July 30, 2023 • 37 mins
This episode closes out the month of July 2023 talking about All Things Media. We discuss the rebranding of Twitter into “X,” the continued hearings about UFOs, and the recent passing of Sinéad O'Connor.
Recorded live July 30. 2023.
Recorded live July 30. 2023.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:02):
You are listening to the Billy D'spodcast. Follow Billy D's on Twitter now
the X platform at Billy D's allright, well, hello everyone, and
welcome to the podcast. As always, I am absolutely thrilled that you are
here. If you have never checkedout the podcast before, we are primarily
(00:24):
an interview and a commentary based podcast. You can find the Billy D's podcasts
pretty much anywhere podcasts are found,and I'm so glad you found us today
Today we are going to be havinga commentary podcast. We're going to be
talking about all things media. It'sbeen a while since we've done one of
those episodes. I'm going to talkabout a couple of different things, including
(00:44):
X formerly known as Twitter, whichis kind of like my social media home.
So I'm very interested in what happenswith X. We're going to talk
about that a little bit. Also, in the news this past week a
lot about you fos again testimony aboutsome of the things the government may have
(01:06):
or may not have. We're goingto talk about that a little bit,
in my opinion, of course,and we're going to round things off with
a Shanada O'Connor, So I'm goingto talk about those three things today.
Before I get into all that,I got to send out a couple of
shout outs. First of all,I want to thank Karen Debanas. She
is the subject of our last episode. You can check her out in our
(01:26):
playlist. Her episode, she hasa book out and during the podcast she
talks about the importance in her caseher child. But anytime you have a
loved one who is being diagnosed bya doctor and there's a certain course of
(01:46):
action that's being mapped out, andthere's something there's a little voice inside of
you saying I'm not sure this isright. And she talks about her experience
with that, and let me tellyou, that's something that a lot of
people can resonate with. So docheck out that episode. Karen Debanas.
(02:06):
That episode of course in our playliston the Billy Dee's podcast. Coming up
within the next few weeks. DeborahFazzelle. I'm sure a lot of you
know Deborah Fazzelle. She's been onthe podcast and numerous times, and she
is going to be talking about herbook, The Time of Our Lives.
She talks about her experience at aJuilliard, the performing arts school, when
(02:32):
she was there numerous years ago,not too far back. She wouldn't want
me to give away her age,I'm sure, but there's some names as
far as our classmates and all thatgo, that you would most certainly recognize.
We're going to be talking to heras well, and also we're going
to be having a couple of recoverystories on the podcast as well. I
(02:53):
am very pleased, very happy,very dare I say proud that this show
has become a forum for people toshare their stories about recovery, whether it's
addiction, trauma, recovery, mentalhealth, whatever the issue may be.
We're always very pleased when someone hasa book out or they're a creator of
(03:17):
some kind and they choose to comeon our podcast to talk about those things.
Those are all wonderful, wonderful aspectsof this show, and they're always
inspiring, and I very much enjoyhaving these people on the program. Getting
into today's topics X. I gotnot an email, a direct message from
(03:42):
one of my good friends on Twitterhere recently, and it was like the
long goodbye. He was like,Bill, it's been a pleasure knowing you.
You can always contact me on myother platforms. It's a pleasure to
work with you. But I justdon't know if I can take this anymore
(04:04):
oh so dramatic. And he's probablylistening to this as a good chance he's
gonna hear this. Obviously, I'mI'm teasing him a little bit, but
it is reflective of a lot ofthe interactions that I've had about the platform
formerly known as Twitter, and I'mjust not sure that it's warranted. You
(04:30):
know, I I like Elon Muskas a rule, and you know I
naturally you don't agree with any humanbeing one hundred percent of the time,
but I can tell you that he'sbeen counted out more than once, whether
it be with Tesla and other things. And it's just too early, you
know, when you're talking about amedia company like Twitter and now X that
(04:59):
is so big, has so manyusers, and we're talking about you know,
hundreds of millions of them, andwhen those changes, you just can't
predict. You know, if youcan look back over the past couple of
months, every so often, therewas just one more time when Twitter that
was this was going to be theend of Twitter, and that's still here.
(05:20):
This is one thing where I haveto say, when you're getting into
an evaluation of a company like this, you have to look at what trajectory
was it on to begin with.Okay, And the fact of the matter
is is that Twitter was never,considering the amount of costs that went into
(05:43):
it, was never a big moneyentity to begin with. And there's a
good chance, a very good chance, that, had Elon not come along,
that the days of Twitter, whetherit been in another year to whatever,
the days might have been numbered anyway, So something had to happen.
(06:09):
Something had to give, as thesaying goes, something had to give,
right, Something had to happen,something had to shake it up a little
bit. I was a little tepidon the move to X and I'm still
just a little tepid on it.Because Twitter, despite the fact that it
was never a huge moneymaker so tospeak, it was a part of the
(06:33):
vernacular. It became a verb,you know, just like when you search
something now on the internet, yougoogle it. The Google brand has become
a verb. And tweeting and retweetingand all these other kinds of things,
referring to your friends as tweets,on and on and on. It was
(06:55):
part of the vernacular. And ifyou're lucky enough to have a brand that
is Kleenex. No matter what brandof tissue you have, you call it
a Kleenex, right, and ifyou're lucky enough to have your brand to
become a part of the vernacular.As a marketing person, advertising person,
I've always been very careful about maybeyou don't want to change that. So
(07:19):
I'm still not one hundred percent behindthis X thing, but I can understand
why. I can understand why.I believe from what I've been able to
gather, and this is just purespeculation on my part. This is an
opinion episode, but I would bewilling to bet that the plans for Twitter,
(07:39):
as as they call it now,the everything app, the everything app,
right, kind of like in physics, you know, the theory of
everything, Okate explains everything, Andit seems like the desire by Elon and
(08:00):
his staff is to have an appone that is very focused on financial transactions,
okay, And I kind of believethat's where the X is really coming
from, because X is associated witha lot of different things regarding financial transactions
online, and he's had the Xdot Com. He's been talking about an
(08:24):
everything app for years, So Iwould be willing to bet that this is
going to become a very big partof its profitability because if you can manage
transactions and you charge just a slightfraction of a fee for that transaction,
(08:45):
what can happen is is if youbecome the go to place to do transactions,
you can be making some real moneyreal soon. I mean, this
would be like Venmo or something likethat with a half a billion users.
So I mean that there, tome, talks a lot about viability.
(09:07):
Now. Twitter has also been thekind of place to go for news and
politics, and oddly enough, itwas often criticized for that because people,
I know, any here a politicswell you know what, right In the
description of the app at various timesit was called news, information, etc.
And things like that. And asa creator, no matter what kind
(09:31):
of a creator you are, whetheryou are a musician, if you are
a podcaster like me, you know, YouTuber, any of these types of
things, blogging, vlogging, youhave some kind of a cause, you
want to bring awareness to a certainillness, all of these things, those
(09:52):
types of topics. In terms oftrending, there's no other place like Twitter.
I mean, it doesn't happen asinstantly on Facebook, LinkedIn, forget
it. I mean you're talking abouta lag time there of days or weeks
before anything happens, that's you know, becomes the topic of conversation on LinkedIn.
And I like LinkedIn, you know, I'm on it. It's a
(10:15):
good place for you know, foryour references. A lot of times when
I meet someone, I noticed rightaway that there's more views on my LinkedIn
profile, because that's kind of oneof the places you go to to make
sure somebody is legit, you know, And that's fine, But if you're
talking about something happening in real time, there's a national crisis of some kind,
(10:39):
or there's something going on, let'ssay, a presidential debate or something
like that. Now it's not scientific. But for me being sort of an
old media dude, you know,back when Ronald Reagan or the first George
Bush, they had a presidential debateof some kind leading up to the election.
(11:00):
The morning talk shows on the radio, that's where everybody was calling in
saying, you know, well thisor that or the other thing. All
those weren't scientific either, but youhad audience reaction that was a bit delayed.
It came in the next day orwhat have you. The idea that
you can just kind of follow alongright in the palm of your hand and
(11:22):
follow some of these things as theyare happening is just absolutely amazing to me.
It's I mean that it's just socool. And like I said,
no matter what kind of a creatoryou are, you know, talking about
Debora Fizzel, you know she's she'sbeen a show buss person. Anything happening
(11:43):
in that kind of regard is ahit movie whatever, you know, it's
it's being discussed on Twitter, Sothat aspect of it I believe he could
really really capitalize on. And ifyou look at what happened with like and
here again I'm not being political onthis, whether you agree with Chucker Carlson
and people like him or not,he has utilized so far Twitter very successfully.
(12:07):
And if this is a foreshadowing ofthings to come. Now it's new,
so I mean, anything new isgoing to have a bump when it
first happens, but as time goesalong. If people like that newsmakers,
news reporters, anything like that,If this starts to materialize in a way
(12:28):
where it has stability going into thefuture, this could be very big for
the Twitter platform. It could bereally really big. And I gotta say,
if the cable news networks right now, they're all way down. I
mean, if I was in thecable news business right now, I would
be very concerned about the future ofthe of those entities. And what is
(12:52):
happening now with Twitter and social mediain general, but in particular Twitter,
because that is pretty extraordinary. Wecould be looking at a new type of
media coming here, which is socialmedia hybrided with traditional media, and that
could be very interesting. He hasbeen very good about championing the idea of
(13:18):
free speech. And you know,free speech is one of those things you're
all for it until you hear somethingthat you don't like. But the idea
behind free speech is that it's forthat. It's for the information that makes
you mad. That's why it's there. Because here's the thing. When the
(13:43):
word when the term fake news firststarted a number of years ago, I
got very concerned because I knew rightaway that fake news was going to become
the term that you used when youheard news that you didn't agree with,
that you did not like. Itwas fake news, and it is.
(14:03):
It's exactly what I predicted. WhatI feared has become of that and more
recently with the pandemic and all thestuff about Fauci and the vaccines. Initially
when the pandemic was going on,the word that was used where there's a
lot of disinformation out there. Now, who could possibly like disinformation? Right?
(14:28):
Well, that can get a littlefuzzy. That can get fuzzy real
quick. And here's how because disinformationa lot of times who makes that decision?
A lot of stuff that was labeleddisinformation during the pandemic has turned out
to be true. And this isI know that's that may be triggering to
(14:50):
a lot of you, but it'sthe truth. Nonetheless, there was a
lot of things about the vaccines thatwere overstated, to say the least in
terms of their effectiveness. And ifyou can't even discuss it, okay,
if you can't even say, hey, wait a minute, how do we
know this? What other studies arethere? And so on and so forth.
(15:13):
If you can't even say those thingsand even challenge those things to the
least degree without getting turned off,then that's a problem. Because there's two
facets to this. Who determines whatthe truth is? And number two is
time sometimes has a way of revealinga different truth. And if you silence
(15:37):
people at the very beginning, youlose a lot of time in your analysis
and how you deal with the problem. I'll defend Facebook and some of these
other things that in the past maybetook on political ads that a lot of
people didn't like and they were criticizedfor that, but I'll defend them in
this regard. You know, there'san old saying that figures don't lie,
(16:02):
but liar's figure. And we couldtake let's say, something going on in
your state. We could take tenindependent facts about what's going on there,
and you could have one candidate pickseven of them and state a certain given
truth. And you could have anothercandidate take a different seven different mix and
(16:27):
take those same facts and present anothergiven truth. Now, all those individual
facts independently might very well be true, but moving forward, if you are
a media company, how do youknow which analysis is correct? And a
(16:48):
lot of times nobody knows exactly whatthat truth is going to be until this
situation plays out a little bit.So if somebody makes that decision for you,
this candidate, you don't need tohear because this is misinformation. This
is something that you don't need tobother with. Okay, that decision has
been made for you. You can'tmake an analysis for yourself in that moment.
(17:11):
And as time goes along, it'svery hard to backtrack and figure out
what we knew and what we didn'tknow because one side of that issue was
closed down. So as odd asit may seem, disinformation in a sense,
in a way is designed to bepredicted by free speech. That's that's
(17:33):
the whole point of it. AndI understand there's going to be people that
say, well, you know,free speech is really about governmental silencing and
all that. Well here again,uh, that's true, but and these
are private entities. But but butbut but we have more than enough evidence
now that there has been tampering witha lot of these entities, the theseum
(17:57):
information companies. There's been tampering.And we also have to let the law
catch up with the technology. Whenyou have technologies like Elon said, where
Twitter was essentially taking the place ofthe public forum, and it'd be a
lot of these social media companies inessence have become the de facto town forum
(18:25):
that is also a monopoly. There'snowhere else to go to get these these
types of information. Now you havea little bit different situation, especially when
the government is getting involved or potentiallygetting involved behind the scenes. That's a
whole other situation. So I believethat the pursuit of free speech has done
(18:48):
very well for x formerly known asTwitter. All right, another thing coming
up, another subject I've on thedetach on today is the idea of the
UFO testimony. I'm sure a lotof you have at least heard about the
UFO testimony and the assertions that theUnited States government may not only have components
(19:18):
of alien spacecraft, but have nonhuman biologics. I believe was the term
used. Non human biologics sounds scary. They're done, isn't it yet?
It does sound a little scary,Yeah, it does. What's my opinion
about this? This has come upsocially with me a number of different times,
(19:38):
because people that are in my circleof friends know that I sometimes feel
that I missed my calling when itcomes to science. I did very well
with physics and things like that,and I've followed it as an amateur.
I'm not a you know, BrianCox or one of those kind of people,
(20:00):
but I professor Brian Cox. Ienjoy it as an avid amateur.
I really like stories about Newton,Einstein, Stephen Hawking. Those kind of
people really grab my interest. Somy friends have asked me, well,
(20:22):
what do you say about these UFOs, And the simple fact of the matter
is I don't know. That's thebottom line. I don't know for certain,
but right now as it stands,another one of my people that I've
enjoyed listening to over the years,Carl Sagan. Carl Sagan, he said
something that has always stuck with me, and that is, extraordinary claims require
(20:45):
extraordinary evidence. I'll say that onemore time. Extraordinary claims, we require
extraordinary evidence, and so far thetestimony and the things that I have heard
do not qualify for extraordinary evidence.It's just not there. I do find
(21:08):
it odd, and I'm not theonly person that has brought this up,
that these supposedly and I'm not sayingthat as a skeptic, but let's say,
if it's true, we're presuming thatthese intelligent life forms can travel the
(21:29):
enormity of space and time, theycan dive through wormholes, they can pass
through parallel universes and do all theseother things. They just can't seem to
fly over New Mexico. That seemsto be an extraordinary challenge for them an
extraordinary challenge flying over Maybe the sandgets in their engines. I don't know,
(21:52):
but I'm being facetious here. Anda lot of people have said,
well, you know, we havehighly technological airplanes and things like that,
and they crash, And that's true. But that brings me to another thing.
Of another point of skepticism that Ihave in regard to this subject is,
and I say skepticism positively. Skepticismdoes not mean necessarily that you're looking
(22:17):
to say that something isn't true.But skepticism simply means I need a little
bit more evidence here. I justI just need a little bit more to
go on than what you're giving me, right, And that's where these crashes
and all these sightings always seem tohappen somewhere high up in the sky or
(22:38):
the crash out in the middle ofnowhere. Why don't one of these landings
ever happen in Central Park, youknow, or you know, during halftime
during the Super Bowl, you know, one of these things show up or
crash or something else where you havethe best camera equipment and the best media
(23:00):
technology in the world available to documentit. It just never seems to happen.
That way. It's always out insome corn field. Yeah, I
was sitting over there and uh,their team right over to him, their
heels. I just don't. I'mand here again. I know there are
(23:22):
people that have had personal experiences.As a matter of fact, one of
my favorite rock and roll musicians,Sammy Hagar, he was talking about the
other day, I never go againstsomeone's personal experience. And this is true
of ghost stories or anything, becauseyou just don't know what their personal experience
is, what their personal given truthis. And I came from a family
(23:48):
there were a lot of alcoholics inmy family, and during the holidays and
things like that, I would alwaysgo down in the basement where all the
the guys were hanging out, andthey always had their cigarette and you know,
cocktail of some kind, and theywere all telling ghost stories. You
know, a lot of these individualsin my family. They're all gone now,
God rest their souls, but theywere from the old world and they
(24:12):
had a lot of superstitions, alot of stories about ghosts and things like
that. And I gotta tell you, when you're ten years old, When
you're ten years old and you're sittingaround listening to a bunch of your family
members getting sauced up telling ghost stories. That's as good as life gets,
man. I mean, I gottatell you, that's absolutely as good as
(24:37):
life gets right there. And Iwas very entertained by them. And my
dad was always a very practical man. And you always told me, don't
take those things to heart too much, don't believe too much of those stories.
And I actually to defend myself,even at that age, I didn't.
But I never told them you're lying. I never told them I don't
(25:00):
believe you. I never did thateither. You can't. Really, someone's
personal experience, just as the wordimplies, is their truth, and they
believe it, whether it's about religionor coincidences or any of those things,
and it gives a lot of meaningto their life, and it's very real
to them. And who knows,something may have happened. But for me
(25:22):
to go to the public and say, hey, my uncle Chuck, he
had a flying saucer land on hisbarn, Okay, if I'm going to
relay that story to you as agiven truth, as something that really happened,
that I'm going to need more thanhis word on it. As much
as I respect him and his personalexperience. For me to relay that to
(25:48):
you as evidence for believing in something, I have to have something more to
go on than that. And hereagain we're getting back to extraordinary evidence.
Is there extraordinary evidence in a lotof these stories? And quite frankly,
it's it's just not there yet.And another thing that strikes me odd and
er again this is this is kindof like my personal observation. I don't
(26:11):
know why most of these stories arecoming mainly from the United States and to
a lesser degree, the UK andcertain parts of Europe. Around the world,
these kind of stories are not Idon't know if they're not talked about
as much or what have you,but it seems like most of the occurrences
are happening largely in the United States. Now, this this could be for
(26:33):
a couple of different things. Youcould say when maybe the United States people
in the United States are more observant, or you could even say something more
disparaging, like maybe we have moreactive imaginations, a lot of different things.
I don't know what the explanation forthat is, but I do find
it curious. I also, youknow, in terms of these things,
(26:55):
could they possibly be have a humanorigin? An earthly origin. If that's
the case, then it does makesense to me that the United States and
the UK and other places like thatare the areas where they're occurring the most
because the superpowers, as it were, the economic power of and the military
power of the United States, let'ssay, would be one of the places
(27:18):
that you would want to be,you know, taking reconnaissance missions and things
like that. So I don't know. I will say that I wouldn't dismiss
anything out of hand. It couldvery well be possible that these occurrences are
very real and we are being visitedby people or beings from outer space that
(27:45):
could be happening. And like Einsteinsaid, never dismiss anything. You're due
to make a mistake if you do. So, I wouldn't dismiss those stories,
but I would be very practical aboutmy analysis. Just because we can't
explain something doesn't mean it has asupernatural origin, you know, just like
with anything else, with ghosts oranything else. Just because we can't explain
(28:06):
why this happened doesn't mean that ithas a supernatural explanation of some kind.
And just because there are things flyingaround out there that we can't explain does
not mean they have an extraterrestrial origin. I would not at this point the
way technology is developing right now aroundthe world, I wouldn't be surprised by
(28:27):
anything in terms of what technologies areout there and what other countries have done,
whether it be with anti gravity oranything like that. I wouldn't discount
human ingenuity in some of these thingsat all. So we just have to
be practical in how we analyze thesethings. The third thing today, excuse
(28:53):
me, is set O'Connor. Ihaven't heard. She, of course,
very famous for the hit the megapowerfulhit Nothing Compares to You. I was
a disc jockey when that song cameout and the video there was something about
(29:14):
her that was so different. Shecame across so vulnerable in that video.
She melted the hearts of many ayoung folk, including my own. I
there was something very captivating about herin that video. And not long after
that is I'm not sure how longit was, at the height of her
(29:34):
frame, she tore up a pictureof the Pope on live television and that
changed everything for her. That certainlyset her career on a different path.
And I'll only say this in retrospect. We know that she was right.
(30:00):
In the early nineties, there therewasn't the common talk about the child abuse
that was going on with not onlywithin the Catholic Church, but we've come
to find out a lot of institutionsin our society, whether it be a
coaching and a lot of different things. So you know, you have different
religious institutions involved in this. Youhave institutions that were relied on and trusted
(30:26):
for generations through the nineteen nineties andup to now being exposed as polaces for
predators. So I believe her stancewas very powerful. I believe it was
very courageous, and I don't believeanybody can question that. And that's of
(30:49):
course, with the benefit of hindsightknowing that she was correct. A lot
of the people that are singing herpraises right now in memoriam weren't necessary earlier
around when when when this all unfolded, because the backlash was pretty severe.
I will only say this, I'mfrom here again from a marketing perspective,
(31:12):
going back in time and to thatplace she was at the height of her
fame, getting an interview from let'ssay, Oprah Winfrey, are Barbara Walters
during that time for a national audiencewould have been very easy for her,
and I don't know why if Iwas consulted with her, if she would
(31:34):
have asked me about this during thistime, my urging would have been to
go on one of these programs andmake your case about what's happening in the
Catholic Church, about what's happening inIreland and so on, and just say
these are the things that are happenings, and relay her experiences and the experiences
(31:56):
that she knows about, and letthat become the topic of conversation. Now,
that may not have won her anyfans necessarily, but it would have
reached the people that needed to hearit. One of the things that happens
when you do something very provocative,and I've had this conversation with I don't
know how many people over the years, and they just don't seem to get
(32:19):
it. Anytime you want to burna flag or let's say for example,
and maybe for something that you genuinelywant to bring attention to. Let's say,
in another case, I want toin my hometown, I want to
raise awareness for the hungry people inmy town. So I'm going to burn
across all right, You have tounderstand that, Okay, you're doing something
(32:45):
provocative, you are doing something thatis going to grab the attention of people,
But are you going to overshoot youmark? Is your action going to
become the focus more so that itovershadows what your cause is? Okay,
(33:05):
And um, that's kind of whathappened with that action. Any Catholic,
anybody who is religious, or anybodywho respected Christianity to great to any great
degree, was instantly turned off bythat paper, by that picture being torn
up. And anything she said afterthat was immediately turn turned off. I
don't want to hear what that personhas to say. She's crazy, blah
(33:30):
blah blah, and they just turnedit off. And here again, I
want to be very careful here.I'm talking specifically to how you market something
when you bring it to the public'sattention. When when you do something that
is so provocative that it overshoots yourmark, it overrides what you are trying
(33:53):
to do, what you're trying thecause becomes secondary at that point, and
you turn off instantly the very peoplethat need to hear it. And in
my example of doing like an interviewwith Oprah Winfrey or you know, at
the time, Barbara Walters, anyof those kind of individuals, Like I
(34:15):
said, you might not have wonany fans, but at least there would
have been people that sat through theinterview long enough to hear what you were
saying. You weren't instantly just blowingthem out of the room with what appears
to be a provocative act. SoI I from what I understand about shand
I don't didn't follow her career thatmuch after that big hit. And but
(34:40):
my understanding is she had her struggles, She had her personal struggles, experienced
the death of a child recently,which is probably one of the worst things
that anybody can go through. Shedied very young, she was in her
mid fifties, fifty six something likethat, And what a sad story.
(35:00):
And I feel bad that that passionand that sense of purpose that she had,
which was undeniable, such an admirablequality to We don't really have people
that are that fixed for any lengthof time on a cause that isn't popular.
(35:20):
It isn't popular at the moment,and once the cause goes by the
wayside and the cameras go away,those people go away too. She stayed
with that cause at the very end, and I wish things had gone differently
for I wish things had gone differentlyfor in terms of her career. I
(35:40):
wish that she would have been understoodbetter at the time for trying to get
the message across that she was tryingto get across. And I certainly wish
that things in her personal life hadgone better than what they did. So
very sad story about Sinad O'Connor andI really hate I really hate it when
(36:02):
somebody goes before their time. Ireally do. Anyway, that's kind of
our subject today are subjects for todayon all things media. I certainly hope
you enjoyed this episode of the podcast. Just a reminder, you can find
the Abilities podcast pretty much anywhere thatyou find podcasts, and you can find
(36:25):
me as Prince I'll paraphrase a princehere on the platform formerly known as Twitter,
it's now known as X and changesare coming. And if you're a
big user of X, if you'vebeen a Twitter user for a long time,
my advice would be at this time, don't give up just yet.
(36:49):
I have a feeling this is goingto take a while to play out.
It might take another year before wereally know where this is going to go,
but it's going to be interesting,and the Abilities podcast we'll be following
it all along. My name isBilly D's. Thank you very much for
checking out our podcast today and wewill talk to you again next week.
(37:15):
I'm Billy D's and host of theself titled podcast, The Billy D's Podcast.
We are primarily an interview and acommentary based podcast featuring authors and creators
talking about their craft, advocates forcommunity issues, and myself in an array
of co host discussing current events.There's no partisan renting and raving going on
here, just great content. Youcan find The Billy D's Podcast on your
(37:38):
favorite platform and on Twitter at BillyD's. Thank you and I hope you listen in
You are listening to the Billy D'spodcast. Follow Billy D's on Twitter now
the X platform at Billy D's allright, well, hello everyone, and
welcome to the podcast. As always, I am absolutely thrilled that you are
here. If you have never checkedout the podcast before, we are primarily
(00:24):
an interview and a commentary based podcast. You can find the Billy D's podcasts
pretty much anywhere podcasts are found,and I'm so glad you found us today
Today we are going to be havinga commentary podcast. We're going to be
talking about all things media. It'sbeen a while since we've done one of
those episodes. I'm going to talkabout a couple of different things, including
(00:44):
X formerly known as Twitter, whichis kind of like my social media home.
So I'm very interested in what happenswith X. We're going to talk
about that a little bit. Also, in the news this past week a
lot about you fos again testimony aboutsome of the things the government may have
(01:06):
or may not have. We're goingto talk about that a little bit,
in my opinion, of course,and we're going to round things off with
a Shanada O'Connor, So I'm goingto talk about those three things today.
Before I get into all that,I got to send out a couple of
shout outs. First of all,I want to thank Karen Debanas. She
is the subject of our last episode. You can check her out in our
(01:26):
playlist. Her episode, she hasa book out and during the podcast she
talks about the importance in her caseher child. But anytime you have a
loved one who is being diagnosed bya doctor and there's a certain course of
(01:46):
action that's being mapped out, andthere's something there's a little voice inside of
you saying I'm not sure this isright. And she talks about her experience
with that, and let me tellyou, that's something that a lot of
people can resonate with. So docheck out that episode. Karen Debanas.
(02:06):
That episode of course in our playliston the Billy Dee's podcast. Coming up
within the next few weeks. DeborahFazzelle. I'm sure a lot of you
know Deborah Fazzelle. She's been onthe podcast and numerous times, and she
is going to be talking about herbook, The Time of Our Lives.
She talks about her experience at aJuilliard, the performing arts school, when
(02:32):
she was there numerous years ago,not too far back. She wouldn't want
me to give away her age,I'm sure, but there's some names as
far as our classmates and all thatgo, that you would most certainly recognize.
We're going to be talking to heras well, and also we're going
to be having a couple of recoverystories on the podcast as well. I
(02:53):
am very pleased, very happy,very dare I say proud that this show
has become a forum for people toshare their stories about recovery, whether it's
addiction, trauma, recovery, mentalhealth, whatever the issue may be.
We're always very pleased when someone hasa book out or they're a creator of
(03:17):
some kind and they choose to comeon our podcast to talk about those things.
Those are all wonderful, wonderful aspectsof this show, and they're always
inspiring, and I very much enjoyhaving these people on the program. Getting
into today's topics X. I gotnot an email, a direct message from
(03:42):
one of my good friends on Twitterhere recently, and it was like the
long goodbye. He was like,Bill, it's been a pleasure knowing you.
You can always contact me on myother platforms. It's a pleasure to
work with you. But I justdon't know if I can take this anymore
(04:04):
oh so dramatic. And he's probablylistening to this as a good chance he's
gonna hear this. Obviously, I'mI'm teasing him a little bit, but
it is reflective of a lot ofthe interactions that I've had about the platform
formerly known as Twitter, and I'mjust not sure that it's warranted. You
(04:30):
know, I I like Elon Muskas a rule, and you know I
naturally you don't agree with any humanbeing one hundred percent of the time,
but I can tell you that he'sbeen counted out more than once, whether
it be with Tesla and other things. And it's just too early, you
know, when you're talking about amedia company like Twitter and now X that
(04:59):
is so big, has so manyusers, and we're talking about you know,
hundreds of millions of them, andwhen those changes, you just can't
predict. You know, if youcan look back over the past couple of
months, every so often, therewas just one more time when Twitter that
was this was going to be theend of Twitter, and that's still here.
(05:20):
This is one thing where I haveto say, when you're getting into
an evaluation of a company like this, you have to look at what trajectory
was it on to begin with.Okay, And the fact of the matter
is is that Twitter was never,considering the amount of costs that went into
(05:43):
it, was never a big moneyentity to begin with. And there's a
good chance, a very good chance, that, had Elon not come along,
that the days of Twitter, whetherit been in another year to whatever,
the days might have been numbered anyway, So something had to happen.
(06:09):
Something had to give, as thesaying goes, something had to give,
right, Something had to happen,something had to shake it up a little
bit. I was a little tepidon the move to X and I'm still
just a little tepid on it.Because Twitter, despite the fact that it
was never a huge moneymaker so tospeak, it was a part of the
(06:33):
vernacular. It became a verb,you know, just like when you search
something now on the internet, yougoogle it. The Google brand has become
a verb. And tweeting and retweetingand all these other kinds of things,
referring to your friends as tweets,on and on and on. It was
(06:55):
part of the vernacular. And ifyou're lucky enough to have a brand that
is Kleenex. No matter what brandof tissue you have, you call it
a Kleenex, right, and ifyou're lucky enough to have your brand to
become a part of the vernacular.As a marketing person, advertising person,
I've always been very careful about maybeyou don't want to change that. So
(07:19):
I'm still not one hundred percent behindthis X thing, but I can understand
why. I can understand why.I believe from what I've been able to
gather, and this is just purespeculation on my part. This is an
opinion episode, but I would bewilling to bet that the plans for Twitter,
(07:39):
as as they call it now,the everything app, the everything app,
right, kind of like in physics, you know, the theory of
everything, Okate explains everything, Andit seems like the desire by Elon and
(08:00):
his staff is to have an appone that is very focused on financial transactions,
okay, And I kind of believethat's where the X is really coming
from, because X is associated witha lot of different things regarding financial transactions
online, and he's had the Xdot Com. He's been talking about an
(08:24):
everything app for years, So Iwould be willing to bet that this is
going to become a very big partof its profitability because if you can manage
transactions and you charge just a slightfraction of a fee for that transaction,
(08:45):
what can happen is is if youbecome the go to place to do transactions,
you can be making some real moneyreal soon. I mean, this
would be like Venmo or something likethat with a half a billion users.
So I mean that there, tome, talks a lot about viability.
(09:07):
Now. Twitter has also been thekind of place to go for news and
politics, and oddly enough, itwas often criticized for that because people,
I know, any here a politicswell you know what, right In the
description of the app at various timesit was called news, information, etc.
And things like that. And asa creator, no matter what kind
(09:31):
of a creator you are, whetheryou are a musician, if you are
a podcaster like me, you know, YouTuber, any of these types of
things, blogging, vlogging, youhave some kind of a cause, you
want to bring awareness to a certainillness, all of these things, those
(09:52):
types of topics. In terms oftrending, there's no other place like Twitter.
I mean, it doesn't happen asinstantly on Facebook, LinkedIn, forget
it. I mean you're talking abouta lag time there of days or weeks
before anything happens, that's you know, becomes the topic of conversation on LinkedIn.
And I like LinkedIn, you know, I'm on it. It's a
(10:15):
good place for you know, foryour references. A lot of times when
I meet someone, I noticed rightaway that there's more views on my LinkedIn
profile, because that's kind of oneof the places you go to to make
sure somebody is legit, you know, And that's fine, But if you're
talking about something happening in real time, there's a national crisis of some kind,
(10:39):
or there's something going on, let'ssay, a presidential debate or something
like that. Now it's not scientific. But for me being sort of an
old media dude, you know,back when Ronald Reagan or the first George
Bush, they had a presidential debateof some kind leading up to the election.
(11:00):
The morning talk shows on the radio, that's where everybody was calling in
saying, you know, well thisor that or the other thing. All
those weren't scientific either, but youhad audience reaction that was a bit delayed.
It came in the next day orwhat have you. The idea that
you can just kind of follow alongright in the palm of your hand and
(11:22):
follow some of these things as theyare happening is just absolutely amazing to me.
It's I mean that it's just socool. And like I said,
no matter what kind of a creatoryou are, you know, talking about
Debora Fizzel, you know she's she'sbeen a show buss person. Anything happening
(11:43):
in that kind of regard is ahit movie whatever, you know, it's
it's being discussed on Twitter, Sothat aspect of it I believe he could
really really capitalize on. And ifyou look at what happened with like and
here again I'm not being political onthis, whether you agree with Chucker Carlson
and people like him or not,he has utilized so far Twitter very successfully.
(12:07):
And if this is a foreshadowing ofthings to come. Now it's new,
so I mean, anything new isgoing to have a bump when it
first happens, but as time goesalong. If people like that newsmakers,
news reporters, anything like that,If this starts to materialize in a way
(12:28):
where it has stability going into thefuture, this could be very big for
the Twitter platform. It could bereally really big. And I gotta say,
if the cable news networks right now, they're all way down. I
mean, if I was in thecable news business right now, I would
be very concerned about the future ofthe of those entities. And what is
(12:52):
happening now with Twitter and social mediain general, but in particular Twitter,
because that is pretty extraordinary. Wecould be looking at a new type of
media coming here, which is socialmedia hybrided with traditional media, and that
could be very interesting. He hasbeen very good about championing the idea of
(13:18):
free speech. And you know,free speech is one of those things you're
all for it until you hear somethingthat you don't like. But the idea
behind free speech is that it's forthat. It's for the information that makes
you mad. That's why it's there. Because here's the thing. When the
(13:43):
word when the term fake news firststarted a number of years ago, I
got very concerned because I knew rightaway that fake news was going to become
the term that you used when youheard news that you didn't agree with,
that you did not like. Itwas fake news, and it is.
(14:03):
It's exactly what I predicted. WhatI feared has become of that and more
recently with the pandemic and all thestuff about Fauci and the vaccines. Initially
when the pandemic was going on,the word that was used where there's a
lot of disinformation out there. Now, who could possibly like disinformation? Right?
(14:28):
Well, that can get a littlefuzzy. That can get fuzzy real
quick. And here's how because disinformationa lot of times who makes that decision?
A lot of stuff that was labeleddisinformation during the pandemic has turned out
to be true. And this isI know that's that may be triggering to
(14:50):
a lot of you, but it'sthe truth. Nonetheless, there was a
lot of things about the vaccines thatwere overstated, to say the least in
terms of their effectiveness. And ifyou can't even discuss it, okay,
if you can't even say, hey, wait a minute, how do we
know this? What other studies arethere? And so on and so forth.
(15:13):
If you can't even say those thingsand even challenge those things to the
least degree without getting turned off,then that's a problem. Because there's two
facets to this. Who determines whatthe truth is? And number two is
time sometimes has a way of revealinga different truth. And if you silence
(15:37):
people at the very beginning, youlose a lot of time in your analysis
and how you deal with the problem. I'll defend Facebook and some of these
other things that in the past maybetook on political ads that a lot of
people didn't like and they were criticizedfor that, but I'll defend them in
this regard. You know, there'san old saying that figures don't lie,
(16:02):
but liar's figure. And we couldtake let's say, something going on in
your state. We could take tenindependent facts about what's going on there,
and you could have one candidate pickseven of them and state a certain given
truth. And you could have anothercandidate take a different seven different mix and
(16:27):
take those same facts and present anothergiven truth. Now, all those individual
facts independently might very well be true, but moving forward, if you are
a media company, how do youknow which analysis is correct? And a
(16:48):
lot of times nobody knows exactly whatthat truth is going to be until this
situation plays out a little bit.So if somebody makes that decision for you,
this candidate, you don't need tohear because this is misinformation. This
is something that you don't need tobother with. Okay, that decision has
been made for you. You can'tmake an analysis for yourself in that moment.
(17:11):
And as time goes along, it'svery hard to backtrack and figure out
what we knew and what we didn'tknow because one side of that issue was
closed down. So as odd asit may seem, disinformation in a sense,
in a way is designed to bepredicted by free speech. That's that's
(17:33):
the whole point of it. AndI understand there's going to be people that
say, well, you know,free speech is really about governmental silencing and
all that. Well here again,uh, that's true, but and these
are private entities. But but butbut but we have more than enough evidence
now that there has been tampering witha lot of these entities, the theseum
(17:57):
information companies. There's been tampering.And we also have to let the law
catch up with the technology. Whenyou have technologies like Elon said, where
Twitter was essentially taking the place ofthe public forum, and it'd be a
lot of these social media companies inessence have become the de facto town forum
(18:25):
that is also a monopoly. There'snowhere else to go to get these these
types of information. Now you havea little bit different situation, especially when
the government is getting involved or potentiallygetting involved behind the scenes. That's a
whole other situation. So I believethat the pursuit of free speech has done
(18:48):
very well for x formerly known asTwitter. All right, another thing coming
up, another subject I've on thedetach on today is the idea of the
UFO testimony. I'm sure a lotof you have at least heard about the
UFO testimony and the assertions that theUnited States government may not only have components
(19:18):
of alien spacecraft, but have nonhuman biologics. I believe was the term
used. Non human biologics sounds scary. They're done, isn't it yet?
It does sound a little scary,Yeah, it does. What's my opinion
about this? This has come upsocially with me a number of different times,
(19:38):
because people that are in my circleof friends know that I sometimes feel
that I missed my calling when itcomes to science. I did very well
with physics and things like that,and I've followed it as an amateur.
I'm not a you know, BrianCox or one of those kind of people,
(20:00):
but I professor Brian Cox. Ienjoy it as an avid amateur.
I really like stories about Newton,Einstein, Stephen Hawking. Those kind of
people really grab my interest. Somy friends have asked me, well,
(20:22):
what do you say about these UFOs, And the simple fact of the matter
is I don't know. That's thebottom line. I don't know for certain,
but right now as it stands,another one of my people that I've
enjoyed listening to over the years,Carl Sagan. Carl Sagan, he said
something that has always stuck with me, and that is, extraordinary claims require
(20:45):
extraordinary evidence. I'll say that onemore time. Extraordinary claims, we require
extraordinary evidence, and so far thetestimony and the things that I have heard
do not qualify for extraordinary evidence.It's just not there. I do find
(21:08):
it odd, and I'm not theonly person that has brought this up,
that these supposedly and I'm not sayingthat as a skeptic, but let's say,
if it's true, we're presuming thatthese intelligent life forms can travel the
(21:29):
enormity of space and time, theycan dive through wormholes, they can pass
through parallel universes and do all theseother things. They just can't seem to
fly over New Mexico. That seemsto be an extraordinary challenge for them an
extraordinary challenge flying over Maybe the sandgets in their engines. I don't know,
(21:52):
but I'm being facetious here. Anda lot of people have said,
well, you know, we havehighly technological airplanes and things like that,
and they crash, And that's true. But that brings me to another thing.
Of another point of skepticism that Ihave in regard to this subject is,
and I say skepticism positively. Skepticismdoes not mean necessarily that you're looking
(22:17):
to say that something isn't true.But skepticism simply means I need a little
bit more evidence here. I justI just need a little bit more to
go on than what you're giving me, right, And that's where these crashes
and all these sightings always seem tohappen somewhere high up in the sky or
(22:38):
the crash out in the middle ofnowhere. Why don't one of these landings
ever happen in Central Park, youknow, or you know, during halftime
during the Super Bowl, you know, one of these things show up or
crash or something else where you havethe best camera equipment and the best media
(23:00):
technology in the world available to documentit. It just never seems to happen.
That way. It's always out insome corn field. Yeah, I
was sitting over there and uh,their team right over to him, their
heels. I just don't. I'mand here again. I know there are
(23:22):
people that have had personal experiences.As a matter of fact, one of
my favorite rock and roll musicians,Sammy Hagar, he was talking about the
other day, I never go againstsomeone's personal experience. And this is true
of ghost stories or anything, becauseyou just don't know what their personal experience
is, what their personal given truthis. And I came from a family
(23:48):
there were a lot of alcoholics inmy family, and during the holidays and
things like that, I would alwaysgo down in the basement where all the
the guys were hanging out, andthey always had their cigarette and you know,
cocktail of some kind, and theywere all telling ghost stories. You
know, a lot of these individualsin my family. They're all gone now,
God rest their souls, but theywere from the old world and they
(24:12):
had a lot of superstitions, alot of stories about ghosts and things like
that. And I gotta tell you, when you're ten years old, When
you're ten years old and you're sittingaround listening to a bunch of your family
members getting sauced up telling ghost stories. That's as good as life gets,
man. I mean, I gottatell you, that's absolutely as good as
(24:37):
life gets right there. And Iwas very entertained by them. And my
dad was always a very practical man. And you always told me, don't
take those things to heart too much, don't believe too much of those stories.
And I actually to defend myself,even at that age, I didn't.
But I never told them you're lying. I never told them I don't
(25:00):
believe you. I never did thateither. You can't. Really, someone's
personal experience, just as the wordimplies, is their truth, and they
believe it, whether it's about religionor coincidences or any of those things,
and it gives a lot of meaningto their life, and it's very real
to them. And who knows,something may have happened. But for me
(25:22):
to go to the public and say, hey, my uncle Chuck, he
had a flying saucer land on hisbarn, Okay, if I'm going to
relay that story to you as agiven truth, as something that really happened,
that I'm going to need more thanhis word on it. As much
as I respect him and his personalexperience. For me to relay that to
(25:48):
you as evidence for believing in something, I have to have something more to
go on than that. And hereagain we're getting back to extraordinary evidence.
Is there extraordinary evidence in a lotof these stories? And quite frankly,
it's it's just not there yet.And another thing that strikes me odd and
er again this is this is kindof like my personal observation. I don't
(26:11):
know why most of these stories arecoming mainly from the United States and to
a lesser degree, the UK andcertain parts of Europe. Around the world,
these kind of stories are not Idon't know if they're not talked about
as much or what have you,but it seems like most of the occurrences
are happening largely in the United States. Now, this this could be for
(26:33):
a couple of different things. Youcould say when maybe the United States people
in the United States are more observant, or you could even say something more
disparaging, like maybe we have moreactive imaginations, a lot of different things.
I don't know what the explanation forthat is, but I do find
it curious. I also, youknow, in terms of these things,
(26:55):
could they possibly be have a humanorigin? An earthly origin. If that's
the case, then it does makesense to me that the United States and
the UK and other places like thatare the areas where they're occurring the most
because the superpowers, as it were, the economic power of and the military
power of the United States, let'ssay, would be one of the places
(27:18):
that you would want to be,you know, taking reconnaissance missions and things
like that. So I don't know. I will say that I wouldn't dismiss
anything out of hand. It couldvery well be possible that these occurrences are
very real and we are being visitedby people or beings from outer space that
(27:45):
could be happening. And like Einsteinsaid, never dismiss anything. You're due
to make a mistake if you do. So, I wouldn't dismiss those stories,
but I would be very practical aboutmy analysis. Just because we can't
explain something doesn't mean it has asupernatural origin, you know, just like
with anything else, with ghosts oranything else. Just because we can't explain
(28:06):
why this happened doesn't mean that ithas a supernatural explanation of some kind.
And just because there are things flyingaround out there that we can't explain does
not mean they have an extraterrestrial origin. I would not at this point the
way technology is developing right now aroundthe world, I wouldn't be surprised by
(28:27):
anything in terms of what technologies areout there and what other countries have done,
whether it be with anti gravity oranything like that. I wouldn't discount
human ingenuity in some of these thingsat all. So we just have to
be practical in how we analyze thesethings. The third thing today, excuse
(28:53):
me, is set O'Connor. Ihaven't heard. She, of course,
very famous for the hit the megapowerfulhit Nothing Compares to You. I was
a disc jockey when that song cameout and the video there was something about
(29:14):
her that was so different. Shecame across so vulnerable in that video.
She melted the hearts of many ayoung folk, including my own. I
there was something very captivating about herin that video. And not long after
that is I'm not sure how longit was, at the height of her
(29:34):
frame, she tore up a pictureof the Pope on live television and that
changed everything for her. That certainlyset her career on a different path.
And I'll only say this in retrospect. We know that she was right.
(30:00):
In the early nineties, there therewasn't the common talk about the child abuse
that was going on with not onlywithin the Catholic Church, but we've come
to find out a lot of institutionsin our society, whether it be a
coaching and a lot of different things. So you know, you have different
religious institutions involved in this. Youhave institutions that were relied on and trusted
(30:26):
for generations through the nineteen nineties andup to now being exposed as polaces for
predators. So I believe her stancewas very powerful. I believe it was
very courageous, and I don't believeanybody can question that. And that's of
(30:49):
course, with the benefit of hindsightknowing that she was correct. A lot
of the people that are singing herpraises right now in memoriam weren't necessary earlier
around when when when this all unfolded, because the backlash was pretty severe.
I will only say this, I'mfrom here again from a marketing perspective,
(31:12):
going back in time and to thatplace she was at the height of her
fame, getting an interview from let'ssay, Oprah Winfrey, are Barbara Walters
during that time for a national audiencewould have been very easy for her,
and I don't know why if Iwas consulted with her, if she would
(31:34):
have asked me about this during thistime, my urging would have been to
go on one of these programs andmake your case about what's happening in the
Catholic Church, about what's happening inIreland and so on, and just say
these are the things that are happenings, and relay her experiences and the experiences
(31:56):
that she knows about, and letthat become the topic of conversation. Now,
that may not have won her anyfans necessarily, but it would have
reached the people that needed to hearit. One of the things that happens
when you do something very provocative,and I've had this conversation with I don't
know how many people over the years, and they just don't seem to get
(32:19):
it. Anytime you want to burna flag or let's say for example,
and maybe for something that you genuinelywant to bring attention to. Let's say,
in another case, I want toin my hometown, I want to
raise awareness for the hungry people inmy town. So I'm going to burn
across all right, You have tounderstand that, Okay, you're doing something
(32:45):
provocative, you are doing something thatis going to grab the attention of people,
But are you going to overshoot youmark? Is your action going to
become the focus more so that itovershadows what your cause is? Okay,
(33:05):
And um, that's kind of whathappened with that action. Any Catholic,
anybody who is religious, or anybodywho respected Christianity to great to any great
degree, was instantly turned off bythat paper, by that picture being torn
up. And anything she said afterthat was immediately turn turned off. I
don't want to hear what that personhas to say. She's crazy, blah
(33:30):
blah blah, and they just turnedit off. And here again, I
want to be very careful here.I'm talking specifically to how you market something
when you bring it to the public'sattention. When when you do something that
is so provocative that it overshoots yourmark, it overrides what you are trying
(33:53):
to do, what you're trying thecause becomes secondary at that point, and
you turn off instantly the very peoplethat need to hear it. And in
my example of doing like an interviewwith Oprah Winfrey or you know, at
the time, Barbara Walters, anyof those kind of individuals, Like I
(34:15):
said, you might not have wonany fans, but at least there would
have been people that sat through theinterview long enough to hear what you were
saying. You weren't instantly just blowingthem out of the room with what appears
to be a provocative act. SoI I from what I understand about shand
I don't didn't follow her career thatmuch after that big hit. And but
(34:40):
my understanding is she had her struggles, She had her personal struggles, experienced
the death of a child recently,which is probably one of the worst things
that anybody can go through. Shedied very young, she was in her
mid fifties, fifty six something likethat, And what a sad story.
(35:00):
And I feel bad that that passionand that sense of purpose that she had,
which was undeniable, such an admirablequality to We don't really have people
that are that fixed for any lengthof time on a cause that isn't popular.
(35:20):
It isn't popular at the moment,and once the cause goes by the
wayside and the cameras go away,those people go away too. She stayed
with that cause at the very end, and I wish things had gone differently
for I wish things had gone differentlyfor in terms of her career. I
(35:40):
wish that she would have been understoodbetter at the time for trying to get
the message across that she was tryingto get across. And I certainly wish
that things in her personal life hadgone better than what they did. So
very sad story about Sinad O'Connor andI really hate I really hate it when
(36:02):
somebody goes before their time. Ireally do. Anyway, that's kind of
our subject today are subjects for todayon all things media. I certainly hope
you enjoyed this episode of the podcast. Just a reminder, you can find
the Abilities podcast pretty much anywhere thatyou find podcasts, and you can find
(36:25):
me as Prince I'll paraphrase a princehere on the platform formerly known as Twitter,
it's now known as X and changesare coming. And if you're a
big user of X, if you'vebeen a Twitter user for a long time,
my advice would be at this time, don't give up just yet.
(36:49):
I have a feeling this is goingto take a while to play out.
It might take another year before wereally know where this is going to go,
but it's going to be interesting,and the Abilities podcast we'll be following
it all along. My name isBilly D's. Thank you very much for
checking out our podcast today and wewill talk to you again next week.
(37:15):
I'm Billy D's and host of theself titled podcast, The Billy D's Podcast.
We are primarily an interview and acommentary based podcast featuring authors and creators
talking about their craft, advocates forcommunity issues, and myself in an array
of co host discussing current events.There's no partisan renting and raving going on
here, just great content. Youcan find The Billy D's Podcast on your
(37:38):
favorite platform and on Twitter at BillyD's. Thank you and I hope you listen in
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
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.