be perfectly honest,
And and I get it because their engagement on those
posts is through the roof, right like if they and
and I'll use an example, right, someone the one one
of the ones that people love to do is to
get fire up the debate about whether or not Great

(59:09):
Lakes steel head or actually steel head, and for context,
steelhead or a Pacific Northwest fish they like go into
the ocean, but they put steelhead in the Great Lakes,
and now they migrate in and out of the out
of the Great Lakes and the trips. And for some
reason that this has created a fight, a semantic fight,
like those aren't real steel head, they've never been to
the ocean. No, screw you up at the left coasters

(59:31):
and your real steel head, Like it's so dumb. But
if you do a post that gets people on that topic,
your comet section explodes, and and and your popularity increases,
your visibility increases. They're leveraging that same tactic on a
much smaller scale within our industry all the time, and
and it just makes me sad. Yeah, and why wouldn't

(59:53):
they draw from that playbook? Yeah, that is the playbook.
That's what's been incentivized on social media, news media. You know,
it's the painting of that broad brush. I mean, I
could go all day in hunting. Um, I saw I
had people. I'm off Instagram totally, So don't come try
to say some message about the show or whatever. I'll
get back on. I'm just taking a break. I'll get
back on UM, but I'm taking a break because it's

(01:00:15):
just I don't like it. It's not fun for me.
It's a terrible place. It's stupid, it's and it's also
just it's not It's just a stupid place where people
are manufacturing all types of false narratives and all types
of false realities for everyone to either make fun of
or celebrate. So but there, when you go there, you
go anywhere UM at a larger scale like that, where

(01:00:39):
conversation is happening. You know, hunters that hunt with a
crossbow right versus vertical bow hunters, um, not only do
not only do we have you know a bit of
a debate about the efficacy and and and the wildlife
management implications of a cross bow, both good and bad.

(01:01:00):
And also you know new hunters coming in and being
nobody's across bow. We don't just do that. What do
we do? We start to characterize, oh and stereotype, Oh,
the guy with the crossbow, drinks mountain dew and eats
Case's pizza, the guy with a vertical bow. Whereas Sitka
and his elitist we're doing the same, college educated high
school educated, rural urban discourse. We're pairing that discourse. All

(01:01:23):
we're doing is applying it to the differences in our space.
That's all we're doing. That's what you just describe with
fishing exactly. And and and I could just like you know,
we could. We could point to a ton of different
ones in hunting. We can point to a ton of
different ones and fishing. I think the point that we're
trying to make is like we this this set of plays,
this way of of having your media system function works

(01:01:45):
right now, but it has really terrible implications. And so look,
I will I feel I'm a little concerned that I'm
trying to paint myself as as holier than though, and
it's like, oh, I'm above that. I don't really think
about it that way, but I really do try and
avoid getting in using leveraging that particular tactic in the
media that I create, because I think it's it's it's lazy,

(01:02:09):
and I think it's destructive. So well, but there's also
shades of gray, you know, when it comes to like
sometimes comedy, sometimes stereotypes make comedy work, Like oh, yeah,
you know, we have you have segments on your show
we do stuff all the time here where where we're
clearly performing satire, where we're clearly just having fun with

(01:02:30):
the way with the cultural differences from place to place,
or we're from pursuit to pursuit or whatever. Um And
and that's certainly is a part of who we are too.
So there's shades of gray. And I'm not saying that.
I look back on a lot of things I've done,
and I'm certainly ten years when I if I ever
come back and listen to some of the episodes of
my podcast, I go, whoa the hell are you talking about? Man?

(01:02:50):
I hope I do, because I hope I'm better then
now that I am now, and then I am as
I'm speaking to you right now. But um, I'm not
saying I'm better than anybody. I'm saying these these are
things that bother me and I hate it, and I
want to surround myself with people that, you know, start
at respect, and start at respecting the differences between us

(01:03:11):
and go from there. Um. And when social media have
a you know, really incentivizes that division, what are you
gonna do? I mean, people are trained to get more engagement,
to get more likes, to get more followers. That's the
arcade game of social media. That's what it is. It
is it is more points for whatever. You get more, Yeah,

(01:03:34):
get more points, and then you get community status based
on the number of points that you received, and then
you become some character of yourself because there's no way
to speak truth because all of it is every word
typed into Instagram and the history of Instagram is meant
to get attention in some way. Um. You're talking about
like you know, meme accounts or troll accounts on social media,

(01:03:55):
they're doing the same thing. They're just they're just angling
it towards towards hate or towards you know, as we say,
trolling or attacking people, um or citing differences. They're doing
the same thing there. It's just the antithesis of of
of you know, somebody like David Goggins or somebody that's
trying to inspire people, um and put that value system

(01:04:16):
out there for everybody. Like we're so cynical that anything
that's not trying to be that like postmodern is is corny. Right,
If you're trying to inspire people, or you're trying to
be celebratory, or you're trying to be positive, you're you're

(01:04:38):
so corny, nobody's gonna listen to you, Like you might
as well just go sit in the corner with Grandpa already,
because like no one's no one, no one's to hear
that ship. And well, yeah, even in this piece, Taiebi
goes on to say, like he when he first got
in the business, he thought that, you know, by the book,
journalists were boring people that were searching for objectivity and
never having a hard and faster in and we're boring.

(01:05:01):
And I think he's turned that on now he sees
the danger in um the absence of that. But we
were talking about this before. I I do think there again,
there are a lot of broader examples of hunting and
fishing that go to this, you know that that we
could talk about. We're not gonna examine them, you know fully,
and we didn't do a book report on these things.
But I was writing down and shared with you a

(01:05:23):
couple of things that I think show this UM. Number one,
I mean, I'll just make a list of things. The
green decoy push, like the website green about Green decoy,
is the push to label anyone with environmentalist tendencies, including backhuntry, hunters, anglers,
myself and others a green decoy. Um. Then you have

(01:05:48):
folks like Ted Nugent and Donald Trump Jr. And the
National Rifle Association. Um. Those folks, I think are examples
of the cultural divide and folks that are fanning the
flames of that cultural divide by playing some of the
games that there's some of the psychological games that we
have talked about earlier, and the taiebe brings up. Um.

(01:06:09):
All of those are examples, I think, and we and
and I think even people hearing me bring those things
up an examples. They're probably ears perked up based on
what they think about these these very polarizing individuals or organizations. UM.
And that's okay, but we're not gonna shy away from
talking about them. But one of the things that that
came to mind, and I don't I would admit to

(01:06:31):
not having checked in on this issue and maybe a
year it's been a while since it's been relevant, but
was the National Monument production that played out in December
with Donald Trump. Um. It was one of the first.
It was it was one of the most um striking
moments where I saw these two different narratives being played

(01:06:53):
out within my own community, or at least in in
reference to our community. Do you remember having a similar
I mean, you've been around longer than me, But do
you feel like this is one of the more striking times?
Is that overplaying it? I mean it, I think you
you chose an excellent crystallization for for the outdoor community

(01:07:14):
being presented with with a set effects that was interpreted
in utterly opposite ways. Yes, and so I did pull
up two articles. One of them is on Patagonis websites.
It's still there. Um the title, well the title is
is irrelevant, but they're big, bold headlines, and this was
on their website at the time, says you were lied

(01:07:38):
to and the president stole your land. So let's just
say for a minute that you don't know what the
national monument issue is or what happened in seen with
the reduction of two specific national monuments. Let's say you
don't know anything about let's say the first time you're
hearing about it. Okay, so patagon you said said at
that time, you were lied to and the president stole

(01:07:58):
your land. And they, by the way, it also used
that as an ad, just a straight ad that went
out all over the place. It was huge. That was
a campaign and a campaign of activism on behalf of Paedagonia.
No Patagonians in the outdoor space. They're not in the
hunting your fishing space very very much. They dabble, they
play in the fly fishing space. Yeah, yes, okay that yeah,
it makes sense. But they're they're around, right, So they're

(01:08:19):
not like a core hunting and fishing brand, but they're
around and we all know that they lean left. Uh
vanard van sard Is is who he is. Um. The
n ARRAY Institute for Legislative Action said a headline about
the same set of facts. N RA applauds Trump administration

(01:08:40):
for restoring access to Utah public land. So if this
isn't an example of a very important topic, an essential
topic for land designation and an access and habitat in
this country tree taking this example. Now, look, this is

(01:09:04):
three years ago, so maybe this is not a rampid
thing in our space on a broad level, but this
certainly is uh a part of it, you know. I
mean I think I think it still is. But I
think this is a good one to use because we
can skin it really well with those headlines. And so
let's just play like the the fact checker Arbiters of

(01:09:25):
truth moment. Here, I will I will first admit my
own bias and say that I was not a fan
of shrinking those monuments first, but I will also say
that if I had to rank the truth the truthiness
of those two headlines, I think the n r A
is comes closer like it. It hits a little higher
on the truthiness scale for me than than than the

(01:09:48):
Patagonia one. And that doesn't I don't care if you
were opposed to that particular shrinking of monuments. Lying about
it to piss people off doesn't help anyone's cause. Yes, Um,
to read a little bit from I'll read it. I'll
read you a little bit from the n r A.
I mean, first the Patagonia piece, and then the n

(01:10:10):
r A piece, and and and again. Let's just start
by saying, you know what's happening here? Is there being
there there's one the painting of motivation, purity and motivation
on both sides, Um, and again we're gonna say Trump
is pure. The NRA is gonna says Trump's motivations are
purity is doing it for you, And PATAGONA is gonna

(01:10:32):
say Trump is evil. He's doing it to hurt you.
He's lying to you, so, Patagonia said. In December of
the president illegally reduced Bears the Years and Grand Staircases
Galante National Minings by nearly two million acres, despite overwhelming
support from the gjority of Americans nearly three million, of
whom spoke up during a public comment period in favor
of protecting our national monuments. The President invoked terms like heritage, respect,

(01:10:56):
glorious natural wonder, and protection to substance sub substantiate the announcement.
What wasn't explained at the time, and only came to
light with a release of thousands of pages of documents
from a Freedom of Information Act requests, was that the
decision was nothing more than a political favor. Despite numerous
promises by a handful of politicians that the former monuments

(01:11:16):
contain no sufficient energy resources, it turns out that they do.
The redrawing of boundaries was deliberate and directly influenced by
an industry that spends billions of dollars lobbying the government
to get what it wants, and they went on to
give examples of coal, oil and gas, uranium and other
resources that that sit in a place that was once

(01:11:38):
a national monument and is no longer right. So to
be clear, what Patagony is saying is that the president
lied to you about his intentions so that he could
do favors for his buddies in the extractive resources industry.
I guess we will say in this case that square
up miles. Yeah. Yeah, And if that had been their

(01:12:00):
banner than it would have scored higher on the truthiness
uh scale. But the stealing of public lands is just
purely incorrect, yes for the redesignation right. And so this
gets back to and you start getting into how that
we we we take the like the whaler analogy, We
take the whale and we chop it up, and we

(01:12:21):
we present the fact quote unquote facts. How people see
this this very important happening in the outdoors. You had
Secretary Zinkie at the time he was no longer Secretary Interior,
was was really playing up his relationship with hunters and anglers. UM,
this was a big thing people wanted to support from
our community on this um. And so now you have

(01:12:44):
the National Rifle Association, which I read to you n
R a applause. Trump administration for restoring a S. S.
Tou tall public lands. Now, to be clear, I'm not
picking on the n r A for any other reason
that when I googled this, they came up first, so
good for them on s c O. But they were
not the only one that that had this. UM. This
was racking. MOLNLK Foundation, National Wild Stricty Fare and others

(01:13:06):
parated this same talking point. UM. I want to go
and double check that those folks are involved, but I'm
almost positive that many conservation groups in our space parroted
this messaging as well around this, and they just said
this is a very press release. Ee. The National Right
Association's i l A today applauded President Trump and Secretary
of Interior Ryan Zinky's decision to restore access to public

(01:13:28):
lands in Utah. President Trump announced it he intends to
shrink the size of the Bears Ears and Grand Staircases
Scalante National Monuments, spanning millions of acres in Utah. The
two national monuments were among twenty seven that President Trump
ordered Interior secretaries in each review earlier this year. Now
to go back to the points of emphasis, opponents of
this review said that the review was fake. All they

(01:13:50):
were doing is feigning and review, so they could they
take these two You know, this was what they started
out to do to shrink these two monuments, and the
review was what it was to kind of shield politically
shield this political action. It says the n Ray applause
the President Trump and Secretary Zinky. This is former i
l A Executive Director Chris cox decision to restore access

(01:14:10):
to public lands in Utah. Under the Trump Administration's decisions
regarding national public lands are transparent and being made with
the input of America's sportsmen and women. Hunters and sportsmen
serve as the backbone of modern natural resource management in
the United States. It's refreshing that the Trump administration values
their input. It almost feels like Chris Cox is trolling
us there. Feel like it feels like he's just being

(01:14:33):
like he's saying the opposite of what he's doing to
to to troll us, to see if wh' I'm noticing
um so, so they to to set off the other side.
You know, the motivation clearly here is to get hunters
and anglers on board and and to use the idea
that we pay through excise taxes and license sales for

(01:14:53):
the bulk of um conservation work in this country and
use that power to say like these these sent you'll
stakeholders are on board with this and we're doing this
for them, and also at the same time saying the
national monument designation is a problem for access for hunting
and fishing UM and so here we are that. You know,

(01:15:14):
it's I want to let you kind of comment, and
like I said, I will be very honest that I
haven't kept up on what actually happened in the last year,
but I know that there were some some mining leases
and things going up in UM both of these national
monuments that I haven't checked on. So maybe we'll update
this in the in the prologue. Yeah, I I I'm

(01:15:36):
not as up on this topic as I was a
year ago either. UM. So I would love to be
able to say here's what's going on, but I can't
do that with any authority whatsoever. I think that I
think that we are and by we I mean hunters
and anglers. We are a valuable demographic right now. And

(01:15:59):
and you saw at in the most recent the most
recent Congress right like Great American Outdoors Act was I
think an excellent example of representatives and political consciousness is
realizing we we we gotta get this board, this particular
group on board. It's one of those few places we
can sway people and and so all of a sudden

(01:16:24):
we're valuable and different, different different sides, however you want
to characterize that, different political persuasions are gonna skin what
they do differently in order to try and sway us
to one side or the other. I and I think
I think all of this circles right back to where
we started in that, like, you know what, I don't

(01:16:46):
really want to hear the predetermined conclusion about why this
is greater, why it's terrible. I really want to hear
how this is going to impact the public lands that
I care about, in in in concrete measure norble terms. Yeah.
And and you know when I now, when I announce
the social media, just be like, hey, I might I
might vote for Trump. It was like three days before

(01:17:06):
the election, I was like, right now, if I had
vote today, I'd vote for Trump. And it was a
shitty three days from me trying to figure that out.
But when I said that, a lot of people called
me from both sides to discuss. And what happened was
when I gave my reasoning. I would hear two things

(01:17:27):
from people on the right. They would say, Hey, our
public plans aren't under attack as much as you think
they are. It's not a problem. Because I was often
I was vascalating between gun rights and public land access,
environmentalism and things I care about for for healthy ecosystems
and healthy wild places and the ability to defend my
family and what that all means, and some of the

(01:17:48):
nuances between the two things. So I'm thinking about those
two things in my mind. I'm trying to weigh them out.
And I heard pretty consistently from people I respect, Ah,
you know your gun rights aren't under you know, you'll
be able to keep your shotguns and rifles. For people
on the left, and for people on the right, hey,
your public lands are fine. Like the trying to convince

(01:18:09):
me that the you know, the my fear should be
elevated against one of these issues that or another right.
And I think that to me, that showed me a
lot in just how people. You know, when when you
lean one way, even if you lean very intellectually that way. Um,
I think you're predisposed to to think that you know,
your gun rates are fine. Uh, access to those things

(01:18:31):
are fine and and in reality, maybe they're both not fine. Yeah,
that's what do you do? That's what I said. I said, Well,
maybe maybe they are not fine, and I, in my opinion,
they aren't because I can see because I care about
the stuff I read about it, I think about it
quite a lot um and I know that no matter
where I vote, I'm putting something I value at risk.

(01:18:54):
And that's the problem I have. And and it's not
a to me. It's not the you know, the better
of two evils or the lesser of two evils. It's
it's how do I It's It's not that, it's it's
how do I weigh these very important things when I
go and I make those decisions. And what we've just
highlighted here is is part of why we are unclear

(01:19:16):
thinkers collectively, and part of why even our passions, even
our pursuits are enthusiast pursuits like hunting and fishing land
directly in the same muddy water as national politics. Um So, yeah,
now all we have to do is end on providing
the solution. Go ahead, Miles, I, I yeah, I got it.

(01:19:38):
It's all figured out. What here's what I'm gonna say,
now here's here's my issue with all sides of it.
And I'm worried because I know what I'm gonna sound
like right now, but I'm gonna say it anyway. As
I said from the beginning, when when you first started
quoting the article profit and sales, to me, the I'm

(01:19:59):
I'm way to for and I don't see any evidence
of becoming. But I'm waiting for the candidate that is
not actually in the pocket of the huge, massive corporations
and the very few billionaires on both sides of the
political spectrum that are that are the ones pushing all
these agendas um to. I will also admit I'm not

(01:20:22):
a huge Bernie fan, just because like he strikes me
as like the really obnoxious uncle at Thanksgiving and that's
always yelling at everybody, and I don't really like that guy.
But I I do agree with his perspectives of of
we have to find a way to strip the profit
and the money out of our political system or we
don't have a path forward. And I in some ways

(01:20:44):
that's true with our media system too. But as I
said earlier, I don't like the the alternative of it
being a state run media either, So I'm not I'm
not on board with that ship. So I don't know
how we move the profit game out of these very
very important pillars of democracy. But god damn, that's what

(01:21:04):
I think we gotta do. Yeah, well, I mean, you know,
in the hunting in the hunting and fishing conversation, one
of the things I often say that that that when
I look logically at hunting, I'm like, man, I'm glad
the North American molelide widlife conservation exists because at least
we could start by like a thought out foundation that
has tenants and ways of acting and things that um

(01:21:28):
should educate us and dictate how we function and and
then we can determine our sets of values and try
to move around with that. So I'm always very comfortable
with that. But I will say this at the same time,
I don't know of any you can tell me of
of any political shows or any shows that are discussing

(01:21:49):
this kind of stuff other than advocacy groups or conservation
groups that clearly have that have a stated goal public
land access, elk populations, turkey populations, you know, fish populated,
whatever it might be, healthy habitats. These are are lots
of times single species conservation groups that are taking up

(01:22:11):
the mantle of political discourse within the hunting and fishing space.
There isn't a show about politics that talks through these
things and tries to educate people in hunting at all.
We have seeded the conversation to either outsiders or people
that have clearly stated nonprofit goals in terms of conservation
or wildlife, and we're both. So I'm not saying I

(01:22:35):
know much about all of that. It's not all bad,
but we certainly should try to break it down for
ourselves more because we don't have something dedicated to doing that,
and I don't know where where it starts or what
the incentive for it. That's it. The incentive for it
is like that would be a tough job for anybody,

(01:22:55):
you know. And as you said earlier, we have we
have uh this show. If everyone hated this show on
both sides and it tried to remain firmly in the middle,
which sometimes happens to this program, um, most companies would
be like that, that's not a good business model. Why
don't you go with the hate incorporated business model? Because
we did. We live in a world where people actually

(01:23:17):
actively hate hunting and try to stop it. And so
I could just come on here every week and go,
you know, here's the list of all the things you
need to be worried about and be angry about and hate.
Um wouldn't be hard to do. But you know, when
we do that, we often do that after we've heard
from an anti hunter or a vegan or something like that.
So we can then say, like, here's what they said.

(01:23:39):
Now here's what's happening on the you know, on the
on the legislative side or a policy side. That is
the manifestation of these feelings. Right, They're trying to ban
bear hunting New Jersey to save the bears. Here's a
guy who his ideologies lead to this legislation and the
end of this song, etcetera, etcetera. So at least try
to string it out in a way that just does

(01:24:00):
and pander to people's hate of people that don't like
what they do. If we can take one thing away
from this, I certainly think that we can, all of
us can can pick out when we're being pandered too,
when when the hate is being delivered in a weaponized way,
in a in a very narrative way, like when it happens,
when some big political thing happens, and hunting and fishing

(01:24:21):
and the outdoors are involved, we should be able to
look at it and suss out the real facts and
pick out the bullshit pretty quickly if we If we
train ourselves to really look hard at at the presentations
and the motivations of those UH outlets and conservation organizations
and entities that have goals, we fix it done. Follow

(01:24:42):
the money, Follow the money, all right, everybody? Well hopefully um,
And and we'll talk about what we're gonna do in
in episodes going forward. But we're gonna continue down this
path and and the Tayebe paradox will will be showing
up in future episodes of this year. Back anytime, man,
you know what you know, I love these conversations. I
love it too. I appreciate you in every way. And

(01:25:04):
go listen to Bent. If you aren't already listening to Bent,
you are a loser. Uh. And that's it's on you really,
So all right, man, you have a good night, and
we will talk to you real soon. Brother. Thanks brother, Yep,
that's it. That's all another episode in the books. Thank

(01:25:26):
you to our friend Miles Nolte. Is that right? And
Miles Nolte uh And I got called out this last
week on the Bent podcast because I've been consistently pronouncing
his name Miles Nulte like with a little French accent
over the eat, but Nulty like Nick Nolty, well all

(01:25:48):
the yeah, Nick Nolty is a badass. Um. So lots
lots covered. There a lot of ground covered. Again. Um.
I think this is an important topics. I think it
expands everything we do you in life, and it really
dictates how we talk to each other, how exchange ideas,
how we think about things. And I will freely admit

(01:26:08):
that every podcast of this nature, every media thing other
than as Phil brought up before we got in with Miles,
other than things like the AP and and some of
this strict news report, everything has a value proposition. Everything
has the thing that you listened for, right. I've listened
to podcasts before that made it seem like masculinity was
the only thing that mattered and it was under attack.

(01:26:29):
I've listened to podcast before that that told you that
religion was under attack, that your your First Amendment rights
were under attack, that your gender, that your race. I've
listened to a news broadcasts and all types of media
that had told me that every aspect of my life
is under attack, as we talked about with Miles, So, UM,

(01:26:50):
thank you for listening to that whole thing. I wanted
to examine that I was inspired by Taiebi. Uh, if
you want to go, there's no reason for me to
be promoting him other than I really Shady's ideas and
his writings. So go see him. But we're going to
next week and weeks after because we have so many
new hunters coming into this show and coming into our sport,

(01:27:10):
our pursuits. Uh, talk a little bit more about guns,
gun culture. Um, what do you need to know if
you're a new gun owner. We did go over some
of the n RAY safety rules with Phil a couple
you know last week. We're gonna do that more with
Ian Harrison, who's the editor in chief of Recoil magazine,
and then down the road some other folks that have

(01:27:31):
some diversion ideas from Ian. But first Ian next week
on the Hunting Collective, say by Phil By because I
can't go a week without doing run with

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Ep. 161: Emergent Hunters are Badass, Cultural Division in our Pursuits, and the Taibbi Paradox with Miles Nolte

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Ep. 161: Emergent Hunters are Badass, Cultural Division in our Pursuits, and the Taibbi Paradox with Miles Nolte

On Purpose with Jay Shetty