How to Navigate the Fog of War: Creators Covering Israel & Hamas | Panel (Ep23) - StreamLeader Report with Ross Brand

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
All right, welcome to The StreamLeader Report. I'm Ross Brand. My
show is The stream Leader Report,and joining me are my co host Rob
Greenley from The Trust Factor and RebeccaGunter from Business in the Rock. Claudia
Santiago isn't able to join us today, So we're gonna start off with a

(00:21):
topic that's really everywhere in the newsright now, but we're gonna talk about
it from the approach of a creatoror an influencer, somebody doing a talk
show, commentary on the news online, perhaps a YouTube show, a podcast,
something like that, And that iswhat do you do when the fog

(00:49):
of war takes over. And wehad, of course, the major major
news incident the other day was therewas a report that all of the you
know, a lot of the majorold media ran with the CNN, New
York Times, BBC and so forth, which was Israel bomba hospital in Gaza

(01:12):
and five hundred people were dead.And they went with that immediately, and
that spread all over the world andthey ended up being riots in front of
US embassies and countries and and itjust blew everything blew up into this big

(01:34):
out outcry and by the time thedust settled, it turned out that it
was a rocket fired from within gazathat crashed into a parking lot. There
may have been some casualties, butit certainly wasn't five hundred. It was,
you know, essentially friendly fire withinthe confines of that area. And

(01:59):
so by by the time the storyhad corrected itself on the major news and
the proof got out, didn't reallymatter that much to those who were looking
to use that story to inflame antiAmerican sentiment around the world. And so

(02:21):
what's interesting is, as creators,and to some extent when I worked in
radio radio, if you're not ifyou don't have a news team that's covering
the world right, you're relying onthe AP, you're relying on the New
York Times, you're relying on newssources that other people are doing the reporting.

(02:44):
So now you have news sources thatare taking reports from a war zone
running with it, and then thecreator is twice removed, or the influencer
or the commentator online is twice removedfrom the event because obviously we're relying on

(03:07):
what the news says. If we'redoing a talk or commentary show, how
can we do better than the mainstreammedia? What role, I guess do
creators have or play in or dothey have a role in trying to be

(03:30):
responsible in trying to parse truth oris it all about getting the clicks and
running with the news story as fastas the details get out there. And
this goes for not just you know, live streamers and podcasters, but this
goes for people who are you know, very active on Twitter and other types

(03:51):
of platforms. I would just imagineif we're kind of facing this dilemma of
like what's true and not's true?This is a real situation. Yet if
you project just even a few yearsdown the future, and what kind of

(04:12):
deep face can be used to incendiarycreate an incendiary reaction. I mean,
this is a beautiful, well notbeautiful, but a profound example of how
we're reacting to something you know,kind of a misinformation imagine when it's by
design. My wow. Yeah,and it's even more dangerous than even that.

(04:34):
It's it's like, as creators,if you if you hold back on
something like that, you are givingup clicks and you are giving up audience.
But if you run with it,you lose credibility with your audience because
maybe the information that you shared didn'tturn out to be accurate. So I

(04:57):
think all of us as creators needto look at these things with a you
know, a skeptical eye. Youknow, mainstream media is rapidly losing trust
on the part of their audiences whenthey do this every single time. The
chase towards clicks and potentially incorrect informationerodes those relationships. And it's also very

(05:26):
dangerous because it people hear things onceand they think it's the truth. And
when it is reported a week lateror four or five days later that what
was reported five days earlier was incorrect, not everybody gets the message. And
by that and then by that point, you've already internalized your opinions about it,

(05:48):
and you've really already stirred up dangeroussentiment around the world that it was
based on a false premise and basedon false information, based on media being
more concerned about their profitability and clicksthan they are being responsible journalists. Well,
here you have ABC News with aphoto that clearly isn't of that event

(06:14):
with the story, and The NewYork Times ran a photo of another building
that had been blown up with theirfirst version of the story. And while
you know, you could say,okay, it's relevant because it might be
from the same conflict or whatever.The amount of credibility that putting a picture

(06:36):
of a building in rubble or acrying patient holding their child or something like
that does to inflame and give credibilityto a story that isn't true. You
know, why would you put apicture to go with a story that the

(07:00):
picture wasn't of that story? Insomething that's sensitive. We're not talking about
b roll of somebody walking into abuilding to show that the president's going to
a meeting or something. Right,so we have an old picture of the
president walking into a building. Wego, you know that we're talking about
something that looks like it's evidence ofa major war crime, catastrophe and it

(07:26):
turns out to be nothing of theof the sort. Yeah, and if
you really think about it, theperson that made that choice at the New
York Times should be fired, right, if that publication has any journalistic ethics.
What they did there was a majorerosion of their particular audiences trust,

(07:53):
right, because what they portrayed issomething that was not what it was implied
to be. And that right thereundermines the very fabric of journalistic integrity that
supposedly the New York Times was builton. Right, And this is why
mainstream media is now currently falling apartis because of these very same practices that

(08:20):
we're seeing happen, and because it'svery dangerous to our culture, our society
and the world that these can easilybe inflamed and turned into weapons against each
other and and cause wars. AndI hate to say this, but maybe
that's the real reason why it's happening. Mhmm, is that there are people

(08:43):
that want to create a war.And it's good for It's good for the
economy, man, good for business. Right, it's good for the news
business. Right, I mean it'sgood. I've probably been watching three or
four hours of news a day versusyou know, a skim of Twitter and
a half an hour to forty fiveminutes of TV or whatever. Or yeah,

(09:07):
I mean, why is The NewYork Times willing to give up their
journalistic integrity that they built over thelast hundred years? Right, And if
you're a foreign if you're a foreigneditor, you know or you're on that
desk where you're you know that youcan't get a five hundred person casualty count
within seconds of an explosion. Youknow that certain groups like Jumas have a

(09:35):
history of making up stories and youknow, using old footage and all that.
But yet they ran with it,while when the massacre occurred in Israel,
they took time, particularly CNN hada like, oh, well,
we don't have evidence that this happened, and we need to wait, and
we need to wait, and weneed to wait. So why did they

(09:58):
run with that that quickly unless itwas to stir up audiences around the world
and to perhaps draw America into alarger global conflict. Right. Plus,
I'm I'm absolutely as a content creator, I'm absolutely not willing to share things

(10:22):
like this, especially when they're unverified. I think the same thing happened a
week ago when they everybody was talkingabout how forty babies were decapitated. Right,
It's like, you know, therewas no evidence of that, And
it's it's the same kind of process, right, It's it's trying to inflame

(10:43):
people's emotions, to get people's attention, and that's what the media is really,
that's their goal right now, becausethat that directly gets to the bottom
line, and also other ring justto just to kind of completely start to
really create the enemyization of pr Ithink the military complexes is alive, and

(11:07):
well, yeah, right, they'regoing to be the long term beneficiary of
the things that are happening here.But you know, I think we as
content creators are independent content creators.We need to take that journalistic standard that
the mainstream media refuses to embrace anymoreand call them out for it and say

(11:30):
what they did was wrong, butthey did. Somebody needs to get fired
over there, and we're going toset a better example of going forward.
That's the only response, the responsibleresponse that we can have to this is
to call them out. Yeah.I mean, the field of journalism has
so many guidelines and supposed standards andethics and practices and things that are recommended,

(11:56):
and it seems like it goes outthe win, know, when it's
convenient or when the possibility of blowingthings up into a bigger story or being
first to the first to twitter withit or what have you comes along.
And I guess I wonder like theInternet is sort of still like the wild

(12:18):
wild West, right, But dowe ask podcasters, talk show hosts,
live streamers, YouTubers, do weneed some sort of guidelines or some sort
of way to organize ourselves to saythese are the standards we're trying to hold
ourselves to. I mean, let'sface it, a lot of shows on

(12:41):
aren't strictly news shows. They're acombination of commentary, satire, hangout and
whatever. And that's fine. Imean talk radio is in news per se
either. It's the same kind ofcombination of entertainment and opinion and so forth.
But I mean, is there away to somehow I don't want to

(13:07):
say credentialized, because I don't wantgatekeepers and things like that, but is
there a way to somehow elevate theonline independent creator, journalist, commentator who
oftentimes has as much or more knowledgeand behaves at a standard that is at

(13:30):
least as good and probably better thanwhat the legacy media. It's hard to
do ross these days. I mean, it's it's what you know, It's
really what is happening out there isthat independent media creators are. It came
out in research just the other daysaying that the podcasters were the most trusted

(13:54):
sources of information on the Internet,and and right after that was was YouTubers.
So it's it's this opportunity that wehave as creators, independent creators to
take a higher road here and toset a better example and to I hate

(14:15):
I hate you know, in someways I hate to say this, but
to run these mainstream media companies outof business. Rob, I'm so glad
you said that, because what asegue into embracing not only as content creators,
but thinking about the audience and shiftingour own mindset as to where we
get our news. I'm team firstperson perspective whenever I can get it,

(14:39):
so we start actually listening to thepeople who are actually there and that they
have a platform to be able totell their stories or to at least share
what's going on. Shifting my focusfrom like a top down media consumption to
a bottom up media consumption probably willgo a long way towards understanding how what's

(15:00):
really going on in the world andstop feeling a little bit like a marionette.
Yeah, and as we do that, there's going to be efforts to
silence us too, So you know, we just have to keep charging forward
and to co opt us, becausewhat's going to happen is that those in

(15:20):
power will then AstroTurf right and usethe solo observer and the citizen journalist or
create the appearance of one. Soyou're gonna get what you're gonna get eventually,
because I went to TikTok because onlybecause of Rebecca recommending it when we

(15:41):
were chatting about this, and itwas phenomenal to see the videos that people
were showing and breaking down the situationand everything. If I didn't have knowledge
from other media or from Twitter orwhat have you, I may not have
understood the context. But once Iknew a little bit about the issue from

(16:03):
the general media and other social media, I could really delve into those videos
and make sense of what was goingon. My concern is that the parties
involved will eventually get sophisticated and havethe citizen journalist the first person on the
ground and co op that person andcreate. But it's still interesting that,

(16:27):
you know, TikTok and Twitter figuresit out before the New York Times and
CNN. Ross what you've got yourfinger on the zeitgeist, man, because
I just watched a few tiktoks whowe're kind of pulling back the curtain on
independent news creat just exactly's the thingthat I'm man on the street who had

(16:48):
been very you know, celebrated withinthe platform and kind of painting the numbers
back to see how many of themare actually kind of under the umbrella of
the of the DNC and watching likeDNC planted, you know, news sources
amongst TikTok was kind of shot likeI pulled the curtain back a little bit

(17:11):
for me, And that's exactly whatyou're talking about. You've got your you've
got your finger on the pulse ofthe zitegeist for sure. The other cool
thing though, for following, likejust for following the news is the ability
to get translations. So I'm ableto read posts on Twitter that are in
Hebrew, I maybe read posts inArabic and other languages and see what people

(17:37):
on the ground from different governments whatIt's always interesting to see what people are
saying in their own language versus thecontent that they put out in English when
there's a conflict going on, becausesometimes there's there's quite the divergence between what
parties will say in their own languageand what they'll say in English. So

(18:02):
getting the translations is kind of interesting. Yeah, yeah, because you're hearing
it from local people that are thatto speak that language. It's not being
translated and maybe changed by someone that'san English speaker that's gonna present. Yeah,
I've been watching some news sources outof out of the the Middle East

(18:27):
that are not you know, likemainstream sources, So it's it's been interesting
to get their perspective on what's happening. Well, one more interesting things was
it was Al Jazeera because they haveaccess in Gaza and we're running video feeds
constantly, they accidentally caught something thatthey didn't want to catch. Well,

(18:53):
you know, they're they're located ina country that is friends with the West
and friends with the Muslim side too, right, so they're kind of like
a country that likes to, Iguess, get in the middle of everything.
So they have a lot of Americanthey both American troops and a base

(19:15):
there, and they have the eliteleadership of Hamas living in luxury hotels all
together right there. It's really aninteresting situation. So you'd think if somebody
wanted our hostages to be released,just walk down the street and go like,
you know, hey, we're gonnawe're gonna kill this guy if you

(19:36):
don't let our people, our peoplefree. I think they like twenty fifteen,
twenty twenty seven American hostages something likethat. Yeah, I think it's
in the country of cutter right,Yes, yes, Doha, So that's
where this is all happening. Solike the was it the secret or State

(19:57):
and mister Anthony blink and was theremeeting with the with that regime over that
country here just in the last weekor so, and so it was interesting
to see him there in this smalllittle country that is in the middle of
all this stuff going on, andit's it's way more complicated that crazy.

(20:18):
I mean, isn't that crazy thatthe US has a huge military installment there.
Hamas's leadership are living in luxury hotelsthere there, and Al Jazeera's broadcasting
from there. It's like, whatworld are we living? Well, the

(20:40):
Al Jazeera folks, you used topublish and this is kind of a because
I had I had contact with themwhen I was working at Microsoft. So
they were putting out a bunch ofvideo podcasts into the podcast medium back then.
And then they they took on acable deal with the cable networ work
here in the US where Al Jazeerawas going to be one of their channels,

(21:03):
and then that cable deal forced themto cancel all of their all their
video podcasts that were being published.Is that when they bought al Gore's cable
network exactly. Yeah, that's theother little detail there. But yeah,
is that the weather Channel? No, I'm just kidding, right, But

(21:23):
but things are much more complicated inthe Middle East in the relationships with all
these countries than we're being told.There's more inter relationships. Like there's plenty
of public information that Israel was reallythe original funder of UMAs many many years

(21:45):
ago. So you you know inthe US is rumored to be the funder
originally of al Qaeda too, right, So you know, you you create
your bedfellows to accomplish goals that youhave at the time that then can turn
on you in the end. Soit's it's this, things are much more
complicated over there than really I feeleven comfortable totally being able to understand or

(22:10):
comprehend. It's just plus the timescales on this conflict over there, and
it's for us to make quick determinationson what side to take or who how
to view the situation. Is reallypart of the manipulation here is that the
media is praying on the fact thatvery few people have any kind of depth
of knowledge about what's actually going onover there or what the history of what's

(22:33):
gone on over there. Well,I think what's one of the things that's
interesting is there are podcasts and videoshows where people are trying to have a
guess from one perspective and a guessfrom another perspective. Oftentimes both of both
of them are American, but they'retrying to take it from from different sides.

(22:56):
But the other thing about podcasts thatI like in YouTube shows is usually
they're they're targeting and niche audience,and they're pretty upfront and where they come
from, like they're labeled. Theylabel themselves this is a progressive podcast,
or this is a you know,right wing libertarian podcast, or hey,

(23:21):
where a show that goes straight downthe middle and gives you both sides or
whatever. Like, it's far morehonest than the than the mainstream media saying
we're the objective media following this tenpoint guide from the AP or whatever,
when you know the AP isn't followingits own its own standards. I mean

(23:42):
Q Two, I think I thinkthe humans have more of an ethical kind
of drive to do the right thingthan mainstream media has. They have a
pure profit business objective and what they'redoing and so they're going to drift between
what the popular belief are or thepopular kind of thoughts on this and then

(24:03):
ride that wave right where I thinkindependent creators like ourselves don't feel comfortable putting
out information that is that is harmfulto others more I think, but it's
it's wow, that's that's that's adifferent view. Yeah. Sorry, I
was just trying. But hey,when it's three and somebody's on the bottom,

(24:27):
but I'll put myself there. Therewe go, All right, there
you go, you're under us.Now how did you do that? I
just you just slide one window intowhere the other window is and they yeah,
yeah, it's tricky. Stream yardlessons happen in real time, right,

(24:49):
Yeah. So, I mean Ithink this is a conversation we can
have over time, regardless of what'sin the news is you know, it's
time. Hopefully podcasts and live streamsand YouTube shows will become the these sources
or at least will become another crediblesource. And how we how we elevate

(25:14):
those sources, how we choose thosesources, what standards maybe we recommend to
people without becoming gatekeepers. I thinkit's an interesting conversation. Yeah, And
One last point on this too,is that increasingly we're being kind of leveraged
into taking a side, right,So as as as media prayers. As

(25:37):
I sit here today, I'm conflictedwith this thought of if I get out
and I speak about this stuff,I need to take a side, right.
I have to be in favor ofIsrael or I need to be in
favor of the Palestine, you know, country, and because both are bad
things are happening to everyone here.So but there is this drive, and

(26:04):
I think it's really core to theconflict that's happening is that people are increasingly
taking sides, and that's that's what'sdriving this division between countries. So you're
seeing even the biggest countries in theworld kind of taking sides, right,
and then you have the US takingsides, and you have all these and

(26:25):
that's what scares me about the potentialof this escalating into a world war,
right, is people start taking sides. And that's happening inside the US as
well as outside the US right now. Well, there's also government's public posture
and then what they're doing behind thescenes, like Blincoln had a seven hour

(26:45):
meeting I think with the Israeli welland so that staff or whatever, which
was sort of saying maybe you couldslow down, maybe let's try something,
you know. So one hand,it's like the carriers are going over there,
but behind the scenes, it's like, slow down. So what is

(27:06):
our posture really? Well? Whowhat are what is our goal? What
are we trying to accomplish? Uh? You know, hand, go destroy
the terrorists. On the other hand, it's like, wait, don't don't
go too fast. I'm increasingly seeingthis, this movement towards talking about the

(27:26):
Palestinians over what happened to the Israelis, and that is kind of a shift
in in focus that I think isvery dangerous. But it's also indicative of
the shifts in the perceptions and themedia coverage of this. Increasingly, Israel

(27:51):
is seen instead of a victim ofa vicious attack, seen as a perpetrator
of an attack. And that's thechange in the rhetoric that that is happening
here, that is is really startingto inflame the world. I think that
this also ties in with our previousdiscussions and episodes of what can humans do

(28:15):
to stay nimble and competitive amongst theAI takeover? And what can humans do
that AI can't and it's all aroundcritical thinking, right, Yeah, I
think if I think if you canjust I if anybody out there and extremely
to report universe can take one thingaway, it's to just keep doubling down
on your critical thinking and really payingattention to who's saying it, what do

(28:40):
they have to gain, what arethe what are the what's the cond what's
the larger context? Critical thinking?Yeah, that's a conversation here that I'm
definitely thinking about a lot, Andwe could do a two hour podcast just
on the layers of this, uhand just what I've learned in the last
you know, five or six daysabout the Middle East and and how all

(29:03):
these big countries are shifting their positionsand making alignment, like Russia and China
are now aligned more than ever.And that's kind of because there's a common
enemy and that's the West. Right, So we've kind of fomented this realignment
of the world by our actions tosome degree, and then the actions of

(29:26):
others too have created a dynamic that'srapidly dividing us. I heard the other
day Rob that was sooner or laterwe all sit down to a buffet of
the consequences of our actions. Ithought that was pretty powerful. It's a
buffet this time, though, there'sa lot of nuclear weapons that are accessible

(29:49):
to many of the players involved here, so things could go horribly wrong.
So well, shit, I know, right, right, right, all
right, so let's talk about therobots. Okay, how about that for
transit and well more right to let'sdo the robots. That's more fun.

(30:12):
Yeah, if you're if you're anAmazon employee, i'd be a little worried,
right go ahead, No, goahead, I'll I'll let you take
off with the that's right. Well, I guess I started with the punchline
there is that if you're an Amazonwarehouse employee, you should be a little

(30:33):
concerned about what's happening here. Butyou know, I think most people have
seen it coming, you know,like Tesla has been working on their Optimus
Prime robot that is doing a lotof what's being talked about in this article
in tech Crunch about Amazon is addingincreasingly adding robots to their warehouse operations to

(30:57):
handle packages and and things like thatthat were formerly done by humans. Right.
And what's interesting about this is thatthere's been a lot of talk that
I've been hearing over the last coupleof years that the employees in the Amazon
warehouses they actually feel like robots becauseof the expectations that are expected of them.

(31:22):
They're you know, processing per packageper hour kind of standard of performance,
and they're limited to breaks that arekind of unhuman right, and it's
and it's almost like Amazon has beensetting up their warehouse operations for the future,

(31:44):
which is they can run twenty fourto seven, seven days a week
without a break and without stopping.All they have to do is keep electricity
moving to them and they'll keep processingpackages. Which humans have to take lunch
breaks and they have to take vacationsand they have to do this, but
robots don't. So but increasingly theserobots are able to have like finger dexterity,

(32:07):
and they're able to have this thiscapability of moving things around, and
that's what the Tesla Optimist Prime robotis being increasingly able to do as well.
It was I think just in thislast week it was demonstrated that the
Tesla Optimist Prime robot now can doyoga. So if that tells you anything

(32:29):
about how the the agility is beingworked on here. So in order to
relax and refresh before the next cheftright exactly. I'm sure that's what they're
going to expect of the optimist goon vacation, align the chakras, right
right. So, so that's kindof a summary. Amazon is, you

(32:52):
know and actively thinking that you knowthat they're going to have these type of
robots in there. They've been usingrobots all along, but they haven't been
humanoid type structures that they've been using. I guess up to this point that
they've had seven hundred and fifty thousandrobots systems. So as you think about
the robotics side of things, beingan automotive, so you've seen lots of

(33:15):
videos where there's these arms that aredoing things with cars as they're going through
an assembly line. That's essentially what'sbeen going on here at Amazon is that
they're they've been using robots to transportkind of racks of packages around a warehouse,
right, And that's all being doneby increasingly by kind of an artificial

(33:37):
intelligent type of platform or software platformthat's been able to do that. So
it's just coming out that you knowthat there's going to be you know,
thousands of these robots that are goingto be coming into all sorts of manufacturing
operations like Amazon or warehouses, andthat's going to just workers. That's just

(34:01):
a fact. Claudius story of afew weeks ago in which all of the
professions that were like ninety nine pointnine percentile chance of being phased out,
and the shock of the prediction thatthis will be the case by twenty thirty
is really evidenced by what you're bringingto the table today. And I think

(34:23):
it could happen before then too.I think twenty thirty is still quite a
ways off. I think, youknow, based on what I'm reading in
this article, it's coming. Theyactually have these type of humanoid type robots
that are already in the warehouse doingthings that they're testing right now. They
haven't been fully deployed. The samething with the Optimist Prime robot. I

(34:45):
think Elon Musk was quoted just onthe on the earnings call yesterday talking about
it, saying that you know,he wasn't going to talk about any kind
of manufacturing or scale or anything likethat for the Optimist Prime robot, but
that is the kind of bot thatany of us will be able to buy
and be able to mower lawn ordo our dishes or whatever in our houses.

(35:07):
I love how you're pre launching yourbusiness. Rob, you know how
you're you're managing your robot army.Well, yeah, I guess I did
talk about that, didn't I you'redead right? How far off are we
from having our own robot? Iwouldn't mind not having to do my dishes.
I think it's within probably five toten years before they'll have one that

(35:30):
we can buy for like maybe myguess. Of course, it depends on
inflation between now and then, butprobably around twenty five thousand dollars probably you
can get your own robot. Iguess I'm going to be doing my day.
It'll be about the same price asthe Tesla model. To the heck
with a new car, I'm gettinga rope right, Well, you just

(35:52):
kind of get on the back ofthe robot and just ride it to the
grocery store, you know, orjust send the robot to the store with
the You can just send them tothe store too, but driving car.
Yeah, it's kind of like ahorse. It's our new horse. Now,
will those be connected to the internet, Rob, Remember when you said
that it's called starlink. Yes,okay, remember how we were talking about

(36:15):
whether the cars would be connected tothe internet. What that means, well,
they already are. Mine is mine. I thought you said that the
new Tesla doesn't have to. Itdoesn't have to, so if it has
a disconnection from the Internet, it'llstill operate because it's got all of its
intelligence right in the car. Sorobot doesn't have to be connected to the

(36:39):
end. No, it doesn't,but you might connect it to download like
new scales or like, hey,there's an update for the robot. Now
it can play catch and you know, walk your dog or what you know,
get get version four point three.I was saying, the danger of

(37:01):
these robots being being connected to theinternet is they could all be turned into
evil, evil robots and kill usall. So that's the you know,
just by flipping the switch youringe,you're gonna take the vaccine. Okay,

(37:22):
it's like this, it's like beastmode and then kill mode. So right.
My kid actually brought up an interestingquestion about that. I was sharing
about how the Tesla driverless cars don'thave to be hooked up to the Internet,
and I was kind of like,they're not, So you clarified that
for me, Like it said,how on earth will I know where to
go? Like, is there TeslaMaps or something? And I hadn't thought

(37:45):
of that, Like how would theydriverless card? Well, you can store
all the maps for you know,all the maps in the car and memory.
So if you're that's that's what mykid suggested, like Tesla Maps or
something, and I was like,well, yeah, it uses Google Maps
right now. So so but that'sthat's connected to GPS, which isn't a

(38:10):
data connection, so it's it's aseparate connection that happens from the Internet.
So you know, they're testing dronesright now Amazon in the UK for delivery.
Yeah, we'll see how that playswell. Where does I mean like
you have a central location where thepackages are and like the drones are going

(38:31):
to go all over the place andnot in with air travel and not interfere
with power line like I guess.I guess the navigation on these things is
just so good that you can havethese drones go a really long distance from
a way. I mean, we'renot talking about taking it from like the

(38:52):
post office in every little town toyou know that the houses down the block.
We're talking about you know, there'sa airhouse I assume, and then
from there the stuff gets put ona truck, but instead it gets put
on a drone. How big arethese drones gonna be and how do they
think? It depends on how bigthe package is. I mean, because

(39:13):
I assume they're not gonna have onedrone for package. Right, you're gonna
have the drone's gonna have to domore than one stop at a time,
so they're gonna be pretty good sizeddrones. Then, because you've seen the
Amazon trucks as they go around theneighborhood, right, it's not like they're
just bringing you your package. Everybodyon the block is getting something from aps.
But reimagine I think about this asthe bird flies, is always a

(39:37):
shorter path than driving, right,It's true, It's true, just straight
across, no traffic, no trap, no rush hour traffic to boot,
drop it off, go back,good, another one drop it off,
robot, reindeer that can that canfly. Yeah, I'm seeing all of
it. The question is where whereis it going to drop it? Right?

(40:00):
If it's gonna drop it like inyour driveway, it's not going to
do it during a rainstorm, right, because the package will get completely you
know, drenched, unless it's goingto be delivered with plastic wrap around it
or something. I don't I'm notquite sure how they're going to handle that,
and they're probably not going to flyit up to your porch. Maybe
they are, but I would thinkthat that could be dangerous. Right on

(40:32):
the door they put it in thedriveway, they still have to land,
right, They're not going to justdrop it from well, they'll probably from
there set and then they'll drop itto the ground. Well it's hovering probably

(40:52):
is what I'm assuming that it willdo, because it doesn't want to get
too low because it might hit ahuman, right, and those that have
been reprogrammed by the nefarious villains rossmen earlier, like open the door to
drop your package in the face,right, or you know, somebody has
a gun and shoots it down.Maybe we have our like our our Amazon

(41:15):
landing pad or whatever where it's likethis cushiony thing and they get on the
rough it from a certain height righton that surprise. Yeah, you have
to teach kids like don't stand underthe Vega package. Just come at some
point right. Yeah. Yeah,some hey mailboxes were weird once, you

(41:37):
know, still are. Yeah,I've been I've been really skeptical of the
drone delivery idea that came out many, many years ago, and they've they've
really struggled to get it get itdeployed because of safety reasons mainly, And
the FAA is in the process rightnow. And we haven't talked about this

(41:58):
too much on the show, butthe FAA is really cracking down on drunes.
So yeah, yeah, I've gotone in the drone zone. Rebecca,
what is this code this private messagething that people families aren't doing ross
When my kid was a we taughta practice I had learned in you know,

(42:23):
best practices of parenting were to havea secret code word. That way,
if anybody tried to pick my kidup from school or knock on the
door and gain entry, they didn'tknow the code word, they couldn't get
in. And our code word,by the way, my kid's fifteen now,
so you'd have to drone this oneoff. But our code word was
band aid. And it's old schoolparenting tactic to have a code word no

(42:45):
one to kind of avoids stranger dangerand to you know, get your kid
not to just go willing nelly withanybody. That concept is alive and well
here as we face whether or notthere are potentials of deep faking voice prints
in a scam, a ransom scam, so can AI basically voice spoof,

(43:09):
which I think is a really interestingcombination of words. Your kid or your
mom, or you know someone aloved one on the phone who's asking say
they've been taken hostage and asking forkidnapping money, or some sort of scenario
where you think a real person isin danger. How do you know whether

(43:30):
or not that's real, really happeningto you, which I think is this
theme here in the stream Leader report. What's real, what's not? And
how do you know? This writersuggesting that you have a safe word or
a safe code of words that youuse with your you're commonly with your friends
and your family, so that youcan know whether or not you're being faked

(43:52):
out by a voice copy of thepeople you care about. And I thought
this was really streamely in a reportingkind of content. And I'm gonna be
working on my code word now thatI've told everybody what band aid is.
Yeah, but I think it probablywould have to be kind of a string

(44:13):
of words, but it's really around. Here's another practice that we're putting in
place in case shit, in caseit happens, and start to normalize how
we can signify to each other ashuman beings that were real. And that's
interesting and also I hope this doesn'thappen anybody and will as I learn how

(44:38):
to discover what our codes are.I mean, what if you're discussing,
what if you have the time?You know, so, yeah, what
do you have to do? Youhave to go and like out into the
forest, like ten ten miles intothe forest with no devices on you and

(44:58):
discuss what you're safe word is orpassive back and forth on a piece of
paper. It's a good point,Rob, What do you think? What
do you think about having to havea safe word? It's probably a good
idea. You know, there's alot of scammers on online now and increasingly
access to the AI tools is prettyeasy to do now. So yeah,

(45:23):
there's no reason why. I mean, especially if you're an online media creator.
I think you're you're probably especially vulnerable, and I think we're being an
online media creator does kind of presentsome potential risks with being able to be
cloned. It's like what I dowith audio and video. I mean,

(45:44):
it would be easy. Increasingly youcan clone somebody with a very small piece
of content to train the AI toduplicate it, and then it sounds like
that person and you can give themwhatever script you want exactly right. I
need help, I need to sendI need you to do something, any
kind of way to separate. Youkidnap my dog and don't bring it back.

(46:12):
I love that dog, don't you. So I think we all all
have to be very aware of ourwhat's going on around us at all times,
especially when we're in public or inany major city. I think we
just need to be aware because there'sincreasing videos that are coming out. I
don't know if they're real or not, because I don't know that anything that's

(46:34):
being published online is necessarily real anymore. You just don't always know. So
I always have a skeptic eye witheverything. But but to address this specific
thing, I think having a safecode is probably probably a good idea,
right Yeah, just one little humanhack and a post it note can prevent.

(46:59):
But the should that code be issomething that has me thinking, is
it probably if you're going to bebecause oftentimes, especially in a kidnapping situation,
that they will do like a proofof life or something like that type
of scenario. Right, So,It'll need to be something that can be

(47:20):
said in that type of a situation, right, that won't clue the kidnappers
that you just gave a code,Right, So I would think about it
in that context. Yeah. Interesting. I would hate Roths to get kidnapped
and for it to be not forme not to believe that it was his

(47:43):
actual voice. Who will have towork at the code. I can tell
the difference between f and yes,yes, Hey, do you guys use
on on Instagram? Do you guysuse any those broadcast channels or even know
what they are? Because now they'recoming to Facebook and the idea is they're

(48:10):
kind of like Telegram, you knowthe app Telegram where people sort of subscribe
to somebody and they'll generally post avariety of content there, videos, news
stories, different things. It's generallyaround the topic. I couldn't have totally.

(48:31):
Rebecca said, like a slack channel, and I'm like, not exactly,
but I don't know why it's notexactly. It sounds very much like
a slack channel or a Telegram orI don't know. I've never used these,
and I've seen a couple of peoplemaybe invited me to theirs on Instagram

(48:52):
and I don't know whether I evenjoined or I'm not joining, or I'm
messaging them. I don't know.What do you guys think of these?
Do you know anything about them?And are you interested or not interested in?
Are they like Slack? Are theylike Telegram? Or what are they?
Yeah? I think it's it's alittle bit more like even like Facebook

(49:17):
groups, but it's more like athreaded conversation type of a type of inexperience.
Yeah. I think in a lotof ways, it's it's kind of
a hybrid between I think what we'veseen with like threads and WhatsApp, So
you kind of combine those two experiencestogether and you kind of have an idea

(49:38):
of what it might be. Idon't think it's really that revolutionary. I
mean, there's nothing that meta doesright now that's very revolutionary. Yeah,
that's just one more thing for meto not want to be on Facebook or
Instagram, which is increasingly intense rightI do not want to be there.

(50:00):
Although I had a situation last weekwhere I needed to find somebody that I
only knew by like paying, andI really needed to find this person because
we had kind of like an abandoneddog scenario. Not mine even still,
uh, and the only way Icould find them was Facebook and that was
it. That was the only lookLike went through real estate records and the

(50:23):
internet deep Internet search LinkedIn everything,and Facebook was the vehicle. But other
than that, I'm ready to scrapit now. On Twitter, people have
their own like mini Twitter within Twitter, do you do? You know what
I'm talking about? Like within Xyou have you can sort of have your
own community or group that you're tweetingto and other people can tweet in there

(50:46):
and uh, but everything just stayswithin that group and it can be invite
only. I imagine the concept ofthe broadcast channel is similar, but in
a more facebooky Instagram ish way.Maybe. Yeah. I think it's interesting
that I've been increasingly seeing threads postsshowing up in my wall in Instagram,

(51:12):
which is which is an interesting kindof merging of those those two platforms that
are both owned by Meta Right,So, so are we going to see
this happen or it's going to bemerging more into the Facebook proper platform and
into what's happened. So this isjust an effort to kind of converge all

(51:37):
the communities into you know, intodominating kind of the whole kind of conversation
side of of what's happening. I'mnot sure it's gonna be that huge or
that popular. There's just so manyof these doing it right now. There's
so many apps doing this. There'sI mean, it's in and it's in

(52:00):
WhatsApp, it's it's not on Instagram, but it's in threads. So but
they keep saying that this is partof Facebook. So it's coming to Facebook
pages, right, So it's somethingthat's going to be integrated into Facebook pages.
I think it would make more sensefor groups, I would think,

(52:22):
But for pages, Okay, Imean, I don't know how much engagement
there is with people in pages unlessyou have a really big following. But
this is where I think Rebecca wasright in comparing it to slack in that,
Yeah, basically, you have apage and you make your regular public

(52:43):
posts that you make about your businessor about what's you know, issues of
interest to people who are connected toyour brand or the celebrity or the person
whatever, and then you want tohave specific conversations or like threads. Almost
you create channels, and anybody whofollows your page or whatever, or maybe

(53:07):
they don't even have to follow yourpage, but they can join that broadcast
channel. So you know, youhave the stream leader report. Let's say
had a page and on that pagewe wanted to create some channels. We
could have AI media robots, youknow, like if we wanted to have

(53:29):
like ongoing discussions or something like that. Not saying that we want to do
that, but that would be theidea, right, sort of like a
Slack where you have, you know, people for business would have hr marketing,
you know, new ideas, youknow, product launches or whatever.

(53:51):
You know, different Slack channels theyhave off topic, off topic. I
got to say that like hot pockets. How it works, if you manage
a page on Facebook in a marketwhere broadcast channels are currently available, you
can start a channel directly from yourpage. Otherwise you can join the wait

(54:12):
list and we'll be notified. Oncethe broadcast channel is created and the first
message is sent, followers of thepage will receive a one time notification to
join the channel. Only the creatorof the channel can send messages, but
members of the broadcast channel can reactto messages and vote in polls. I
think that's more like Telegram right where. I think in Telegram, when you

(54:37):
follow somebody on Telegram or whatever you'reI don't know. I haven't spent enough
time in it, but I thinkalmost everything comes from the person who started
it. You can jardin broadcast channelsfrom your favorite pages profile on Facebook and
see those you've joined in your chatlist. Once you join the channel,
you'll start receiving notifications when content isPostedations could be muted by tapping the mute

(55:01):
icon at the top right corner ofthe channel thread. Then they list a
bunch to join, like Netflix andWWE. Anyway, that is broadcast channels
for us. You know, itjust kind of reminds me of and I'm
speaking a little bit out of turnbecause I'm not old school Twitter. I'd

(55:22):
like you guys, but when peopletalk about black Twitter or or queer Twitter
or like, you know, justkind of like alignments of people on Twitter,
that happened because it'd be like ahashtag and conversation, right, So
the idea of like black Twitter beingjust a concept more than you know,

(55:45):
I'm not a formalized way of doingit. And this is formalized. Are
those think when a community forms arounda hashtag, anybody can post using that
tag and participate in the conversation,whereas the only person who can initiate the

(56:06):
post is a person who runs thatpage or the people who add the page,
and then you can comment on it, you can react to it,
but you can't initiate the conversation initiative. So it's sort of like you're subscribing
to Rob's or Rebecca's or Ross's channelabout XYZ because you know, like people

(56:32):
will subscribe on Telegram, let's say, to an expert on some medical issue
or some political issue that this person'sreally deep in the weeds on or whatever,
and it's like they get those updatesin real time as that person is
doing their work or testing what they'retesting, or following the news from an
inside perspective or whatever. So nowI see why you say it makes more

(56:58):
sense in groups. I think so, because it'd be nice to divide.
Like you have a big group,it'd be nice to divide up. Hey,
this is one group. If you'vejust interested in when we're live streaming,
that'll be in in this group.If you're just interested in talking about
monetizing your content, well we'll haveextra stuff here, and then the main

(57:19):
group page is maybe more focused oneverybody. Yeah, what's really interesting is
that the the the Instagram kind ofmessages area looks looks a lot like this
this app here, and it's gotthe same kind of you know, like
a little round icons at the verytop. What's different is it has that

(57:45):
channels icon there, which isn't inInstagram. Yeah, so it's it's it's
channels, but the channels are takingplace within within the messager part of Instagram,
not like within people's regular feeds orpay or profiles. I don't think

(58:07):
yeah, because I'm not seeing itin the Facebook messenger platform. I'm not
seeing the same experience. It's interesting, So this must be a separate app.
It must be a different app.I guess we're all going to have
to do our research a little bitmore on this. It's your thing,
and to figure out whether this issomething worth leveraging if you have a community,

(58:30):
or you have a specific issue ortopic that you want to provide information
on and get people involved and mightsubscribe to you or follow you or whatever.
But we are out of time.I want to thank Claudia for keeping
the chat buzzing. I know shewasn't able to join us live, but

(58:50):
great to see you Claudia in theChat. Hope you're doing well. We
will be back next week Thursday,one thirty pm East for Rebecca Gunter Business
in the Raw, Rob Breenley,The Trust Factor. I'm Ros's frand this
has been the Stream Leader Report.We'll see you again next week. Take
care everybody,

All Episodes

How to Navigate the Fog of War: Creators Covering Israel & Hamas | Panel (Ep23)

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}How to Navigate the Fog of War: Creators Covering Israel & Hamas | Panel (Ep23)