November 7, 2024 • 47 mins
Chris & Lauren come together the day after the election to discuss legacy, mainstream media and how it’s changed the course of voting over the years. They also weigh in on how much influence celebrity endorsements have and why Taylor Swift’s post for Kamala may have fallen short.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
This is the most dramatic podcast ever and iHeartRadio podcast.
Chris Harrison and Lauren Zema coming to you from the
home office in Austin, Texas. We are taping this the
day after.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
The morning after we are both on oh, I don't know,
six hours of sleep. We stayed up as the country.
Yeah sure, I'm one of the you know you and
I are both such news junkies. We had to stay
up and watch what happened. And I will say, no
matter how anybody feels this morning, I think I hope
it is going to be really good for our country
moving forward, that we didn't have a week long question
(00:42):
mark about the selection, that we did get those results
last night, just so that we can all try to
move forward together.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Here's what we know like right now, Donald J. Trump
is the forty seventh president of the United States. The
Republicans are going to take the Senate. I think the
House is still somewhat in doubt at this hour that
we're taping the and it does look like he's probably
also going to win the popular vote for president. So
that's what we know heading into as far as the
details go. But we're not going to spin this podcast
(01:09):
talking about the details and the results. You can go
elsewhere for that.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
This is not here also for us, as we always
tell you guys, and we're not here to talk about
how we feel about the selection. But I think that
Chris and I have both been probably I mean, I'll
say it for me, tell me if you agree, babe.
I've been more wrapped up in this selection than any before,
as I've said another podcast, because of the media, because
(01:34):
of how the media has acted, and so we wanted
to come on and talk about what these results mean
for the future of media.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
Because I think out of my entire life. Again, I'm
in my fifties, so I have been a part of
and seen many elections. Going back to Jimmy Carter. I
hate to say how old I am, but hey, Jimmy.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Still with us, member his family, said he was going to.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Vote, he dropped the one vote for Kamala, and he
ended up losing his home state of Georgia. So Jimmy
Carter did not deliver Georgia. But two things that drastically
I have seen change in the last three elections, and
that's what you and I really wanted to dive into.
And I think this is something that has changed forever
more number one media number two, and this goes right
(02:19):
next to it, so that would be one. I guess
maybe in one A would be polling, which is a
part of the media. Those two things have been disrupted,
turned upside down unlike never before. And I don't and
you don't want to be too verbose that the day after,
but I think it's safe to say those two things
(02:40):
have been changed forever, and that's what we wanted to
talk about today.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
Yes, and I do think we also want to bring
up the celebrity part of it a little bit too,
because us as journalists there it is I knew, I knew,
I knew your thoughts because we obviously covered entertainment journal
celebrity journalism. And you know, that's part of the reason
why we don't share our endorsements with you guys as well,
(03:05):
is because I don't know. I just think there's a
lot of a lot of places you can get news
and facts and media, and my biggest thing is to
encourage people to seek it out on their own and
to seek in this day and age, the source of
the information. To go watch the full interview, to go
watch the full clip, to not just judge based on
ten seconds you see someone grab on the internet. But
(03:28):
you know, Chris and I covered entertainment journalism. That means
we're trained in journalism. But I'm not going to go
out there and advise people on how to vote because
I the only politics I know is what's available for
everybody else to look into. So on that note, let's
get into the media. Let's get into our industry. Last night,
when we were watching you and I always flip back
and forth, we watched CNN a little, We watched Fox
(03:50):
a little, We watch MSNBC a little, We look on
Twitter a little, and we try to really get a
full picture. What was your overall reaction last night in
terms of the coverage of the results.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
The coverage of the results was actually what what again?
And what I found interesting is even the results as
they were coming in were obviously very partisan. As you
were watching CNN and MSNBC, they were much slower to
the take and the realization because Fox was calling states,
especially the swing states North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin much faster.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
And Fox called Pennsylvania and then they called Trump as president. Yeah,
I mean I would say hours.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
There was and everybody knew that, and by the way,
the other stations knew that as well. They were just
kind of like letting people go to bed. And it
was really awkward last night because of the Harris campaign
and the way they kind of handled it was really
awkward of you guys, just go to bed. Everyone just
will see in the morning. And so it kind of
left MSNBC and CNN and the lurch because obviously.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
They didn't have anything to cover.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
As soon as he won Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania was
over because Nevada and Hawaii, like the dominoes had fallen,
and so she had no path out. So Fox called
it appropriately and quickly, and so it was really interesting
to flip back over and flip around last night. But
I will say they they handled exactly how you thought
(05:16):
they were going to handle it. CNN kind of muddled
about in the middle. They kind of took their shots,
but not so much that it was embarrassing. MSNBC, you know,
more extreme, more extreme, yeah, Joy read Rachel maddout. But
those are the people, you know, they are extremists for
their side. If things had gone well, they would have been,
(05:39):
you know, gloating of what a referendum. It was for them, etc.
Just like you would assume Fox did last night, and
that's essentially what they did. So everybody, I think played
their role, which is exactly why we have the problem
we have now.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
I thought that CNN and MSNBC were so slow behind
Fox to keep people tuned in. Yeah, that's what they know.
They know, especially in MSNBC, that their audience wanted Kamaa
to win, so they were keeping I mean, they want
those ratings that I thought they were so slow on
(06:14):
the declaration because they wanted people to keep watching and
keep holding onto hope that maybe their candidates winning, And
that's not the right thing to do. The right thing
to do is to report what is happening. They all
have the same numbers again, no matter how you feel,
they're all getting the same numbers. At this point. This
isn't a game on election night. It's not a game
of my source versus my source inside this or that campaign.
(06:36):
We're just all getting the same numbers. So you could
have all called it at the same time.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
It was interesting too. The person I felt for and
I don't know his name, the guy who runs their
electronic board, you know, like.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
On which channel on MSNBC Kernak think and by the way,
the three those people, Bill Hammer, Steve and then who
does guy, But the three gentlemen that handled the electronic boards.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
First of all, your geography, fellas is unbelievable. They all
need to teach a masterclass. But knowing the states, knowing
the counties, King, John King, those guys were unbelievable for
all three networks across the board. They were the stars
of the show because they're going in every county, every breakdown,
and in at three in the morning. They're not getting
(07:20):
lost in going back and forth between you know, two
thousand and four, twenty sixteen, like all the So kudos
to all of them. But what I felt for for
Steve over at MSNBC is he kept showing. He was like, yeah,
Pennsylvania's read like, there's nothing I can show you that's
going to show you any different. And they're like, well,
it's just you know, ninety four percent is in. It's
(07:41):
just still too close to call. And he's just like,
I don't think it is, but you're right. They were
trying to stretch it out and I don't blame them
for that. That that to me, there wasn't bad journalism.
They were very sensational and they were definitely leaning into
their sides last night, But that those three gentlemen crushed
it last night. It always amazes me how well they
(08:02):
handle the boards.
Speaker 2 (08:03):
It was interesting. At one point we flipped onto Fox.
Sean Hannity asked the question is legacy media dead?
Speaker 1 (08:11):
After the selection and that started our debate.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
And he was asking that question obviously because what people are,
what that question entails is look at how this these
two candidates were covered in this election cycle. Look at
you know, Kamala did sixty minutes, Trump didn't. Trump did
the Joe Rogan podcast, Kamala didn't. And he's kind of
pointing at how much does legacy media matter? Now. I
(08:34):
will say, for me, that question coming from Fox, and
I thought, maybe you and I view legacy media a
little differently. I group Fox in with legacy media too,
because so you do. Okay, to me, I'm like, broadcast
TV is legacy media. But maybe he meant literally the
old school networks versus the cable networks. And differently, you.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Can't differentiate yourself, guys. It's like your you are mainstream media. Yeah,
you're on team Fox CNN MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, They're
all I definitely put them all in the same basket
for sure.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
So the question is is legacy media dead because how
much did it matter in the selection?
Speaker 1 (09:11):
My opinion, that's too extreme. It's not dead because last night.
We're going to look at the ratings in the next
days and I promise you what I think is dead
though we're not dead. But I think what has changed
dramatically is CBS, NBC and CBS. I do think the
(09:35):
networks took a huge hit, a massive, massive hit. I'll
be interested to see the huge ratings difference of who
watched the networks last night, who watched cable. I grouped
them all together in the mainstream media world, and I
think it's way too over the.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Top to sa so networks are NBCs, ABC, Cable as Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
So my opinion is the networks did themselves a great
disservice this election cycle, and I think they went a
bridge too far sixty minutes the debates, just time and
time again, they showed themselves to be incompetent and not trustworthy.
(10:23):
I think that's the best word, not trustworthy. And so
people I think ran more to their corners on the cables.
They went to MSNBC, they went to see Ann, they
went to Fox. I think they have left in droves
from the networks, But I don't think you can say
across the board this huge broadbrush that legacy media is dead.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
So on a daylight today, you know, we've been so
deep in the day to day of the election and
news and rallies and interviews and all that, and then
on today you start to think, years from now, what
will I remember. What will I remember about when the
results were revealed? And what will I remember about this
entire election cycle now that it's over. What will I
tell kids about, you know, years from now? And I
(11:21):
agree with you that it's the trustworthiness and most importantly
the ability to question and critique, which like them not
doing legacy media not doing that is what has lost
the trustworthiness. I think I think that I agree that
it's not totally lost. And here's why we didn't really
(11:42):
have We had two very different candidates here. And so
I don't know if this was the best test of
whether legacy media still matters, because I mean, it shows
that it's that they're flailing and they need to get
it together, but like, we didn't have like two brand
new candidates and where did each of them go? Because
to me, that would have been a clearer litmus test
(12:02):
on well, which platform really got the reach out. We
had someone who'd been VP, someone who'd been president before,
They're so different, were coming off of like, you know,
you know, so much turmoil there. It was just such
an extreme situation with so many factors. But I will
remember Time magazine putting Kamala Harris on their cover without
(12:26):
interviewing her, right. That blew my mind. It was just
a few I don't even know if it was. It
was maybe within the first week that she'd been announced,
and she was on the cover a drawing of her,
not a photo because they didn't get photo shoot with her,
a drawing and the headline was something like her and
I went to read it, I'm like, I'm interested. They
didn't get an interview with her, right, And that blew
(12:48):
my mind because what is that? That is journalism without critique,
without question, without analysis, without direct source material. That is
not journalism. I will remember that. I will remember no
one asking the question. In the first few days of
wait her approval ratings were at this and now she's
(13:11):
the candidate. We didn't have a primary. Let's analyze this
a little bit. And you and I have said this before.
I think that hurt her as a candidate because the
American people looked at it and said, wait a minute,
we have questions. Journalists are supposed to ask the questions
that the people are asking at home, and they didn't
do that.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
I think they did a great disservice to themselves. Obviously,
the major networks are in the bag for the Democratic Party.
There is no more question. And I think this is
a very glaring error on their part. There is no
more question that they are biased. There is zero point
zero percent chance that you will get unbiased news on
(13:50):
a network. They showed themselves and I don't know whether
it was just Trump and his Wait, Trump and his
craziness just got the better of them.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Okay, well let me just clarify for the audience. First,
you mean networks? Are you including Cable and the Cable
Classic broadcast stas?
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Listen? Yes, I'm talking. When I say networks, I mean
the big three, NBC, CBS.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
What about the sixty minutes interview?
Speaker 1 (14:10):
So they should be above it, all right, They're supposed
to be a bit of all.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
They're supposed to be totally unbiased.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
Box, MSNBC, and CNN. They're biased.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
So we know that, we know they're slanted one right,
you get what you pay for.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
If you're listening to Rachel Maddow and enjoy Read, you
know you're you're in the echo and if you're listening
to Fox News, you want to be in that echo chamber.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
And a key difference to note for people is that
the broad old school broadcast networks, NBC, ABC, CBS, they
have licenses that they get, right, am I explaining this right? Yes,
and and that we and we helped pay for them.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
And whether it was Tom Brokaw or you know whoever,
back in the day, there was this air of and
it's not that those people didn't have opinions, but there
was an air of we're not, we're not. The cables
were going to hold ourselves to a different standard. We
are going to be unbiased as much as we possibly can.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
And there's the equal time rules.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
And equal time rules, which.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Because they have those licenses, and you talked.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
About things that happened, and there was this this slow
domino effect and I think the biggest glaring thing Joe
Rogan did an interview with Elon Musk in the closing days.
It should have been Kamala Harrison, could have been Kamala
Harris and and Tim Walls. It wasn't. They denied him
the opportunity to interview him interview that go on that
(15:34):
his podcast. And it was interesting when Elon Musk went
on and they were they were chatting, he and a
Rogan and Rogan's like. The difference was when Tim Walls
lied about stolen valor, you know, his rank being a
head coach of his football team. He was not a
head coach of his football team. He was an assistant coach,
(15:55):
which you may think, oh that's not a big deal.
It is he Tanneman's being in Tan Square. Oh whatever.
So he lied about his rank coaching, He lied about
so many things, and his time and time again was
I'm a knucklehead, me not so good with words. And
everybody just kind of laughed at this jolly old fella.
(16:16):
And Rogan made a very great point. He said, nobody
called him on his sh Nobody called him on his bullshit.
Nobody said, sir, let's go further. What was it that
made you lie about your stolen valor that you you
said you were in action and you carried a gun
or a weapon a time.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
That's not an answer.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
Yeah, that's a lie. You lied. How did that happen, sir?
Was it something that was just maybe perpetrated and put
on you that somebody said it you kind of let
it go? Was it you misremembered?
Speaker 2 (16:46):
Like?
Speaker 1 (16:47):
What was it? Same thing with Tianem and Square. It's
like saying I was at the jfk assassination. That was
a pretty big moment in history, and so nobody pressed
him on, Okay, you're a knucklehead, sir, let's go deeper.
But he never had that moment, and so Rogan and
I know Tim Walls wasn't running for president, but that
was just a microcosm of how poor the journalism was
(17:09):
and how much they were in the bag all along.
And there were so many moments, whether it was Leslie
Stall and going back to the Hunter Biden situation sixty
minutes this time around with the debacle that they had
the debates.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
Well, let's talk about the debates for a minute, because
I will remember going back to what well you remember,
I will remember the debates and we talked about it
on the podcast before, and that's where I think on
CNN did a better job with Biden and with Trump
back in that debate over the summer by just saying
we're not going to fact check either side, and that
came across more credible. And then the ABC debate with
(17:46):
Trump and Harris, that was when they only fact checked Trump,
and again, whatever your party is, that doesn't look good.
People at home are going, well, wait a minute, what
fact checked them both? Then be consistent and have ethics
that you're standing on. And where did the I forget
where the Vance Waltz debate? What network that was on?
(18:08):
Was that on CBS? Yes, and same thing there, you know,
and JD. Vance had to call them out and say,
wait a minute. You guys said you weren't going to
fact check, and you are a fact checking and.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
You're wrong, and by the way, and your facts are wrong.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
So they're coming across fully on the democratic side. I
think that newsrooms have to look at that. I mean,
I don't know the exact number, but I saw statistic
the other day and I think everybody can is general
newsrooms are overwhelmingly democratic. They and the biggest thing, though,
the biggest thing is are you able to put that
(18:43):
aside and ask important questions and critique both sides equally
to your job. That's what it's all about. We're human.
It's impossible to not have a personal bias. And you're
an American. You get to vote, you get to care
about who's running your country, no matter what your job is.
But can you put that aside? And I saw this,
(19:04):
I just about.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
The giving about just about newsrooms, about ninety they went
through and they're like the donations to Democratic or Republican Party,
and it was like it was over ninety five percent
Democrats would donated to Democratic Party. And as you look
up what you're looking at, it's like even and I
would they did themselves and their party a disservice by
(19:29):
not doing their jobs. I think if they had done
their jobs, which by the way, they did, they holding
Trump and JD. Vance accountable actually did them a favor.
They had to fight hard. And Trump even said it
last night in his acceptance speech. I sent JD into
the enemy territory. He would go into MSNBC, he would
go into CNN. He would go in enemy territory and
(19:50):
take it and take the beatings and the Democrats and
the legacy media did not provide that, they did not
give a test to Kamala Harris, and they allowed and
NBC brought this up last night. Did we all do
a disservice by allowing what essentially was a coup and
(20:11):
knocking Biden out of the race and just giving it,
handing it without without a debate, without a vote, without
anybody asking any questions. One day President Biden is great
and he's competent and sharp. The next day, Kamala Harris
is your candidate. Get over it and approval. I don't
blame the Democratic Party. That's that was their job of
(20:35):
to push whatever their agenda was. But the media went
along with it. They went full lockstep, and that did
a huge disservice to themselves, to the Democratic Party. And
if they think that people don't see that, don't feel it,
and don't notice and the continued gas lighting of telling
people you're seeing something and hearing something that you didn't
(20:58):
for example, and this wasn't a major change because by
now the election over, but even last week the Liz
Cheney hoax and the lie about when President Trump came
out and very clearly said you're sitting there in your
ivory tower, and you are you and your dad, Dick
Cheney love to send people to war, and you send
our brothers and sisters and sons and daughters to war.
(21:18):
You sit in your ivory tower. What would it be
like if the guns were pointed at you?
Speaker 2 (21:22):
What would it be like if you were on the
front lines? Essentially?
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Essentially? And you know, he said it in his Trumpian
style whatever, And they perpetrated this for a couple of days.
They tried to perpetrate this hoax that he threatened her life.
And everybody's had enough. I think the people are just
so tired of being lied to and these agendas, and
the media really has failed in that department. And if
(21:48):
if you're a news director, and if you're not looking
in the mirror and taking stock and cleaning house this morning,
and I'm not saying firing everybody, but if you are
not thinking I need to hire people who don't talk
like me, who don't look like me, who don't sound
like me, you're insane.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
Well sure, but like that extends to who aren't my party? Right?
I mean, so I'm pulling up this these statistics from
the American Journalist dot org from a twenty twenty two survey.
So the mores they said slightly more females and journalism
now slightly more minorities in journalism right now. Also more
journalists say they are democrats. You have to have diversity
(22:28):
of party when you're covering political elections. And this is
the biggest one that stuck out to me is fewer
journalists value analyzing complex problems. That is a real takeaway
(22:49):
from this study.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
That's like saying plumbers dislike working on drains. Your entire
job is breaking down complex problem, diving in.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
And plumber's got to get in those.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
You got to get the raads.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
You're not doing a good job.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
Construction worker hates building walls. I just like roofs. I'm
just going to put roofs up, but no walls. Yeah.
That that truly defines and they really do. You're right.
They go to the simplest answer and the talking points
cannot be handed down from upon high. In my hope
and my dream is that for the next four years
(23:27):
or next two yearsuntil we get to the next midterm,
is that they hold this group accountable. And they and
by the way, I have no issue with it. You know,
there is no question that they will because that's you know,
that's been their job all along. But everybody, that's your
job is to ask the questions and follow the science
(23:48):
and and ask those questions.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
And and you know, part of the problem, I think
has been a cultural shift that happened with the pandemic
where if you asked questions, you were bad, and that
in a scary way. That's thing we have to get
away from as a country, as a culture. It's okay
to ask questions. It's not You're not a bad person
if you're questioning statistics or science or you know, we
(24:15):
have to get the I think something that Elon Musk
has been talking about a lot lately. I think I'm
bringing up because he mentioned it in that Joe Rogan
interview is that the solution to misinformation is more information.
It's not silencing, it's more information. It's okay. Well, if
you the wrong takeaway was made from this little clip,
(24:37):
go watch the whole clip, you know, go watch the
whole interview. And I do think the impact of like
seeing for the first time president and vice presidential candidates
sitting down for three hour podcasts with Joe Rogan. I
mean that had never happened before. When have we heard
an unfiltered three hour interview with candidates. I do think
(24:59):
that's going to majorly impact the legacy media in the
long run. I think people found it refreshing. I think
that they saw who candidates really were instead of seeing
them in these sound bites. And going back to one
thing we haven't mentioned yet except briefly, but the CBS.
Probably the toughest interviews Kamala Harris did were with Brett Barron,
Fox and with CBS in sixty minutes. But then sixty
(25:21):
Minutes lost their credibility there because when there were questions,
they wouldn't release that full transcript.
Speaker 1 (25:25):
They covered their tracks, they edited the tape, they edited
her interview to make her look better and more correctly, they.
Speaker 2 (25:31):
Wouldn't release the full transcript. And then over here you
had three hour interviews that Trump and Vance were doing
for all to hear. Yeah, and look, do I think
that Joe Rogan pushed or grilled as much as sixty
minutes did?
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Know?
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Because that's not his I'm not critiquing him, it's not
his platform's And he said.
Speaker 1 (25:51):
He was going to do the same with Kamala Harris
if she had taken the time.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
I don't think he would have sat and grilled or
he said he wouldn't have.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
It was very interesting. Is and you brought up a
good point, is the legacy media day? No? But is
the world that the Joe Rogan's, Megan Kelly's, Tucker Carlson's
that they created is that impactful one and eighty percent?
And if you don't acknowledge that this morning, you're fooling yourself.
(26:19):
That Joe Rogan interview was massive. It was massive because
for both vi Ja da Vance and Trump, because whatever
you thought of them, you got to hear them and
you're like, oh, and I think a lot of people
took away he's not weird. He's actually like jd Vance
is a really brilliant mind. Holy cow. Whether you agree
with him or not is beyond it's but this guy
(26:41):
is really sharp. And you know, Kamala had the same opportunity,
so did Tim Walls. They avoided it, and what they
went and did was kind of the old school. You know,
we're gonna I'm gonna go let Oprah talk, I'm gonna
let Jennifer Lopez talk and kind of segueing into our
next topic, what's more impactful these podcasts and these kind
(27:05):
of independent journalists, or just having Oprah or the Avengers
create a really cringey video for you. I think you
can definitely say that those videos, those endorsements give very
little weight and credence to your platform to the vote.
(27:31):
And then what you see the impact of what Joe
Rogan and all these other podcasts created, You're like, man,
this is there. That is a big shift.
Speaker 2 (27:39):
Well, it's interesting, right again, it's kind of the so okay,
we're talking about do celebrity endorsements matter? Now? I do
think this isn't necessarily something super new. I'm not sure
celebrity endorsements have ever really mattered, but for some reason,
politicians have still gone after them.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
Yeah, you're right, that is a very weird thing.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
I don't know when they've ever mattered. I really don't,
because you know, this morning, let me just give the
smallest focus group test. I'm talking to my mom and
my sister about the results, and I brought this up,
and both my mom and my sister said, no, they
don't matter, and they're annoying, And I'm like, oh, are
they even a negative to people at home? I I
(28:19):
go back to the Taylor Swift endorsement of Kamala Harris.
When that happened, I was like, WHOA, this could be
really big. She's the biggest star in the world right now.
And I sit here, Swifty, I'm a big fan and
we both are. But I don't think it mattered in
the long run.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
Did not move the.
Speaker 2 (28:34):
Needle biggest That's that's the best test to me, because
that's the biggest star in the world right now.
Speaker 1 (28:40):
Yeah, hands down.
Speaker 2 (28:41):
And Trump is winning not only the electoral but the
popular vote. So and what does that tell you?
Speaker 1 (28:49):
Well, and it's not new right, I mean like Oprah's
Oprah's always going to endorse the Democrat. Bruce Springsteen is
always going to Robert de Niro, Like it's the same
people and they're always endorsing the right.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
RFK was talking about his wife, Cheryl Hines and how
she's she's handled him doing this political thing, and he said, well,
it's been really tough for her. She's an actress, she's
on Curb your enthusiasm. He said, it's been really tough
for her because her industry, probably more than any industry,
is so politically involved and democratic. And by the way, Democrats,
you could have had RFK one of the wilder One
(29:23):
of the wilder choices to me is like.
Speaker 1 (29:25):
Il Gabrett, I don't know, I had Tulci Gavartt and
r FKA worship Hero.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
Wish they'd been a primary anyway, So I I do
think it speaks to Yeah, I don't know. It's interesting
they but year after our election after election, they go
for it. Politicians try to get on both sides by
the way they try to get celebrity endorsements. This election,
(29:50):
I wanted to ask you what you think of this
type of quote unquote celebrity endorsement that Trump had. I
think he I was coming from a much more grounded,
valid connected place with his endorsements. Dana White, for example,
not the biggest celebrity in the world, but Dana White
(30:11):
could get up there and say, I've been friends with
him for twenty years, I've known him, I know his family,
and I think that came across more genuine.
Speaker 1 (30:18):
And he's an endorsement, and he's an entrepreneur, he's a
businessman that has created because of him.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
And oh, you mean Dana White has created something? Yeah,
it's not.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
Yeah, in interesting, you know, and it's not And by
the way, so has Oprah. She's the biggest entrepreneur in
the history of mankind. But you're right, they were very
different endorsements of Dana White Elon Musk.
Speaker 2 (30:40):
Well, I think part of the problem the Democrats have
is over and over again, you got the same celebrities
coming out. It's George Clooney, it's Oprah, It's all the
same people, and so you're like, what, this doesn't seem
legitimate to me. It just seems like here we are again,
you know. Or Trump bringing out Elon Musk, that was
a really powerful one because Elon my was a former Democrat,
(31:01):
and because you've got i mean, everybody could agree one
of the smartest men in the world. You know, this
isn't an actress or a singer, and no offense. But
I'm not saying they can't be smart. But so that
had a different validity to it, I thought.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
And we can't look by you know. One of probably
the most monumental shifts in the history of media was
Elon Musk buying x Twitter and turning it into free
press and making sure that if you wanted to see
a full clip of something, it was there, and just
taking the veil of secrecy, in the veil of even
(31:47):
being able having that question. Am I you know? Am
I getting the truth here? On X? Is the algorithm
against me or for me or whatever? You know? Him
buying X and then in being a part of that
free press is massive. That was huge, But you're right,
the endorsements were very different when you're getting Oprah again
and Jennifer Lopez and you're getting the same ultimate.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
Let me add on to the X thing really quick,
since you brought that up. It We all have to
be aware of the algorithm. Whatever social media platform you
are on. I follow people who I don't agree with
because I want to keep seeing the other side of things.
We have to be aware of that. The algorithm will
(32:29):
feed you what you want to keep you in an
echo chamber. But the fact that Mark Zuckerberg admitted on
the record that the Biden administration had had him via
Facebook censor certain information about the pandemic and about the
Hunter Biden laptop for the American people was shocking to me.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
And Jack Dorsey and Twitter admitted as much as.
Speaker 2 (32:51):
Well, yes, and that they had at one point blocked
President Trump taken his account down. Why are these business
men have no reason, no credence to to silence, and
I don't know whatever, it's their business.
Speaker 1 (33:07):
But when the FBI and everyone shows up your door
like well.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
And I guess my point in all this, without getting
into too many specifics, is simply this. I do firmly
believe that we have that free Our country is built
on free speech is our first Amendment. It is going.
It is what our founding fathers were escaping was not
being able to speak our minds, and being able to
(33:36):
speak your mind means other people who disagree with you
get to speak their minds. And I am very afraid
and was very afraid by what some people John Carrey
in particular, or Hillary Clinton were saying about how we
needed to start silencing misinformation. When John Carey said we
need to take a look at the First Amendment and
(33:59):
and think about if we need to change it, that
was just a few months ago, very scary to me.
So I do think elon buying Twitter, and I was
a little I've changed my opinion on it because I
was a little like WHOA wow, okay when that first happened.
But I think it's a freer place now.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
I would say the long and short of it is this.
Celebrity endorsements are fun, they're cute, and they're fun. Overall,
you have to say they're meaningless. They're not impacted because
what those people can impact and this is nothing against
those people. You know, I'm not making fun of Scott Bao,
Hulk Cogan or Jennifer Lopez or ropers today because they're
(34:44):
just supporting what they believe in. And good for you
for speaking up and what you believe in. That's great,
but your meaning fullness is zero. You can't take today's
referendum and what happened last night and say anything else
because look at the list of celebrities and who was
backing Kamala Harris and ad meant nothing because what those
(35:06):
people can't affect is what people vote on. Nobody and
a UA can't say nobody, but clearly the majority of
people are not going to vote because Jennifer Lopez, Oprah Bono,
Barack Obama, whoever says you should do this. Those people
aren't affecting the economy, they're not affecting immigration, they're not
affecting a woman's right to choose, They're not affecting any
(35:26):
of the issues that you care about. Those people aren't
on the both with you. They're not changing the world.
And so I think what you would have to say
if you're just looking at the science and the facts. No,
celebrity endorsements are fun, they're cute. They work at a
round sometimes yeah, sometimes very cringey. Yeah, Avengers, come on, got.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Come on, man, you're my family annoying.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
That was a really cringey video you guys released last week.
But and honestly, most of those videos. Anytime anyone comes
to you with a script and says everybody is doing this,
if you are an agent or if you are a celebrity,
don't do the group thing. It never works. It comes
off really cramp.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Yeah, the group thing doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (36:10):
Oh, those things are so bad.
Speaker 2 (36:11):
The timing's bad.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
Remember the zooms the World, the white Dudes for Harris thing.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
Oh, I was going back to the pandemic.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
Those were bad too. But anyway, so I think in
the end, those people don't affect change. They're just fun
and they're good window dressing when you need someone at
a rally.
Speaker 2 (36:29):
I think that's been proven more by the selection and
Beyonce actually sing wow to BT's switch. To be honest,
that could have maybe maybe it's a powerful voice when
in singing. I think that this election proved more than
the is legacy media dad question. It proved celebrity endorsements
don't make a difference. It really did. You had Taylor
(36:51):
Swift Beyonce say I can't think of two bigger people
in the entertainment industry right now.
Speaker 1 (37:02):
And we can go further too. How about the late
night shows. Oh, Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, John Stewart were
one hundred and fifty percent in the bag for Kamala Harris.
They could not have campaigned harder for her. They used
talking about equal time, They used their shows for nothing
but propaganda for the Democratic Party. So the late night shows,
(37:25):
I mean talk about legacy meeting.
Speaker 2 (37:26):
I mean Kimmel got up there and told people, don't
if you're planning on voting for Trump, vote late. So yeah,
he couldn't have been clear.
Speaker 1 (37:32):
Yeah, no, there is no there is no kidding. I'm
just a con.
Speaker 2 (37:36):
Do you remember Stuart had Waltz And I find Stuart
I think he sometimes will see both sides. I find
him a little bit of a different category. I think
he had Walls on for an interview only I don't
know if he ever I'd be curious if he ever
reached out to answer Trump.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
Yeah, but though the late night shows you have to
throw them in the bag of wow, what is their
meaning anymore? And what is their usefulness? And it's very
interesting because you know, did you did you end up
killing your brand and your audience for your selfish thoughts
(38:13):
deeds not? You know, like you like, who's going to
go back and watch Kimmel next?
Speaker 2 (38:17):
All right, but here's something that I want to just
give from an empathetic place. When you were in that
world and you and I have been in that world, Yeah,
everybody around you feels that way. I don't think I've
ever told this story on the podcast before, but when
I first joined ET, I joined in twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen,
Trump wins kind of a big time to start in
a media outlet. Now, luckily we were entertainment journalism, so
(38:40):
I wasn't so fully in it. But when Trump won,
our online editor so my boss sent out an email
to the entire staff, the entire staff, that said something
along the lines of, I know we're all really upset.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
We're all hurting too.
Speaker 2 (39:00):
I know we're all really upset about what has happened today.
If anybody needs to go home and take a minute,
you can. And I'm new in this job. Can you
imagine when I was there? Yeah, I'm new in this job.
And I read that and I went, this is nuts
to me. And by the way, I didn't vote for Trump,
(39:20):
but I remember I read that and thought, this is like,
why is she assuming her entire staff feels this way?
This is we're a journalism outlet, and why regardless of company,
why would you assume all of your staff felt that way?
And I just realized, whoa I mean, that was literally
an email signal to me, you need to feel this
(39:44):
way here. And so I do think that maybe what
you know, what you're talking about a lot of those
hosts and producers and all these people, at the very least,
they need to wake up the fact that the Republicans
have won the Republican vote. They need to wake up
and ask what is our our audience really want to see?
Are we doing a disservice to our audience, no matter
how we feel personally, or what are we giving to them? Yeah?
(40:09):
That's what I would say, is our audience annoyed by us?
Is that why part of why our ratings are so bad.
Speaker 1 (40:13):
Yeah, it's people from the same schools, that go to
the same parties, that hang out in the same You're right,
it's just they just they're in this echo chamber and
there's never anybody that could possibly think there is another
side to this, that somebody would possibly be thinking differently.
Speaker 2 (40:28):
Well, but if and if there are those people, they
feel a little bit scared to speak up. I don't
think it's easy to walk into a news outlet and
say hello, I'm a Republican. I don't think I don't
think that that's an easy thing to do, and it
shouldn't be. So, you know, that's my biggest thing overall
with all of this. I felt this way this whole
election cycle. No matter how you feel, we should be
(40:49):
able to talk about this stuff. We should all be
able to feel differently and discuss and not lose friendships
and family over these things. And we should all be
open enough to hear from the other side and say,
oh yeah, show me that article you're talking about her.
Oh yeah, I'd like to see that interview you're just
you're referencing, and let me be open to maybe thinking
(41:10):
differently about this or maybe not, but let's be okay
talking about it.
Speaker 1 (41:14):
You know one thing the media did and look, they
got to sell panic. They sell drama. I'm someone who
knows a lot about drama. They sold panic, they sold drama.
They selled gloom and doom. You know the old if it,
if it bleeds, it leads. There that is a saying
for a.
Speaker 2 (41:30):
Reason to clarify, for people to sing, it's a local
news saying. If it bleeds it leads means crime is
the top story on your local news broadcast, because that's
what people pay attention to.
Speaker 1 (41:40):
Whether it affects you or not. And so that's what
the media has been selling you for the last couple
of years because that's gotten us to watch right. That
is the algorithm. But what they won't tell you, which
we will, is that you woke up this morning and
the sun was shining and the world still spinning, and
no matter what happened, and you get up, you go
(42:01):
to work and you try to affect change and you
try to do your best. And that is something that
the media has been hammering on us and hammering is
that like if he wins, the world is over. If
she wins, the world is over guess what it's.
Speaker 2 (42:16):
Not yeah, and both and when both political parties say
that and you have to and that again is it
should be the media's job to sort through that, but
instead they were partaking in it. One thing I wanted
to ask, how about all the celebrities who said it
once again that they would leave if Trump won.
Speaker 1 (42:33):
I would love to see if TMZ is at lax
this morning. There there has to.
Speaker 2 (42:37):
Be is anyone flying out.
Speaker 1 (42:38):
There has to be a long line to you know.
And I love the I always love the countries that
they use, like as if we're your backup plan. It's
like they're the girl that's like, well, if you know,
if she won't have me, I'll date her. And it's
like if the United States sucks, I'll go to Canada,
or I'll go to New Zealand, or I'll go It's like, wait,
we're not your backup plan. I love America, not your
(43:01):
drunk dial in the morning when you need a hookup.
Speaker 2 (43:04):
I love America. And I think there's a reason that
people try to come live in this country because it's amazing.
And I don't think that that's good rhetoric to say
I'm threatened to leave Okay, go if you want to go.
Speaker 1 (43:16):
Go. That is such a when you talk about privilege,
when you talk about like how blessed you are, the
fact that you get to say that, right, there are
people the.
Speaker 2 (43:25):
Biggest, dying and losing family members trying to cross here.
Speaker 1 (43:30):
They will have respect for that. Yeah, And so you're right,
it is the greatest country in the world. Do we
have it figured out? Clearly not. We do not have
it all figured out. It's not perfect. But is it spectacular?
And is it beautiful? And are we going to continue
to make mistakes but also improve? Yeah, that's the beauty
of this country. And so, uh, this has been such
(43:54):
a great lesson in journalism and studying this, and we'll
continue to follow this because i debates that we've had.
I'm just curious if you guys have been having these
same talks in your own houses about how horrible the
polls are and how they mean nothing. Talk about people
that have lost jobs the last three elections. They've completely
botched on the polls. They have gotten one. Right, Oh
my gosh, how about the Iowa poll? Good lord.
Speaker 2 (44:17):
Yeah, we didn't really get into that, but that's something
that's probably even more dead than celebrity endorsements because you know,
it's interesting. I don't want to go on too long,
but now I'm like, you know, I could talk about
this for hours because I forgot Kamala Harris did call
her daddy that she did that podcast, so and I
don't know that that made that big of an impact.
So again I don't know. Wrapping up on that with
(44:38):
legacy media, I think we can declare maybe polls are dead,
celebrity endorsements dead if they have no meaning. I think
a valid celebrity endorsement meaning do you have a relationship
with this person, or did this person leave their party
for you that that's something powerful, or is this a
really smart business person and so they have a different perspective,
(45:01):
not just oh, I'm an actor and so I'm saying this.
I think it has to have It has to be
celebrity endorsement plus like what's the extra added value there?
Not just I say vote for this one, but so
not so dead. And then legacy media again we had
to just these situations were so extreme, this time around
(45:24):
a former president who had been accused of crimes and
coming back for a potential comeback, and then a current
sitting vice president but her candidate. The candidate dropped out
and she was shoehorned in late in the game. And
so these were just two such extreme cases that I
(45:45):
don't feel ready to say the influence of legacy media
is dead, but I definitely and not every podcast was effective, right,
And I think that's reflective of more so the candidates.
I definitely think legacy media needs to look in the
mirror after this and say, how are we best serving
our audience?
Speaker 1 (46:02):
Can you? I don't know why, I just had this thought.
Let's flash forward four years and you're watching jd Vance
and Shapiro debate. That's going to be the most boring
issue latent debate for the media. I know the media
is going to be like, right, wow, Shapiro and Dvance.
Speaker 2 (46:17):
As I'm saying this, do they want to look there?
You're right, we need drama.
Speaker 1 (46:22):
Well, ratings will be down. We're just gonna have two like,
really smart guys debating issues. Dang it, that's going to
be weird. As they love to say, that's weird. That's
going to be weird. Just two really normal educated men
or women, whoever it is, Tulci Gabbard or you know,
Gabby whoever. It's just normal people talking about issues. That's
going to be such a boring, boring election. But thank
(46:45):
you for listening. Elsie. It's always fun to debate these
topics with you.
Speaker 2 (46:48):
I love it, I love you, and I love America
and I hope that, I really really hope we can
have a good next four years and unanalyzed and critiqued
and challenged next four years by the media, do better.
But that is the people of America. We can come together.
(47:09):
That's my hope.
Speaker 1 (47:10):
God bless you all. We'll do this again because we
have a lot more to talk about. Thanks for listening.
Follow us on Instagram at the most dramatic pod ever,
and make sure to write us a review and leave
us five stars. I'll talk to you next time.
This is the most dramatic podcast ever and iHeartRadio podcast.
Chris Harrison and Lauren Zema coming to you from the
home office in Austin, Texas. We are taping this the
day after.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
The morning after we are both on oh, I don't know,
six hours of sleep. We stayed up as the country.
Yeah sure, I'm one of the you know you and
I are both such news junkies. We had to stay
up and watch what happened. And I will say, no
matter how anybody feels this morning, I think I hope
it is going to be really good for our country
moving forward, that we didn't have a week long question
(00:42):
mark about the selection, that we did get those results
last night, just so that we can all try to
move forward together.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Here's what we know like right now, Donald J. Trump
is the forty seventh president of the United States. The
Republicans are going to take the Senate. I think the
House is still somewhat in doubt at this hour that
we're taping the and it does look like he's probably
also going to win the popular vote for president. So
that's what we know heading into as far as the
details go. But we're not going to spin this podcast
(01:09):
talking about the details and the results. You can go
elsewhere for that.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
This is not here also for us, as we always
tell you guys, and we're not here to talk about
how we feel about the selection. But I think that
Chris and I have both been probably I mean, I'll
say it for me, tell me if you agree, babe.
I've been more wrapped up in this selection than any before,
as I've said another podcast, because of the media, because
(01:34):
of how the media has acted, and so we wanted
to come on and talk about what these results mean
for the future of media.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
Because I think out of my entire life. Again, I'm
in my fifties, so I have been a part of
and seen many elections. Going back to Jimmy Carter. I
hate to say how old I am, but hey, Jimmy.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Still with us, member his family, said he was going to.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Vote, he dropped the one vote for Kamala, and he
ended up losing his home state of Georgia. So Jimmy
Carter did not deliver Georgia. But two things that drastically
I have seen change in the last three elections, and
that's what you and I really wanted to dive into.
And I think this is something that has changed forever
more number one media number two, and this goes right
(02:19):
next to it, so that would be one. I guess
maybe in one A would be polling, which is a
part of the media. Those two things have been disrupted,
turned upside down unlike never before. And I don't and
you don't want to be too verbose that the day after,
but I think it's safe to say those two things
(02:40):
have been changed forever, and that's what we wanted to
talk about today.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
Yes, and I do think we also want to bring
up the celebrity part of it a little bit too,
because us as journalists there it is I knew, I knew,
I knew your thoughts because we obviously covered entertainment journal
celebrity journalism. And you know, that's part of the reason
why we don't share our endorsements with you guys as well,
(03:05):
is because I don't know. I just think there's a
lot of a lot of places you can get news
and facts and media, and my biggest thing is to
encourage people to seek it out on their own and
to seek in this day and age, the source of
the information. To go watch the full interview, to go
watch the full clip, to not just judge based on
ten seconds you see someone grab on the internet. But
(03:28):
you know, Chris and I covered entertainment journalism. That means
we're trained in journalism. But I'm not going to go
out there and advise people on how to vote because
I the only politics I know is what's available for
everybody else to look into. So on that note, let's
get into the media. Let's get into our industry. Last night,
when we were watching you and I always flip back
and forth, we watched CNN a little, We watched Fox
(03:50):
a little, We watch MSNBC a little, We look on
Twitter a little, and we try to really get a
full picture. What was your overall reaction last night in
terms of the coverage of the results.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
The coverage of the results was actually what what again?
And what I found interesting is even the results as
they were coming in were obviously very partisan. As you
were watching CNN and MSNBC, they were much slower to
the take and the realization because Fox was calling states,
especially the swing states North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin much faster.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
And Fox called Pennsylvania and then they called Trump as president. Yeah,
I mean I would say hours.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
There was and everybody knew that, and by the way,
the other stations knew that as well. They were just
kind of like letting people go to bed. And it
was really awkward last night because of the Harris campaign
and the way they kind of handled it was really
awkward of you guys, just go to bed. Everyone just
will see in the morning. And so it kind of
left MSNBC and CNN and the lurch because obviously.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
They didn't have anything to cover.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
As soon as he won Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania was
over because Nevada and Hawaii, like the dominoes had fallen,
and so she had no path out. So Fox called
it appropriately and quickly, and so it was really interesting
to flip back over and flip around last night. But
I will say they they handled exactly how you thought
(05:16):
they were going to handle it. CNN kind of muddled
about in the middle. They kind of took their shots,
but not so much that it was embarrassing. MSNBC, you know,
more extreme, more extreme, yeah, Joy read Rachel maddout. But
those are the people, you know, they are extremists for
their side. If things had gone well, they would have been,
(05:39):
you know, gloating of what a referendum. It was for them, etc.
Just like you would assume Fox did last night, and
that's essentially what they did. So everybody, I think played
their role, which is exactly why we have the problem
we have now.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
I thought that CNN and MSNBC were so slow behind
Fox to keep people tuned in. Yeah, that's what they know.
They know, especially in MSNBC, that their audience wanted Kamaa
to win, so they were keeping I mean, they want
those ratings that I thought they were so slow on
(06:14):
the declaration because they wanted people to keep watching and
keep holding onto hope that maybe their candidates winning, And
that's not the right thing to do. The right thing
to do is to report what is happening. They all
have the same numbers again, no matter how you feel,
they're all getting the same numbers. At this point. This
isn't a game on election night. It's not a game
of my source versus my source inside this or that campaign.
(06:36):
We're just all getting the same numbers. So you could
have all called it at the same time.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
It was interesting too. The person I felt for and
I don't know his name, the guy who runs their
electronic board, you know, like.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
On which channel on MSNBC Kernak think and by the way,
the three those people, Bill Hammer, Steve and then who
does guy, But the three gentlemen that handled the electronic boards.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
First of all, your geography, fellas is unbelievable. They all
need to teach a masterclass. But knowing the states, knowing
the counties, King, John King, those guys were unbelievable for
all three networks across the board. They were the stars
of the show because they're going in every county, every breakdown,
and in at three in the morning. They're not getting
(07:20):
lost in going back and forth between you know, two
thousand and four, twenty sixteen, like all the So kudos
to all of them. But what I felt for for
Steve over at MSNBC is he kept showing. He was like, yeah,
Pennsylvania's read like, there's nothing I can show you that's
going to show you any different. And they're like, well,
it's just you know, ninety four percent is in. It's
(07:41):
just still too close to call. And he's just like,
I don't think it is, but you're right. They were
trying to stretch it out and I don't blame them
for that. That that to me, there wasn't bad journalism.
They were very sensational and they were definitely leaning into
their sides last night, But that those three gentlemen crushed
it last night. It always amazes me how well they
(08:02):
handle the boards.
Speaker 2 (08:03):
It was interesting. At one point we flipped onto Fox.
Sean Hannity asked the question is legacy media dead?
Speaker 1 (08:11):
After the selection and that started our debate.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
And he was asking that question obviously because what people are,
what that question entails is look at how this these
two candidates were covered in this election cycle. Look at
you know, Kamala did sixty minutes, Trump didn't. Trump did
the Joe Rogan podcast, Kamala didn't. And he's kind of
pointing at how much does legacy media matter? Now. I
(08:34):
will say, for me, that question coming from Fox, and
I thought, maybe you and I view legacy media a
little differently. I group Fox in with legacy media too,
because so you do. Okay, to me, I'm like, broadcast
TV is legacy media. But maybe he meant literally the
old school networks versus the cable networks. And differently, you.
Speaker 1 (08:50):
Can't differentiate yourself, guys. It's like your you are mainstream media. Yeah,
you're on team Fox CNN MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, They're
all I definitely put them all in the same basket
for sure.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
So the question is is legacy media dead because how
much did it matter in the selection?
Speaker 1 (09:11):
My opinion, that's too extreme. It's not dead because last night.
We're going to look at the ratings in the next
days and I promise you what I think is dead
though we're not dead. But I think what has changed
dramatically is CBS, NBC and CBS. I do think the
(09:35):
networks took a huge hit, a massive, massive hit. I'll
be interested to see the huge ratings difference of who
watched the networks last night, who watched cable. I grouped
them all together in the mainstream media world, and I
think it's way too over the.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Top to sa so networks are NBCs, ABC, Cable as Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
So my opinion is the networks did themselves a great
disservice this election cycle, and I think they went a
bridge too far sixty minutes the debates, just time and
time again, they showed themselves to be incompetent and not trustworthy.
(10:23):
I think that's the best word, not trustworthy. And so
people I think ran more to their corners on the cables.
They went to MSNBC, they went to see Ann, they
went to Fox. I think they have left in droves
from the networks, But I don't think you can say
across the board this huge broadbrush that legacy media is dead.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
So on a daylight today, you know, we've been so
deep in the day to day of the election and
news and rallies and interviews and all that, and then
on today you start to think, years from now, what
will I remember. What will I remember about when the
results were revealed? And what will I remember about this
entire election cycle now that it's over. What will I
tell kids about, you know, years from now? And I
(11:21):
agree with you that it's the trustworthiness and most importantly
the ability to question and critique, which like them not
doing legacy media not doing that is what has lost
the trustworthiness. I think I think that I agree that
it's not totally lost. And here's why we didn't really
(11:42):
have We had two very different candidates here. And so
I don't know if this was the best test of
whether legacy media still matters, because I mean, it shows
that it's that they're flailing and they need to get
it together, but like, we didn't have like two brand
new candidates and where did each of them go? Because
to me, that would have been a clearer litmus test
(12:02):
on well, which platform really got the reach out. We
had someone who'd been VP, someone who'd been president before,
They're so different, were coming off of like, you know,
you know, so much turmoil there. It was just such
an extreme situation with so many factors. But I will
remember Time magazine putting Kamala Harris on their cover without
(12:26):
interviewing her, right. That blew my mind. It was just
a few I don't even know if it was. It
was maybe within the first week that she'd been announced,
and she was on the cover a drawing of her,
not a photo because they didn't get photo shoot with her,
a drawing and the headline was something like her and
I went to read it, I'm like, I'm interested. They
didn't get an interview with her, right, And that blew
(12:48):
my mind because what is that? That is journalism without critique,
without question, without analysis, without direct source material. That is
not journalism. I will remember that. I will remember no
one asking the question. In the first few days of
wait her approval ratings were at this and now she's
(13:11):
the candidate. We didn't have a primary. Let's analyze this
a little bit. And you and I have said this before.
I think that hurt her as a candidate because the
American people looked at it and said, wait a minute,
we have questions. Journalists are supposed to ask the questions
that the people are asking at home, and they didn't
do that.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
I think they did a great disservice to themselves. Obviously,
the major networks are in the bag for the Democratic Party.
There is no more question. And I think this is
a very glaring error on their part. There is no
more question that they are biased. There is zero point
zero percent chance that you will get unbiased news on
(13:50):
a network. They showed themselves and I don't know whether
it was just Trump and his Wait, Trump and his
craziness just got the better of them.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Okay, well let me just clarify for the audience. First,
you mean networks? Are you including Cable and the Cable
Classic broadcast stas?
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Listen? Yes, I'm talking. When I say networks, I mean
the big three, NBC, CBS.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
What about the sixty minutes interview?
Speaker 1 (14:10):
So they should be above it, all right, They're supposed
to be a bit of all.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
They're supposed to be totally unbiased.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
Box, MSNBC, and CNN. They're biased.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
So we know that, we know they're slanted one right,
you get what you pay for.
Speaker 1 (14:23):
If you're listening to Rachel Maddow and enjoy Read, you
know you're you're in the echo and if you're listening
to Fox News, you want to be in that echo chamber.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
And a key difference to note for people is that
the broad old school broadcast networks, NBC, ABC, CBS, they
have licenses that they get, right, am I explaining this right? Yes,
and and that we and we helped pay for them.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
And whether it was Tom Brokaw or you know whoever,
back in the day, there was this air of and
it's not that those people didn't have opinions, but there
was an air of we're not, we're not. The cables
were going to hold ourselves to a different standard. We
are going to be unbiased as much as we possibly can.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
And there's the equal time rules.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
And equal time rules, which.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Because they have those licenses, and you talked.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
About things that happened, and there was this this slow
domino effect and I think the biggest glaring thing Joe
Rogan did an interview with Elon Musk in the closing days.
It should have been Kamala Harrison, could have been Kamala
Harris and and Tim Walls. It wasn't. They denied him
the opportunity to interview him interview that go on that
(15:34):
his podcast. And it was interesting when Elon Musk went
on and they were they were chatting, he and a
Rogan and Rogan's like. The difference was when Tim Walls
lied about stolen valor, you know, his rank being a
head coach of his football team. He was not a
head coach of his football team. He was an assistant coach,
(15:55):
which you may think, oh that's not a big deal.
It is he Tanneman's being in Tan Square. Oh whatever.
So he lied about his rank coaching, He lied about
so many things, and his time and time again was
I'm a knucklehead, me not so good with words. And
everybody just kind of laughed at this jolly old fella.
(16:16):
And Rogan made a very great point. He said, nobody
called him on his sh Nobody called him on his bullshit.
Nobody said, sir, let's go further. What was it that
made you lie about your stolen valor that you you
said you were in action and you carried a gun
or a weapon a time.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
That's not an answer.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
Yeah, that's a lie. You lied. How did that happen, sir?
Was it something that was just maybe perpetrated and put
on you that somebody said it you kind of let
it go? Was it you misremembered?
Speaker 2 (16:46):
Like?
Speaker 1 (16:47):
What was it? Same thing with Tianem and Square. It's
like saying I was at the jfk assassination. That was
a pretty big moment in history, and so nobody pressed
him on, Okay, you're a knucklehead, sir, let's go deeper.
But he never had that moment, and so Rogan and
I know Tim Walls wasn't running for president, but that
was just a microcosm of how poor the journalism was
(17:09):
and how much they were in the bag all along.
And there were so many moments, whether it was Leslie
Stall and going back to the Hunter Biden situation sixty
minutes this time around with the debacle that they had
the debates.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
Well, let's talk about the debates for a minute, because
I will remember going back to what well you remember,
I will remember the debates and we talked about it
on the podcast before, and that's where I think on
CNN did a better job with Biden and with Trump
back in that debate over the summer by just saying
we're not going to fact check either side, and that
came across more credible. And then the ABC debate with
(17:46):
Trump and Harris, that was when they only fact checked Trump,
and again, whatever your party is, that doesn't look good.
People at home are going, well, wait a minute, what
fact checked them both? Then be consistent and have ethics
that you're standing on. And where did the I forget
where the Vance Waltz debate? What network that was on?
(18:08):
Was that on CBS? Yes, and same thing there, you know,
and JD. Vance had to call them out and say,
wait a minute. You guys said you weren't going to
fact check, and you are a fact checking and.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
You're wrong, and by the way, and your facts are wrong.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
So they're coming across fully on the democratic side. I
think that newsrooms have to look at that. I mean,
I don't know the exact number, but I saw statistic
the other day and I think everybody can is general
newsrooms are overwhelmingly democratic. They and the biggest thing, though,
the biggest thing is are you able to put that
(18:43):
aside and ask important questions and critique both sides equally
to your job. That's what it's all about. We're human.
It's impossible to not have a personal bias. And you're
an American. You get to vote, you get to care
about who's running your country, no matter what your job is.
But can you put that aside? And I saw this,
(19:04):
I just about.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
The giving about just about newsrooms, about ninety they went
through and they're like the donations to Democratic or Republican Party,
and it was like it was over ninety five percent
Democrats would donated to Democratic Party. And as you look
up what you're looking at, it's like even and I
would they did themselves and their party a disservice by
(19:29):
not doing their jobs. I think if they had done
their jobs, which by the way, they did, they holding
Trump and JD. Vance accountable actually did them a favor.
They had to fight hard. And Trump even said it
last night in his acceptance speech. I sent JD into
the enemy territory. He would go into MSNBC, he would
go into CNN. He would go in enemy territory and
(19:50):
take it and take the beatings and the Democrats and
the legacy media did not provide that, they did not
give a test to Kamala Harris, and they allowed and
NBC brought this up last night. Did we all do
a disservice by allowing what essentially was a coup and
(20:11):
knocking Biden out of the race and just giving it,
handing it without without a debate, without a vote, without
anybody asking any questions. One day President Biden is great
and he's competent and sharp. The next day, Kamala Harris
is your candidate. Get over it and approval. I don't
blame the Democratic Party. That's that was their job of
(20:35):
to push whatever their agenda was. But the media went
along with it. They went full lockstep, and that did
a huge disservice to themselves, to the Democratic Party. And
if they think that people don't see that, don't feel it,
and don't notice and the continued gas lighting of telling
people you're seeing something and hearing something that you didn't
(20:58):
for example, and this wasn't a major change because by
now the election over, but even last week the Liz
Cheney hoax and the lie about when President Trump came
out and very clearly said you're sitting there in your
ivory tower, and you are you and your dad, Dick
Cheney love to send people to war, and you send
our brothers and sisters and sons and daughters to war.
(21:18):
You sit in your ivory tower. What would it be
like if the guns were pointed at you?
Speaker 2 (21:22):
What would it be like if you were on the
front lines? Essentially?
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Essentially? And you know, he said it in his Trumpian
style whatever, And they perpetrated this for a couple of days.
They tried to perpetrate this hoax that he threatened her life.
And everybody's had enough. I think the people are just
so tired of being lied to and these agendas, and
the media really has failed in that department. And if
(21:48):
if you're a news director, and if you're not looking
in the mirror and taking stock and cleaning house this morning,
and I'm not saying firing everybody, but if you are
not thinking I need to hire people who don't talk
like me, who don't look like me, who don't sound
like me, you're insane.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
Well sure, but like that extends to who aren't my party? Right?
I mean, so I'm pulling up this these statistics from
the American Journalist dot org from a twenty twenty two survey.
So the mores they said slightly more females and journalism
now slightly more minorities in journalism right now. Also more
journalists say they are democrats. You have to have diversity
(22:28):
of party when you're covering political elections. And this is
the biggest one that stuck out to me is fewer
journalists value analyzing complex problems. That is a real takeaway
(22:49):
from this study.
Speaker 1 (22:50):
That's like saying plumbers dislike working on drains. Your entire
job is breaking down complex problem, diving in.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
And plumber's got to get in those.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
You got to get the raads.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
You're not doing a good job.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
Construction worker hates building walls. I just like roofs. I'm
just going to put roofs up, but no walls. Yeah.
That that truly defines and they really do. You're right.
They go to the simplest answer and the talking points
cannot be handed down from upon high. In my hope
and my dream is that for the next four years
(23:27):
or next two yearsuntil we get to the next midterm,
is that they hold this group accountable. And they and
by the way, I have no issue with it. You know,
there is no question that they will because that's you know,
that's been their job all along. But everybody, that's your
job is to ask the questions and follow the science
(23:48):
and and ask those questions.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
And and you know, part of the problem, I think
has been a cultural shift that happened with the pandemic
where if you asked questions, you were bad, and that
in a scary way. That's thing we have to get
away from as a country, as a culture. It's okay
to ask questions. It's not You're not a bad person
if you're questioning statistics or science or you know, we
(24:15):
have to get the I think something that Elon Musk
has been talking about a lot lately. I think I'm
bringing up because he mentioned it in that Joe Rogan
interview is that the solution to misinformation is more information.
It's not silencing, it's more information. It's okay. Well, if
you the wrong takeaway was made from this little clip,
(24:37):
go watch the whole clip, you know, go watch the
whole interview. And I do think the impact of like
seeing for the first time president and vice presidential candidates
sitting down for three hour podcasts with Joe Rogan. I
mean that had never happened before. When have we heard
an unfiltered three hour interview with candidates. I do think
(24:59):
that's going to majorly impact the legacy media in the
long run. I think people found it refreshing. I think
that they saw who candidates really were instead of seeing
them in these sound bites. And going back to one
thing we haven't mentioned yet except briefly, but the CBS.
Probably the toughest interviews Kamala Harris did were with Brett Barron,
Fox and with CBS in sixty minutes. But then sixty
(25:21):
Minutes lost their credibility there because when there were questions,
they wouldn't release that full transcript.
Speaker 1 (25:25):
They covered their tracks, they edited the tape, they edited
her interview to make her look better and more correctly, they.
Speaker 2 (25:31):
Wouldn't release the full transcript. And then over here you
had three hour interviews that Trump and Vance were doing
for all to hear. Yeah, and look, do I think
that Joe Rogan pushed or grilled as much as sixty
minutes did?
Speaker 1 (25:46):
Know?
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Because that's not his I'm not critiquing him, it's not
his platform's And he said.
Speaker 1 (25:51):
He was going to do the same with Kamala Harris
if she had taken the time.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
I don't think he would have sat and grilled or
he said he wouldn't have.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
It was very interesting. Is and you brought up a
good point, is the legacy media day? No? But is
the world that the Joe Rogan's, Megan Kelly's, Tucker Carlson's
that they created is that impactful one and eighty percent?
And if you don't acknowledge that this morning, you're fooling yourself.
(26:19):
That Joe Rogan interview was massive. It was massive because
for both vi Ja da Vance and Trump, because whatever
you thought of them, you got to hear them and
you're like, oh, and I think a lot of people
took away he's not weird. He's actually like jd Vance
is a really brilliant mind. Holy cow. Whether you agree
with him or not is beyond it's but this guy
(26:41):
is really sharp. And you know, Kamala had the same opportunity,
so did Tim Walls. They avoided it, and what they
went and did was kind of the old school. You know,
we're gonna I'm gonna go let Oprah talk, I'm gonna
let Jennifer Lopez talk and kind of segueing into our
next topic, what's more impactful these podcasts and these kind
(27:05):
of independent journalists, or just having Oprah or the Avengers
create a really cringey video for you. I think you
can definitely say that those videos, those endorsements give very
little weight and credence to your platform to the vote.
(27:31):
And then what you see the impact of what Joe
Rogan and all these other podcasts created, You're like, man,
this is there. That is a big shift.
Speaker 2 (27:39):
Well, it's interesting, right again, it's kind of the so okay,
we're talking about do celebrity endorsements matter? Now? I do
think this isn't necessarily something super new. I'm not sure
celebrity endorsements have ever really mattered, but for some reason,
politicians have still gone after them.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
Yeah, you're right, that is a very weird thing.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
I don't know when they've ever mattered. I really don't,
because you know, this morning, let me just give the
smallest focus group test. I'm talking to my mom and
my sister about the results, and I brought this up,
and both my mom and my sister said, no, they
don't matter, and they're annoying, And I'm like, oh, are
they even a negative to people at home? I I
(28:19):
go back to the Taylor Swift endorsement of Kamala Harris.
When that happened, I was like, WHOA, this could be
really big. She's the biggest star in the world right now.
And I sit here, Swifty, I'm a big fan and
we both are. But I don't think it mattered in
the long run.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
Did not move the.
Speaker 2 (28:34):
Needle biggest That's that's the best test to me, because
that's the biggest star in the world right now.
Speaker 1 (28:40):
Yeah, hands down.
Speaker 2 (28:41):
And Trump is winning not only the electoral but the
popular vote. So and what does that tell you?
Speaker 1 (28:49):
Well, and it's not new right, I mean like Oprah's
Oprah's always going to endorse the Democrat. Bruce Springsteen is
always going to Robert de Niro, Like it's the same
people and they're always endorsing the right.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
RFK was talking about his wife, Cheryl Hines and how
she's she's handled him doing this political thing, and he said, well,
it's been really tough for her. She's an actress, she's
on Curb your enthusiasm. He said, it's been really tough
for her because her industry, probably more than any industry,
is so politically involved and democratic. And by the way, Democrats,
you could have had RFK one of the wilder One
(29:23):
of the wilder choices to me is like.
Speaker 1 (29:25):
Il Gabrett, I don't know, I had Tulci Gavartt and
r FKA worship Hero.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
Wish they'd been a primary anyway, So I I do
think it speaks to Yeah, I don't know. It's interesting
they but year after our election after election, they go
for it. Politicians try to get on both sides by
the way they try to get celebrity endorsements. This election,
(29:50):
I wanted to ask you what you think of this
type of quote unquote celebrity endorsement that Trump had. I
think he I was coming from a much more grounded,
valid connected place with his endorsements. Dana White, for example,
not the biggest celebrity in the world, but Dana White
(30:11):
could get up there and say, I've been friends with
him for twenty years, I've known him, I know his family,
and I think that came across more genuine.
Speaker 1 (30:18):
And he's an endorsement, and he's an entrepreneur, he's a
businessman that has created because of him.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
And oh, you mean Dana White has created something? Yeah,
it's not.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
Yeah, in interesting, you know, and it's not And by
the way, so has Oprah. She's the biggest entrepreneur in
the history of mankind. But you're right, they were very
different endorsements of Dana White Elon Musk.
Speaker 2 (30:40):
Well, I think part of the problem the Democrats have
is over and over again, you got the same celebrities
coming out. It's George Clooney, it's Oprah, It's all the
same people, and so you're like, what, this doesn't seem
legitimate to me. It just seems like here we are again,
you know. Or Trump bringing out Elon Musk, that was
a really powerful one because Elon my was a former Democrat,
(31:01):
and because you've got i mean, everybody could agree one
of the smartest men in the world. You know, this
isn't an actress or a singer, and no offense. But
I'm not saying they can't be smart. But so that
had a different validity to it, I thought.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
And we can't look by you know. One of probably
the most monumental shifts in the history of media was
Elon Musk buying x Twitter and turning it into free
press and making sure that if you wanted to see
a full clip of something, it was there, and just
taking the veil of secrecy, in the veil of even
(31:47):
being able having that question. Am I you know? Am
I getting the truth here? On X? Is the algorithm
against me or for me or whatever? You know? Him
buying X and then in being a part of that
free press is massive. That was huge, But you're right,
the endorsements were very different when you're getting Oprah again
and Jennifer Lopez and you're getting the same ultimate.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
Let me add on to the X thing really quick,
since you brought that up. It We all have to
be aware of the algorithm. Whatever social media platform you
are on. I follow people who I don't agree with
because I want to keep seeing the other side of things.
We have to be aware of that. The algorithm will
(32:29):
feed you what you want to keep you in an
echo chamber. But the fact that Mark Zuckerberg admitted on
the record that the Biden administration had had him via
Facebook censor certain information about the pandemic and about the
Hunter Biden laptop for the American people was shocking to me.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
And Jack Dorsey and Twitter admitted as much as.
Speaker 2 (32:51):
Well, yes, and that they had at one point blocked
President Trump taken his account down. Why are these business
men have no reason, no credence to to silence, and
I don't know whatever, it's their business.
Speaker 1 (33:07):
But when the FBI and everyone shows up your door
like well.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
And I guess my point in all this, without getting
into too many specifics, is simply this. I do firmly
believe that we have that free Our country is built
on free speech is our first Amendment. It is going.
It is what our founding fathers were escaping was not
being able to speak our minds, and being able to
(33:36):
speak your mind means other people who disagree with you
get to speak their minds. And I am very afraid
and was very afraid by what some people John Carrey
in particular, or Hillary Clinton were saying about how we
needed to start silencing misinformation. When John Carey said we
need to take a look at the First Amendment and
(33:59):
and think about if we need to change it, that
was just a few months ago, very scary to me.
So I do think elon buying Twitter, and I was
a little I've changed my opinion on it because I
was a little like WHOA wow, okay when that first happened.
But I think it's a freer place now.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
I would say the long and short of it is this.
Celebrity endorsements are fun, they're cute, and they're fun. Overall,
you have to say they're meaningless. They're not impacted because
what those people can impact and this is nothing against
those people. You know, I'm not making fun of Scott Bao,
Hulk Cogan or Jennifer Lopez or ropers today because they're
(34:44):
just supporting what they believe in. And good for you
for speaking up and what you believe in. That's great,
but your meaning fullness is zero. You can't take today's
referendum and what happened last night and say anything else
because look at the list of celebrities and who was
backing Kamala Harris and ad meant nothing because what those
(35:06):
people can't affect is what people vote on. Nobody and
a UA can't say nobody, but clearly the majority of
people are not going to vote because Jennifer Lopez, Oprah Bono,
Barack Obama, whoever says you should do this. Those people
aren't affecting the economy, they're not affecting immigration, they're not
affecting a woman's right to choose, They're not affecting any
(35:26):
of the issues that you care about. Those people aren't
on the both with you. They're not changing the world.
And so I think what you would have to say
if you're just looking at the science and the facts. No,
celebrity endorsements are fun, they're cute. They work at a
round sometimes yeah, sometimes very cringey. Yeah, Avengers, come on, got.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Come on, man, you're my family annoying.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
That was a really cringey video you guys released last week.
But and honestly, most of those videos. Anytime anyone comes
to you with a script and says everybody is doing this,
if you are an agent or if you are a celebrity,
don't do the group thing. It never works. It comes
off really cramp.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Yeah, the group thing doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (36:10):
Oh, those things are so bad.
Speaker 2 (36:11):
The timing's bad.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
Remember the zooms the World, the white Dudes for Harris thing.
Speaker 2 (36:18):
Oh, I was going back to the pandemic.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
Those were bad too. But anyway, so I think in
the end, those people don't affect change. They're just fun
and they're good window dressing when you need someone at
a rally.
Speaker 2 (36:29):
I think that's been proven more by the selection and
Beyonce actually sing wow to BT's switch. To be honest,
that could have maybe maybe it's a powerful voice when
in singing. I think that this election proved more than
the is legacy media dad question. It proved celebrity endorsements
don't make a difference. It really did. You had Taylor
(36:51):
Swift Beyonce say I can't think of two bigger people
in the entertainment industry right now.
Speaker 1 (37:02):
And we can go further too. How about the late
night shows. Oh, Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, John Stewart were
one hundred and fifty percent in the bag for Kamala Harris.
They could not have campaigned harder for her. They used
talking about equal time, They used their shows for nothing
but propaganda for the Democratic Party. So the late night shows,
(37:25):
I mean talk about legacy meeting.
Speaker 2 (37:26):
I mean Kimmel got up there and told people, don't
if you're planning on voting for Trump, vote late. So yeah,
he couldn't have been clear.
Speaker 1 (37:32):
Yeah, no, there is no there is no kidding. I'm
just a con.
Speaker 2 (37:36):
Do you remember Stuart had Waltz And I find Stuart
I think he sometimes will see both sides. I find
him a little bit of a different category. I think
he had Walls on for an interview only I don't
know if he ever I'd be curious if he ever
reached out to answer Trump.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
Yeah, but though the late night shows you have to
throw them in the bag of wow, what is their
meaning anymore? And what is their usefulness? And it's very
interesting because you know, did you did you end up
killing your brand and your audience for your selfish thoughts
(38:13):
deeds not? You know, like you like, who's going to
go back and watch Kimmel next?
Speaker 2 (38:17):
All right, but here's something that I want to just
give from an empathetic place. When you were in that
world and you and I have been in that world, Yeah,
everybody around you feels that way. I don't think I've
ever told this story on the podcast before, but when
I first joined ET, I joined in twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen,
Trump wins kind of a big time to start in
a media outlet. Now, luckily we were entertainment journalism, so
(38:40):
I wasn't so fully in it. But when Trump won,
our online editor so my boss sent out an email
to the entire staff, the entire staff, that said something
along the lines of, I know we're all really upset.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
We're all hurting too.
Speaker 2 (39:00):
I know we're all really upset about what has happened today.
If anybody needs to go home and take a minute,
you can. And I'm new in this job. Can you
imagine when I was there? Yeah, I'm new in this job.
And I read that and I went, this is nuts
to me. And by the way, I didn't vote for Trump,
(39:20):
but I remember I read that and thought, this is like,
why is she assuming her entire staff feels this way?
This is we're a journalism outlet, and why regardless of company,
why would you assume all of your staff felt that way?
And I just realized, whoa I mean, that was literally
an email signal to me, you need to feel this
(39:44):
way here. And so I do think that maybe what
you know, what you're talking about a lot of those
hosts and producers and all these people, at the very least,
they need to wake up the fact that the Republicans
have won the Republican vote. They need to wake up
and ask what is our our audience really want to see?
Are we doing a disservice to our audience, no matter
how we feel personally, or what are we giving to them? Yeah?
(40:09):
That's what I would say, is our audience annoyed by us?
Is that why part of why our ratings are so bad.
Speaker 1 (40:13):
Yeah, it's people from the same schools, that go to
the same parties, that hang out in the same You're right,
it's just they just they're in this echo chamber and
there's never anybody that could possibly think there is another
side to this, that somebody would possibly be thinking differently.
Speaker 2 (40:28):
Well, but if and if there are those people, they
feel a little bit scared to speak up. I don't
think it's easy to walk into a news outlet and
say hello, I'm a Republican. I don't think I don't
think that that's an easy thing to do, and it
shouldn't be. So, you know, that's my biggest thing overall
with all of this. I felt this way this whole
election cycle. No matter how you feel, we should be
(40:49):
able to talk about this stuff. We should all be
able to feel differently and discuss and not lose friendships
and family over these things. And we should all be
open enough to hear from the other side and say,
oh yeah, show me that article you're talking about her.
Oh yeah, I'd like to see that interview you're just
you're referencing, and let me be open to maybe thinking
(41:10):
differently about this or maybe not, but let's be okay
talking about it.
Speaker 1 (41:14):
You know one thing the media did and look, they
got to sell panic. They sell drama. I'm someone who
knows a lot about drama. They sold panic, they sold drama.
They selled gloom and doom. You know the old if it,
if it bleeds, it leads. There that is a saying
for a.
Speaker 2 (41:30):
Reason to clarify, for people to sing, it's a local
news saying. If it bleeds it leads means crime is
the top story on your local news broadcast, because that's
what people pay attention to.
Speaker 1 (41:40):
Whether it affects you or not. And so that's what
the media has been selling you for the last couple
of years because that's gotten us to watch right. That
is the algorithm. But what they won't tell you, which
we will, is that you woke up this morning and
the sun was shining and the world still spinning, and
no matter what happened, and you get up, you go
(42:01):
to work and you try to affect change and you
try to do your best. And that is something that
the media has been hammering on us and hammering is
that like if he wins, the world is over. If
she wins, the world is over guess what it's.
Speaker 2 (42:16):
Not yeah, and both and when both political parties say
that and you have to and that again is it
should be the media's job to sort through that, but
instead they were partaking in it. One thing I wanted
to ask, how about all the celebrities who said it
once again that they would leave if Trump won.
Speaker 1 (42:33):
I would love to see if TMZ is at lax
this morning. There there has to.
Speaker 2 (42:37):
Be is anyone flying out.
Speaker 1 (42:38):
There has to be a long line to you know.
And I love the I always love the countries that
they use, like as if we're your backup plan. It's
like they're the girl that's like, well, if you know,
if she won't have me, I'll date her. And it's
like if the United States sucks, I'll go to Canada,
or I'll go to New Zealand, or I'll go It's like, wait,
we're not your backup plan. I love America, not your
(43:01):
drunk dial in the morning when you need a hookup.
Speaker 2 (43:04):
I love America. And I think there's a reason that
people try to come live in this country because it's amazing.
And I don't think that that's good rhetoric to say
I'm threatened to leave Okay, go if you want to go.
Speaker 1 (43:16):
Go. That is such a when you talk about privilege,
when you talk about like how blessed you are, the
fact that you get to say that, right, there are
people the.
Speaker 2 (43:25):
Biggest, dying and losing family members trying to cross here.
Speaker 1 (43:30):
They will have respect for that. Yeah, And so you're right,
it is the greatest country in the world. Do we
have it figured out? Clearly not. We do not have
it all figured out. It's not perfect. But is it spectacular?
And is it beautiful? And are we going to continue
to make mistakes but also improve? Yeah, that's the beauty
of this country. And so, uh, this has been such
(43:54):
a great lesson in journalism and studying this, and we'll
continue to follow this because i debates that we've had.
I'm just curious if you guys have been having these
same talks in your own houses about how horrible the
polls are and how they mean nothing. Talk about people
that have lost jobs the last three elections. They've completely
botched on the polls. They have gotten one. Right, Oh
my gosh, how about the Iowa poll? Good lord.
Speaker 2 (44:17):
Yeah, we didn't really get into that, but that's something
that's probably even more dead than celebrity endorsements because you know,
it's interesting. I don't want to go on too long,
but now I'm like, you know, I could talk about
this for hours because I forgot Kamala Harris did call
her daddy that she did that podcast, so and I
don't know that that made that big of an impact.
So again I don't know. Wrapping up on that with
(44:38):
legacy media, I think we can declare maybe polls are dead,
celebrity endorsements dead if they have no meaning. I think
a valid celebrity endorsement meaning do you have a relationship
with this person, or did this person leave their party
for you that that's something powerful, or is this a
really smart business person and so they have a different perspective,
(45:01):
not just oh, I'm an actor and so I'm saying this.
I think it has to have It has to be
celebrity endorsement plus like what's the extra added value there?
Not just I say vote for this one, but so
not so dead. And then legacy media again we had
to just these situations were so extreme, this time around
(45:24):
a former president who had been accused of crimes and
coming back for a potential comeback, and then a current
sitting vice president but her candidate. The candidate dropped out
and she was shoehorned in late in the game. And
so these were just two such extreme cases that I
(45:45):
don't feel ready to say the influence of legacy media
is dead, but I definitely and not every podcast was effective, right,
And I think that's reflective of more so the candidates.
I definitely think legacy media needs to look in the
mirror after this and say, how are we best serving
our audience?
Speaker 1 (46:02):
Can you? I don't know why, I just had this thought.
Let's flash forward four years and you're watching jd Vance
and Shapiro debate. That's going to be the most boring
issue latent debate for the media. I know the media
is going to be like, right, wow, Shapiro and Dvance.
Speaker 2 (46:17):
As I'm saying this, do they want to look there?
You're right, we need drama.
Speaker 1 (46:22):
Well, ratings will be down. We're just gonna have two like,
really smart guys debating issues. Dang it, that's going to
be weird. As they love to say, that's weird. That's
going to be weird. Just two really normal educated men
or women, whoever it is, Tulci Gabbard or you know,
Gabby whoever. It's just normal people talking about issues. That's
going to be such a boring, boring election. But thank
(46:45):
you for listening. Elsie. It's always fun to debate these
topics with you.
Speaker 2 (46:48):
I love it, I love you, and I love America
and I hope that, I really really hope we can
have a good next four years and unanalyzed and critiqued
and challenged next four years by the media, do better.
But that is the people of America. We can come together.
(47:09):
That's my hope.
Speaker 1 (47:10):
God bless you all. We'll do this again because we
have a lot more to talk about. Thanks for listening.
Follow us on Instagram at the most dramatic pod ever,
and make sure to write us a review and leave
us five stars. I'll talk to you next time.
Hosts And Creators
Lauren Zima
Chris Harrison
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!