Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Small dun said, help from small, small human area small.
It's so funky. Hey, guys, welcome to Small Doses Podcast.
I just try and be cheerful for y'all because I
know we all going through it. Even if you're not
(00:24):
in the United States, I hope you're actually not going
through it. Welcome to another episode of Small Doses Podcast.
Or just an intellectual Amanda Seels, I never thought that.
I actually that's not really true. I never owned that
I would be a like person in media talking about
(00:46):
the news. It was always very niche in like, oh,
I'm discussing pop culture albums, you know, things happening in
that realm of the pop culture. And now that I
have really come to take up space deliberately as somebody
(01:07):
who speaks about politics and social justice and hopes to
effectively educate around propaganda, manufacturing content, et cetera, et cetera,
I realize that mainstream media as it has existed for
so long is so far from what I would actually
(01:27):
want from the news. Then comes along folks like Medie Hassen,
who is a really unique person in that he was
very deeply, deeply, deeply ingrained in that sphere until Kiden
talking about Israel in a very honest way post to
October seventh, where he was then asked to rescind his
show at MSNBC and take on the role of a
(01:49):
basically like a talking head, and he was like oooh
fuck yeses and decided to go and start his own
media company. He was able to get funding and he
bound the TEO. So, if you've been seeing Za Teo,
that is Medis and if you haven't, it's spelled Zeteo
and it stands for it's like a Greek god or
(02:12):
person or something. But what it really stands for outside
like the name, is independent journalism. And I want to
talk to him today about the difference between the TEO
as an independent space and the mainstream spaces that he's
come from, as well as just what is the role
of mainstream media at this point and are they serving
(02:33):
their role if they're supposed to be doing it right.
I think there's also something really important to discuss in
what is considered mainstream media and where do our expectations
fairly lie in mainstream media. So many of us have
been here in the United States growing up, and we
(02:54):
were trained to be able to trust the news, the
news was supposed to be objective, it was supposed to
be unbiased, et cetera. And I don't think many of
us really understood the propensity for the news to be
straight up liars, straight up liars. I don't think many
of us are even willing to accept or admit the
(03:16):
amount of involvement the media has had in bringing us
to where we are on the eve of a complete
fascist dictatorship, don't I don't think folks want to admit
that because they may feel like they're dumb for having listened, right, Like,
people might turn that on themselves and say, like, silly me.
And I want to encourage you not to do that,
(03:36):
because that's really what the work of propaganda has been like.
That's been a decades long project after World War Two,
a decade's long project to get people really married to
media in a way where they believe that the media
is there for them. And I was just rewatching Fahrenheit
(03:58):
four fifty one. I mean, the book is, of course better,
but it was just a refresher because I was like,
I haven't had enough, Michael B. I need to get
some more. And it was I was so in the
book's part in the past that I had really missed
the media aspect of it as a tool for propaganda.
And now that I am where I am now in
(04:18):
my radicalism, I was able to hear that whole other
stream of consciousness raising happening in this dystopian novel in
a whole other light. And now here we are, as
folks in media, what are we doing? What are we saying?
What do you all expect from us? I am having
that conversation with a peer with Meghi Hussen. I met
(04:39):
Mehi because of October seventh. I met Mehi because those
of us who were speaking honestly about what took place
after October seven. This is, of course, before I was
even in this media space in this way. I was
just on these internets talking. He was put into my
silo because that's how I met a number of these
people who are really principally committed to telling the truth.
(05:01):
So check it out as we get into this episode
Side Effects, Small Thoses Podcasts. Welcome to the cast. Mehdias
Son Hassan Mehdi Hassen. Is that right? Am I pronouncing
it right?
Speaker 2 (05:22):
I'm close, Mad Hassen?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Is it? Is it? I?
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Butcher? Everyone's name? So I don't care how people pronounce
my name.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
That's actually very generous of you, Maddie Hassen, you know,
because you know Americans will be like Maydi Hassan and
you're like, I feel like that's not it.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
But also you have to deal with the British people
mispronouncing it and then Americans you mispronounce it different ways.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
That's the best part o The Brits Mehdi Hassen.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
So an Americans is often Hassan and in England it
was Hassan. Neither is correct. It's Hassen. Did I do
it right?
Speaker 1 (05:53):
Okay, Hassen. We are here. I can't think of anybody
else who, at present is the right person to talk
to about the import or lack thereof of mainstream media
because you were there and then you left. Is the
TAO aspiring to be in mainstream media?
Speaker 2 (06:14):
That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that.
I haven't really thought about it, because it depends how
you define mainstream media. I mean, the word mainstream itself
is such a loaded phrase. What does it mean to
be in the mainstream? Is it somewhere a positive place
to be? Is it one place? Does it keep moving
can we talk about the fringes becoming mainstream? I mean,
right now, Amanda, that we've got to think of about
(06:35):
the big picture we live in America where Tim Paul
just asked the first question at the White House Press
briefing from the new media chair sitting in his beanie.
Jdvans did not run into the room and say why
you're not wearing a suit and tie. But this is
the world we now live in where fringe media you know,
Gateway Pundit and Bright Bart and Tim Paul are sitting
in the White House Press briefing room with kind of
you know, real good access. So what is the mainstream media?
(06:57):
I did even know anymore? In many ways, I do
think I would like Zeteo, the company I founded a
year ago, to be mainstream in the sense that I
want people across the board to be paying attention to
what we're saying. Right. My position always is, if a
tree falls in the word, no one around to hear it,
doesn't make a sound. In the media, There's no point
doing great journalism or breaking new stories or getting on
(07:19):
interesting voices. If the people you need to hear that
stuff or see that stuff or read that stuff I'm
not doing so. So I'm quite proud of the fact
that we have an audience that is eclectic, that is diverse.
That I have, you know, Muslims sitting in Indonesia or
Malaysia watching our stuff. I also have members of Congress
watching our stuff and appearing on our stuff. I have
(07:39):
people in the UK, Like, I don't just want to
cater to one quote unquote fringe or niche audience.
Speaker 1 (07:44):
I don't consider that to be mainstream. For me. Mainstream means, well,
for one, mainstream means you are funded by folks who
want to keep America propagandized. That's what mainstream means for me.
I mean, why do you smile when I said that?
Speaker 2 (08:00):
No, No, I like it. I love how you cut
to the chase. It's like, that's the definition I wasn't expecting.
But it's a good one. Another phrase that people use,
which is legacy media, which is kind of straightforward because
people get it. It's like, ah, I grew up with CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN,
or if you're in the UK, the BBC, ITV, et
cetera at times of London. So I do think sometimes
(08:20):
legacy is a good phrase given we have new media,
and a lot of what independent journalism is these days
is using new media and new technology. We are on
the substat platform, we're right now conversing to each other
on stream yard with podcast mics. We're on the Internet.
So I do think that's also a helpful discriptive. But
you're right, Look, corporate ownership is a lot of it,
but it's not all of it, because the BBC is
mainstream but not corporate owned. I do think it is
(08:43):
about keeping debate to a certain place, within certain limits.
I do think that's where your propaganda point comes in.
You know. Noam Chomsky famously said that when it comes
to the mainstream media, it's about an intense amount of debate,
but in a very small spectrum. You had to shout
and stream and fight and to see each other. That's
the debate, but in a.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Very very small section.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
So you know, you can watch Abby Phillips show on
ten PM and CNN and people are all shouting at
each other and they clearly don't like each other, and
there is a quote unquote debate going on, but it's
in a very narrow space.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
It's so narrow that it actually irritates me to no end.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
So that I think is a good useful way of
looking at mainstream media. I do think mainstream media to
jump ahead. It does have a role to play. I'm
not one of these people who says burn it all down.
I do believe that mainstream media still has a role
to play, a vital role to play in many ways.
I don't think you can just wish it out of existence.
People ask me about the future of cable news. I
was a cable news host for three and a half
year at MSNBC. They still get big audiences, right, relatively
(09:39):
big audience, is not absolutely big. At some point cable
news is going to die, right, Young people are not
on cable, But that's not tonight. Tonight. It still has relevance.
We can't pretend that's not the case.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
So it has relevance. It also has very narrow conversations.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
Yeah, huge trust issues.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
Huge trust issues. I mean post October seventh, I would
say that shift happened almost overnight. Like I would say,
within two weeks, what I considered to be like my
trust issues with mainstream media or legacy media, within a
matter of two weeks went from like, oh, I'm not
really sure about you guys, too. Oh, Actually, you can
burn it down because it's really not purposeful. But I
(10:19):
would say I'm far less performists than you.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
It's not about reformist or not. It's about the fact
that for exact Okay, let me give you an example.
CNN has been not great on Gaza, like most media outlets,
right the guests, they get on the lack of diversity,
the inability to talk about genocide, the kind of bowing
down to Israeli censorship, pushing manufactured stories about be headed babies,
and et cetera, et cetera. So it's been bad, right, Yeah,
(10:44):
But at the same time, some of the big revelations
we've had about Israeli war crimes and about Israeli lies
have come from CNA. CNN has done some great reporting
on the Flower massacre, for example. They were the ones
who uncovered that the Israelis open fire. They've done fascinating reporting
on what's going on with you know, the way Israelis
have lied about what's happened at graveyards. Even CNN has
done good reporting. There are good CNN journalists. So when
(11:06):
people say burn it down, I get it, but I
also think be careful because some of the investigative stories.
At the end of the day, legacy outlets have the
resources to do a lot of investigative journalism that independent
media still hasn't quite got there. We've got a big
documentary coming very very soon that's coming out, which is
going to piss off these Raelis and the Americans. But look,
we can't do that at scale, right, We're small meat.
(11:28):
We did a big one last year, we're doing a
big one now, but we can't do it every day.
And therefore, if you want good investigative journalism, you're still
going to have to rely on the New York Times,
the Washington Post, CNN, the BBC, whether you like it
or not.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
But I also feel like a lot of that is
just because that's what we are today. Yeah, like is
there a red line?
Speaker 2 (11:45):
No, it's changing, Like Pro Publica does great investigative journalism,
They're not CNN, right, They're much better in so it
is changing, things are improving. What I'm saying is if
we were to wave a magic wand and make the
New York Times and CNN and washing them has disappear tomorrow,
in many ways, that might improve things, but in other
ways it would certainly help these Raelis or Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
But I feel like what we're having right now is
like we're having two different conversations.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
Okay, because I have the same one, Amanda, bring me.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
I would love to because when I say mainstream, you
mean something different, and when I say burn it down,
you mean something different. Right, So like when I say
burn it down, I don't even necessarily mean like eradicate
all of these spaces, but I do mean eradicate the
frameworks that make these spaces operate the way they do.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
I'm with you on that, like you shouldn't have been. No,
I'm with you on that. And I actually would take
it one step further and say, burn down the mindset
that says, yes, people are more trustworthy and reliving. Yes, Oh,
I'm with you on that.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
Yes. Like I saw Connie Chung interview Amra Baraka and
this was like twenty years ago, I want to say,
and the it was like, why do you think you're
smarter than him? In this instance, you're reading a prompter.
He's speaking from his mind, but you're reading a prompter.
But you've been given this platform, and the American people
(13:06):
have been given the trust of you, but you're being
given all of your words and you don't even really
know where they're coming from.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
And the tragedy is, in many ways, these organizations have
betrayed the trust American pops. And I don't say that happily. Right,
there are someone on the left who say that, yeah,
this is it. I don't because I live in the
real world where when these organizations lose trust, the people
who benefit are the bright Barts and the tim All right,
did you see the story about this week that The
(13:32):
New York Times ironically did about Facebook meta shutting down
news in Canada because the Canadians passed the law saying
you've got to pay money to news organizations to share
their stuff. Facebook said, hey, we're not doing that. We're
just not gonna have any news on Facebook in Canada.
So in Canada right now you can't get any news
on your Facebook feed. So what happened. Right wing websites,
right wing posters, right wing propagandas stepped into the gap.
(13:54):
So now Canadians are just getting far out propaganda on Facebook.
So that's my worry. Like it's like that old line
of you know, if people don't believe in God, they
don't believe in nothing. They believe in anything like this
idea that like there's a sense that if you just
take away the CNN's, the Washington most New York Times,
and you don't have an actual good alternatives on the
left or in progressive space, or forget politics in fact
(14:16):
based spaces, take pro public as an example. If you
don't have more of that ready to fill the gap,
then unfortunately, it is the kind of the Elon Musk
who will step into the gap. And they're the ones
rejoicing at the lack of trust in the media. They're
the ones who love you know, Donald Trump made fake
news the word of the day, the word of the
year for all these years because at the end of
(14:36):
the day, it helps them, right if there's no accountability,
more than anyone else.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
So where do you feel like we are now in
terms of the responsibility of the major platform media in
challenging this fascist takeover. Do you think they're showing up?
Do you feel like they should be doing something different?
What are your thoughts?
Speaker 2 (15:04):
It's a disaster. It's a disaster. They're doing worse than
even I thought they would do. Like I covered the
mainstream media in the first term, much of the first time,
I wasn't at MSNBC. In the first time I was
at the intercept in al Jazeira. I was very scathing
about the media's lack of coverage of Trump's racism and
live all the rest of.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
It, because they set the stage for this.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
Oh yeah. And then twenty twenty came along and there
was a little bit of improvement, but not much. And
then twenty twenty four came along and we kind of
regressed because Trump made his comeback. And now we're in
his second term. And I'll be honest, as bad as
I thought the media would do, I didn't see the
wholesale surrender and rolling over of mainstream media organizations and
(15:44):
big social media companies. I didn't see that coming at
this level, at this pace, Like I didn't predict a
Bezos Zuckerberg, all of that lot lining up at the inauguration,
Bezos paying millions of dollars for a Millennia documentary, and
all of the rest. You know. CBS News is settling,
is about to settle, we believe, reports all indications one
of the most frivolous lawsuits ever brought against a media
(16:06):
organization in the history of the United States. People keep saying, oh,
CBS lawsuit. No one ever talks about the lawsuit. It's
want to make clear to your listeners and viewers. Donald
Trump is suing sixty minutes and CBS News and Paramount
because he says they edited an interview of Kamala Harris
in a way he thinks is bad, wrong, dishonest, That
is insane. Media organizations have been editing interviewed politicians for decades, right,
(16:31):
it's a normal thing to do to view someone. You
don't run the whole thing. You edit it. Now, maybe
I don't like the edit. We can all say, well,
I didn't like the idea that you would sue someone
for libel or defamation, whatever it is, and then ask
for billions of dollars and then maybe if you able
to settle it, get what you want. Because Shari Redstone
and all the other folks there are trying to do
their own deal with sky Dance and Paris or a
(16:51):
corporate as usually it goes back to the c suite.
The corporation that owns CBS is trying to do a deal.
They want Trump's FCC to give them to go ahead.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
There it is, it's an under did corruption play.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
It's so open, so open.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Well, remember, Matthew, you're you like that's true. Yes, yes,
on the surface, it's not being talked about in this way,
which would be great if mainstream media did right. But
on the surface so.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Interestingly, hats off to the CB. I criticized mainstream media
so much, so let me also praise them when they
get something right. They of CBS Nightly News ended their
broadcast quite boldly by calling out the resignation. Bill Owens,
the executive producer of sixty Minutes quit, saying I have
no longer control over the show. We're not independent anymore.
They mentioned that on the show, and they mentioned the deal,
(17:34):
and they mentioned the parent of CBS. That was a
bold move on corporate media for these two hosts to
do live on air. Good for them, but yes, you're right,
that hasn't really seeped through. ABC News also settled that
ridiculous George Stephanopolis lawsuit that they could have run. Stephanopolis
quoted a judge who said Donald Trump that what he
did to the journalist, what he did in that situation
wasn't just sexual abuse. It could be called rape by
(17:57):
any common understanding of the word rape. Stephanipolis repeat and
an interview Trumps, who's ABC and ABC settles. So look,
to answer your question, it's abysmal. It's not just a
bad coverage. You know, Times had a story the other
day saying, oh, the Trump way House is not as
disciplined as we thought. Come on, right, So there's an
awful coverage, and then there's this corporate level shit where
they're all just rolling over the billionaires, the CEOs, they're
(18:19):
doing as many deals as they can with drop either
out of self interest or fear or both. And yeah,
we're all suffering because this is really really bad. If
in the first hundred days of this neo fascist administration,
you've got the mainstream media organized the people, the organizations
of people trust most have watched most just basically rolling
over and not doing their job in any shape or form.
(18:41):
So it is really bad and we need independent medium
more than ever before. Right now, in this moment.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Are you enjoying being an independent media?
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Oh so much?
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Why?
Speaker 2 (18:50):
Many reasons. Number one, I don't have to worry about
a c suite and I have to worry about a
corporate owner, and I have to worry about looking over
my shoulder. I am unfireable, which is a great position
to be and I'm fun by my subscribers. They're the
only ones who can fire me. Tens of thousands of
Stator subscribers revolt tonight and cancel their subthingy, I'm fired,
But I can't be fired by a boardroom or a
(19:11):
CEO or somebody who's rolling over to Trump. It gives
me the independence to do whatever the hell I want,
to pick stories based on merit, not on anything else,
not to have to worry about access. It allows me
to actually say things that other journalists are thinking but
too afraid to say. Whether it's using the G word
genocide on Gaza, whether it's using the F word fascist
when it comes to Trump, We're able to do that.
(19:32):
I also love building new things. In the past, I
was able to launch new shows here. We've been able
to launch an entire new media company. We've been able
to launch multiple shows. We've been able to do journalism
in a way that I've always wanted to do it. It's
been fun hiring people. It's kind of fun giving opportunities
to great people. We launched a show called Bowman and
Bush Like I never dreamt that I would get Jamal
Bowman and Corey Bush to do a show for me
(19:54):
on YouTube, which we've already launched. We keep adding new
contributors to our lineup. We get to do fun podcasts
with people like yourself, who came We're not Kidding twice,
and this week we want a Webbie in our first team.
So we're enjoying ourselves. We're expanding, we're growing, and you know,
it means a lot to me when people come up
to me in the street and say the line I
(20:15):
get most these days from people in the street is
not all I love your work, or can I take
ussel for you? Whatever it is. A line is is
a common line, and it means a lot to me.
But it's also quite scary about the moment we're in,
which is thank you for what you're doing, Thank you
for what you're doing. People are desperate for an alternative
to the shit that is being served up nightly in primetime.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Yes, even though I said I would like to have
a conversation, this has very much become an interview. Whatever
you like about this your shoe, No, I said conversation,
and you're literally you'll talk and then you'll stop talking,
And now that makes it an interview.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
No interview, What I'm going to say to you, Amanda,
is do you have people telling you in the street
that they're fed up with the media, Because.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
I do all the time. I get the same thank
you for what you're doing narrative, and they say it.
It's not flippant, it's being said with desperation, and I
feel like one of the byproducts of that that is,
you know, an oddly positive thing is seeing people's curiosity
awakening and being able to help serve that on I
(21:23):
started doing a show on YouTube after I was aspired
from my radio show, The Amanda sil Show, which was
my mainstream radio platform, and I was in a number
of major cities. But I started doing views for Amandoland
on YouTube and I basically decided, Okay, I'm not just
gonna tell the news, I'll contextualize it because I think
so many people, particularly in this time, it's just I mean,
(21:47):
you said, it's been that kind of week, and it's
like it's been that kind of year this week, Like
it's like the amount of not just information, but having
to determine what is disinformation is If I know that
that's a lot for me, then I know that for
regular folks who this isn't their job, Like, this isn't
their work. I mean, that's just an incredibly arduous task.
(22:08):
So I take pride in it. And I feel like
when you see this government make ignorance a big part
of their platform, but that's their jazz.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
Every day you see that, and it's I was just
thinking about that today. I was looking at a White
House post about on the Twitter account saying that Donald
Trump is a leader in science, which obviously makes you laugh.
The gaslighting is so brazen. But then they put in
the statement. It's like, and he's now not like the
previous administration that was a joke on this issue. It's
even the way they put out official statements feels like
(22:41):
a seven year old wrote the statement, just like all
caps shouting childish, peevish, and it's kind of like they
are bragging about their ignorance and boorishness and childishness. And
I know we've got so many fires to put out,
but I do think, in the back of my head,
can America recover from this? Just infantilizing of a section
(23:02):
of the population is degrading of our discourse. I don't
know if it can.
Speaker 1 (23:06):
I don't even think it's just not even I don't
think I know that this is a lead up from
a very perfect storm of folks leaning into ignorance. I
remember when I was pitching shows and every week they
would put out mandates like this is what we're looking for,
this is what we're looking for, and I never forget.
(23:26):
One week the mandate was loud masculine, and I was like,
what does that even mean?
Speaker 2 (23:35):
Loud master?
Speaker 1 (23:38):
What does that mean? And they were like, you know,
like the show Dave or WWE.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Wow, that's what well you mentioned WWE you realize, I mean,
the Education Secretary of the United States of America is
from ww on. W is a technology of a one
will transform US education.
Speaker 1 (23:59):
This is literally the dumb like I know history.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
Which, without doubt the dumbest administration, right.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
I don't know that I've ever.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Wasn't alive in the Buchanan administration, but I'm pretty sure
in the history of the United States, there's never been
a collection of more unqualified, more ignorant, more ridiculous figures
than RFK Junior and Tulsea Gabbard and then the mc
bonn and all the rest of these. The Freak Show,
the Star Wars, Cantina.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Let's not bring Star Wars into this. Ah, okay, not
too much on Star Wars. Tell me this. You know
a lot of history, and you have done a lot
of global coverage. Have you ever heard of other cabinets,
(24:45):
other administrations in other countries being this dumb. We've heard
of them being really actively like terrible, But these are
stupid people.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I mean never, never, I mean even the Taliban administration
in two thousand and one. I'm sure I had more qualified,
educated people than the people in this administration. No, the
rest of the world. I hate to say this because
it sounds patronazy, and then everyone goes, oh, we hate
the rest of all. You travel around the rest of
the world, they are laughing at the United States of America.
There's no other I mean, when I go abroad, the
first thing people say is like, this can't be real, right,
what's happening there? Maydy like is he really that dumb?
(25:16):
And they really like especially the tariffs, Like pre tariffs,
it was bad enough before tariffs, it was like, wow,
America is really dumb electing Trump and these people around
Trump are really weird, and what the hell's going on?
Tariffs is like, what the hell are you doing, You're
dragging the whole world down with you in your dumbness.
So no, people don't quite get. I have to tell
people in the UK. I spend a lot of time
in the UK, where I'm from originally, I have to
tell people in the UK No, it's much worse than
(25:37):
you think. Like they're not following the news as closely
as I have to tell them. None of the if
people like a WWE person is the Education secretary and
RFK Junior, this crazy conspiracy theorist is the Health secretary
and he wants to take floride out of the water.
And you know Peter Hexath, where do we start with
Peter Hexith as the Defense Secretary of the United States.
And they've gone out of their way right to attack expertise.
(25:58):
You know, there's a famous line from the UK man
from Michael Gove, who was one of the big leaders
behind Brexit, and he said, during a debate in twenty sixteen,
all these economists are saying that brex is going to
destroy the UK economy and he said, I think we've
had enough of experts. That was his famous line that
kind of defined it, right. It's the proud anti intellectualism
anti expertise, and we have that now, right, Like they're
(26:18):
putting a guy in charge of the Joint chiefs of Staff,
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who is
by their own definitions, it's my definite like the Pentagon
Zonne standards, you have to be a four star general
and he's a three star general. Like they're going out
of their way to get rid of the black generals
and promote the underqualified white generals. That's you know, DEI
and reverse. So they are going out of their way.
And this has always been part of the Republican Party
right for quite a while. Like if you go back
(26:40):
to William Buckley, who's one of the great godfathers of
American conservatism, he famously said you could open a telephone
directory and pull out one hundred names at random, and
they would better running the country than people from Harvard
and Yale and Ivy League, Right, So it's always been
their kind of fake effect, like we're populist, where were
the very people were anti intellectual? And you know, I've
feel like we have to go back in time and
(27:01):
apologize to George W.
Speaker 1 (27:02):
Bush because he wasn't as dumb. It was like.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
I just watched the clip of him. Somebody put a
clip of him online the other day and I couldn't
but I was like, really and it was George, but
I couldn't. Wow, Am I misremembering Bush? And he's asked
some audiencing about tariff Somebody found a clip and he's
like explaining free trade and like the cost of tariffs
and how I was like, and he's making up Smoot
Hawley and the depression. I'm like, what the fuck? How
is that?
Speaker 1 (27:25):
George W. Bush?
Speaker 2 (27:26):
And also George W. Bish please come back. All this
forgive and except for it, ir Art, you will go
to the Hague and you're a war criminal. But all
is forgiven in terms of you being a dumbass compared
to the person who is currently in the Oval office,
the person who's currently his vice president, the person who
was currently the Defense secretary, and the Education secretary and
the director of National Intelligence, and we can go down
the list. It's ridiculous. I mean, this is why a
(27:47):
friend of mine's, you know, you get the politicians you deserve.
Is this what America deserves? Right now? We're living in idiocracy,
the real life thing.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
I call this the age of idiocy. Do you feel like,
because of this incredible array of jackassery, has that at
all shifted any of what you consider your responsibility as
in journalism.
Speaker 2 (28:09):
That's such a great question because I remember in twenty
sixteen when Trump wins. I remember turning to a colleague
of mine and I was out of English time, and
I said, we might as well jacket all in and
go do something else. Let's go be accountants, Like there
is no point in doing journalism right now if such
a significant chunk of the population can willingly, intentionally, happily,
(28:30):
proudly openly elect this Carnival Barker, the star of Home
Alone two, to be president of the United States of America.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
Did you know that they wanted to take him out
of it?
Speaker 2 (28:39):
No? I didn't know that.
Speaker 1 (28:40):
Yeah, the director wants to cut the scene.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
Wasn't there something about it? In Canada? They did take
him out in the Canadian version. I saw some story
I cad, Oh really, Yeah, Trum's pissed about it. That's
why he hates Canada. There's always some personal grievance thing.
He hates tariffs because some Japanese person outbid him for
the piano from Casamblanca in nineteen eighty eight, so he said,
put tariffs on Japan, and now he start with tariff's
that's why he's bringing down the globe economy. But yeah,
when that happened, I said to a colleague, like, what
(29:02):
is the point, right? If you can't get through millions
of Americans they're living in a complete alternative reality, alternative
facts to quote killing, then what the f is the
point of what we're doing? I feel that now times ten, right,
because at least in twenty sixteen, you could at least
make a case for like, no one quite knew how
bad he was. They hate Hillary Clinton. They were like,
give him a chance to burn things down, it might
be funny, but to do it again on his third
(29:24):
run after he's incited an insurrection?
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Do you really think this was a legitimate election?
Speaker 2 (29:29):
As far as I'm aware, it was really surprised by that.
In what sense do you not think it was legitimate?
Speaker 1 (29:34):
Well, the fact that they've said several times it wasn't legitimate.
Who him?
Speaker 2 (29:38):
No, which elections say this one's he won it?
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Yeah, but he said we've rigged this.
Speaker 2 (29:43):
Oh yeah, they must say I and he.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
Literally said I already have the votes. And then he
played iPhone DJ for twenty nine minutes at a rally.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I mean he's insane, that's a different issue. He's demented.
We haven't even got into mental healthy, right, and we
just talk about ignorance, right, we even started on mental health.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
And here's another reason why, Because I just think that
even in framing this as just like a Donald Trump problem,
like I don't even think that he's smart enough. This
is so widespread.
Speaker 2 (30:13):
Also, Trump could disappear tomorrow and the problems we're discussing
still exists.
Speaker 1 (30:18):
Right, Yeah, they'd probably be proficient, actually.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Agree one hundred percent. I always have to remind myself
that the only silver learning right now is that these
people are so dumb, that the only block between us
and full blown fascism right now is that these people
are too dumb to get it done in an efficient
and smart way. I don't know if you saw Deborah Lipstadt,
who was Joe Biden's anti Semitism envoy, very famous Holocaust historian,
super pro Israel, one of these people who wants to
(30:42):
redefine anti Semitism is anti Zionism. And she was asked
in an interview about the Trump deportations and Mahmoud Khalil
and what's happening on campus. And she goes, well, you know,
I don't want to defend these Hamas supporters, and you know,
but I just wish they would do it more deftly,
was what she said. Like the classic centrist liberal implicit
response to fascism is just don't do it in that
(31:02):
kind of jack booted way. Yeah, do it in a
way that we could all get on board with. You're
just the little too crass in your authoritarianism and racism.
It's too fascisty a Andy, he's holding a military rally
in DC. Jude Like, you can't make this shit up.
Victor Orban is not doing that last time I checked.
Nor In Remodi is not doing that. Even then Yahoo's
not doing that.
Speaker 1 (31:22):
He has them wearing pins of his head.
Speaker 2 (31:24):
Yeah. So Trump like goes so far that it's actually
helpful to those of us who are anti Trump. And
I have to keep reminding myself that is the only
silver lining. That these people are too dumb to execute
the plan that they probably want to execute. And he's
too all over the place. You know, there's another word
used for this government, right, They are a cacistocracy, which
means rule by the worst people. Right, they are the
(31:44):
worst in everyone cacistocracy.
Speaker 1 (31:47):
Cacistocracy.
Speaker 2 (31:48):
Yeah, so it's rule by the worst people. It's like
the nero in every way, right, worst morally, they're just
morally depraved individuals with no conscious associally about but also
worse in terms of incompetence. They just can't run anything,
right what Pete hegxtth is in trouble now partly because
he just can't run again, as we knew depending it
is this huge bureaucracy, and they put the Fox Weekend
(32:09):
anchor in with a drinking problem to run America's biggest bureaucracy.
So what was gonna happen? Obviously this So, although again
I'm jumping around here, the downside of them being so
cac astocratic is that we lost like a quarter of
a million Americans who didn't need to die in his
first term because they couldn't respond to a pandemic in
a half decent way like any other country in the world.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
So now that you decided not to throw the towel
in and you actually instead like really dug your heels in,
you know, you didn't say, you know what, I'm out
of here? I'm going back to England. Yeah, or at
least not yet, at.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
Least till they deputed me and denaturalized me. I've had
people calling for my denaturalization from the MAGA folks.
Speaker 1 (32:47):
Well, Sharon Osborne just called for Kneecap to no longer
have their visas to be able to perform in the
United States. I'm like, ladies, shut up, Bruce Peach, I
don't know what they you know.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
I dug my oles in and let's see how long
we can dig in for. Like people keep saying to me, Amanda,
this is so good for business. You having Trump back, right,
this is good for zeteo. Now you're gonna have all
these I'm like, it's like it's good.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
Like when people say, aren't you happy that you got
the inheritance from your dad dying? Like that's that type
of thing. Yeah, you know, and it's like it's.
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Great on a daily basis to have stories and stuff
to cover, but hey, the free press could be gone
very soon, so then how the fuck am I supposed
to survive?
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Then?
Speaker 2 (33:23):
Like on a micro level.
Speaker 1 (33:24):
Ye, how would you have you thought about that? Like?
Does that keep you up at all?
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Every brown person I know, every Muslim, I know is
discussing plans B, C, and D for when the shit
hits the fan. I used to say if, but when,
And I think I'm not any different. No, We've all
had those discussions and it would be crazy not to.
I mean, have you seen the Axial story today suggesting
that the next step is not just going to be about,
you know, going after American citizen criminals to send them
(33:49):
to El Salvador, but also going after Americans critics of
the government and using anti terror laws to go after
people like you and me.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
Oh yeah, yes.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
Sebastian Gorka, who is head of counter Terrorism in the
White House, who himself was being accused of having Nazi
links in the past in Hungary and is a very
strange man. He has a very senior position part of
the cacistocracy. He actually went on TV and said, yeah,
if you're setting this stuff, you're aiding an abetting terrorism.
So that's where we're going next. To go back to
my Georgia Bush. No, I don't forgive you Georgia Bush,
because that's the discourse of the war on terror. The
(34:20):
Bush and Cheney gave us that they're also picking up.
Are you thinking of leaving a man.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
At some point I was, I mean I was, and
then I had a premonition and my guides were like,
M sorry, you gotta stick around. And I never thought
that I would feel compelled to fight for America and
I'm not fighting for America, but I never felt like
I've always known that shit was going to hit the
(34:51):
fan in this country, and I always felt like I
would immediately just be like, I good luck with that, y'all. Peace.
And I think there's a large part of me that
has dedicated my life to, you know, speaking about fighting
about injustice and it's happening here. So it's like if
(35:12):
I were to disassociate myself or run from that, I
would literally be counter to my whole purpose and principle.
Like everything I've been talking about is now, yes, preach.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
Everything you're saying is one hundred percent of how I
feel like I wouldn't be me if I wasn't new
when I was doing Like it's not just that I
can't be an encountered because I'm bad at mouth, but
I just couldn't do anything else because this is who
I am and in this moment, Yeah, this is what
I'm supposed to be saying, I mean, it's one of
the reasons I left MSNBC, right, So I could have
stayed on and been the kind of standing anchor and
political analyst, guess that they wanted to have me do.
(35:44):
But the idea of hardly ever being on air or
having been able to air my voice at a time
when there was a genocide going on, at a time
when fascists were at the door, was just inconceivable to me.
And it was not even it wasn't even a debate.
It was like instant, like I have to go and
find another platform. I can't see silently like some people can,
like I'm not throwing shape, but some people can like
disconnect from the news. And you know, people take a
(36:06):
sabbatical and go write a book for a year, and
then they come back. You're like, what do you mean.
I'm not that person. Respect to them, I'm not that person.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
I did it for ten days to write my book,
and the first five days was withdrawal, literal withdrawal symptoms.
And I ain't gonna lie to you know them less
five days it was great, But then you come back, ye,
and it's like what I miss and in this day
(36:33):
and age, I mean who knows what's happened since you
and I have been on here for thirty six minutes.
Speaker 2 (36:38):
It's like that scribing fired new Defense secretary.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
I mean, they have been saying that he was introduced
on CNN as former I mean current, But.
Speaker 2 (36:50):
It's true there It's not just a withdrawal. It is
also the sense of I mean, for me, it is
an issue where like on Palestine, for example, there are
not that many people saying what I'm saying quote unquote
mainstream media. To go back to your point, so I
would feel a guilt if I.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
Was absolutely saying I mean, I still feel that.
Speaker 2 (37:08):
It's not like I don't have lots of people telling
me just shut the fuck up, keep your head down.
It's not safe for you. Like everybody in my family
and friends and community, Will has said to me at
some point since November, be careful, watch out. I worry
for you. They're going to come for you, et cetera.
And I get that, and the wise move is to
be more careful. And look, Zeteo is a careful company.
We're not going out and saying crazy shit that's going
(37:29):
to get us in legal trouble, I hope. But also
I just said, it's injustice is an understatement. What we're
seeing right now insane. Like you read the stories of
what's happening in El Salvador, blood boils, you cannot believe
this is happening in twenty twenty five in the United States,
right And you know what, Sorry, I'm going to say this.
You might get mad at me some people is merry.
(37:50):
It really also makes me mad at people in twenty
twenty four who are telling me they're all the same.
And I was like, look, the Democrats are horrible on Gaza.
Biden and Harris are complicit and a genocide. I'm say
that openly. But this nihilistic position that they're all the
same is ridiculous when we are now all acknowledging that
this shit we've never seen before in our lifetimes. Nobody
was predicted, I'm sorry, nobody was predicting that Kamala Harris
(38:13):
was going to take Green card holders and send them
to El Salvador anywhere else.
Speaker 1 (38:16):
That's let me tell you where they're all the same
was really coming from. For a lot of people. There
are people who were saying that in a very literal sense, right,
like they're two wings of the same bird. Meaning like
she's gonna do this and he's gonna do that, and
it's gonna be the same thing. But I think for
a lot of people myself included that they're all the
same was that there isn't an opposition party. They're not
(38:38):
fighting them, so that's more so it's like they're serving
the same masters more so in that way, and so
it was like, how does this actually get challenged if
there is no challenger? Like Kamala Harris was a challenger
by nature of like, this is an election and there
are two people, and she would say things were you know,
(39:01):
he's doing this, he's doing that, but in the actual
action based being the antithesis, they were really that. So
it was like, if you're not going to be the
opposite of the extreme, how are you going to beat
the extreme?
Speaker 2 (39:15):
I agree with your border scripture of the democraty body
not being a proper position body. My point is I
would literally say to people Trump is gonna do shit
on campuses that you cannot imagine, and people would say
it's already happening. Now, no, and now that is shit? No, no,
come on no. Mehmood Khalil was not fucking put in
a prison sense Louisiana, and he was never going to
be putting in prisons in Louisiana.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
I don't know that. I don't know that underbidy. If
you use any other example besides things having to deal
with Israel, then I can get with you on this.
But as it deals with Israel, they literally.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
Are right, fine, fine, abrego Garcia Sentel Salvador correct, And
then they're saying to the Supreme Court, if you were
not bringing.
Speaker 1 (39:51):
Him back, that would not happen, absolutely not.
Speaker 2 (39:53):
We could agree to it.
Speaker 1 (39:54):
Then no, there's nothing to agree to disagree because at
the end of the day, the DNC did not run
a good campaign. I agree.
Speaker 2 (40:03):
So it's like that's awful. Hold on, hold on. I
can say that the Democrats are awful, right, an awful campaign,
did not deserve people's votes, et cetera, et cetera. That's
all true. But I can also say voters who take
a position that says they're all as bad as each other,
Like right now, the only person who went to see
moss and Madawi, who's the other to me? To welch vermonth,
(40:23):
he's on a Republican The only people who went to
El Salvador is Chris van Holland, a Democrats man. So
it annoys me when people are like, oh no, actually,
there are some people trying to make a difference. Maybe
not as much as we would like, but that is
a reality, and I think it gets My problem is
you can't say Trump is a unique threat, which I
believe he is, and then also say they're all the same.
I think you have to accept we're in a unique
(40:43):
historical moment and what he's doing right now. We're not
even one hundred days in Amanda, and he's already done
more damage. Like you know, he stood up at the
Congress and he goes, I've done more in my first
four weeks than most people do in four years. I
was like, fuck, he's telling the truth like a stopped Clark. Right,
He's true for once. Don Trump is not like he
has done more in four weeks than most presidents in
four years. It's all bad in my view, But I
(41:05):
don't know where we are in June. I'm planning a
show in the UK in July and I was talking
to producer and I said, well, everything we're talking about
now is redundant. That's another three months away. Look at
what's happened in the last three months.
Speaker 1 (41:15):
I keep telling this to people and they think, ah,
and I'm like, I think it could.
Speaker 2 (41:20):
Be done by July. The United States of America's democratic
experiment could be finished by July fourth, twenty twenty five.
Sorry to be the hyperbolic guy, but like they're already
defining the Supreme Court after that, what's left?
Speaker 1 (41:30):
I'm gonna say, I don't think that's hyperbolic. I mean, ultimately,
they're just dancing right now. They're just dancing with do
we go all the way into the circle or do
we just keep doing the two step clap? And for
how long? Because once they say definitively we don't care,
and the Supreme Court says they don't have.
Speaker 2 (41:50):
To, or the Supreme Court says you do have to care,
and they say make us.
Speaker 1 (41:54):
Well that's where we are.
Speaker 2 (41:55):
Yeah, they're saying it out loud that what's his name,
That guy Sean Davis from the Federal Society is like,
just ignore the Supreme Court now, just forget it, disband them,
like this is we are in like Pinochet's Chile. On
the verge of it.
Speaker 1 (42:11):
What does media look like? Because I saw a commercial
for like a state run media that they want to invoke, Like,
what does our jobs look like once that crosses over?
Speaker 2 (42:22):
I don't know. The only way we can know, the
only possible hope we have of knowing, is to look
at other countries and see what has happened in similar situations.
So if you look at Hungary, or you look at India,
or you look at Turkey, or you look at Russia
where there have been authoritarian power crabs and where the
media has either been shut down violently like in Russia,
or in places like Turkey and India, you know, billionaire
friends of the leaders have basically taken over mainstream media organizations.
(42:45):
Jeff Bezos mark.
Speaker 1 (42:46):
That was true.
Speaker 2 (42:47):
Yeah, familiar. So then you get to a situation where
you look at Russia, you know you have dissident media, right,
you have people either living abroad and writing about those places,
or you have people within those countries pushing it to
the limit but staying within the authoritarian laws that have
been set up. Now Here in the US, we have
the First Amendment. We thought it was the greatest protection
of the free press anywhere in the democratic world. Turns
out it's only as good as the enforcement behind it.
(43:10):
That is a Supreme Court and the Supreme Court to
quote Stalin on the pope, how many legions does he have?
It's a real problem. And as you say, they're dancing,
they're waiting to see, Well, what are you gonna do
about it?
Speaker 1 (43:20):
It's a game of chicken.
Speaker 2 (43:21):
We're talking on Wednesday afternoon. It's for twenty right now.
I read earlier today that one of the federal judges
involved in the Abrigo Garcia case is saying they've got
till six pm. Government has till six pm Wednesday. I'm like, okay,
what are they gonna do?
Speaker 1 (43:32):
Or what they've already said this several times? This is
a terrible breakup. If you don't, then I'm gonna and
then I'm at your house, you know.
Speaker 2 (43:41):
Like, but the only solution therefore is and you know,
Promila Giapol Congression. A democrat said it when I interviewed
a few months ago. She was ahead of the curve
on this sailor. All the discussions are eventually going to
end up in one place, which is peaceful resistance, civil disobedience.
The examples of other countries where dictatorships are confronted by
people power on the streets, and that's all we have left.
(44:02):
There is nothing else. We cannot rely on mainstream media,
we cannot rely on the courts, we cannot rely on universities,
we cannot rely on big business, we cannot rely on
the military. So all that is left is really people power,
and people power can only exist when they are informed.
And that comes back to your original question, which is
why do we do what we do because we needed
informed populis You can't have a democratic experiment with an
(44:25):
uninformed populace, and therefore, you know, for people to understand
what's going on in the world, that requires.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
So informing and educating the same thing in your mind, No,
I'll provide context in my question you said no.
Speaker 2 (44:35):
Minds is no, but please provide more context than my no.
Speaker 1 (44:38):
Well, only because I was on a min show recently
with two folks who are also they're like talking heads.
I don't claim that anymore because I feel like I
didn't come here to try and get a job being
a talking head. So but others aren't absolutely trying to
get a job being a talking head, so they show
up a certain way, right, And the conversation just kept
(44:58):
being about this is what Republicans should do, This is
what Democrats should do this, what probably should do. This
is what democrats could do. And I grot to the
table the thought of like we're not talking about like
what the people should do or educating folks about the
things that we're saying. And I feel like a lot
of people, and I learned this in doing my show
(45:18):
views for Amanda Land, like a lot of people just
don't even know how we got to like certain situations. True,
So they don't even know even if in their heart
they're like, I know, we need to fight this, they
kind of are without the tools to do it in
a logic mind, they could probably follow if somebody was
just giving them guidance.
Speaker 2 (45:37):
Which is why the Burning AOC tour is being interesting
to see because raised ibrow there. I'll let you tell
me what you don't like about it. But one thing
that I like about it is it is about getting
people all in one place, getting them actually talking about
substanti issues. Like you said, not just like democrats do
(45:58):
this republic debt. It's actually talking about underlying issues that
we're facing here, the lack of healthcare, inequality, the oligarchy,
and we do need people out in numbers, right, These
people at the end of the day, we can't fall
into the trap of nihilism or hopelessness, because that is
how fascism wins, right when people just give up and say, well,
there's no point. It's inevitable, right, the fascist wants you
to believe it's inevitable. And the example I've given from
(46:19):
recent weeks, which is the one from New York State
where Tom Holman, the face of Donald.
Speaker 1 (46:24):
Trump's he literally talks like a MTA subway train worker
speaking through a speaker like that he's gonna say.
Speaker 2 (46:35):
He talks like a concentration camp guard, and he looks
like one too, and he is. The borders are And
in the town where he lives, he arrested and entertained
a young woman and her children undocumented, and they put
cuffs on the third grader, eight year old child as
an America in twenty twenty five. And this is a
town of thirteen hundred people, and a thousand of them
(46:57):
showed up outside Tom Holman's home to protest yes, and
they release the family. So people power probably pressure for now,
to use your phrase for now still works. I don't
know when that we get to a point where it
doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
Well, that's what the cops cities are for.
Speaker 2 (47:10):
Indeed, why was the raised eyebrow for AOC and Bernie.
Speaker 1 (47:13):
Because I always have to do the dance of nuance,
which is, even though I know they're full of shit,
shit can make things grow, So it's like manure smells,
but it can also fertilize, and I believe that. Like
hearing Bernie still say Israel has the right to protect itself.
Speaker 2 (47:35):
Is like to bec does not say that.
Speaker 1 (47:39):
She doesn't say enough, but she.
Speaker 2 (47:41):
Doesn't use that horrible line that Bernie keeps using.
Speaker 1 (47:43):
It would literally be she can't afford to also right,
like because she's still gen z like she cannot afford.
She's savvy, she knows what she can say.
Speaker 2 (47:52):
It can't walking the tightrope because she also understandably might
want to be New York State senator.
Speaker 1 (47:58):
She's definitely walking a type rope, which is why she's
voted certain ways. Right, She's definitely walked the tightrope, which
is why the squad is not what it was. Right.
It used to be like, look at us, let's get
imagine jackets. And I was like, actually, I don't know,
Like I'll eat with you guys on Tuesdays. But not
on Wednesdays.
Speaker 2 (48:14):
I mean, but a couple of years back, would anyone
who believed you and I if we were sitting in
I said, hey, polling shows she's the most popular Democrat
in America.
Speaker 1 (48:22):
No, but the same people a couple of years back,
when I said he wants to be Hitler, I got
shunned at a table by Anna Navarro and Van Lathan
and Sally Cohne. They were all like, oh, and Caitlyn
Jenner and Katie Perry. They were all just mortified that
I made this comparison. This is in twenty eighteen.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (48:45):
No, all I'm saying is that the timeframe of things
that seemed absolutely unfounded are here. We are where things
that people were saying five years ago, here they are
that come to pass. I will say this, I just
in general have a distrust of people who take ownership
of I'm a politician. There is a perpetuating of what
(49:07):
that means, what that system is about, et cetera. That
I have to remain the cynic about.
Speaker 2 (49:12):
Anyone who would put themselves in that position. You have
suspicions off.
Speaker 1 (49:15):
Yes, if you're taking ownership. But like I remember when
Hill Harper was running for senator and he was like,
I'm a public servant. I'm a public servant. And I
know that some people might say it semantics, but I
don't believe it to be semantics. When I interviewed Marian
Williamson and I was like, are you a politician or
a public servant? She was like, well, I mean, I
guess if I'm running for president, I'm a politician, aren't I?
(49:37):
And I was den from that moment. She also kept refreencing,
like oh, she kept representing this book about reparations from
like nineteen ninety eight, and finally I was like, please
stop referencing the nineteen ninety eight book about reparations. Are
you involved in reparations right now? In twenty twenty four?
Are you?
Speaker 2 (49:55):
I did a TV debate with the Recony. She just
invented a quote that I apparently said about it, which
I never sai, and then I said wait to your
face to the host and I was sitting in this
home studio and I was like, I never said that,
and then she DMed me to follow up, and I'm like,
I'm not finishing this in the DMS. I'm done with this.
Good luck with your seventeenth presidential campaign.
Speaker 1 (50:16):
All right, we're going to head on over to the
Seals squad and Mahdi's gonna tell us what his suggestions
are for how we should be taking in media at
this time.
Speaker 2 (50:34):
The last.
Speaker 1 (50:40):
So my last question is this, When you created ZTEO,
what were some very clear distinctions that you wanted to
make going to independent journalism from where you had come
from in mainstream media. What was like, we're not doing
this over at zteo.
Speaker 2 (50:56):
Off talk about it. I would say three things. Number One,
I wanted to tell the model of interviewing that I
do and expand it and take pride in it. I
think our political interviews are very bad in the United
States of America, and why people have traditionally come to
me and liked me is because I do ask tough
questions and I try people to account. And I've done
that on my show with Democrats and Republicans, with Israelis,
(51:16):
with others, try and do it across the board. So
that's one thing I wanted to kind of save that
protect that. Number Two, language right for me, is a
great frustration that the US media is so timid in
its use of words. Yes, Atosaurus, get a dictionary. And
the racist debate on Trump like that killed me, Like
he gave me ulcers for the first time. I was like,
(51:37):
he's racially tinged rhetoric, racially divisive rhetoric. He's rare, it's
fewer letters, so that kind of stuff, you know, I
said that we want today, we're gonna say fascism, We're
going to say racism, we're going to say genocide. So
that was important, the use of language. And then the
third point, which is why I created Totayo and I
didn't go, hey, it's the Mardy Hussan network like Tucker
Carlson is because I wanted to platform other voices. I
(51:58):
want to bring in other voices who not getting the
platforms they deserve and giving them broader audiences. You look
at someone like Fatumabuto, the Pakistani novelist who's fantastic. She's
been writing on Gaza for US for the last year.
Amazing writer. I'm glad we've been able to give her
a much bigger platform in the US media so people
can read fat Tombuta. There are many such voices out
there like that.
Speaker 1 (52:18):
Do you run business different than mainstream media inns? Well,
I know that I didn't know this until I was
like speaking to people who do news in mainstream cable news.
But like there is exclusivity, there's also like a lot
of very specific like you can't show up in these
other places.
Speaker 2 (52:33):
No, in terms of our contributors, yeah, we are very democratic.
We've grown now this year, we've gone from like twelve
to eighteen contributors. We brought on Taylor Lorentz, We brought
on Jamal Bowman, were brought on Grace Blakeley in the UK,
we brought on Daniel Levy. So we brought a bunch
of different people. But no, this is all just about
providing platforms. I said earlier. I'm less interested in the exclusivity.
I'm much more insted in the cross pollination, in collaboration,
(52:54):
in working together. I don't see everyone as a competitor.
I actually think we all need to make this damn
thing right. When I see others doing well, I think
that's good from Zeteo as well. So, no, they are
all contributors. They are employees separate to our contributors. We
have about a dozen full time employees, producers, editors. They
are obviously exclusively working for CETEO. Prem Tacker is our
political correspondent. He's one content creator on air the rest
(53:15):
of behind the scenes, folks. But prem for example, is
exclusive working visitato. He's our full time political correspondent, writing
and producing content for CETEO. But everyone else, you know,
Naomi Klein would she does a great show for us
once a month, but obviously the rest of her time
she's doing other amazing stuff, right, No in that sense. No, Look,
we are a for profit. We're trying to make money
because we can't survive, we don't make money. And also
we actually want to show like there's a reason again,
(53:37):
another reason we did TOTAO is I do want to
show people this can be done right. I want to
show I want to have a good example. I want
to set a present. When I looked around last year
and I thought, why is there the Daily Wire and
why is there the Free Press, and why is he
Carson Network, And why isn't there progressive versions of this?
Why haven't Left managed to take on the subscription space,
the direct to consumer space, the substat newsletter space. And
(54:00):
that's one of the reasons I do want to show.
I want other people to say, Okay, I tell you
can do we can do well.
Speaker 1 (54:04):
There you have it, y'all. Thank you so much. And
I remember when we talked about it, and you know,
there was a little bit of apprehension because it was
about to launch, and here we are. And I remind
you of this regularly because it continues to grow. And
I am one of those people who would run into
you on the street and say, thank you for what
you're doing, thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (54:22):
Thank you to you too, thank you for coming on
Wino kidding not once, but twice.
Speaker 1 (54:28):
I liked it better when I was by myself. Though.
I don't do good on panels, yeah, because I don't
like getting cut off.
Speaker 2 (54:33):
Okay, but I'll still cut you off. That's fine. When
can we get you back? We need to get you
back on one on one.
Speaker 1 (54:38):
Depending on if the world is still in existence. I
need to promote my show anyway. So if you show
Amanda Landers on.
Speaker 2 (54:44):
Your show, what'd you say? Thank you for having me
on your show?
Speaker 1 (54:47):
This is actually my podcast.
Speaker 2 (54:49):
This is not my show, ok Now, we're just independentry
a pod customers.
Speaker 1 (54:52):
No, because this has been in existence for seven years
and the show has been in existence for five months.
Speaker 2 (54:58):
A podcast is a show, Amanda, this is my podcast.
Speaker 1 (55:01):
You're trying to get me irritated. I'm not gonna do it.
See I'm getting better. I'm getting better at social cues.
I just lived. This is like one of the very
first times where I really can say that I caught
myself like this person is antagonizing me. I am off
d No. I had an ex who would always call
(55:23):
TV shows movies.
Speaker 2 (55:24):
That's weird. But a podcast is show.
Speaker 1 (55:26):
It's a type of show.
Speaker 2 (55:27):
It's a type of show. Thank you hearing me on
your type of show. Podcast
Small dun said, help from small, small human area small.
It's so funky. Hey, guys, welcome to Small Doses Podcast.
I just try and be cheerful for y'all because I
know we all going through it. Even if you're not
(00:24):
in the United States, I hope you're actually not going
through it. Welcome to another episode of Small Doses Podcast.
Or just an intellectual Amanda Seels, I never thought that.
I actually that's not really true. I never owned that
I would be a like person in media talking about
(00:46):
the news. It was always very niche in like, oh,
I'm discussing pop culture albums, you know, things happening in
that realm of the pop culture. And now that I
have really come to take up space deliberately as somebody
(01:07):
who speaks about politics and social justice and hopes to
effectively educate around propaganda, manufacturing content, et cetera, et cetera,
I realize that mainstream media as it has existed for
so long is so far from what I would actually
(01:27):
want from the news. Then comes along folks like Medie Hassen,
who is a really unique person in that he was
very deeply, deeply, deeply ingrained in that sphere until Kiden
talking about Israel in a very honest way post to
October seventh, where he was then asked to rescind his
show at MSNBC and take on the role of a
(01:49):
basically like a talking head, and he was like oooh
fuck yeses and decided to go and start his own
media company. He was able to get funding and he
bound the TEO. So, if you've been seeing Za Teo,
that is Medis and if you haven't, it's spelled Zeteo
and it stands for it's like a Greek god or
(02:12):
person or something. But what it really stands for outside
like the name, is independent journalism. And I want to
talk to him today about the difference between the TEO
as an independent space and the mainstream spaces that he's
come from, as well as just what is the role
of mainstream media at this point and are they serving
(02:33):
their role if they're supposed to be doing it right.
I think there's also something really important to discuss in
what is considered mainstream media and where do our expectations
fairly lie in mainstream media. So many of us have
been here in the United States growing up, and we
(02:54):
were trained to be able to trust the news, the
news was supposed to be objective, it was supposed to
be unbiased, et cetera. And I don't think many of
us really understood the propensity for the news to be
straight up liars, straight up liars. I don't think many
of us are even willing to accept or admit the
(03:16):
amount of involvement the media has had in bringing us
to where we are on the eve of a complete
fascist dictatorship, don't I don't think folks want to admit
that because they may feel like they're dumb for having listened, right, Like,
people might turn that on themselves and say, like, silly me.
And I want to encourage you not to do that,
(03:36):
because that's really what the work of propaganda has been like.
That's been a decades long project after World War Two,
a decade's long project to get people really married to
media in a way where they believe that the media
is there for them. And I was just rewatching Fahrenheit
(03:58):
four fifty one. I mean, the book is, of course better,
but it was just a refresher because I was like,
I haven't had enough, Michael B. I need to get
some more. And it was I was so in the
book's part in the past that I had really missed
the media aspect of it as a tool for propaganda.
And now that I am where I am now in
(04:18):
my radicalism, I was able to hear that whole other
stream of consciousness raising happening in this dystopian novel in
a whole other light. And now here we are, as
folks in media, what are we doing? What are we saying?
What do you all expect from us? I am having
that conversation with a peer with Meghi Hussen. I met
(04:39):
Mehi because of October seventh. I met Mehi because those
of us who were speaking honestly about what took place
after October seven. This is, of course, before I was
even in this media space in this way. I was
just on these internets talking. He was put into my
silo because that's how I met a number of these
people who are really principally committed to telling the truth.
(05:01):
So check it out as we get into this episode
Side Effects, Small Thoses Podcasts. Welcome to the cast. Mehdias
Son Hassan Mehdi Hassen. Is that right? Am I pronouncing
it right?
Speaker 2 (05:22):
I'm close, Mad Hassen?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Is it? Is it? I?
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Butcher? Everyone's name? So I don't care how people pronounce
my name.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
That's actually very generous of you, Maddie Hassen, you know,
because you know Americans will be like Maydi Hassan and
you're like, I feel like that's not it.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
But also you have to deal with the British people
mispronouncing it and then Americans you mispronounce it different ways.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
That's the best part o The Brits Mehdi Hassen.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
So an Americans is often Hassan and in England it
was Hassan. Neither is correct. It's Hassen. Did I do
it right?
Speaker 1 (05:53):
Okay, Hassen. We are here. I can't think of anybody
else who, at present is the right person to talk
to about the import or lack thereof of mainstream media
because you were there and then you left. Is the
TAO aspiring to be in mainstream media?
Speaker 2 (06:14):
That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that.
I haven't really thought about it, because it depends how
you define mainstream media. I mean, the word mainstream itself
is such a loaded phrase. What does it mean to
be in the mainstream? Is it somewhere a positive place
to be? Is it one place? Does it keep moving
can we talk about the fringes becoming mainstream? I mean,
right now, Amanda, that we've got to think of about
(06:35):
the big picture we live in America where Tim Paul
just asked the first question at the White House Press
briefing from the new media chair sitting in his beanie.
Jdvans did not run into the room and say why
you're not wearing a suit and tie. But this is
the world we now live in where fringe media you know,
Gateway Pundit and Bright Bart and Tim Paul are sitting
in the White House Press briefing room with kind of
you know, real good access. So what is the mainstream media?
(06:57):
I did even know anymore? In many ways, I do
think I would like Zeteo, the company I founded a
year ago, to be mainstream in the sense that I
want people across the board to be paying attention to
what we're saying. Right. My position always is, if a
tree falls in the word, no one around to hear it,
doesn't make a sound. In the media, There's no point
doing great journalism or breaking new stories or getting on
(07:19):
interesting voices. If the people you need to hear that
stuff or see that stuff or read that stuff I'm
not doing so. So I'm quite proud of the fact
that we have an audience that is eclectic, that is diverse.
That I have, you know, Muslims sitting in Indonesia or
Malaysia watching our stuff. I also have members of Congress
watching our stuff and appearing on our stuff. I have
(07:39):
people in the UK, Like, I don't just want to
cater to one quote unquote fringe or niche audience.
Speaker 1 (07:44):
I don't consider that to be mainstream. For me. Mainstream means, well,
for one, mainstream means you are funded by folks who
want to keep America propagandized. That's what mainstream means for me.
I mean, why do you smile when I said that?
Speaker 2 (08:00):
No, No, I like it. I love how you cut
to the chase. It's like, that's the definition I wasn't expecting.
But it's a good one. Another phrase that people use,
which is legacy media, which is kind of straightforward because
people get it. It's like, ah, I grew up with CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN,
or if you're in the UK, the BBC, ITV, et
cetera at times of London. So I do think sometimes
(08:20):
legacy is a good phrase given we have new media,
and a lot of what independent journalism is these days
is using new media and new technology. We are on
the substat platform, we're right now conversing to each other
on stream yard with podcast mics. We're on the Internet.
So I do think that's also a helpful discriptive. But
you're right, Look, corporate ownership is a lot of it,
but it's not all of it, because the BBC is
mainstream but not corporate owned. I do think it is
(08:43):
about keeping debate to a certain place, within certain limits.
I do think that's where your propaganda point comes in.
You know. Noam Chomsky famously said that when it comes
to the mainstream media, it's about an intense amount of debate,
but in a very small spectrum. You had to shout
and stream and fight and to see each other. That's
the debate, but in a.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Very very small section.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
So you know, you can watch Abby Phillips show on
ten PM and CNN and people are all shouting at
each other and they clearly don't like each other, and
there is a quote unquote debate going on, but it's
in a very narrow space.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
It's so narrow that it actually irritates me to no end.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
So that I think is a good useful way of
looking at mainstream media. I do think mainstream media to
jump ahead. It does have a role to play. I'm
not one of these people who says burn it all down.
I do believe that mainstream media still has a role
to play, a vital role to play in many ways.
I don't think you can just wish it out of existence.
People ask me about the future of cable news. I
was a cable news host for three and a half
year at MSNBC. They still get big audiences, right, relatively
(09:39):
big audience, is not absolutely big. At some point cable
news is going to die, right, Young people are not
on cable, But that's not tonight. Tonight. It still has relevance.
We can't pretend that's not the case.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
So it has relevance. It also has very narrow conversations.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
Yeah, huge trust issues.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
Huge trust issues. I mean post October seventh, I would
say that shift happened almost overnight. Like I would say,
within two weeks, what I considered to be like my
trust issues with mainstream media or legacy media, within a
matter of two weeks went from like, oh, I'm not
really sure about you guys, too. Oh, Actually, you can
burn it down because it's really not purposeful. But I
(10:19):
would say I'm far less performists than you.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
It's not about reformist or not. It's about the fact
that for exact Okay, let me give you an example.
CNN has been not great on Gaza, like most media outlets,
right the guests, they get on the lack of diversity,
the inability to talk about genocide, the kind of bowing
down to Israeli censorship, pushing manufactured stories about be headed babies,
and et cetera, et cetera. So it's been bad, right, Yeah,
(10:44):
But at the same time, some of the big revelations
we've had about Israeli war crimes and about Israeli lies
have come from CNA. CNN has done some great reporting
on the Flower massacre, for example. They were the ones
who uncovered that the Israelis open fire. They've done fascinating reporting
on what's going on with you know, the way Israelis
have lied about what's happened at graveyards. Even CNN has
done good reporting. There are good CNN journalists. So when
(11:06):
people say burn it down, I get it, but I
also think be careful because some of the investigative stories.
At the end of the day, legacy outlets have the
resources to do a lot of investigative journalism that independent
media still hasn't quite got there. We've got a big
documentary coming very very soon that's coming out, which is
going to piss off these Raelis and the Americans. But look,
we can't do that at scale, right, We're small meat.
(11:28):
We did a big one last year, we're doing a
big one now, but we can't do it every day.
And therefore, if you want good investigative journalism, you're still
going to have to rely on the New York Times,
the Washington Post, CNN, the BBC, whether you like it
or not.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
But I also feel like a lot of that is
just because that's what we are today. Yeah, like is
there a red line?
Speaker 2 (11:45):
No, it's changing, Like Pro Publica does great investigative journalism,
They're not CNN, right, They're much better in so it
is changing, things are improving. What I'm saying is if
we were to wave a magic wand and make the
New York Times and CNN and washing them has disappear tomorrow,
in many ways, that might improve things, but in other
ways it would certainly help these Raelis or Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
But I feel like what we're having right now is
like we're having two different conversations.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
Okay, because I have the same one, Amanda, bring me.
Speaker 1 (12:11):
I would love to because when I say mainstream, you
mean something different, and when I say burn it down,
you mean something different. Right, So like when I say
burn it down, I don't even necessarily mean like eradicate
all of these spaces, but I do mean eradicate the
frameworks that make these spaces operate the way they do.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
I'm with you on that, like you shouldn't have been. No,
I'm with you on that. And I actually would take
it one step further and say, burn down the mindset
that says, yes, people are more trustworthy and reliving. Yes, Oh,
I'm with you on that.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
Yes. Like I saw Connie Chung interview Amra Baraka and
this was like twenty years ago, I want to say,
and the it was like, why do you think you're
smarter than him? In this instance, you're reading a prompter.
He's speaking from his mind, but you're reading a prompter.
But you've been given this platform, and the American people
(13:06):
have been given the trust of you, but you're being
given all of your words and you don't even really
know where they're coming from.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
And the tragedy is, in many ways, these organizations have
betrayed the trust American pops. And I don't say that happily. Right,
there are someone on the left who say that, yeah,
this is it. I don't because I live in the
real world where when these organizations lose trust, the people
who benefit are the bright Barts and the tim All right,
did you see the story about this week that The
(13:32):
New York Times ironically did about Facebook meta shutting down
news in Canada because the Canadians passed the law saying
you've got to pay money to news organizations to share
their stuff. Facebook said, hey, we're not doing that. We're
just not gonna have any news on Facebook in Canada.
So in Canada right now you can't get any news
on your Facebook feed. So what happened. Right wing websites,
right wing posters, right wing propagandas stepped into the gap.
(13:54):
So now Canadians are just getting far out propaganda on Facebook.
So that's my worry. Like it's like that old line
of you know, if people don't believe in God, they
don't believe in nothing. They believe in anything like this
idea that like there's a sense that if you just
take away the CNN's, the Washington most New York Times,
and you don't have an actual good alternatives on the
left or in progressive space, or forget politics in fact
(14:16):
based spaces, take pro public as an example. If you
don't have more of that ready to fill the gap,
then unfortunately, it is the kind of the Elon Musk
who will step into the gap. And they're the ones
rejoicing at the lack of trust in the media. They're
the ones who love you know, Donald Trump made fake
news the word of the day, the word of the
year for all these years because at the end of
(14:36):
the day, it helps them, right if there's no accountability,
more than anyone else.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
So where do you feel like we are now in
terms of the responsibility of the major platform media in
challenging this fascist takeover. Do you think they're showing up?
Do you feel like they should be doing something different?
What are your thoughts?
Speaker 2 (15:04):
It's a disaster. It's a disaster. They're doing worse than
even I thought they would do. Like I covered the
mainstream media in the first term, much of the first time,
I wasn't at MSNBC. In the first time I was
at the intercept in al Jazeira. I was very scathing
about the media's lack of coverage of Trump's racism and
live all the rest of.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
It, because they set the stage for this.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
Oh yeah. And then twenty twenty came along and there
was a little bit of improvement, but not much. And
then twenty twenty four came along and we kind of
regressed because Trump made his comeback. And now we're in
his second term. And I'll be honest, as bad as
I thought the media would do, I didn't see the
wholesale surrender and rolling over of mainstream media organizations and
(15:44):
big social media companies. I didn't see that coming at
this level, at this pace, Like I didn't predict a
Bezos Zuckerberg, all of that lot lining up at the inauguration,
Bezos paying millions of dollars for a Millennia documentary, and
all of the rest. You know. CBS News is settling,
is about to settle, we believe, reports all indications one
of the most frivolous lawsuits ever brought against a media
(16:06):
organization in the history of the United States. People keep saying, oh,
CBS lawsuit. No one ever talks about the lawsuit. It's
want to make clear to your listeners and viewers. Donald
Trump is suing sixty minutes and CBS News and Paramount
because he says they edited an interview of Kamala Harris
in a way he thinks is bad, wrong, dishonest, That
is insane. Media organizations have been editing interviewed politicians for decades, right,
(16:31):
it's a normal thing to do to view someone. You
don't run the whole thing. You edit it. Now, maybe
I don't like the edit. We can all say, well,
I didn't like the idea that you would sue someone
for libel or defamation, whatever it is, and then ask
for billions of dollars and then maybe if you able
to settle it, get what you want. Because Shari Redstone
and all the other folks there are trying to do
their own deal with sky Dance and Paris or a
(16:51):
corporate as usually it goes back to the c suite.
The corporation that owns CBS is trying to do a deal.
They want Trump's FCC to give them to go ahead.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
There it is, it's an under did corruption play.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
It's so open, so open.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Well, remember, Matthew, you're you like that's true. Yes, yes,
on the surface, it's not being talked about in this way,
which would be great if mainstream media did right. But
on the surface so.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Interestingly, hats off to the CB. I criticized mainstream media
so much, so let me also praise them when they
get something right. They of CBS Nightly News ended their
broadcast quite boldly by calling out the resignation. Bill Owens,
the executive producer of sixty Minutes quit, saying I have
no longer control over the show. We're not independent anymore.
They mentioned that on the show, and they mentioned the deal,
(17:34):
and they mentioned the parent of CBS. That was a
bold move on corporate media for these two hosts to
do live on air. Good for them, but yes, you're right,
that hasn't really seeped through. ABC News also settled that
ridiculous George Stephanopolis lawsuit that they could have run. Stephanopolis
quoted a judge who said Donald Trump that what he
did to the journalist, what he did in that situation
wasn't just sexual abuse. It could be called rape by
(17:57):
any common understanding of the word rape. Stephanipolis repeat and
an interview Trumps, who's ABC and ABC settles. So look,
to answer your question, it's abysmal. It's not just a
bad coverage. You know, Times had a story the other
day saying, oh, the Trump way House is not as
disciplined as we thought. Come on, right, So there's an
awful coverage, and then there's this corporate level shit where
they're all just rolling over the billionaires, the CEOs, they're
(18:19):
doing as many deals as they can with drop either
out of self interest or fear or both. And yeah,
we're all suffering because this is really really bad. If
in the first hundred days of this neo fascist administration,
you've got the mainstream media organized the people, the organizations
of people trust most have watched most just basically rolling
over and not doing their job in any shape or form.
(18:41):
So it is really bad and we need independent medium
more than ever before. Right now, in this moment.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Are you enjoying being an independent media?
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Oh so much?
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Why?
Speaker 2 (18:50):
Many reasons. Number one, I don't have to worry about
a c suite and I have to worry about a
corporate owner, and I have to worry about looking over
my shoulder. I am unfireable, which is a great position
to be and I'm fun by my subscribers. They're the
only ones who can fire me. Tens of thousands of
Stator subscribers revolt tonight and cancel their subthingy, I'm fired,
But I can't be fired by a boardroom or a
(19:11):
CEO or somebody who's rolling over to Trump. It gives
me the independence to do whatever the hell I want,
to pick stories based on merit, not on anything else,
not to have to worry about access. It allows me
to actually say things that other journalists are thinking but
too afraid to say. Whether it's using the G word
genocide on Gaza, whether it's using the F word fascist
when it comes to Trump, We're able to do that.
(19:32):
I also love building new things. In the past, I
was able to launch new shows here. We've been able
to launch an entire new media company. We've been able
to launch multiple shows. We've been able to do journalism
in a way that I've always wanted to do it. It's
been fun hiring people. It's kind of fun giving opportunities
to great people. We launched a show called Bowman and
Bush Like I never dreamt that I would get Jamal
Bowman and Corey Bush to do a show for me
(19:54):
on YouTube, which we've already launched. We keep adding new
contributors to our lineup. We get to do fun podcasts
with people like yourself, who came We're not Kidding twice,
and this week we want a Webbie in our first team.
So we're enjoying ourselves. We're expanding, we're growing, and you know,
it means a lot to me when people come up
to me in the street and say the line I
(20:15):
get most these days from people in the street is
not all I love your work, or can I take
ussel for you? Whatever it is. A line is is
a common line, and it means a lot to me.
But it's also quite scary about the moment we're in,
which is thank you for what you're doing, Thank you
for what you're doing. People are desperate for an alternative
to the shit that is being served up nightly in primetime.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Yes, even though I said I would like to have
a conversation, this has very much become an interview. Whatever
you like about this your shoe, No, I said conversation,
and you're literally you'll talk and then you'll stop talking,
And now that makes it an interview.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
No interview, What I'm going to say to you, Amanda,
is do you have people telling you in the street
that they're fed up with the media, Because.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
I do all the time. I get the same thank
you for what you're doing narrative, and they say it.
It's not flippant, it's being said with desperation, and I
feel like one of the byproducts of that that is,
you know, an oddly positive thing is seeing people's curiosity
awakening and being able to help serve that on I
(21:23):
started doing a show on YouTube after I was aspired
from my radio show, The Amanda sil Show, which was
my mainstream radio platform, and I was in a number
of major cities. But I started doing views for Amandoland
on YouTube and I basically decided, Okay, I'm not just
gonna tell the news, I'll contextualize it because I think
so many people, particularly in this time, it's just I mean,
(21:47):
you said, it's been that kind of week, and it's
like it's been that kind of year this week, Like
it's like the amount of not just information, but having
to determine what is disinformation is If I know that
that's a lot for me, then I know that for
regular folks who this isn't their job, Like, this isn't
their work. I mean, that's just an incredibly arduous task.
(22:08):
So I take pride in it. And I feel like
when you see this government make ignorance a big part
of their platform, but that's their jazz.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
Every day you see that, and it's I was just
thinking about that today. I was looking at a White
House post about on the Twitter account saying that Donald
Trump is a leader in science, which obviously makes you laugh.
The gaslighting is so brazen. But then they put in
the statement. It's like, and he's now not like the
previous administration that was a joke on this issue. It's
even the way they put out official statements feels like
(22:41):
a seven year old wrote the statement, just like all
caps shouting childish, peevish, and it's kind of like they
are bragging about their ignorance and boorishness and childishness. And
I know we've got so many fires to put out,
but I do think, in the back of my head,
can America recover from this? Just infantilizing of a section
(23:02):
of the population is degrading of our discourse. I don't
know if it can.
Speaker 1 (23:06):
I don't even think it's just not even I don't
think I know that this is a lead up from
a very perfect storm of folks leaning into ignorance. I
remember when I was pitching shows and every week they
would put out mandates like this is what we're looking for,
this is what we're looking for, and I never forget.
(23:26):
One week the mandate was loud masculine, and I was like,
what does that even mean?
Speaker 2 (23:35):
Loud master?
Speaker 1 (23:38):
What does that mean? And they were like, you know,
like the show Dave or WWE.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Wow, that's what well you mentioned WWE you realize, I mean,
the Education Secretary of the United States of America is
from ww on. W is a technology of a one
will transform US education.
Speaker 1 (23:59):
This is literally the dumb like I know history.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
Which, without doubt the dumbest administration, right.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
I don't know that I've ever.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Wasn't alive in the Buchanan administration, but I'm pretty sure
in the history of the United States, there's never been
a collection of more unqualified, more ignorant, more ridiculous figures
than RFK Junior and Tulsea Gabbard and then the mc
bonn and all the rest of these. The Freak Show,
the Star Wars, Cantina.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Let's not bring Star Wars into this. Ah, okay, not
too much on Star Wars. Tell me this. You know
a lot of history, and you have done a lot
of global coverage. Have you ever heard of other cabinets,
(24:45):
other administrations in other countries being this dumb. We've heard
of them being really actively like terrible, But these are
stupid people.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I mean never, never, I mean even the Taliban administration
in two thousand and one. I'm sure I had more qualified,
educated people than the people in this administration. No, the
rest of the world. I hate to say this because
it sounds patronazy, and then everyone goes, oh, we hate
the rest of all. You travel around the rest of
the world, they are laughing at the United States of America.
There's no other I mean, when I go abroad, the
first thing people say is like, this can't be real, right,
what's happening there? Maydy like is he really that dumb?
(25:16):
And they really like especially the tariffs, Like pre tariffs,
it was bad enough before tariffs, it was like, wow,
America is really dumb electing Trump and these people around
Trump are really weird, and what the hell's going on?
Tariffs is like, what the hell are you doing, You're
dragging the whole world down with you in your dumbness.
So no, people don't quite get. I have to tell
people in the UK. I spend a lot of time
in the UK, where I'm from originally, I have to
tell people in the UK No, it's much worse than
(25:37):
you think. Like they're not following the news as closely
as I have to tell them. None of the if
people like a WWE person is the Education secretary and
RFK Junior, this crazy conspiracy theorist is the Health secretary
and he wants to take floride out of the water.
And you know Peter Hexath, where do we start with
Peter Hexith as the Defense Secretary of the United States.
And they've gone out of their way right to attack expertise.
(25:58):
You know, there's a famous line from the UK man
from Michael Gove, who was one of the big leaders
behind Brexit, and he said, during a debate in twenty sixteen,
all these economists are saying that brex is going to
destroy the UK economy and he said, I think we've
had enough of experts. That was his famous line that
kind of defined it, right. It's the proud anti intellectualism
anti expertise, and we have that now, right, Like they're
(26:18):
putting a guy in charge of the Joint chiefs of Staff,
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who is
by their own definitions, it's my definite like the Pentagon
Zonne standards, you have to be a four star general
and he's a three star general. Like they're going out
of their way to get rid of the black generals
and promote the underqualified white generals. That's you know, DEI
and reverse. So they are going out of their way.
And this has always been part of the Republican Party
right for quite a while. Like if you go back
(26:40):
to William Buckley, who's one of the great godfathers of
American conservatism, he famously said you could open a telephone
directory and pull out one hundred names at random, and
they would better running the country than people from Harvard
and Yale and Ivy League, Right, So it's always been
their kind of fake effect, like we're populist, where were
the very people were anti intellectual? And you know, I've
feel like we have to go back in time and
(27:01):
apologize to George W.
Speaker 1 (27:02):
Bush because he wasn't as dumb. It was like.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
I just watched the clip of him. Somebody put a
clip of him online the other day and I couldn't
but I was like, really and it was George, but
I couldn't. Wow, Am I misremembering Bush? And he's asked
some audiencing about tariff Somebody found a clip and he's
like explaining free trade and like the cost of tariffs
and how I was like, and he's making up Smoot
Hawley and the depression. I'm like, what the fuck? How
is that?
Speaker 1 (27:25):
George W. Bush?
Speaker 2 (27:26):
And also George W. Bish please come back. All this
forgive and except for it, ir Art, you will go
to the Hague and you're a war criminal. But all
is forgiven in terms of you being a dumbass compared
to the person who is currently in the Oval office,
the person who's currently his vice president, the person who
was currently the Defense secretary, and the Education secretary and
the director of National Intelligence, and we can go down
the list. It's ridiculous. I mean, this is why a
(27:47):
friend of mine's, you know, you get the politicians you deserve.
Is this what America deserves? Right now? We're living in idiocracy,
the real life thing.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
I call this the age of idiocy. Do you feel like,
because of this incredible array of jackassery, has that at
all shifted any of what you consider your responsibility as
in journalism.
Speaker 2 (28:09):
That's such a great question because I remember in twenty
sixteen when Trump wins. I remember turning to a colleague
of mine and I was out of English time, and
I said, we might as well jacket all in and
go do something else. Let's go be accountants, Like there
is no point in doing journalism right now if such
a significant chunk of the population can willingly, intentionally, happily,
(28:30):
proudly openly elect this Carnival Barker, the star of Home
Alone two, to be president of the United States of America.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
Did you know that they wanted to take him out
of it?
Speaker 2 (28:39):
No? I didn't know that.
Speaker 1 (28:40):
Yeah, the director wants to cut the scene.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
Wasn't there something about it? In Canada? They did take
him out in the Canadian version. I saw some story
I cad, Oh really, Yeah, Trum's pissed about it. That's
why he hates Canada. There's always some personal grievance thing.
He hates tariffs because some Japanese person outbid him for
the piano from Casamblanca in nineteen eighty eight, so he said,
put tariffs on Japan, and now he start with tariff's
that's why he's bringing down the globe economy. But yeah,
when that happened, I said to a colleague, like, what
(29:02):
is the point, right? If you can't get through millions
of Americans they're living in a complete alternative reality, alternative
facts to quote killing, then what the f is the
point of what we're doing? I feel that now times ten, right,
because at least in twenty sixteen, you could at least
make a case for like, no one quite knew how
bad he was. They hate Hillary Clinton. They were like,
give him a chance to burn things down, it might
be funny, but to do it again on his third
(29:24):
run after he's incited an insurrection?
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Do you really think this was a legitimate election?
Speaker 2 (29:29):
As far as I'm aware, it was really surprised by that.
In what sense do you not think it was legitimate?
Speaker 1 (29:34):
Well, the fact that they've said several times it wasn't legitimate.
Who him?
Speaker 2 (29:38):
No, which elections say this one's he won it?
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Yeah, but he said we've rigged this.
Speaker 2 (29:43):
Oh yeah, they must say I and he.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
Literally said I already have the votes. And then he
played iPhone DJ for twenty nine minutes at a rally.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I mean he's insane, that's a different issue. He's demented.
We haven't even got into mental healthy, right, and we
just talk about ignorance, right, we even started on mental health.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
And here's another reason why, Because I just think that
even in framing this as just like a Donald Trump problem,
like I don't even think that he's smart enough. This
is so widespread.
Speaker 2 (30:13):
Also, Trump could disappear tomorrow and the problems we're discussing
still exists.
Speaker 1 (30:18):
Right, Yeah, they'd probably be proficient, actually.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
Agree one hundred percent. I always have to remind myself
that the only silver learning right now is that these
people are so dumb, that the only block between us
and full blown fascism right now is that these people
are too dumb to get it done in an efficient
and smart way. I don't know if you saw Deborah Lipstadt,
who was Joe Biden's anti Semitism envoy, very famous Holocaust historian,
super pro Israel, one of these people who wants to
(30:42):
redefine anti Semitism is anti Zionism. And she was asked
in an interview about the Trump deportations and Mahmoud Khalil
and what's happening on campus. And she goes, well, you know,
I don't want to defend these Hamas supporters, and you know,
but I just wish they would do it more deftly,
was what she said. Like the classic centrist liberal implicit
response to fascism is just don't do it in that
(31:02):
kind of jack booted way. Yeah, do it in a
way that we could all get on board with. You're
just the little too crass in your authoritarianism and racism.
It's too fascisty a Andy, he's holding a military rally
in DC. Jude Like, you can't make this shit up.
Victor Orban is not doing that last time I checked.
Nor In Remodi is not doing that. Even then Yahoo's
not doing that.
Speaker 1 (31:22):
He has them wearing pins of his head.
Speaker 2 (31:24):
Yeah. So Trump like goes so far that it's actually
helpful to those of us who are anti Trump. And
I have to keep reminding myself that is the only
silver lining. That these people are too dumb to execute
the plan that they probably want to execute. And he's
too all over the place. You know, there's another word
used for this government, right, They are a cacistocracy, which
means rule by the worst people. Right, they are the
(31:44):
worst in everyone cacistocracy.
Speaker 1 (31:47):
Cacistocracy.
Speaker 2 (31:48):
Yeah, so it's rule by the worst people. It's like
the nero in every way, right, worst morally, they're just
morally depraved individuals with no conscious associally about but also
worse in terms of incompetence. They just can't run anything,
right what Pete hegxtth is in trouble now partly because
he just can't run again, as we knew depending it
is this huge bureaucracy, and they put the Fox Weekend
(32:09):
anchor in with a drinking problem to run America's biggest bureaucracy.
So what was gonna happen? Obviously this So, although again
I'm jumping around here, the downside of them being so
cac astocratic is that we lost like a quarter of
a million Americans who didn't need to die in his
first term because they couldn't respond to a pandemic in
a half decent way like any other country in the world.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
So now that you decided not to throw the towel
in and you actually instead like really dug your heels in,
you know, you didn't say, you know what, I'm out
of here? I'm going back to England. Yeah, or at
least not yet, at.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
Least till they deputed me and denaturalized me. I've had
people calling for my denaturalization from the MAGA folks.
Speaker 1 (32:47):
Well, Sharon Osborne just called for Kneecap to no longer
have their visas to be able to perform in the
United States. I'm like, ladies, shut up, Bruce Peach, I
don't know what they you know.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
I dug my oles in and let's see how long
we can dig in for. Like people keep saying to me, Amanda,
this is so good for business. You having Trump back, right,
this is good for zeteo. Now you're gonna have all
these I'm like, it's like it's good.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
Like when people say, aren't you happy that you got
the inheritance from your dad dying? Like that's that type
of thing. Yeah, you know, and it's like it's.
Speaker 2 (33:16):
Great on a daily basis to have stories and stuff
to cover, but hey, the free press could be gone
very soon, so then how the fuck am I supposed
to survive?
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Then?
Speaker 2 (33:23):
Like on a micro level.
Speaker 1 (33:24):
Ye, how would you have you thought about that? Like?
Does that keep you up at all?
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Every brown person I know, every Muslim, I know is
discussing plans B, C, and D for when the shit
hits the fan. I used to say if, but when,
And I think I'm not any different. No, We've all
had those discussions and it would be crazy not to.
I mean, have you seen the Axial story today suggesting
that the next step is not just going to be about,
you know, going after American citizen criminals to send them
(33:49):
to El Salvador, but also going after Americans critics of
the government and using anti terror laws to go after
people like you and me.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
Oh yeah, yes.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
Sebastian Gorka, who is head of counter Terrorism in the
White House, who himself was being accused of having Nazi
links in the past in Hungary and is a very
strange man. He has a very senior position part of
the cacistocracy. He actually went on TV and said, yeah,
if you're setting this stuff, you're aiding an abetting terrorism.
So that's where we're going next. To go back to
my Georgia Bush. No, I don't forgive you Georgia Bush,
because that's the discourse of the war on terror. The
(34:20):
Bush and Cheney gave us that they're also picking up.
Are you thinking of leaving a man.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
At some point I was, I mean I was, and
then I had a premonition and my guides were like,
M sorry, you gotta stick around. And I never thought
that I would feel compelled to fight for America and
I'm not fighting for America, but I never felt like
I've always known that shit was going to hit the
(34:51):
fan in this country, and I always felt like I
would immediately just be like, I good luck with that, y'all. Peace.
And I think there's a large part of me that
has dedicated my life to, you know, speaking about fighting
about injustice and it's happening here. So it's like if
(35:12):
I were to disassociate myself or run from that, I
would literally be counter to my whole purpose and principle.
Like everything I've been talking about is now, yes, preach.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
Everything you're saying is one hundred percent of how I
feel like I wouldn't be me if I wasn't new
when I was doing Like it's not just that I
can't be an encountered because I'm bad at mouth, but
I just couldn't do anything else because this is who
I am and in this moment, Yeah, this is what
I'm supposed to be saying, I mean, it's one of
the reasons I left MSNBC, right, So I could have
stayed on and been the kind of standing anchor and
political analyst, guess that they wanted to have me do.
(35:44):
But the idea of hardly ever being on air or
having been able to air my voice at a time
when there was a genocide going on, at a time
when fascists were at the door, was just inconceivable to me.
And it was not even it wasn't even a debate.
It was like instant, like I have to go and
find another platform. I can't see silently like some people can,
like I'm not throwing shape, but some people can like
disconnect from the news. And you know, people take a
(36:06):
sabbatical and go write a book for a year, and
then they come back. You're like, what do you mean.
I'm not that person. Respect to them, I'm not that person.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
I did it for ten days to write my book,
and the first five days was withdrawal, literal withdrawal symptoms.
And I ain't gonna lie to you know them less
five days it was great, But then you come back, ye,
and it's like what I miss and in this day
(36:33):
and age, I mean who knows what's happened since you
and I have been on here for thirty six minutes.
Speaker 2 (36:38):
It's like that scribing fired new Defense secretary.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
I mean, they have been saying that he was introduced
on CNN as former I mean current, But.
Speaker 2 (36:50):
It's true there It's not just a withdrawal. It is
also the sense of I mean, for me, it is
an issue where like on Palestine, for example, there are
not that many people saying what I'm saying quote unquote
mainstream media. To go back to your point, so I
would feel a guilt if I.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
Was absolutely saying I mean, I still feel that.
Speaker 2 (37:08):
It's not like I don't have lots of people telling
me just shut the fuck up, keep your head down.
It's not safe for you. Like everybody in my family
and friends and community, Will has said to me at
some point since November, be careful, watch out. I worry
for you. They're going to come for you, et cetera.
And I get that, and the wise move is to
be more careful. And look, Zeteo is a careful company.
We're not going out and saying crazy shit that's going
(37:29):
to get us in legal trouble, I hope. But also
I just said, it's injustice is an understatement. What we're
seeing right now insane. Like you read the stories of
what's happening in El Salvador, blood boils, you cannot believe
this is happening in twenty twenty five in the United States,
right And you know what, Sorry, I'm going to say this.
You might get mad at me some people is merry.
(37:50):
It really also makes me mad at people in twenty
twenty four who are telling me they're all the same.
And I was like, look, the Democrats are horrible on Gaza.
Biden and Harris are complicit and a genocide. I'm say
that openly. But this nihilistic position that they're all the
same is ridiculous when we are now all acknowledging that
this shit we've never seen before in our lifetimes. Nobody
was predicted, I'm sorry, nobody was predicting that Kamala Harris
(38:13):
was going to take Green card holders and send them
to El Salvador anywhere else.
Speaker 1 (38:16):
That's let me tell you where they're all the same
was really coming from. For a lot of people. There
are people who were saying that in a very literal sense, right,
like they're two wings of the same bird. Meaning like
she's gonna do this and he's gonna do that, and
it's gonna be the same thing. But I think for
a lot of people myself included that they're all the
same was that there isn't an opposition party. They're not
(38:38):
fighting them, so that's more so it's like they're serving
the same masters more so in that way, and so
it was like, how does this actually get challenged if
there is no challenger? Like Kamala Harris was a challenger
by nature of like, this is an election and there
are two people, and she would say things were you know,
(39:01):
he's doing this, he's doing that, but in the actual
action based being the antithesis, they were really that. So
it was like, if you're not going to be the
opposite of the extreme, how are you going to beat
the extreme?
Speaker 2 (39:15):
I agree with your border scripture of the democraty body
not being a proper position body. My point is I
would literally say to people Trump is gonna do shit
on campuses that you cannot imagine, and people would say
it's already happening. Now, no, and now that is shit? No, no,
come on no. Mehmood Khalil was not fucking put in
a prison sense Louisiana, and he was never going to
be putting in prisons in Louisiana.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
I don't know that. I don't know that underbidy. If
you use any other example besides things having to deal
with Israel, then I can get with you on this.
But as it deals with Israel, they literally.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
Are right, fine, fine, abrego Garcia Sentel Salvador correct, And
then they're saying to the Supreme Court, if you were
not bringing.
Speaker 1 (39:51):
Him back, that would not happen, absolutely not.
Speaker 2 (39:53):
We could agree to it.
Speaker 1 (39:54):
Then no, there's nothing to agree to disagree because at
the end of the day, the DNC did not run
a good campaign. I agree.
Speaker 2 (40:03):
So it's like that's awful. Hold on, hold on. I
can say that the Democrats are awful, right, an awful campaign,
did not deserve people's votes, et cetera, et cetera. That's
all true. But I can also say voters who take
a position that says they're all as bad as each other,
Like right now, the only person who went to see
moss and Madawi, who's the other to me? To welch vermonth,
(40:23):
he's on a Republican The only people who went to
El Salvador is Chris van Holland, a Democrats man. So
it annoys me when people are like, oh no, actually,
there are some people trying to make a difference. Maybe
not as much as we would like, but that is
a reality, and I think it gets My problem is
you can't say Trump is a unique threat, which I
believe he is, and then also say they're all the same.
I think you have to accept we're in a unique
(40:43):
historical moment and what he's doing right now. We're not
even one hundred days in Amanda, and he's already done
more damage. Like you know, he stood up at the
Congress and he goes, I've done more in my first
four weeks than most people do in four years. I
was like, fuck, he's telling the truth like a stopped Clark. Right,
He's true for once. Don Trump is not like he
has done more in four weeks than most presidents in
four years. It's all bad in my view, But I
(41:05):
don't know where we are in June. I'm planning a
show in the UK in July and I was talking
to producer and I said, well, everything we're talking about
now is redundant. That's another three months away. Look at
what's happened in the last three months.
Speaker 1 (41:15):
I keep telling this to people and they think, ah,
and I'm like, I think it could.
Speaker 2 (41:20):
Be done by July. The United States of America's democratic
experiment could be finished by July fourth, twenty twenty five.
Sorry to be the hyperbolic guy, but like they're already
defining the Supreme Court after that, what's left?
Speaker 1 (41:30):
I'm gonna say, I don't think that's hyperbolic. I mean, ultimately,
they're just dancing right now. They're just dancing with do
we go all the way into the circle or do
we just keep doing the two step clap? And for
how long? Because once they say definitively we don't care,
and the Supreme Court says they don't have.
Speaker 2 (41:50):
To, or the Supreme Court says you do have to care,
and they say make us.
Speaker 1 (41:54):
Well that's where we are.
Speaker 2 (41:55):
Yeah, they're saying it out loud that what's his name,
That guy Sean Davis from the Federal Society is like,
just ignore the Supreme Court now, just forget it, disband them,
like this is we are in like Pinochet's Chile. On
the verge of it.
Speaker 1 (42:11):
What does media look like? Because I saw a commercial
for like a state run media that they want to invoke, Like,
what does our jobs look like once that crosses over?
Speaker 2 (42:22):
I don't know. The only way we can know, the
only possible hope we have of knowing, is to look
at other countries and see what has happened in similar situations.
So if you look at Hungary, or you look at India,
or you look at Turkey, or you look at Russia
where there have been authoritarian power crabs and where the
media has either been shut down violently like in Russia,
or in places like Turkey and India, you know, billionaire
friends of the leaders have basically taken over mainstream media organizations.
(42:45):
Jeff Bezos mark.
Speaker 1 (42:46):
That was true.
Speaker 2 (42:47):
Yeah, familiar. So then you get to a situation where
you look at Russia, you know you have dissident media, right,
you have people either living abroad and writing about those places,
or you have people within those countries pushing it to
the limit but staying within the authoritarian laws that have
been set up. Now Here in the US, we have
the First Amendment. We thought it was the greatest protection
of the free press anywhere in the democratic world. Turns
out it's only as good as the enforcement behind it.
(43:10):
That is a Supreme Court and the Supreme Court to
quote Stalin on the pope, how many legions does he have?
It's a real problem. And as you say, they're dancing,
they're waiting to see, Well, what are you gonna do
about it?
Speaker 1 (43:20):
It's a game of chicken.
Speaker 2 (43:21):
We're talking on Wednesday afternoon. It's for twenty right now.
I read earlier today that one of the federal judges
involved in the Abrigo Garcia case is saying they've got
till six pm. Government has till six pm Wednesday. I'm like, okay,
what are they gonna do?
Speaker 1 (43:32):
Or what they've already said this several times? This is
a terrible breakup. If you don't, then I'm gonna and
then I'm at your house, you know.
Speaker 2 (43:41):
Like, but the only solution therefore is and you know,
Promila Giapol Congression. A democrat said it when I interviewed
a few months ago. She was ahead of the curve
on this sailor. All the discussions are eventually going to
end up in one place, which is peaceful resistance, civil disobedience.
The examples of other countries where dictatorships are confronted by
people power on the streets, and that's all we have left.
(44:02):
There is nothing else. We cannot rely on mainstream media,
we cannot rely on the courts, we cannot rely on universities,
we cannot rely on big business, we cannot rely on
the military. So all that is left is really people power,
and people power can only exist when they are informed.
And that comes back to your original question, which is
why do we do what we do because we needed
informed populis You can't have a democratic experiment with an
(44:25):
uninformed populace, and therefore, you know, for people to understand
what's going on in the world, that requires.
Speaker 1 (44:30):
So informing and educating the same thing in your mind, No,
I'll provide context in my question you said no.
Speaker 2 (44:35):
Minds is no, but please provide more context than my no.
Speaker 1 (44:38):
Well, only because I was on a min show recently
with two folks who are also they're like talking heads.
I don't claim that anymore because I feel like I
didn't come here to try and get a job being
a talking head. So but others aren't absolutely trying to
get a job being a talking head, so they show
up a certain way, right, And the conversation just kept
(44:58):
being about this is what Republicans should do, This is
what Democrats should do this, what probably should do. This
is what democrats could do. And I grot to the
table the thought of like we're not talking about like
what the people should do or educating folks about the
things that we're saying. And I feel like a lot
of people, and I learned this in doing my show
(45:18):
views for Amanda Land, like a lot of people just
don't even know how we got to like certain situations. True,
So they don't even know even if in their heart
they're like, I know, we need to fight this, they
kind of are without the tools to do it in
a logic mind, they could probably follow if somebody was
just giving them guidance.
Speaker 2 (45:37):
Which is why the Burning AOC tour is being interesting
to see because raised ibrow there. I'll let you tell
me what you don't like about it. But one thing
that I like about it is it is about getting
people all in one place, getting them actually talking about
substanti issues. Like you said, not just like democrats do
(45:58):
this republic debt. It's actually talking about underlying issues that
we're facing here, the lack of healthcare, inequality, the oligarchy,
and we do need people out in numbers, right, These
people at the end of the day, we can't fall
into the trap of nihilism or hopelessness, because that is
how fascism wins, right when people just give up and say, well,
there's no point. It's inevitable, right, the fascist wants you
to believe it's inevitable. And the example I've given from
(46:19):
recent weeks, which is the one from New York State
where Tom Holman, the face of Donald.
Speaker 1 (46:24):
Trump's he literally talks like a MTA subway train worker
speaking through a speaker like that he's gonna say.
Speaker 2 (46:35):
He talks like a concentration camp guard, and he looks
like one too, and he is. The borders are And
in the town where he lives, he arrested and entertained
a young woman and her children undocumented, and they put
cuffs on the third grader, eight year old child as
an America in twenty twenty five. And this is a
town of thirteen hundred people, and a thousand of them
(46:57):
showed up outside Tom Holman's home to protest yes, and
they release the family. So people power probably pressure for now,
to use your phrase for now still works. I don't
know when that we get to a point where it
doesn't work.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
Well, that's what the cops cities are for.
Speaker 2 (47:10):
Indeed, why was the raised eyebrow for AOC and Bernie.
Speaker 1 (47:13):
Because I always have to do the dance of nuance,
which is, even though I know they're full of shit,
shit can make things grow, So it's like manure smells,
but it can also fertilize, and I believe that. Like
hearing Bernie still say Israel has the right to protect itself.
Speaker 2 (47:35):
Is like to bec does not say that.
Speaker 1 (47:39):
She doesn't say enough, but she.
Speaker 2 (47:41):
Doesn't use that horrible line that Bernie keeps using.
Speaker 1 (47:43):
It would literally be she can't afford to also right,
like because she's still gen z like she cannot afford.
She's savvy, she knows what she can say.
Speaker 2 (47:52):
It can't walking the tightrope because she also understandably might
want to be New York State senator.
Speaker 1 (47:58):
She's definitely walking a type rope, which is why she's
voted certain ways. Right, She's definitely walked the tightrope, which
is why the squad is not what it was. Right.
It used to be like, look at us, let's get
imagine jackets. And I was like, actually, I don't know,
Like I'll eat with you guys on Tuesdays. But not
on Wednesdays.
Speaker 2 (48:14):
I mean, but a couple of years back, would anyone
who believed you and I if we were sitting in
I said, hey, polling shows she's the most popular Democrat
in America.
Speaker 1 (48:22):
No, but the same people a couple of years back,
when I said he wants to be Hitler, I got
shunned at a table by Anna Navarro and Van Lathan
and Sally Cohne. They were all like, oh, and Caitlyn
Jenner and Katie Perry. They were all just mortified that
I made this comparison. This is in twenty eighteen.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (48:45):
No, all I'm saying is that the timeframe of things
that seemed absolutely unfounded are here. We are where things
that people were saying five years ago, here they are
that come to pass. I will say this, I just
in general have a distrust of people who take ownership
of I'm a politician. There is a perpetuating of what
(49:07):
that means, what that system is about, et cetera. That
I have to remain the cynic about.
Speaker 2 (49:12):
Anyone who would put themselves in that position. You have
suspicions off.
Speaker 1 (49:15):
Yes, if you're taking ownership. But like I remember when
Hill Harper was running for senator and he was like,
I'm a public servant. I'm a public servant. And I
know that some people might say it semantics, but I
don't believe it to be semantics. When I interviewed Marian
Williamson and I was like, are you a politician or
a public servant? She was like, well, I mean, I
guess if I'm running for president, I'm a politician, aren't I?
(49:37):
And I was den from that moment. She also kept refreencing,
like oh, she kept representing this book about reparations from
like nineteen ninety eight, and finally I was like, please
stop referencing the nineteen ninety eight book about reparations. Are
you involved in reparations right now? In twenty twenty four?
Are you?
Speaker 2 (49:55):
I did a TV debate with the Recony. She just
invented a quote that I apparently said about it, which
I never sai, and then I said wait to your
face to the host and I was sitting in this
home studio and I was like, I never said that,
and then she DMed me to follow up, and I'm like,
I'm not finishing this in the DMS. I'm done with this.
Good luck with your seventeenth presidential campaign.
Speaker 1 (50:16):
All right, we're going to head on over to the
Seals squad and Mahdi's gonna tell us what his suggestions
are for how we should be taking in media at
this time.
Speaker 2 (50:34):
The last.
Speaker 1 (50:40):
So my last question is this, When you created ZTEO,
what were some very clear distinctions that you wanted to
make going to independent journalism from where you had come
from in mainstream media. What was like, we're not doing
this over at zteo.
Speaker 2 (50:56):
Off talk about it. I would say three things. Number One,
I wanted to tell the model of interviewing that I
do and expand it and take pride in it. I
think our political interviews are very bad in the United
States of America, and why people have traditionally come to
me and liked me is because I do ask tough
questions and I try people to account. And I've done
that on my show with Democrats and Republicans, with Israelis,
(51:16):
with others, try and do it across the board. So
that's one thing I wanted to kind of save that
protect that. Number Two, language right for me, is a
great frustration that the US media is so timid in
its use of words. Yes, Atosaurus, get a dictionary. And
the racist debate on Trump like that killed me, Like
he gave me ulcers for the first time. I was like,
(51:37):
he's racially tinged rhetoric, racially divisive rhetoric. He's rare, it's
fewer letters, so that kind of stuff, you know, I
said that we want today, we're gonna say fascism, We're
going to say racism, we're going to say genocide. So
that was important, the use of language. And then the
third point, which is why I created Totayo and I
didn't go, hey, it's the Mardy Hussan network like Tucker
Carlson is because I wanted to platform other voices. I
(51:58):
want to bring in other voices who not getting the
platforms they deserve and giving them broader audiences. You look
at someone like Fatumabuto, the Pakistani novelist who's fantastic. She's
been writing on Gaza for US for the last year.
Amazing writer. I'm glad we've been able to give her
a much bigger platform in the US media so people
can read fat Tombuta. There are many such voices out
there like that.
Speaker 1 (52:18):
Do you run business different than mainstream media inns? Well,
I know that I didn't know this until I was
like speaking to people who do news in mainstream cable news.
But like there is exclusivity, there's also like a lot
of very specific like you can't show up in these
other places.
Speaker 2 (52:33):
No, in terms of our contributors, yeah, we are very democratic.
We've grown now this year, we've gone from like twelve
to eighteen contributors. We brought on Taylor Lorentz, We brought
on Jamal Bowman, were brought on Grace Blakeley in the UK,
we brought on Daniel Levy. So we brought a bunch
of different people. But no, this is all just about
providing platforms. I said earlier. I'm less interested in the exclusivity.
I'm much more insted in the cross pollination, in collaboration,
(52:54):
in working together. I don't see everyone as a competitor.
I actually think we all need to make this damn
thing right. When I see others doing well, I think
that's good from Zeteo as well. So, no, they are
all contributors. They are employees separate to our contributors. We
have about a dozen full time employees, producers, editors. They
are obviously exclusively working for CETEO. Prem Tacker is our
political correspondent. He's one content creator on air the rest
(53:15):
of behind the scenes, folks. But prem for example, is
exclusive working visitato. He's our full time political correspondent, writing
and producing content for CETEO. But everyone else, you know,
Naomi Klein would she does a great show for us
once a month, but obviously the rest of her time
she's doing other amazing stuff, right, No in that sense. No, Look,
we are a for profit. We're trying to make money
because we can't survive, we don't make money. And also
we actually want to show like there's a reason again,
(53:37):
another reason we did TOTAO is I do want to
show people this can be done right. I want to
show I want to have a good example. I want
to set a present. When I looked around last year
and I thought, why is there the Daily Wire and
why is there the Free Press, and why is he
Carson Network, And why isn't there progressive versions of this?
Why haven't Left managed to take on the subscription space,
the direct to consumer space, the substat newsletter space. And
(54:00):
that's one of the reasons I do want to show.
I want other people to say, Okay, I tell you
can do we can do well.
Speaker 1 (54:04):
There you have it, y'all. Thank you so much. And
I remember when we talked about it, and you know,
there was a little bit of apprehension because it was
about to launch, and here we are. And I remind
you of this regularly because it continues to grow. And
I am one of those people who would run into
you on the street and say, thank you for what
you're doing, thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (54:22):
Thank you to you too, thank you for coming on
Wino kidding not once, but twice.
Speaker 1 (54:28):
I liked it better when I was by myself. Though.
I don't do good on panels, yeah, because I don't
like getting cut off.
Speaker 2 (54:33):
Okay, but I'll still cut you off. That's fine. When
can we get you back? We need to get you
back on one on one.
Speaker 1 (54:38):
Depending on if the world is still in existence. I
need to promote my show anyway. So if you show
Amanda Landers on.
Speaker 2 (54:44):
Your show, what'd you say? Thank you for having me
on your show?
Speaker 1 (54:47):
This is actually my podcast.
Speaker 2 (54:49):
This is not my show, ok Now, we're just independentry
a pod customers.
Speaker 1 (54:52):
No, because this has been in existence for seven years
and the show has been in existence for five months.
Speaker 2 (54:58):
A podcast is a show, Amanda, this is my podcast.
Speaker 1 (55:01):
You're trying to get me irritated. I'm not gonna do it.
See I'm getting better. I'm getting better at social cues.
I just lived. This is like one of the very
first times where I really can say that I caught
myself like this person is antagonizing me. I am off
d No. I had an ex who would always call
(55:23):
TV shows movies.
Speaker 2 (55:24):
That's weird. But a podcast is show.
Speaker 1 (55:26):
It's a type of show.
Speaker 2 (55:27):
It's a type of show. Thank you hearing me on
your type of show. Podcast
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.
Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2
Season Two Out Now! Law & Order: Criminal Justice System tells the real stories behind the landmark cases that have shaped how the most dangerous and influential criminals in America are prosecuted. In its second season, the series tackles the threat of terrorism in the United States. From the rise of extremist political groups in the 60s to domestic lone wolves in the modern day, we explore how organizations like the FBI and Joint Terrorism Take Force have evolved to fight back against a multitude of terrorist threats.
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