Speaker 1: Just answered this nationwide keyword on our website bank. That's
Speaker 1: bank answer it now. My Scott's Loan Show on seven
Speaker 1: hundred WLW is Instagram engineered like a like a casino
Speaker 1: in order to hook your kids. The jury's going to
Speaker 1: answer that question as tech CEOs get called to the
Speaker 1: witness stand in a very fascinating case where social media, TikTok, insta, Facebook,
Speaker 1: all of that is on trial. Jason Philibaum is a
Speaker 1: defense attorney here in Cincinnati and joins the show to
Speaker 1: discuss Jason, welcome, how you have.
Speaker 2: Good morning, doing well? Thank you.
Speaker 1: So I've read this and it's fascinating because we're all
Speaker 1: engaged in social in some way, shape or form, but
Speaker 1: especially on more impressionable younger people. And that's the crux
Speaker 1: of the argument. To me, it strikes me as a
Speaker 1: this is essentially a product liability case in that the
Speaker 1: defense is going to have to walk this type rope
Speaker 1: of going, well, yeah, the platforms are engaging by this,
Speaker 1: but they're not harmful. And that's the intent of this thing,
Speaker 1: is that the folk from here.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: In fact, I think this is going to probably near
Speaker 3: the either the gun cases or the cigarette cases where
Speaker 3: you have, for example, the gun lobby shut that down.
Speaker 3: But the cigarette cases, they started out in the sixties
Speaker 3: and the seventies, and you have a couple of big verds.
Speaker 3: The next thing you know, you have a multi state settlement.
Speaker 3: So I think what you're seeing here is the beginning
Speaker 3: of either the end or the expansion of social media, having.
Speaker 1: Tech companies or other companies that past successfully defended that
Speaker 1: accusation of their products.
Speaker 2: Somehow it was addictive, yes, And that's what's interesting.
Speaker 3: And again I see such parallels between the social media
Speaker 3: trial that's starting now in the cigarette cases, because when
Speaker 3: the cigarette cases first started, they defended it and they
Speaker 3: shot it down and they won I think the first
Speaker 3: lawsuit within the fifties, and they lost big time, and
Speaker 3: I think they even got attorning keys. And then you know,
Speaker 3: they started in the sixties and the seventies, and then
Speaker 3: finally it was in I think nineteen eighty eight or
Speaker 3: something like.
Speaker 2: That you finally had a big verdict.
Speaker 3: And then a few years later the state stepped in
Speaker 3: because now you have a flood of lawsuits. So I
Speaker 3: think what you're going to see here is you've got
Speaker 3: this lawsuit against a social media or all of them
Speaker 3: essentially claiming they're addictive, claiming they're subjecting the children to
Speaker 3: sexual abuse or other type of anxiety from the images
Speaker 3: they see. And what you're going to have is if
Speaker 3: they get a verdict here, you can see now a
Speaker 3: flood of lawsuits that follow, sort of mirroring the same evidence,
Speaker 3: making the same argument. Yea.
Speaker 1: Although here's the problem I have, and this is the
Speaker 1: argument I would tend to make here, Jason, if I
Speaker 1: were the big media companies, tech companies, is that, Okay,
Speaker 1: we're going to do this like we did the like
Speaker 1: the cigarette lawsuit.
Speaker 2: What's the deal.
Speaker 1: Well, we know cigarettes called cancer and the cigarette mantuffacts No, no,
Speaker 1: no no, And now we found memos that said, yeah,
Speaker 1: we recognize there's a direct correlation between smoking and lung cancer.
Speaker 1: That's irrefutable. And there's probably not much else you're doing
Speaker 1: in your life that would cause lung cancer save not
Speaker 1: smoking cigarettes. Okay, so there's that direct scientific connection. Whereas
Speaker 1: in this case you're making the same argument going, Okay,
Speaker 1: if it weren't for social media, kids would be happy,
Speaker 1: they'd be engaged, they wouldn't be depressed. That might be
Speaker 1: an ally, that may be a factor but there's also
Speaker 1: other causes for this. The causation nightmare is what about
Speaker 1: family trauma? What about academic pressure, what about bullying, what
Speaker 1: about genetics? What about COVID? It just keeps going and
Speaker 1: going and going, And so there's other factors I could
Speaker 1: I could point to in a child's life as to
Speaker 1: why they might be addicted to social media and why
Speaker 1: their temperament is bad. And you know, there are some
Speaker 1: kids killing themselves, there's no question about it, and maybe
Speaker 1: social pushes them over the edge. But there's a whole
Speaker 1: host of other factors you have with social media that
Speaker 1: you don't have with cigarette smoking.
Speaker 3: And I think that's exactly what the social media companies
Speaker 3: are going to be seeing. So we talked, you know,
Speaker 3: just now it's almost like cigarettes. But one would argue,
Speaker 3: and I think your argument was, this is more like
Speaker 3: the gun cases, the firearm cases, where you know, yes
Speaker 3: guns can cause damage and yes guns can cause death,
Speaker 3: but there's an intervening cause and that's a bad guy
Speaker 3: doing it. You know, guns just don't pop up and
Speaker 3: start killing people. It's some bad guy picks up a
Speaker 3: gun and does something bad.
Speaker 4: And so that's what they're going to argue.
Speaker 3: Here in social media, which is, look, you know, we
Speaker 3: we have a platform, and if a bunch of you know,
Speaker 3: perverts get on and start, you know, sending messages your kids,
Speaker 3: that's a bad actor using otherwise okay platform. And so
Speaker 3: I think that's that's the biggest hurdle that the plaintiffs
Speaker 3: are going to have to get over, which is, you
Speaker 3: know this this is designed to be you know, addictive. Maybe,
Speaker 3: but at the end of the day, it's only causing
Speaker 3: trouble because the bad guys on the other side doing things,
Speaker 3: and that's you know, one could argue with mirrors the
Speaker 3: gun lobby cases which end up going away.
Speaker 1: Well, the gun lobby cases were interesting in that the
Speaker 1: argument we all to say product defect issue. This is
Speaker 1: a product liability issue and a gun company so well
Speaker 1: not really. You put around in the chamber, you load it,
Speaker 1: you rack it, and you pull the trigger and a
Speaker 1: bullet flies out. No, that works like it should. It
Speaker 1: depends on who's using it and what the intent is.
Speaker 3: Right, That's what they basically said, like, look, these social
Speaker 3: media platforms, there's other reasons for mental health. You know,
Speaker 3: we have a society that's built.
Speaker 2: On bad news or you know, We've got people on
Speaker 2: the other side that are them.
Speaker 3: And all this does is is create more of a
Speaker 3: public form that you're going on yourself.
Speaker 2: The parents are allowing it to happen.
Speaker 3: And so the argument from the social media company is, look,
Speaker 3: we provide a platform where people can share pictures and
Speaker 3: talk about their life, and just because someone comes in
Speaker 3: and does something bad or because another friend starts to
Speaker 3: bully you, that's not on us. I mean, we can't
Speaker 3: have a free, open platform but then regulate everybody. That's
Speaker 3: a whole different issue that Connors is looking at. And
Speaker 3: so I think that's what they're going to claim, is
Speaker 3: that bad actors are what causing your child's mental health,
Speaker 3: not the actual Instagram or Facebook or TikTok.
Speaker 1: Well, the idea is you're getting fed a steady diet
Speaker 1: of everything that you want to hear. But okay, that's
Speaker 1: social media and there's an algorithm for that. How is
Speaker 1: that different in any way, shape or form than something
Speaker 1: I may watch on streaming, for example, or TV, whether
Speaker 1: it's I don't know, it could be food TV. Maybe
Speaker 1: I have a food today. I can watch food NonStop
Speaker 1: all the time to make a look good. They don't
Speaker 1: see the after effects of it, or something that we
Speaker 1: could recognize as cable news. You know, if you are
Speaker 1: you know, if you write leaning, you watch Fox News.
Speaker 1: But there's even more extreme networks out there one America.
Speaker 1: There's Newsmax, right, and that's a steady the same algorithms
Speaker 1: and play here. Why would they be exempted social media?
Speaker 3: Not?
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 3: I mean, I mean that's anything right now, that's just
Speaker 3: targeting on advertising. I mean you'll look up something for
Speaker 3: a puppy and next thing you know, you're flooded with
Speaker 3: everything that goes along with the puppy, from leashes, the food,
Speaker 3: the puppy pads, you name it. And I think in
Speaker 3: this case that's what they're going to argue is, look, yes,
Speaker 3: we set it up so if you show interest in baseball,
Speaker 3: we're going to show you a bunch of baseball stuff.
Speaker 3: If you show interest in workout, we're going to show
Speaker 3: you workout stuff. And then likewise, you know, people can
Speaker 3: come on and talk to you, and if they're bad
Speaker 3: about it, that's on them. Now, what I'd be most
Speaker 3: interested is snap Chat and TikTok settled before this started,
Speaker 3: and I'd be curious. We'll never know what that amount
Speaker 3: is for but you know, something about snap Chat and
Speaker 3: TikTok had them worried enough to leases to a settlement,
Speaker 3: and I'm guessing that settlement is what then is fueling
Speaker 3: the litigation on the other because there's experts involved, there
Speaker 3: was an undercover study done.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is going to be very interesting to
Speaker 2: watch over the next month.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's another factor you don't have and all these
Speaker 1: other suits. Jason Philibaum, attorney at law, we're talking about
Speaker 1: the interesting case. I think it's going to kind of
Speaker 1: grip us here too, because we're all involved in social
Speaker 1: media in some way, shape or form. The young you
Speaker 1: are probably more likely. But products like Instagram and TikTok
Speaker 1: and Facebook and x are they engineered to hook your kids?
Speaker 1: And the juries can answer that question as CEOs like
Speaker 1: Zuckerberg get called to the witness stand shortly to say, yeah,
Speaker 1: well we wanted the product to be engaging, but no,
Speaker 1: it's not addictive. It's not causing all these societal problems
Speaker 1: facing young people specifically. There's also something in there that's
Speaker 1: not applied to any other the types of suits we've
Speaker 1: talked about. When comes a pride to product liability, Jason.
Speaker 1: That's something called Section two thirty, which basically protects platforms
Speaker 1: from liability for user generated content. So I may get
Speaker 1: on social and create something that's not on meta or YouTube,
Speaker 1: that's on the user, and so it does exactly so
Speaker 1: do section two thirty provide a shield here from these
Speaker 1: suits even more?
Speaker 2: That's what they're going to argue.
Speaker 3: And I think what you have is, you know, we
Speaker 3: had the whole argument what five years ago, when before
Speaker 3: X was taken over by month, you know, we're we're
Speaker 3: certain people being blocked out or being excluded, and is
Speaker 3: this a public form? And of course Congress acts and
Speaker 3: basically says, look, you can you can say and do
Speaker 3: what you want on these platforms because who it is
Speaker 3: for me to say that's misinformation? And then so now
Speaker 3: I think you're going to see the social media companies
Speaker 3: argue the same thing, which is, look, we do make
Speaker 3: this engaging, we do make this interesting. If you like something,
Speaker 3: we're going to send you more things that way. But
Speaker 3: at the end of the day, we can't control what
Speaker 3: people do, whether they harass you, whether they put false
Speaker 3: information out there or anything else. We can't control that.
Speaker 3: And there's actually a statue that says we shouldn't and
Speaker 3: we're not liable for that.
Speaker 2: At the end of the day, this will.
Speaker 3: Then come down to are they knowingly putting children at risk?
Speaker 3: And I think that's a hard burden to overcome for
Speaker 3: the plaintiffs. How does the First Amendment factor into that, Well,
Speaker 3: I think that protects the speech that comes across. But again,
Speaker 3: if you're it's like it's like a cigarette. You know,
Speaker 3: it's you, it's your right to to smoke, and you
Speaker 3: choose to do that. But we put a product out
Speaker 3: that we knew was going to be damaging, that we
Speaker 3: knew was going to cause cancer, and the only difference
Speaker 3: and then we advertise towards you. Now that I think
Speaker 3: the same thing could be said about social media. We
Speaker 3: created this product that we knew would take up eight
Speaker 3: hours of your day of scrolling.
Speaker 2: We knew that it would, you.
Speaker 3: Know, cause vision trouble or or mental health trouble because
Speaker 3: you're not sleeping. And then we also made it more
Speaker 3: addictive so we can send more stuff at you. And
Speaker 3: we knew a lot of that stuff was that if
Speaker 3: that's what they can prove, then yeah, there could be
Speaker 3: a verdict in this case. But that social media comes
Speaker 3: back and says, wait a second. All we did was
Speaker 3: again create a platform that's fun, and the more fun
Speaker 3: it is, the more you're gonna want to do it.
Speaker 3: But that's life. That's not creating a bad sort of product.
Speaker 3: That's the people that engage that you're with. It's like
Speaker 3: going to a park. We created a beautiful park, but
Speaker 3: if there's bad people and they're yelling at you and
Speaker 3: doing stupid stuff, that's that's not on us, that's on
Speaker 3: the bad people.
Speaker 1: Jason. A couple of studies have come out in the
Speaker 1: last couple of years from different institutions, and I was
Speaker 1: talking about it earlier in the show, and that factors
Speaker 1: in here, and that is, you know, certainly young people
Speaker 1: in particular who spend a lot of time and girls
Speaker 1: especially spend a lot of time on social media, they
Speaker 1: tend to be more depressed, to have higher levels of anxiety,
Speaker 1: less performance, things along those lines. However, versus kids who
Speaker 1: are completely banned from social media, the kids who have
Speaker 1: a little bit of social media in their lives tend
Speaker 1: to fare better. And so it sounds to me like
Speaker 1: the research says there's a happy medium. You know, if
Speaker 1: you spend all your time looking at your phone. That's
Speaker 1: really really bad. If you don't have a phone, or
Speaker 1: don't use or don't engage, it's it's not as bad
Speaker 1: as that, but it's also not good. There's a sweet spot,
Speaker 1: and it's always in the middle in that regard. Then
Speaker 1: we have things like teen accounts and parental controls and
Speaker 1: screen time warnings and all that stuff. If those tools
Speaker 1: are out there, and the same people who bring the
Speaker 1: suit fail to engage in that and fail to monitor
Speaker 1: their kids because you know, they're kids, they don't have agency,
Speaker 1: isn't that an affirmative defense for the tech companies and saying, hey, listen,
Speaker 1: you're a parent. You have a responsibility to parent. You know,
Speaker 1: you know, you got to know what your kid's doing
Speaker 1: and monitor. You gave them a phone. They didn't buy
Speaker 1: the phone themselves under the money, especially the young ones.
Speaker 2: Is that on the parent?
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, And that's what the meta attorney actually said
Speaker 3: in open which basically they have repeatedly warn parents and teams,
Speaker 3: but more importantly the parents that harmful conduct does or
Speaker 3: content does get past our firewalls. They do get past
Speaker 3: the safeguards, and this can be an issue, and you
Speaker 3: need the monitor child. It's like taking the child to
Speaker 3: a play area and just letting them go and they
Speaker 3: fall off the top. At some point, you've got to
Speaker 3: monitor your children as well. And I think that's what
Speaker 3: you know, Meta at least was arguing, which is the
Speaker 3: parents have responsibility too, And you know, just because you
Speaker 3: open up an area and let your kid go unexplored,
Speaker 3: that's not on us. We've warned you. And this goes
Speaker 3: back to the whole product liability issue. You and I
Speaker 3: have joked about this. Before you want a drinking party
Speaker 3: at home, go read your warning labels on all your products,
Speaker 3: because that means someone did that to get that warning
Speaker 3: label there. And I think that's what they're saying, is
Speaker 3: we put the warning here that said it could be
Speaker 3: a problem, and you ignored it and let your kid
Speaker 3: just have a free phone for eight ten hours a day.
Speaker 1: I believe I saw Mark Zuckerberg is going to testify,
Speaker 1: and that is going to be a moment for sure.
Speaker 1: What are the legal risks for Meta putting him on
Speaker 1: the stand.
Speaker 3: Well, he probably doesn't know a lot about the You know,
Speaker 3: at the end of the day, you become so big
Speaker 3: in your company that you don't necessarily know the little
Speaker 3: but I think that'll be very interesting. I mean, he's
Speaker 3: testified in Congress, so you know, he's testified before hearings.
Speaker 3: I would think that he's going to do pretty well.
Speaker 3: Set up to testify. I think the things that going
Speaker 3: to be interesting is that they hit him with something
Speaker 3: that maybe he didn't know about, you know, something someone
Speaker 3: lower or whatever they said. But in this case, this
Speaker 3: has been going on for a while. They've got Discovery.
Speaker 3: I would hope he's prep and I think Instagram CEO
Speaker 3: is also going to testify, and that'll again be interesting
Speaker 3: because they've all testified in Congress, again, pretty hostile crowds
Speaker 3: where the rules of evidence don't apply. I would think
Speaker 3: they're probably going to end up doing fine, and it's
Speaker 3: the people underneath them that's that's going to be the
Speaker 3: real interesting is how this operates, how this works, how
Speaker 3: they actually target the kids.
Speaker 2: That's that's I think going to be end up cruct
Speaker 2: of the case.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because the I mean, it's really this, this whole
Speaker 1: thing we're talking about, this culture. It's all his fault
Speaker 1: because he was a nerd at Harvard and wanted to
Speaker 1: be chicks. That's that's basically what this whole thing came about.
Speaker 1: It was like, it's like a senior prank called wildly,
Speaker 1: wildly out of control.
Speaker 3: And ruck, I mean downfall society, social media and next
Speaker 3: thing is terminator.
Speaker 2: With all the ais.
Speaker 3: But hey, at the end of the day, we're welking
Speaker 3: him it with open arms. And that's the defense of
Speaker 3: the social media is, look, you guys use it, so
Speaker 3: all we'd do is putting the products out there. And
Speaker 3: just because other people use it poorly, that's not on.
Speaker 2: Us, right.
Speaker 1: Okay, So we saw Snapchat and TikTok settle. Do they
Speaker 1: wind up just settling in this case? Is that and
Speaker 1: the foregone conclusion here? Jason philbum No, I.
Speaker 2: Think they're going to go through with it.
Speaker 3: I think they have decided that they're going to be
Speaker 3: a target if they settle, I mean if and I
Speaker 3: think I don't know why TikTok and Snapchat did. I
Speaker 3: don't know if there's maybe some internal memos that could
Speaker 3: have got them in trouble, but at the end of
Speaker 3: the day they settled. But I think think you've got
Speaker 3: Instagram and Facebook and meta and all that they're going
Speaker 3: to fight this to the end because otherwise you're going
Speaker 3: to open up a flood of litigation like they do,
Speaker 3: like they did in the cigarette cases, and so I
Speaker 3: think we're going to end up seeing this at a verdict.
Speaker 1: Interesting all right, he's Jason Philibum defense attorney. Maybe a
Speaker 1: little outside his scope here, but the guy knows more
Speaker 1: about law than most people do for sure, especially Lawa's
Speaker 1: Jason all the best, buddy, appreciate you.
Speaker 2: I appreciate it. Thank you, and their.
Speaker 1: Official attorney of the Scott Sloan Show here on seven
Speaker 1: hundred WLW, we'll get a time out of news. I
Speaker 1: want to talk about this more after the news here
Speaker 1: at nine point thirty. And this is a huge, huge
Speaker 1: issue and if you think about it, there are all
Speaker 1: sorts of core questions here because as I mentioned, there's
Speaker 1: a precedent if they wind up winning, the plaintiffs win
Speaker 1: this case, meaning that social media is addictive by design
Speaker 1: and they're at fault. Does that open up I mean Netflix,
Speaker 1: for example, go after Netflix because of AutoPlay or you know,
Speaker 1: news sites, infinite scroll, or mobile games, online shopping. I'll
Speaker 1: go the thems pretty much everything, and I mentioned no
Speaker 1: cable news would be a great example of that. Are
Speaker 1: we just opening Pandora's box where if you just get
Speaker 1: on the information super high Highway, getting the digital fast lane. Now,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, there's legal risk involved for the
Speaker 1: company put the content out there. What uh yeah, that's
Speaker 1: pretty scary, right. I'll also make this case. I don't
Speaker 1: think social media should be on trial at all. I
Speaker 1: don't think that's what should be on trial. There's something else,
Speaker 1: and we'll get into that right after news in your
Speaker 1: calls just ahead, Scott's Loan show. This is seven hundred WW.
Speaker 1: Scott Floatan continues here seven hundred WLW. Welcome to the
Speaker 1: show on this Tuesday morning, the sunshine's in.
Speaker 2: We're at h What I got here?
Speaker 1: I don't have my ammometer here. Let me look at
Speaker 1: the old watch. I got thirty eight degrees. Watch this
Speaker 1: thirty eight. Let's go at thirty eight.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I have to hopefully north of fifty today. Hopefully your
Speaker 1: some pump is working, gonna be a lot by Buddy
Speaker 1: Bobby Miles and Basement Doctor's gonna get a lot of
Speaker 1: calls in three to one. That's just how it is.
Speaker 1: I kind of got a little theme running for the
Speaker 1: first half of the show. Tod I just had Jason
Speaker 1: Phillbaum and talk about the social media addiction trial. I
Speaker 1: think that's fascinating. Christine Miles as a psychologist. She's on
Speaker 1: later to talk about then update on you know, the
Speaker 1: schools have banned cell phones largely because the dangers of that.
Speaker 1: I mentioned the real problem here and I you know,
Speaker 1: thinking about it, was like, Okay, social media, it's so
Speaker 1: bad for kids, so bad, so bad, And then you
Speaker 1: have studies come out and going, yeah, but kids who
Speaker 1: aren't engaged in social media tend to also have problems
Speaker 1: socializing and mental stress and things like that, largely because
Speaker 1: that's her kids meet. You know, if you simply deny
Speaker 1: the kid going hey, you cal it's really bad you
Speaker 1: can't have a cell phone, that's our whole social sphere.
Speaker 1: That's like saying, well, you're not allowed to go to
Speaker 1: the mall. You're not allowed to go to the movies.
Speaker 1: You're not allowed to go you know, when we were younger,
Speaker 1: that's how kids socialize in person. They do it digitally.
Speaker 1: Now it's just the way things are, and so's that's
Speaker 1: not good for the kid either. So there's a happy
Speaker 1: medium where you actually, I hate to say it, you know,
Speaker 1: we got a parent. That's the hardest thing in the
Speaker 1: world is parenting. You know, you just can't simply let
Speaker 1: your kid go feral. And then when they spend twenty
Speaker 1: hours a day on the phone and there you know
Speaker 1: they they don't develop properly or they have mental health issues.
Speaker 1: You turn around and you sue the company. It's like,
Speaker 1: well you got on the phone. Is you do have
Speaker 1: a some liability in this yourself actually the bulk of it.
Speaker 1: And a kid has to be an educated consumer, sadly
Speaker 1: at a younger age than we were. But that's them's
Speaker 1: the rules, right. And I point this out because you know,
Speaker 1: if you think about it, the problem here going after
Speaker 1: social media, that social in my opinion, should not be
Speaker 1: the thing on trial here. It should be smartphones. I
Speaker 1: mean a smartphone, it's a handheld slot machine. If you
Speaker 1: go into the casino, downtown anywhere for that matter, everything
Speaker 1: in there is set up for them to take your money.
Speaker 1: And we know this going in. We know the how
Speaker 1: hose always wins. You go to Vegas, Why do they
Speaker 1: comp your drinks, why do they comp your rooms? Why
Speaker 1: do you get the comp this that? Because you spend
Speaker 1: a lot of money playing the games and at the
Speaker 1: end of the day when you get a free family
Speaker 1: members that go and they gamble it, and they gamble
Speaker 1: uf with like they never pay for a cruise. I
Speaker 1: think it's awesome. It's like you go now, it's one
Speaker 1: hundred dollars, basically, go on this cruise. Why is it
Speaker 1: because we gamble a lot and you can write those
Speaker 1: now for your taxes. The whole thing. I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's a wash or not, but again, it's your money.
Speaker 1: You worked a lifetime, you earned it. Do what you
Speaker 1: want with your money. I don't need the government or
Speaker 1: anyone else tell me what to do what I want
Speaker 1: to do with my money. If I want to give
Speaker 1: it to charity, give it to the church, or gamble
Speaker 1: it away. It's my damn money. Leave me alone. Leave
Speaker 1: me alone. And so you go to a casino and
Speaker 1: it's all set to take that money from you, right.
Speaker 1: All of the bells on a slot machine, the chimes
Speaker 1: are done in a certain way, in a certain fashion
Speaker 1: to make that the most appealing sound in the world
Speaker 1: to you. Done researching the whole thing about pumping oxygen,
Speaker 1: and they really don't. But it's a good wives tele
Speaker 1: all and get you to spend more money to game
Speaker 1: up more. Okay, so if that's true with the casino,
Speaker 1: we don't band casinos, we regulate them. I look at
Speaker 1: social media, go. I don't look at social media. I
Speaker 1: think it's the phone, because it is that handheld slot machine.
Speaker 1: It is literally an amusement park in the palm of
Speaker 1: your hand. You can certainly look at social media. You
Speaker 1: can engage in that. You can scroll videos, you can
Speaker 1: listen to audio and podcast, you can play games, you
Speaker 1: can watch porn, you can bet, you can gamble. You
Speaker 1: can do all of these things you want to do
Speaker 1: within the palm of your hand. And so I don't
Speaker 1: know if it's social that should be on trial. It
Speaker 1: should be the phone. But that's a whole separate set,
Speaker 1: that's a whole different indictment. It's easier to blame social
Speaker 1: media is the evil thing because yeah, in a way,
Speaker 1: we're on but no, I'm just on Facebook. I don't
Speaker 1: look at it that much. Okay, good, but you know
Speaker 1: that's not the platform young people are on. But you
Speaker 1: can be. I'm addicted to that phone as well. I
Speaker 1: also point out this that if the whole crux of
Speaker 1: the argument, like smoking or guns or whatever it might be,
Speaker 1: as the fact that this is a product liability issue
Speaker 1: and nothing else and they win this thing. Here's what
Speaker 1: should scare you about this is that, all right, snapchack,
Speaker 1: the snapchat TikTok. They settled and now it's meta and
Speaker 1: YouTube right now. But okay, this social media's addictive. Well,
Speaker 1: all right, then they will come after your phones next.
Speaker 1: This certainly makes a mobile phone even more so, I think,
Speaker 1: than social media, something that could be banned or litigated against,
Speaker 1: in the sense that the nature of the phone itself
Speaker 1: is addictive. I mean when the first iPod came out.
Speaker 1: You may not have been around then when the iPod
Speaker 1: came Remember the first iPod came out, and these things
Speaker 1: were you know, they weren't part of your phone, and
Speaker 1: it was you know, we weren't streaming music over the
Speaker 1: over your over data. It was a cost prohibit. You
Speaker 1: had download the song onto the physical iPad. You have
Speaker 1: a phone and you have an iPod with you, and
Speaker 1: the iPod is about the size of while the cell
Speaker 1: phone now about the palm of your hand. And when
Speaker 1: they designed that, they designed it for something that had
Speaker 1: a tactile feel to it, like the back of the
Speaker 1: the the original and the iPods. They were chrome, they're heavy,
Speaker 1: and the edges were round it. It was shining and you
Speaker 1: wanted to touch it. And the buttons were intuitive and
Speaker 1: you felt it and weren't you know, just touch screens,
Speaker 1: the actual physical buds and the whole product. The field
Speaker 1: was designed for you not to want to put it down.
Speaker 1: It felt good in your hand, and that was the
Speaker 1: first step towards developing a product, as all products are.
Speaker 1: That's not only visually and audio opena, but sensory from
Speaker 1: a sensory perspective of the peeling. It drew you in.
Speaker 1: It made you want to use it more. It made
Speaker 1: it so you never wanted to set it down. That's
Speaker 1: that's a hell of a design. But okay, does that
Speaker 1: now mean that the whole idea of music YouTube, for example,
Speaker 1: against social media more than anything. I think it's just videos,
Speaker 1: it's not. It's a social media channel that those algorithms
Speaker 1: are set up for you to get more of the
Speaker 1: videos you want to see. So, by nature, the way
Speaker 1: we design things are that you use it more. You
Speaker 1: can say the same thing about food, about potato chips.
Speaker 1: You know, I get you go get a bag of
Speaker 1: grippos the barbecue, especially, why do you want to eat
Speaker 1: the whole bag? Because they've got a great balance between salt,
Speaker 1: between fat, and between sugar. And we talk about that
Speaker 1: when it comes to obesity. Look at all the hidden
Speaker 1: sugar and product wires. There sugar in there. Shouldn't be
Speaker 1: sugar in this. Yeah, it's there's sugar in it to
Speaker 1: make it more appealing. So it rewires your taste buds,
Speaker 1: not in a conspiratorial sense, but rather they want you
Speaker 1: to eat more because you'll buy more chips. You also
Speaker 1: have to have the ability to go I'm good, I'm satiated,
Speaker 1: I'm fine. So what else are we going to go
Speaker 1: after if they win this lawsuit? Is it going to
Speaker 1: be food? It's gonna be phones, It's gonna be music.
Speaker 1: Netflix comes to mind. They've got auto play. The algorithm
Speaker 1: sees what you're watching, goes hey, we think you'll like this.
Speaker 1: But that's not just Netflix. That's every streaming platform from
Speaker 1: Netflix to YouTube, TV to Amazon Prime, ESPN, whatever it
Speaker 1: might be. News sites have something called infinite scroll. You
Speaker 1: read a story and it sends you more of what
Speaker 1: you want. I would argue also that if you're sitting
Speaker 1: there going, well, you know this is we got the
Speaker 1: social it's the problem the fu I don't know. If
Speaker 1: you're still hooked up to cable you're watching cable news,
Speaker 1: all right. If you like Fox, and you've watched Fox
Speaker 1: because you're conservative, you might really like like One America,
Speaker 1: or you might like Newsmax. We are the commercials for Newsmax.
Speaker 1: And the whole thing with Newsmax is basically is like
Speaker 1: Trump likes Newsmax, so you should watch it too. Tell
Speaker 1: the president you watch TV.
Speaker 2: Wait what?
Speaker 1: And if that's part of your identity and who you are,
Speaker 1: then isn't that a steady diet of more of the
Speaker 1: things that you're addicted to? Now it doesn't give you
Speaker 1: a great sense of what's going on the rest of
Speaker 1: the world or opposing viewpoints, or you know, the ability
Speaker 1: to think for yourself, which I try to do. I
Speaker 1: just don't want people lying to me. I don't care
Speaker 1: if you're a Democrat or Republican. I want to know
Speaker 1: what the agenda is and let me figure out the
Speaker 1: game myself. That's just how I'm more and I get
Speaker 1: I'm a unicord in that regard. Although I suspect the
Speaker 1: way things are going maybe more people are going to go, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know what, maybe we got a back off, like
Speaker 1: social media, we need a back off a little bit.
Speaker 1: But you know, could you go after one of these
Speaker 1: conservative or you know, if you I don't know, maybe
Speaker 1: watch CNN. But now you're going, hey, you know, msnbs
Speaker 1: are the view for God's sakes. With that First Amendment lawsuit,
Speaker 1: same thing. It's like, if you want a steady diet
Speaker 1: of progressive left or conservative right, you can find something
Speaker 1: to do that for you. Because it's not an algorithm,
Speaker 1: but it's alread it is. And so at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, are we opening up Pandora's box. We're
Speaker 1: engaging in anything becomes legally risky, whether I meaning it
Speaker 1: a potato chip or watching I don't know, cable news.
Speaker 1: That's a pretty slippery slope, I think. And now everything
Speaker 1: that is because the idea of making a product is
Speaker 1: to get more people to buy it, regardless of what
Speaker 1: it is to consume it. And no one goes, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm going to design a product, but I don't really
Speaker 1: want that many people using I don't. I just there's
Speaker 1: lit the old theory about it's really not that true.
Speaker 1: But the idea you know, back in the old days,
Speaker 1: I get a refrigerator, and the refrigerator the last seventy year,
Speaker 1: I still got an old, you know, calvinator. In the garage,
Speaker 1: I got a nord Er a Crossley that's still running.
Speaker 1: And yeah, if you look in that thing, it's you know,
Speaker 1: it's got a limited amount of parts. It was designed
Speaker 1: to be replaced as or repair as supposed to replace.
Speaker 1: But we live in a disposal age right now. It's
Speaker 1: lowered the cost of those goods substantially compared to what
Speaker 1: it was a long time ago. TV's are a great
Speaker 1: example of that. You go back and look at I
Speaker 1: don't know, the cost of a TV for a twenty
Speaker 1: one inch you know, black and white TV let alone
Speaker 1: color was like four hundred dollars back in the seventies
Speaker 1: and sixties, and today, you know, you can get a
Speaker 1: you know, an eighty inch TV for less than a
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. For several hundred dollars. It's because well, it's
Speaker 1: not meant to be repaired, it's meant to be disposed.
Speaker 1: And they last a fairly long time for that matter.
Speaker 1: But that's the idea here, is that, like, you know,
Speaker 1: we keep changing things and it gets gets a little
Speaker 1: better in a disposable society, for sure, But when it
Speaker 1: comes to the issue of, you know, the consumer culture.
Speaker 1: We try to make things as appealing as possible from
Speaker 1: a cost standpoint, for sure with the TV analogy, but
Speaker 1: also from something that we want to use over and
Speaker 1: over and over again. Yeah, we want product and brand loyalty.
Speaker 1: Isn't this essentially tied in a digital fashion? I mean,
Speaker 1: can you go after Tide really cleans closed very very well?
Speaker 1: It's all I want to use is Tide. Well, they
Speaker 1: do a great job. Okay, P and G. So now
Speaker 1: is there going to be a LOSSU against P and
Speaker 1: gcs tied? So damn good? But you're not addicted to
Speaker 1: it's got that yeah, but I'm addicted to that smell
Speaker 1: and the clean.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 1: And again, this is the way the legal system works.
Speaker 1: It pushes boundaries for sure, and pushes a lot of buttons.
Speaker 1: But I don't know, it's like we're battling over social
Speaker 1: media as the bad guy here, and maybe it is
Speaker 1: the smartphone. It's also probably a lot about us. It's
Speaker 1: the damnedest thing that started with the tobacco settlements, and
Speaker 1: that's a little bit different too in a sense. I
Speaker 1: know that in this case, you know, there are documents
Speaker 1: coming out from Facebook and those companies that said, yeah,
Speaker 1: we've got an addictive product here, and we're keeping kids engaged,
Speaker 1: but it also it's causing mental problems. It's a smoking
Speaker 1: gun that executives knew their platforms harmed kids, but we
Speaker 1: prioritize engagement in revenue. Anyway, I'm not sure if that's
Speaker 1: legally damaging simply because like, Okay, we got a product
Speaker 1: that's really really good and people, in this case kids
Speaker 1: want to use it. Should that really be legally damaging?
Speaker 1: I mean you can become addicted better to I guess
Speaker 1: food or potato chips, and certainly smoking, then you could
Speaker 1: social media or gun. I mean the argument fall apart
Speaker 1: with weapons in that. Yeah, well, it's not a product
Speaker 1: liability if it works as we sold it. Well, what
Speaker 1: do you mean, Well, you're saying it's the product's dangerous.
Speaker 1: It's the liability. It's not dangerous in a sense of
Speaker 1: a defect. It's not defective at all. But you know,
Speaker 1: it's saying, like a lighter, I burned my house down
Speaker 1: because the lighter worked. Yeah, well, you know you took
Speaker 1: the little bit lighter out and you pulled that little
Speaker 1: wheel and it made a spark, and then your thumb
Speaker 1: hit the button and made the buttane come out, and
Speaker 1: now you've got a flame the cause your fired that
Speaker 1: caused the house to burn down. No, no, it's not
Speaker 1: the lighter's fault. At some point, you know, we do
Speaker 1: have to take accountability here, and I know it's easier
Speaker 1: said than done, because you know, raising my kids was hard,
Speaker 1: and I don't know if I did, how good a
Speaker 1: job I did, We don't know. I guess the standard
Speaker 1: right now is you know, nobody is in prison. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you st the par really low, neither my kids
Speaker 1: are in prison. I think it's good enough, but tend
Speaker 1: to be good, good people. Now, you may measure it differently,
Speaker 1: and everyone does. As a parable, we don't know what
Speaker 1: the yardstick is. What is it supposed to be, how
Speaker 1: much money you make, how much education you have, what
Speaker 1: you look like. I'm not quite sure, but everyone's different
Speaker 1: in that regard. The one constant is it's damn near
Speaker 1: in posset. It's really really hard to do. And to
Speaker 1: simply let your kids be ferial and go, okay, well
Speaker 1: you go here here's a phone, go have fun. Just
Speaker 1: don't bother me. I know it's today's version of you know,
Speaker 1: my mom and dad would go, hey, here's a TV.
Speaker 1: Here's some ma Ree runs, or watch TV. Leave me
Speaker 1: alone for a minute. You know, TV was the babysitter.
Speaker 1: Now it's something digital. How you going to a restaurant,
Speaker 1: how many kids or adults for that matter, are engaged
Speaker 1: on the screen. You know, you've got the you've got
Speaker 1: the tablet that you bring in with the cartoon on
Speaker 1: it or game or whatever it is. And you know,
Speaker 1: kids as young as three four five are sitting there
Speaker 1: waiting for the meal to come out, and they're they're
Speaker 1: engaged with a digital thing. You know, in spite of
Speaker 1: engaging with the family, you give them a tablet and
Speaker 1: they shut the hell up. It's a digital pacify. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we've all done that in some regard help. You know,
Speaker 1: back in the day when the mini and are still there,
Speaker 1: but the you know minivans, Hey I got a TV.
Speaker 1: I can put a video on for my kid in
Speaker 1: the back seat, so they quit bugging the hell out
Speaker 1: of me. We've all done that in some way, shape
Speaker 1: or form. Some people more extreme than the others but
Speaker 1: is it the fault of the You know, kids want
Speaker 1: to watch NonStop. My kid love Toy Story when he
Speaker 1: was growing up. Mean, we watch it once a day
Speaker 1: for real. I have the movie on and then you
Speaker 1: got to say, hey, listen, we need to turn it off.
Speaker 1: Despite the tantrum they held, you're still at the day.
Speaker 1: You have to be the gatekeeper here, not expecting a
Speaker 1: big company like Meta or YouTube or Facebook or TikTok
Speaker 1: to do that for us, because watch out for the consequence.
Speaker 1: If we want that to happen as a society, then
Speaker 1: watch out for the negative side, which is going to
Speaker 1: be them going after Oh hey, wait a minute, Now
Speaker 1: that's different. I was watching that. Yeah, well good, now
Speaker 1: we're gonna shut down cable news or whatever it might
Speaker 1: be that you're consuming, because essentially it's an algorithm. Let
Speaker 1: me get a news update and we'll continue this thread
Speaker 1: in a minute. A little bit different here, you know,
Speaker 1: a high windy can. We have banned cell phones in
Speaker 1: schools largely, which I think and for an educational perspective
Speaker 1: and during instructional time. I think it's obviously that's a
Speaker 1: no brainer. However, the idea, what are social media or
Speaker 1: phones for?
Speaker 2: That matter.
Speaker 1: Schools have banned cell phones, as you know, and I
Speaker 1: wonder now, as we're starting to get more data out
Speaker 1: about this, that maybe the phone wasn't the problem, because
Speaker 1: twenty five percent still of teachers say I have a
Speaker 1: difficult time trying to kid keep the young people engaged. Well,
Speaker 1: we thought it was cell phones, but it turns out
Speaker 1: it's not. What else does it play here? I got
Speaker 1: an idea. We'll share that just ahead here with my
Speaker 1: guest Christine Miles after news on the Home of the
Speaker 1: Red seven hundred ww Cincinnati. By the way, iHeartMedia and
Speaker 1: the Big One. Salute Cincinnati's own Procter and Gamble. If
Speaker 1: you've got someone there you'd like for us to recognize
Speaker 1: on the air, text their name to five one eight
Speaker 1: eight one and be listening. Flown me here on seven
Speaker 1: hundred WWS. Schools across America locking up, snatching up kids
Speaker 1: cell phones like their hot conquer band. So you got
Speaker 1: bell to bell bands, you got the big mad night
Speaker 1: of pousage, you got confiscation. Policies. Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana all
Speaker 1: require school districts to implement policies banning those phones during
Speaker 1: instructional class time. And each state's so a little bit
Speaker 1: different than that. Every but largely most states have this
Speaker 1: conon policy.
Speaker 2: But here's the question.
Speaker 1: You're ready for the question, here's the question no one's
Speaker 1: asking us. So new studies come out, and not just new,
Speaker 1: but preceding studies have come out. The shows teachers spend
Speaker 1: somewhere between twenty five and thirty something percent of their day,
Speaker 1: so between a quarter and a third of their instructional
Speaker 1: day trying to get kids to listen despite strict cell
Speaker 1: phone bans. That hasn't changed. So our phones the core problem?
Speaker 1: Or is it just a scapegoat?
Speaker 4: On that?
Speaker 1: Christine Miles, she's a psychologist and works with school systems
Speaker 1: across the country. Founder of the Listening Past. Christine, Welcome
Speaker 1: are you? I'm great.
Speaker 5: I'm so glad we're talking about this, so thanks for
Speaker 5: having me on.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, I was thinking about this before a conversation,
Speaker 1: and you know I was not. I don't know about you,
Speaker 1: but I was not part of the cell phone generation.
Speaker 1: Obviously I had my mobile down and had it for
Speaker 1: twenty thirty years. But I look back and go, wow,
Speaker 1: we didn't have this problem when I was a kid.
Speaker 1: As most parents and grandparents certainly say things are different.
Speaker 1: Of course they're supposed to be different. That's how the
Speaker 1: world this is, That's how America's designed. I guess this
Speaker 1: would be like what if I in school, if I
Speaker 1: were allowed to bring my TV with a cable on
Speaker 1: it and I could watch MTV, What that would do
Speaker 1: for my ability to learn?
Speaker 2: It's the same thing, right it really.
Speaker 5: That's beautifully said, That's exactly what it is. We don't
Speaker 5: need We just don't need the cord. Yeah, so so,
Speaker 5: But I so appreciate the question because it is a
Speaker 5: big It is a big, big problem, and I'm so
Speaker 5: glad the schools are finally.
Speaker 2: Taking this step.
Speaker 5: I mean, we know better, we do better. I mean
Speaker 5: I remember I grew up when smoking was allowed in
Speaker 5: most places, but then we realized it was harmful for
Speaker 5: your health, so we took it outside and we made
Speaker 5: smoking areas and things like that. So setting some limits
Speaker 5: is similar to that, Because I think this is like
Speaker 5: that the ships sailed before we knew what the repercussions were.
Speaker 5: And I don't think it's the root cause it's just
Speaker 5: that in gasoline to the already raging fire. In terms
Speaker 5: of the problem of kids, struggling to listen. There's also
Speaker 5: some rebound effects here. So you take the phones out
Speaker 5: of the schools, and attention spans are still harder to
Speaker 5: come by because when if they're on their phones and
Speaker 5: on devices, which the numbers are kind of staggering. You know,
Speaker 5: these are spending nine hours plus a day outside of
Speaker 5: school work. That's a lot of time. So it's not
Speaker 5: like your brain's going to recover just because you don't
Speaker 5: have it in school. But again we're still it's still
Speaker 5: not the root cause. In my opinion, the root cause
Speaker 5: is that we're told, not taught, and this is a
Speaker 5: problem since been documented since the nineteen fifties.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was making that case, and this kind of
Speaker 1: a theme show today on this I had earlier. We're
Speaker 1: talking about the social media live trial. It's about to
Speaker 1: happen that social media and TikTok and snapchat and instant,
Speaker 1: all those platforms are addictive by design and will ruin
Speaker 1: your kid's life. Yeah, if they go uncheck, if they're
Speaker 1: completely fear aal online with no roadblocks up, But that's
Speaker 1: on the parent. I don't think that's on the company
Speaker 1: also made the case that the social is not the problem.
Speaker 1: The phone itself is the problem. It is like literal,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's like bringing it's a handheld damn
Speaker 1: casino is what it is. Right, It's like I've got
Speaker 1: everything out that it's not social. It's I can message,
Speaker 1: I can look at videos, i can watch porn, I
Speaker 1: can check sports, I can bet online, I can I
Speaker 1: can do all of these things in the problem in
Speaker 1: my hand. That's really it's not social. It's the phone.
Speaker 5: Well, it's it's all the things that are coming. It's
Speaker 5: the world coming at kids, not the world, you know,
Speaker 5: not kids exploring the world and what's finding them.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 5: Again, there's could be a lot of debate about algorithms
Speaker 5: and how we're targeting just espe. We could have debates
Speaker 5: about cigarette companies targeting the brain and making things addictive.
Speaker 5: So there's there's it's a very complex issue, and I think, yes,
Speaker 5: parental control is important schools. Taking these steps is important
Speaker 5: when again, when we know better, we do better, and
Speaker 5: we still be One of the things taking this time
Speaker 5: away in schools is that it forces us to do
Speaker 5: something else. So, you know, I've talked with parents, as
Speaker 5: you know, a family therapist and one time a parent
Speaker 5: said to me, what if my child won't eat anything,
Speaker 5: drink anything but soda? And I said, well, if you
Speaker 5: take soda away in the house, they'll get thirsty eventually.
Speaker 5: So you know they'll eventually drink water if water is
Speaker 5: all there is. So what will happen is kids will
Speaker 5: start to reacclimate towards socializing with each other more than
Speaker 5: they will to the phones when the phones aren't in
Speaker 5: front of them. But it's two at tempting, So we
Speaker 5: need to remove those barriers. But then we also got
Speaker 5: to give them the skills. I mean, we've been telling
Speaker 5: we've been telling people to listen kids, starting with kids
Speaker 5: from like I said, this is a problem documented back
Speaker 5: to the nineteen fifties where we don't have formal listening
Speaker 5: education and classrooms. So we tell them expecting the ears
Speaker 5: to do the work instead of building this as a skill,
Speaker 5: which is what it is.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I mean I saw we should be addressing
Speaker 1: in school. She's a schools that's Christine Mouse, psychologist. Let's
Speaker 1: back up a little bit what goes on in the
Speaker 1: adolescent brain from a developmental psychology perspective, what's actually happening
Speaker 1: when their kids are always on their phone? And you
Speaker 1: metch you know, nine, ten, twelve or more hours a day.
Speaker 5: Well, so I will say that I can talk about
Speaker 5: this from the This is not my core expertise. I'm
Speaker 5: a systems family therapist. But what I do know and
Speaker 5: what the research is, it's just a it's a dopamine hit.
Speaker 5: It's a constant dopamine hit. It is it is asking
Speaker 5: like a drug. Now we can talk about that from
Speaker 5: an adult perspective, and we know how difficult that is.
Speaker 5: You talked about family, you talked about porn. These are
Speaker 5: things for adults that they struggle with in terms of
Speaker 5: the time on the phone. When you're bringing to the
Speaker 5: developing we're in a whole different realm here. So we
Speaker 5: were not forming the pathways that need to be formed
Speaker 5: in early childhood and in adolescence, which is really why
Speaker 5: it's so dangerous, because we're changing those neuropathways we're getting
Speaker 5: they're having a hard time self soothing, They're having a
Speaker 5: hard time you know. This is why we know the
Speaker 5: mental health issues are spiking, not just the attention issues.
Speaker 5: This is very well documented now in the in the literature.
Speaker 1: Okay, but there's also a separation factor here. I guess
Speaker 1: for lack of a better word, we're seeing some students
Speaker 1: are you know, they're experiencing genuine anxiety and panic attacks
Speaker 1: when they're separated from their phones during these bands. Is
Speaker 1: that a clinical concern we should take seriously or is
Speaker 1: that a warning for everyone else?
Speaker 5: Well, I think it's a withdrawal issue. I think this
Speaker 5: is exactly you know what, let's go back to something simple.
Speaker 5: You know, we get to the pacifier because it helps
Speaker 5: them sue themselves and when it's time, when the parents go, okay,
Speaker 5: it's time to now wean off of that. There's some
Speaker 5: peers that when we have to say goodbye to something
Speaker 5: that was helping us south just because it helps us
Speaker 5: suit doesn't mean it's good for us. This is not
Speaker 5: how we want we want kids to regulate is through
Speaker 5: a device and through having to have constant you know,
Speaker 5: attention coming at us, so that our constant stimulus. So
Speaker 5: we're we're not thinking, feeling, or even operating in the
Speaker 5: present and that's the danger zone. So this is where
Speaker 5: but we've got to fill that gap so that they're
Speaker 5: not as anxious again, this is where the socialization is
Speaker 5: the answer. It's not just take it away, it's the
Speaker 5: only way to stop the behavior to start a new one.
Speaker 5: So you take the phones away, now you have to
Speaker 5: replace it with more socialization, more skill building around listening.
Speaker 5: Which is why again teachers have been telling kids to
Speaker 5: listen in the classrooms for you know, decades, and this
Speaker 5: is a constant battle because it's hard to pay attention
Speaker 5: for eight hours a day, especially if you don't have
Speaker 5: the skill. If I said, you go run a marathon
Speaker 5: that you know how to run, but get into the
Speaker 5: get to the end of the race. Got you gotta train,
Speaker 5: you gotta build the muscle. And so this is our
Speaker 5: opportunity is to finally solve this problemhich is what I'm
Speaker 5: committed to doing, is to is to provide education from
Speaker 5: elementary classrooms to corporations. Because it doesn't matter what age
Speaker 5: you are, you only you know, a very small percentage,
Speaker 5: less than two percent have any formal listening training.
Speaker 1: Yeah, she is Christine Miles. She's a psychologist of what
Speaker 1: it's cost to you not to listen to the founder
Speaker 1: of the listening path or talking about school cell phone
Speaker 1: And then we have that in Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana to
Speaker 1: a large degree. But the question nobody's asking that I'm
Speaker 1: bringing in this morning is their studies are coming out
Speaker 1: and they're showing that teachers still spend a quarter or
Speaker 1: more of their workday, of their instruction day, just trying
Speaker 1: to get kids to listen. Then that was before and
Speaker 1: now after cell phone band, so our cell phone is
Speaker 1: really the problem. They really wreck kids lives. I've also
Speaker 1: seen studies that pointed out early it said that that,
Speaker 1: you know, the extreme is if you spend all your
Speaker 1: time on the phone, it's really really bad for you.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's horrible for your development, all these things
Speaker 1: we're talking about. That's absolutely true. But kids who do
Speaker 1: aren't on social or don't have phones, who don't use
Speaker 1: them aren't allowed to tend to also suffer some of
Speaker 1: those same symptoms. May not the extreme we're talking about
Speaker 1: with overusage, but under usage. There's a sweet spot right
Speaker 1: in the middle. And when I hear that, I go, Okay.
Speaker 1: Kids if they're exposed a little social media and able
Speaker 1: to congregate online with friends, because that's how kids socialize today.
Speaker 1: I was a kid where we'd socialized at the mall
Speaker 1: or the arcade, and kids today do it digitally. So
Speaker 1: we have to lean into that. Is this just a
Speaker 1: lesson that we are woefully behind how we educate kids
Speaker 1: in America still today, because we're teaching them like we
Speaker 1: did a couple hundred years ago. There's a you know,
Speaker 1: maybe it's instead of a blackboard, it's a whiteboard or
Speaker 1: a smartboard, but you're still it's rote memorization. It's all
Speaker 1: these things we've taught kids largely the same way. If
Speaker 1: phones and social media, Christine, are changing kids' brains, shouldn't
Speaker 1: we be adopting the school curricula to meet the way
Speaker 1: kids learn now as opposed to how they did a
Speaker 1: couple hundred years ago.
Speaker 5: Well, you're this is such a good point. I mean,
Speaker 5: we we know that just what we know about the
Speaker 5: neurodivergency and the way kids learn that. Look, we're you know,
Speaker 5: you and I could go back and say, well, you know,
Speaker 5: if somebody was dyslexic or had genuinely had a d
Speaker 5: D or things like that, this wasn't necessarily talked about
Speaker 5: or diagnosed to the same degree. We once could argue that,
Speaker 5: you know, not everybody has a d D that, but
Speaker 5: it is real. It is a real thing. So we
Speaker 5: just know that teachers have a lot of divergent learning
Speaker 5: needs and so it's really about meeting kids where they are,
Speaker 5: which is part of why the listening is hard too,
Speaker 5: because kids needs are different, which is why this is
Speaker 5: a this you're The point you're making is I think
Speaker 5: and I which is where my heart and soul is
Speaker 5: is this is a systemic problem. We're not going to
Speaker 5: fix this with one thing. Again, we know that that
Speaker 5: phone that what we're trying to prevent is is keeping
Speaker 5: them off of engaging with each other, engaging with the future,
Speaker 5: and engaging with the with the core curriculum. Like you said,
Speaker 5: take the TV out of the classroom, that's just common sense.
Speaker 5: Right then we have the issue of what we do
Speaker 5: at home and how we limit time. We know that
Speaker 5: past the screen time, the scrolling, the doom scrolling, that's
Speaker 5: not super productive and that can get that's very addictive. Well,
Speaker 5: you know, then there's some socialization. How can you mitigate
Speaker 5: that with socialization? And then you get to the but
Speaker 5: you take all that and you cure all that, you
Speaker 5: still have this learning problem and you still have this
Speaker 5: listening problem. To systemic communication problem. We focus on speaking, telling, knowing,
Speaker 5: and test scores versus how we're learning, and that's what AI,
Speaker 5: in my opinion, is going to come in and change
Speaker 5: is that. You know, we had the calculator. Now we
Speaker 5: have something that can do the formulators but have formulas.
Speaker 5: But how can you explain it, How can you make
Speaker 5: sense out of it? How can you show up as
Speaker 5: a person that knows how to collaborate? And these are
Speaker 5: all the skills that are at the core of what's
Speaker 5: going to make somebody successful in the future. Starting we
Speaker 5: got to start teaching that at a very early age,
Speaker 5: as early as first grade, so that they're ready. And
Speaker 5: this is where we have to fit this systemically, so
Speaker 5: that we're teaching the skills so everybody is a common
Speaker 5: language is how so they can understand.
Speaker 1: So there's another factor here in my mind that this
Speaker 1: whole thing and I get it. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: talk about phones descrying attention spans, and the argument is
Speaker 1: whether the phone is the cause or just the most
Speaker 1: convenient delivery system for a culture that's already dopamine driven
Speaker 1: and overstimulate. I mean, you know, parents are were upset
Speaker 1: with the cell phone bands because they want to be
Speaker 1: able to get a hold of their kid instantly at
Speaker 1: any time during an emergency. But as an excuse to go.
Speaker 1: I can text you during class because parents are also
Speaker 1: anxious all the time as well, and it trickles down
Speaker 1: that we're all anxious and all the time. But I
Speaker 1: think it's interesting, is that. So the way to beat
Speaker 1: this whole thing is to simply use AI and use
Speaker 1: the algorithms for good as opposed to evil, if you
Speaker 1: want to call social media evil, and that is educators
Speaker 1: and the system should be creating platforms much like TikTok
Speaker 1: and snapchat in insta that feed that feeds a student
Speaker 1: a steady diet of what they're interested in to learn,
Speaker 1: that continues to push stuff towards them and challenge them
Speaker 1: and learn what their likes and dislikes are and try
Speaker 1: and strengthen those dislikes and make everything better. Use use
Speaker 1: the technology for good instead of social media. But the
Speaker 1: problem with that is now you're going to replace all
Speaker 1: of these teachers and all these administrators in schools with
Speaker 1: something that's digital. That means now that threatens the teachers' unions,
Speaker 1: That threatens the administrators and the whole construct of schools
Speaker 1: in general. Because guess what if I can do this
Speaker 1: with my phone much like we've seen, you know, broadcast, TV,
Speaker 1: go away radio, everything else, newspapers for example, because of
Speaker 1: the digital age that now threatens the livelihood of the
Speaker 1: education class and we can't have that in America. And
Speaker 1: so what winds up happening is it's disconnect between the
Speaker 1: kids in the classroom.
Speaker 2: Am I wrong?
Speaker 5: Well, here's what I think. I so, you know, I
Speaker 5: yes again the world. It's just like we could be
Speaker 5: saying the same thing about corporate America.
Speaker 2: The road.
Speaker 5: The road things can be replaced, well, can't be replaced
Speaker 5: by the human skills. And that's one of the things
Speaker 5: that I think teachers are getting away from, and not
Speaker 5: by the doing because there's so much pressure to teach
Speaker 5: to these core ideas and curriculum and the standards, is
Speaker 5: that they're getting away from the human part of the job,
Speaker 5: which is really how we develop kids, how we nurture kids.
Speaker 5: And so this is going to be the heart of
Speaker 5: what happens in the school and what teachers love to
Speaker 5: do and why most teachers get into the work. So
Speaker 5: I think it's not that they'll be replaced as to
Speaker 5: what the emphasis.
Speaker 2: Is that needs to change.
Speaker 5: And that's the same thing that I see on the
Speaker 5: corporate side, that if you want to. You have to
Speaker 5: drive that value as a what in your job because
Speaker 5: some of the redundancies can be and so the answer
Speaker 5: isn't more time on screens. The answer is more connection
Speaker 5: in terms of how we raise the kids and how
Speaker 5: we teach them, and how we help them connect through
Speaker 5: language and through interaction, so that everything they learn in
Speaker 5: this kind of this fast paced digital world and what's
Speaker 5: coming at them, then they can manage their emotions. They
Speaker 5: can manage the emotions of others, they can develop empathy.
Speaker 5: They have the things that the AI and the machines
Speaker 5: don't have. And that's the risk is that we're tipping
Speaker 5: over into too much of the screen time.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: She is Christine Miles, psychologist. Her book is What Is
Speaker 1: Costing You Not to Listen? Founder of the Listening Path.
Speaker 1: Christine Miles thanks at the time.
Speaker 2: I appreciate it, appreciate the conversation.
Speaker 5: It's really really helpful.
Speaker 1: I think I just made a case here teachers can
Speaker 1: be replaced. This is believe me, this is like, this
Speaker 1: is dangerous territory. If you could come up with an algorithm,
Speaker 1: and it's easy to do because we've seen this replicated
Speaker 1: time and time again, that would teach kids on their level,
Speaker 1: meaning it feeds them a steady diet. The algorithm feeds
Speaker 1: them a steady die of things they're interested in and
Speaker 1: expands their knowledge base in learning and kind of sort
Speaker 1: of tricks them into learning where it becomes fun and
Speaker 1: engaging on a personal level, just like social media is.
Speaker 1: And now they're hooked on this, and you put that
Speaker 1: in the classroom and ban the phone and give them
Speaker 1: a device that is the alternate to social media and
Speaker 1: all the stuff coming at you. And that's how kids
Speaker 1: learn today. They learn on social media, they learn through
Speaker 1: digital interaction. If you do that in the classroom, kids
Speaker 1: now become smarter, more engaged, more learned. But what happens
Speaker 1: to the educational system the computer replaces the teacher. We
Speaker 1: can't have that in America, can we? Because of what's
Speaker 1: at stake? There's also the is she mentioned important too?
Speaker 1: The social interaction thing? But is this like the it's
Speaker 1: like clickbait right? This is what the educational system doesn't
Speaker 1: want you to know. This one weird old trick for
Speaker 1: saving us a lot of money and getting a better student.
Speaker 1: Thoughts after news here Scotsland continues on seven hundred WLW
Speaker 1: Good cute. Get the party start, let's go, let's go
Speaker 1: sloany here seven hundred WLW on this Tuesday morning, and
Speaker 1: a beautiful one at that with the sunshining right now,
Speaker 1: temperature's going up there. We've cost the forty degree threshold.
Speaker 1: Come home, baby, Let's get some melton, Go on? What
Speaker 1: do you say? What do you say? Just spent like
Speaker 1: a first half of the show. We talked about social
Speaker 1: media addiction, Christine Miles, school psychologists and cell phone bands
Speaker 1: and the like, and yeah, I'll tell you what you know.
Speaker 1: It's kind of sobering.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: We could make great progress when it comes to educating
Speaker 1: kids if we just did it on their level. And
Speaker 1: in the digital age, they learn digitally now as opposed
Speaker 1: to face to face, and so if that's the if
Speaker 1: that's how you get kids and that's where they are,
Speaker 1: then you have to meet them on their level, and
Speaker 1: that would involve more AI, more digital algorithms to teach
Speaker 1: them what they don't know and kind of make it
Speaker 1: appealing to them in a way, because the old ways
Speaker 1: of teaching just don't simply how it makes the work.
Speaker 1: But let's face it, there's better ways to do it.
Speaker 1: But as a threat to that precious ecosystem and all
Speaker 1: that fat cache that goes to our school systems from
Speaker 1: our property taxes, And that's what's in danger here. You know,
Speaker 1: you want to be a disruptor, but how disruptive do
Speaker 1: you want to get? You know, the fear is a
Speaker 1: lot of jobs are being replaced by AI. As I speak.
Speaker 1: The City of Cincinnati is coming up with a policy
Speaker 1: that would regulate data centers in Hamlin County, specifically in Cincinnati. Obviously,
Speaker 1: also that's an issue for the commissioners too. Do we
Speaker 1: want data centers in Cincinnati? Look what's happening in Kentucky
Speaker 1: Butler County up near Columbus and around the area, And
Speaker 1: that's a concern. Big, huge, multi acre plants that suck
Speaker 1: up a lot of resources, natural resources, water and of
Speaker 1: course electricity and the grid can't handle anymore. Do we
Speaker 1: want that in the city of Cincinnati itself? They're debating
Speaker 1: it as we speak, what that policy would look like.
Speaker 1: And so we are all guilty in some way, shape
Speaker 1: or formed this whole thing. If your job and my
Speaker 1: job is endangering to be replaced by AI. Would teachers?
Speaker 1: Would education? Which educators be any less in danger? Should
Speaker 1: they be protected like I don't know, you know here
Speaker 1: at seven hundred w W and iHeart we have the
Speaker 1: guaranteed human. I'm sure you've heard the we're guaranteed human,
Speaker 1: yeah for now. When you hear they're like, okay, well
Speaker 1: we're guaranteed human today tomorrow they're it's gonna be hard
Speaker 1: to compete with AI. Let's face it, for spoken order,
Speaker 1: music or video. Hollywood's in danger being upended by AI.
Speaker 1: Everyone's job is in question right now. Nless, of course
Speaker 1: you're in the trades, and you know, as long as
Speaker 1: I can do plumbing and electrical and carpentry and stuff
Speaker 1: like that, I got a gig for now for now.
Speaker 1: So should we protect the status quo in schools? And
Speaker 1: I think, you know, we talk about homeschooling, which is
Speaker 1: I think somewhat.
Speaker 2: Of a threat.
Speaker 1: I think the education, but of course privateized schools, private
Speaker 1: schools is a threat. I think the next big threat's
Speaker 1: gonna be AI, because we're going to teach kids on
Speaker 1: their level, and I think you're gonna have smarter kids. Granted,
Speaker 1: there's going to be a lot to be desired when
Speaker 1: it comes to interpersonal communication and talking with a living,
Speaker 1: breathing human being. You're still going to need that skill,
Speaker 1: and I think that's going to be maybe the big
Speaker 1: challenges whole thing.
Speaker 2: But man, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm looking over my shoulder going, why don't we just
Speaker 1: have a platform like you would with social media, be
Speaker 1: a TikTok or Instagram and using the same type of
Speaker 1: algorithms teach kids on their level. And he said, hey,
Speaker 1: and look at that. You don't even have to go
Speaker 1: into class, right, you could be at home doing this stuff.
Speaker 2: Frightening. We want change, but that much change.
Speaker 1: Anyway, We've got that going on today, on this on
Speaker 1: this beautiful Tuesday morning, Big Dave points out to me,
Speaker 1: my producer, that Ohio is ranked twenty first in the
Speaker 1: nation for alien abductions. You know, whether it's like business
Speaker 1: or education, cost of living, we always middle of the pack.
Speaker 1: We are mid ass Ohio, that's what we are, always
Speaker 1: right right near twenty five, well right in the mid
Speaker 1: sometimes as high as twenty, sometimes as low as forty.
Speaker 1: But generally speaking with some outliers, we're right. How are you?
Speaker 1: We're very mid mid Ohio was legit, we're mid twenty
Speaker 1: first of the nation for alien abductions. What you have
Speaker 1: a ready for the percentages. Now, according to this is
Speaker 1: a British website, so I'm sorry, British gaming site, So
Speaker 1: I don't know what the credibility is here, but if
Speaker 1: believe in the markets, Ohios have a one point one
Speaker 1: three percent chance of being abducted by aliens. So you're
Speaker 1: saying there's a chance we have and this has surprising me.
Speaker 1: Over four thousand abductions since twenty nineteen. Reports of abduction
Speaker 1: since twenty nineteen. Don't know how many of those reports
Speaker 1: dealt with hallucinogens or alcohol, drugs, whatever it might be,
Speaker 1: but four thousand and if you're wondering if you want
Speaker 1: to increase your chances of being abducted by an alien,
Speaker 1: if you're looking for something to do, Maine in Idaho
Speaker 1: are your top two states for abductions, which is surprising
Speaker 1: because you think it would be Nevada, you know, Area
Speaker 1: fifty one and all this stuff, maybe Arizona, but nope,
Speaker 1: it's Maine in Idaho and Maine and Ahiho. There's nothing
Speaker 1: better to do than to get abducted by aliens. Maybe
Speaker 1: you're so busy in Ohio, Kentucky, Anyon elsewhere, we just
Speaker 1: you know, abducted we don't pay attention to it, but
Speaker 1: there's still a little going on in Idaho and Maine
Speaker 1: that I mean, some people probably look forward to. It's
Speaker 1: like hitting the lottery. It's like getting a number in Kino.
Speaker 1: And by the way, the percentage is only two percent,
Speaker 1: so you know, we are kind of splitting hairs here.
Speaker 1: So good to no, there you go middle of the pack.
Speaker 1: Even aliens are like, Ohio, that's all right, Midway, Yeah, yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: we're fine. We need a body book there. But largely
Speaker 1: Maine in Idaho look looking for trouble out there. This
Speaker 1: is the United States of drama. I was looking forward
Speaker 1: to talking about that. I didn't think, honestly, if you
Speaker 1: asked me, hey, what are you gonna be talking about
Speaker 1: on Tuesday, I didn't think we would still be talking
Speaker 1: about this about America, the Snowflake. It is incredible to
Speaker 1: watch how we could be this upset over a ten
Speaker 1: minute free concert. Literally tens of millions of people fighting
Speaker 1: over a halftime show, and the biggest winners NBC and
Speaker 1: the NFL, because you know, the super Bowl itself kind
Speaker 1: of boring. I mean, there was some action, but it
Speaker 1: was a defensive battle. No touchdowns, to the second half.
Speaker 1: The ads were a couple ads. I like the Dunkin
Speaker 1: Donuts one because it's nostalgic and I'm old and that's
Speaker 1: what we like. Anytime you can get George Costanza and
Speaker 1: Ted Danson in there.
Speaker 2: Good.
Speaker 1: I thought the William Shatner won will shat Fantastic made
Speaker 1: me laugh out loud, a little snort going on there.
Speaker 1: Like Sarah Le's the heart is certainly Budweiser. They always
Speaker 1: hit out of the part with a bird that became
Speaker 1: an eagle, and a couple other ones as well, but
Speaker 1: buying Large's like, yeah, it's kind of kind of the
Speaker 1: Ohio super Bowl NBC NFL they win because I think
Speaker 1: of all the controversies surrounding the halftime show. So here
Speaker 1: we are in day two and one of the stories
Speaker 1: still trending is bad Bunny. We got about twenty percent
Speaker 1: of the country outraged about an all Spanish show by
Speaker 1: a Puerto Rican man against ice raids, and then another
Speaker 1: twenty percent thinks this show was somehow transformative and historic
Speaker 1: and progressive awakening, and it's bringing tears in my eyes
Speaker 1: and just thinking how far he's come, And like, I
Speaker 1: think both sides. I think it's a gross exaggeration. And
Speaker 1: this is back to phones and social media. But we
Speaker 1: all have to have a hot take, and we got
Speaker 1: to be pissed off about everything at all times, and
Speaker 1: everything is a microaggression, and we take our accues from leadership.
Speaker 1: Trump is great at being aggravated by seemingly the pettiest things,
Speaker 1: and we have to look for validation of our beliefs
Speaker 1: and everything. So you're supposed to act now today that
Speaker 1: everything is upsetting and polarizing, and it just it's perfectly
Speaker 1: normal to go, eh, not for me.
Speaker 4: It's not for me.
Speaker 1: It's not a validation, nor is it an indictment. It's
Speaker 1: just targeting a different audience. You can say what you
Speaker 1: want to be. The NFL and the spectacular crack to
Speaker 1: the NFL is going to regret this whole thing as
Speaker 1: we all have sleepless executives and finger pointing and speed
Speaker 1: like the it's like when they you know, when they
Speaker 1: went woke with bud light. No, it's not like anything
Speaker 1: at all. Simply in this case is because the NFL
Speaker 1: is almost too big to lose at this point. And
Speaker 1: if you look at the numbers from the halftimes, they
Speaker 1: got what they wanted free publicity, well maybe not free,
Speaker 1: but publicity and eyeballs to the tune of a hunder
Speaker 1: thirty five million people. And so yeah, mission accomplished. And
Speaker 1: if they're looking to expand the market to Latin America
Speaker 1: as they did Europe, then this is how you do that.
Speaker 1: It's a math game to them and nothing else. It's
Speaker 1: not about patriotism and taking signs. They love that stuff
Speaker 1: because it means more people are going to watch over
Speaker 1: the controversy or the support, as the case may be
Speaker 1: for those on the left. But you know, and here's
Speaker 1: the thing, I try to be consistent. So I'm trying
Speaker 1: to figure out the inconsistencies here and it's pretty easy.
Speaker 1: So initially the backlash of bad Bunny was and I
Speaker 1: get it. You know, he's anti Ice, and you know,
Speaker 1: to those people that think that I should be completely
Speaker 1: shut down, it's like, well, yeah, that's great until the
Speaker 1: person that they take into costody as someone who's accused of,
Speaker 1: I don't know, abducting Savannah Guthrie, not saying that that's
Speaker 1: someone who.
Speaker 2: Shouldn't be here.
Speaker 1: We don't know, but you know what I'm saying, it's like,
Speaker 1: you're just assuming that those people are innocent and they're not.
Speaker 1: They may be here legally, which in itself technically is
Speaker 1: a crime, but not to the level of what we're
Speaker 1: witnessing in streets. But if you're trying to get people
Speaker 1: out there who are here illegally and also committing serious crimes,
Speaker 1: you want that you're standing up and fighting for a criminal.
Speaker 1: That doesn't make a lot of sense. In my book,
Speaker 1: it'd be nice to know which one you know. Is
Speaker 1: this a guy we're just picking up because he's out
Speaker 1: there and is here illegally, or is he here illegally and
Speaker 1: also committing some serious felonies, because that to me and
Speaker 1: that there's a distinction there. But the consistency here is
Speaker 1: I think what makes me laugh. We're angered that No,
Speaker 1: I'm not angered. I got it. It was in Spanish. I
Speaker 1: used to know a little more Spanish than you today.
Speaker 1: I don't use it that often. I'm really good when
Speaker 1: I'm drunk by it. Give me some tequila and I'm
Speaker 1: spitting Spanish like I'm Pablo Escobar.
Speaker 2: It's unbelievable.
Speaker 1: That the lyrics are in Spanish, and therefore some I like,
Speaker 1: I don't know about you, but I'm not just this
Speaker 1: is one of my not super powers. For share can
Speaker 1: understand lyrics of a lot of songs, especially newer songs,
Speaker 1: and that and that's an English because there's a lot
Speaker 1: of slang. And as you get older, it's like, I'm
Speaker 1: not sure what the vernacular is and what this is
Speaker 1: supposed to mean. And I don't you know thet the
Speaker 1: battles between Kendrick and Drake. I'm like, I'm not quite
Speaker 1: sure this whole thing. And you know, we've been also
Speaker 1: been whether it's an English or not, we've been getting wrong.
Speaker 1: We've been screwing up lyrics or generations. I think about it,
Speaker 1: how many songs we sang out loud in our car
Speaker 1: or in the shower or whatever, Like you hear what
Speaker 1: the lyrics are, They're like, wait, that's what he's saying.
Speaker 1: You mean it's revved up like a deuce, not revved
Speaker 1: up like a douche. When my wife is young, and
Speaker 1: that song was fairly popular verse Springsteen, Manford, man et cetera.
Speaker 1: Back in the day. That song time, and she sung
Speaker 1: along with it. Her mom forbid her from listening to
Speaker 1: that song because mom was convinced it was rebbed up
Speaker 1: like a douche, which makes no sense. It's a deuce,
Speaker 1: it's about a car. It's nonetheless, that's where things do.
Speaker 1: We always screw up lyrics, so I don't know way
Speaker 1: to speak, and I don't also point out too, like
Speaker 1: one of the most successful genres of music right now
Speaker 1: in America is K pop. Korean pop very popular Spanish.
Speaker 1: If you look at, for example, in my business and radio,
Speaker 1: one of the top formats across the country is Spanish.
Speaker 1: I'm really not outraged about that. It's you know, you're
Speaker 1: trying to sell materials and good services and a like
Speaker 1: too to those folks. Yeah, because guess what. Edy doesn't
Speaker 1: just affect old white people like me and you listening
Speaker 1: to this radio station. I'm sure there's plenty of Spanish
Speaker 1: speakers out there who need those ed supplements. Nonetheless, I
Speaker 1: will also say the outrage machine then turned to the
Speaker 1: offensive lyrics somehow and pearl clutching over impressionable kids who
Speaker 1: don't speak Spanish.
Speaker 2: So no one understands this.
Speaker 1: But then at the same time, once you get the
Speaker 1: lyrics decoded, once you get the lyrics decoded, then we
Speaker 1: have to be offended. Well, if you don't speak Spanish,
Speaker 1: you don't have to really worry about that, do you,
Speaker 1: And now you look predictable. Ah, my side says, okay,
Speaker 1: we'll play that game for a second. I think this
Speaker 1: is just the offensive lyrics over bad Bunny. All right,
Speaker 1: there's some offensive lyrics and they're sure. Meanwhile, the alternative,
Speaker 1: the wholesome American alternative. This was kid Rock. Now I
Speaker 1: always heard to see kid before he really blew up,
Speaker 1: and I thought he was, man, this guy's gonna go play.
Speaker 1: He's awesome. And I've seen him I don't know four
Speaker 1: or five six times, and you're going, oh, it's it's
Speaker 1: really the lyrics are you know, kids are impressiable and
Speaker 1: they're young, and they're seeing and they're seeing these women
Speaker 1: shake their asses like, hey, guess what you can see
Speaker 1: far worse in a store on your phone or in
Speaker 1: person then you know some Latina, big bone latina women
Speaker 1: shaking i ass on TV is like it really wasn't that.
Speaker 1: But the funny part about the whole alternative thing on
Speaker 1: attorning point was kid Rock is performing who boy like
Speaker 1: Kid Rock has a giant middle finger on the tall
Speaker 1: of its private jet and when kid Rock broke and
Speaker 1: this would have been late nineties. I remember the outrage
Speaker 1: from the same conservatives about the you know, the great
Speaker 1: society's falling apart because of hip hop music and the like.
Speaker 1: And here's this guy out there, and he's in and
Speaker 1: he opens, He opens with a song and and bob
Speaker 1: with the ba is. I want to read the lyrics
Speaker 1: for you that he sang. And the same people are
Speaker 1: offended by bad Bunny. We're not offended by the midnight
Speaker 1: glances and the topless dancers, the gender freaks, the g's
Speaker 1: and the forties and the chicks with beepers, and there
Speaker 1: are the lights of Southern comfort. It don't it don't
Speaker 1: even matter that their veins are punctured. And he talks
Speaker 1: about topless dancers and say it, talks about his heroes
Speaker 1: and the methadone clinic and the crackheads and the critics
Speaker 1: and the cynics and the crooked cops and the cluttered desks,
Speaker 1: all you bastards at the I R s and the
Speaker 1: half pints of love and the fifthest dress for the hooker.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to sing the song, but you know
Speaker 1: he's celebrating his homies in the county at cell Block six,
Speaker 1: and so I don't know. I will look at that,
Speaker 1: go okay, if a kid here's that and has to
Speaker 1: ask you, you know what meth is or what a
Speaker 1: chick with beepers to show you how old a song is,
Speaker 1: Like I don't know. It's like I can't equate, Like
Speaker 1: why bad Bunnies more offensive than that? I don't think
Speaker 1: either one is offensive. It just it's music. It's always
Speaker 1: been that way, and it's the snowflaking of America and
Speaker 1: this time conservative of snowflakes that are worked up about this. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: it wasn't a long ago for progressives that are having
Speaker 1: that smug look on their face. I'd say, weren't y'all upset?
Speaker 1: Like a couple of years ago when when Baby It's
Speaker 1: Cold Outside was outrageous, you know, the old classic standard,
Speaker 1: baby It's cold Outside, where the guys try to talk
Speaker 1: her into staying because it's cold outside, and basically he
Speaker 1: went wants sex and she's like, oh, I don't know.
Speaker 1: It's like what did you put in this drink? And
Speaker 1: now it's the me too movement came involved and it
Speaker 1: was like we are all rolling our eyes, going are
Speaker 1: you kidding me?
Speaker 2: Right now?
Speaker 1: Because at the same time, that everyone and any way
Speaker 1: on the left was upset about baby It's Cold Outside,
Speaker 1: which is stupid the number one and the number one
Speaker 1: song in the United States when that song was always
Speaker 1: it was Cardi B's wap what letter a P word?
Speaker 2: Female body?
Speaker 1: Well go look at that, Like, why are we upset
Speaker 1: about the number one song in the country is far
Speaker 1: more offensive than baby It's Cold Out? Saying that's different. Okay, Now,
Speaker 1: the selective outrage, it's just exhausting, right, Like now we're
Speaker 1: down to the super Bowl where the super Bowl halftime
Speaker 1: show is what everybody's pissed off about. It's it's part
Speaker 1: of the outrage culture and certainly has to do with
Speaker 1: what we've been talking about in the morning. That social media.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I've got to go, hey, you know what it used
Speaker 1: to be like that's not for me. Look when people
Speaker 1: would complain about my show, I hate your far How
Speaker 1: are you Why are you still? Like, well enough people listen.
Speaker 1: If enough people don't listen, I get fired. That's how
Speaker 1: our same w any show that's streaming, I hate that show?
Speaker 1: Why is that show a thing? Why are you exist?
Speaker 1: Why are you telling people what they should and shouldn't like,
Speaker 1: why are you so insecure that you're looking at that
Speaker 1: going well, somebody must like it. Fine, great, good for you.
Speaker 1: It's not my thing.
Speaker 2: I'm good.
Speaker 1: But instead of just being passive about being so aggressive
Speaker 1: and going, it needs to be canceled because I don't
Speaker 1: agree with it. I just I don't understand that it's
Speaker 1: all about the money. At the end of the day,
Speaker 1: if you understand it's about green and nothing else, that's
Speaker 1: what it is. Anyway, I got a news update in here.
Speaker 1: Enough of this more to follow. It's we'll talk to
Speaker 1: Andy Shaffer eleven thirty five. Keep it money related for
Speaker 1: the next hour. Has that because it's a good day
Speaker 1: to think about money. Because if you got a little
Speaker 1: bit on the market, it's just a little bit. You're
Speaker 1: making more. It's a good day. Seven hundred W you
Speaker 1: got futted back on seven hundred WLW welcome to it.
Speaker 1: We'll jump right in with stuff because there's stuff, you know,
Speaker 1: we got stuff. Trumpet administration has decided to ease the
Speaker 1: fuel economy standards know it as a cafe standards for vehicles,
Speaker 1: so roll back. Under Biden, they required a two percent
Speaker 1: annual efficiency and improvement, so two percent annually. They have
Speaker 1: to make better better fiel accountanies, I guess the new
Speaker 1: proposal cuts us back to a half a percent, and
Speaker 1: they're also rolling back the taelpipe emission standards. So the
Speaker 1: question is what does this mean overall for the car
Speaker 1: industry Because cars we've hit American consumers said we're not
Speaker 1: paying more for cars. We have had a breaking point
Speaker 1: in the costing new automobiles.
Speaker 2: What does that do for us?
Speaker 1: Brian Moody is the executive Adam Kelly Bluebook and Auto Trader.
Speaker 2: Welcome Brian hy Ben.
Speaker 4: Yeah, thanks. You're right, that does change things a little bit,
Speaker 4: but I think it could be for the good, even
Speaker 4: though temporarily the headlines are going to be bad.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think in the long term it seems good.
Speaker 1: You know, we have this quest to try and lower
Speaker 1: efficiency start, you know, increase efficiency and how many more
Speaker 1: miles you would drive per gallon tank, and we know
Speaker 1: there's environmental impact there, and that's all well and good,
Speaker 1: but it feels like the screws have really been put
Speaker 1: to the auto industry itself and saying, okay, there's a
Speaker 1: reasonable bound here, but we'ren't in the point of absurdity.
Speaker 4: Right I agree. It turns out the government is a
Speaker 4: terrible automaker, and not just ours, but across the world.
Speaker 4: If you look in Europe, for example, it was government
Speaker 4: that incentivized diesel to the point where that became the
Speaker 4: dominant fuel type across Europle. It turns out that's not
Speaker 4: good for you. So when government is in the position
Speaker 4: of building consumer products, that's not great. And when it
Speaker 4: comes to regulation, I don't think people understand that. They
Speaker 4: understand that good Bettershoel economy is good on one sense,
Speaker 4: so I think we all understand that. But what people
Speaker 4: don't understand is that regulation which leads to needs compliance,
Speaker 4: which costs money, which adds complexity, which adds weight, takes
Speaker 4: away certain things from consumers such as reliability, low cost,
Speaker 4: and you know, the lightweight of the car, which could
Speaker 4: be a safety feature. I guess, for lack of.
Speaker 1: A better word, yeah, understand those masks. But the fact
Speaker 1: of the matter is we, as American consumers, have an
Speaker 1: insatiable demand for trucks and SUVs that's at odds with
Speaker 1: these outdated standards or two aggressive standards I guess under
Speaker 1: the by administration.
Speaker 4: Yes, And here's the thing about trucks, and SUVs. You
Speaker 4: could argue, well, are people buying those because they need
Speaker 4: it or because it's what they want? I don't really know.
Speaker 4: Consumer choice always benefits the consumer. But here's a great
Speaker 4: example of how trucks can become more efficient while also
Speaker 4: serving the consumer's need. For example, there's a Ford pickup
Speaker 4: right now called the Ford Maverick. It's a small pickup truck.
Speaker 4: Well that hasn't been around for very long, of course,
Speaker 4: the name goes way back down to the seventies, but
Speaker 4: the actual vehicle that we have now, the Ford Maverick
Speaker 4: small pickup, has only been around for a few years.
Speaker 4: When they first introduced that, they couldn't make enough of
Speaker 4: those to keep up with demand. So that shows that
Speaker 4: consumers want something that makes sense. It's up to automakers
Speaker 4: to meet them where they are and give them the range,
Speaker 4: the price, the value and reliability they expect.
Speaker 1: I thought I had rare or heard that the Maverick,
Speaker 1: the Ford Maverick is just basically what it's replacing, the
Speaker 1: Ford Escape.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, the Ford Escape is a small suv
Speaker 4: and we may end up seeing hybrid or plug in
Speaker 4: hybrid versions of that in the near future. The thing
Speaker 4: with the Maverick that was so I guess telling is
Speaker 4: that it doesn't have a big VA, it isn't oversized,
Speaker 4: it doesn't cost sixty thousand dollars, it doesn't even cost
Speaker 4: fifty thousand dollars. It's low price. It has some nice features,
Speaker 4: but it arguably has much less capability than say a
Speaker 4: Ford F two fifty, which is probably a special thing
Speaker 4: that some people do need. But the Maverick is a
Speaker 4: great example, and I bet you you'll see others when
Speaker 4: it comes to hybrids and electric counts more right, size
Speaker 4: solutions for what Americans want today.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, you've seen the small pig and I
Speaker 1: guess I don't know what you categorize, but the small
Speaker 1: pickup truck Jeep has a model. It's like every manufacturer's
Speaker 1: rolling out a small pickup truck because they pickup truck.
Speaker 4: Aesthetic, right, Like there's a Hyundai Santa Cruz. You know
Speaker 4: what these cars all remind me of. It's almost like
Speaker 4: everything that's everything that's new, or everything that's old is
Speaker 4: new again. These small pickups like the Hyundai Santa Cruz
Speaker 4: and the Fort Maverick and some of the ones that
Speaker 4: you mentioned, what they kind of remind me of as
Speaker 4: a Chevy El Camino. It's small car base, right, not
Speaker 4: the Jeep, but the other ones are car based, better
Speaker 4: fuel economy, and it occasionally helps you do some utility
Speaker 4: tasks that you might need or might not need. But
Speaker 4: meanwhile you can drive it around every day comfortably.
Speaker 1: It can't belong before bring the station wagon back. You
Speaker 1: think that's gonna happen.
Speaker 4: I'm hoping because here's what I've noticed, and I'm this
Speaker 4: is only anecdotal. My own kids, who recently became driving age,
Speaker 4: have said nobody wants those big SUVs because it's too
Speaker 4: hard to judge where you are and when you're learning
Speaker 4: how to drive. They both kids said they prefer a
Speaker 4: small sedan or a hatchback. Well, SUVs replaced all those cars.
Speaker 4: So what's going to happen when these younger people move
Speaker 4: into the place where they're like, I don't want SUVs.
Speaker 4: They don't want SUV's because why we didn't want station wagons.
Speaker 4: That's my mom drives.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, And eventually we'll come back like trucker
Speaker 1: hats and fanny packs. He's Brian Moody. He's the executive
Speaker 1: editor of Auto Trader and Kelly Bluebook talking about Trump's
Speaker 1: and the Trump administrations cut on cafe standards, which environmentals
Speaker 1: are gnashing their teeth over. But I think it's a
Speaker 1: good business simply because it's so hard for Detroit or
Speaker 1: all automatic American automakers, for manner doesn't have to be
Speaker 1: Detroit to try and keep up with that kind of stuff,
Speaker 1: And it totally does not mesh with what consumers demand,
Speaker 1: which are more trucks and SUVs and even smaller pickup
Speaker 1: trucks and SUVs for that matter. Do we also have
Speaker 1: to talk about evs. I was blown away when I
Speaker 1: traveled this summer to Australia the number of Chinese evs
Speaker 1: that are on the market as ubers there, and I
Speaker 1: thought the fit and finish looked pretty good in most cases,
Speaker 1: sometimes maybe not so much. But how much a threat
Speaker 1: is that to our market here?
Speaker 4: It's a big threat. That's how economic weapons work. I mean,
Speaker 4: they use their advantage to drive the price down, and
Speaker 4: they have working conditions and things in other parts of
Speaker 4: the world we wouldn't have here. But in other parts
Speaker 4: of the world they don't go by those same rules.
Speaker 4: Undercut the price of what's there and introduce it to
Speaker 4: a market and then you can drive the other people
Speaker 4: out of business. That's called an economic weapon. The idea
Speaker 4: that people would want these cars is not surprising because
Speaker 4: they're good, but there has to be some kind of
Speaker 4: protection all over the world, not just in the US,
Speaker 4: to make sure that it's living up to the standards
Speaker 4: that we all hold amongst ourselves in terms of where
Speaker 4: are the materials come from, how is it built, and
Speaker 4: who's building.
Speaker 1: It well as we relax cafe standards for internal combusting engines.
Speaker 1: It looks like to me, and again it's a brief sample.
Speaker 1: You tell me, Brian, the global market continues to prioritize electrification.
Speaker 1: Is that kind of put us at a disadvantage in
Speaker 1: the next I don't know, within the next ten years maybe.
Speaker 4: But here's the thing, more realistic goals would be helpful.
Speaker 4: No one's going No one's arguing that, you know, oh,
Speaker 4: electric cars are going to go away. That's not true.
Speaker 4: I think if most people, the average American, if they
Speaker 4: were to drive an electric car, they would like it. Yep.
Speaker 4: Now that means there's other things that have to be
Speaker 4: solved though. What about the price, what about the durability,
Speaker 4: what about the resale value. What about where I charge
Speaker 4: it up? It's perfect for people to have their own home,
Speaker 4: because that's about eighty percent of people that have electric
Speaker 4: cars charge them up at home. What about everybody else? Right,
Speaker 4: it's not the car that's necessarily the issue. It's a
Speaker 4: lot of other things that go into it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, if I live in a metro city like Cincinnati
Speaker 1: and I don't have a garage, I don't have access
Speaker 1: to that. How do I charge my electric vehicle? I
Speaker 1: need a traditional internal combustion engine at least, so we
Speaker 1: solve that. But again, the market will decide that.
Speaker 4: Right, the market should always decide these things. One thing
Speaker 4: that's a misnomer that I've heard often with electric cars
Speaker 4: is there's an argument that presumes that people who live
Speaker 4: in apartments or in mixed use housing. Let's say they
Speaker 4: don't want electric cars because they're too expensive, and the
Speaker 4: reason they're living in an apartment is because that's what
Speaker 4: they can afford. That's not true. There's many, many people
Speaker 4: in many cities across the country that choose to live
Speaker 4: in apartments, townhouses, or condos because that's what suits their
Speaker 4: lifestyle best. Not everyone wants to mow yard on a Saturday.
Speaker 4: Not everybody wants that. They just want come home. I
Speaker 4: have a place to go. It's all taken care of.
Speaker 4: And that's the thing that we need to solve next
Speaker 4: for how do you charge those things up? Also, there's
Speaker 4: just a mechanism of how long it takes to charge.
Speaker 4: If you need ten gas pumps, you probably need thirty
Speaker 4: charging stations based on the duration of time it takes
Speaker 4: to quote fill up your tank with an electric car.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it makes sense.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you drive several hundred miles, for example,
Speaker 1: you road trip it, you're going to have to plan
Speaker 1: out how long and where you stop. It's going to
Speaker 1: take more time to get from point A to point
Speaker 1: B driving a electric you can do much more on
Speaker 1: a hybrid, which seems to also have fallen out of favors.
Speaker 1: And I mean my son has a hybrid, he's had
Speaker 1: one for years. He loves it. He's getting like ninety
Speaker 1: nine miles of the gallon and when it's not charged,
Speaker 1: the internal combustion engine kicks in. It seems like a
Speaker 1: fair trade. Why did that fallow the favor.
Speaker 4: Well, because I think a lot of it is marketing.
Speaker 4: I think a lot of it is headline grabbing. But
Speaker 4: I think twenty twenty six will be the year of
Speaker 4: the hybrid. I really do think that people have kind
Speaker 4: of come to terms with the taxpayer funded incentive for
Speaker 4: EV's is gone. The cars at current state are relatively expensive,
Speaker 4: about fifty eight thousand dollars on average. Hybrids are much
Speaker 4: more affordable, and you have brands like Towyta that are
Speaker 4: moving to almost all hybrids. All of their cars either
Speaker 4: can be had as hybrids or in some cases like
Speaker 4: the Sienna and the Camera and the Crown, that's the
Speaker 4: only way it comes. So we're moving to a point
Speaker 4: when you look at Twitter like as a leader in
Speaker 4: this area, right, they're moving to a point where it's
Speaker 4: not a choice about getting a hybrid, it's just going
Speaker 4: to come that way, and the way they operate is normal.
Speaker 4: For the most part. They've changed. Listen, anybody out there
Speaker 4: who's thought, oh, I was going to get a hybrid
Speaker 4: fifteen years ago, but they're terrible to drive. You've got
Speaker 4: to drive one today, they're much much better.
Speaker 1: Yeah, technology improves, I mean in EVS. I drove a
Speaker 1: Tesla a few years ago and it was an incredible experience.
Speaker 1: You know, you're driving a computer, self driving computer for
Speaker 1: that matter. That technology is only going to get better.
Speaker 1: But I still think we I think hybrid bridge is
Speaker 1: a gap for a long time. I'm to Thomas Brian
Speaker 1: Moody over Kelly Bluebook and Auto Trader talking about Trump
Speaker 1: relaxing the cafe standards, which is great for manufacturers. It's
Speaker 1: also great for consumers as well. We going to see
Speaker 1: prices level off, if not drop because of this.
Speaker 6: We may.
Speaker 4: But here's the thing about any kind of those predictions.
Speaker 4: The cycle where automakers planned and developed and research vehicles
Speaker 4: is much longer than a year or two. It's more
Speaker 4: like six to eight years. So the few economy standards
Speaker 4: that we have now, yeah, there's a few things they
Speaker 4: can do in the short term, but planning, long term planning,
Speaker 4: And this is probably a point where what President Trump
Speaker 4: has done might be a disadvantage because the back and
Speaker 4: forth can be hard on the automaker being able to
Speaker 4: plan out their product portfolio long term. So it would
Speaker 4: be better to have a middle ground and just say, hey,
Speaker 4: we all agree, let's just keep it this way for
Speaker 4: the next twelve years. That would be better than up
Speaker 4: and down out in the short term.
Speaker 1: I guess get more granular here, Brian, what's the actual
Speaker 1: production cost difference between meeting the old two percent standard
Speaker 1: versus the half a percent standard per vehicle? How much
Speaker 1: does that shave off a car any idea.
Speaker 4: I don't know how much it shaves off a car
Speaker 4: in terms of production, but I know that it does
Speaker 4: reduce the cost of building cars in terms of compliance.
Speaker 4: For example, I spoke to this. This is some time ago.
Speaker 4: I spoke to an executive at the company Renault, which
Speaker 4: is a French company, and one of the reasons they
Speaker 4: stopped making one of their cars with a certain power
Speaker 4: train I think it was a diesel powered subcompact. They said,
Speaker 4: we can't make money on this car because thirty percent
Speaker 4: of the cost is compliant. So any kind you hear
Speaker 4: an additional piece of equipment being added or standards being changed,
Speaker 4: there's a cost for compliance. There's a cost for testing
Speaker 4: in addition to the actual production of the car. Let alone,
Speaker 4: whether or not you decreased drivability or reliability.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's what we'll set that aside. That's an interesting
Speaker 1: perspective from them too. But the other element here too is, Okay,
Speaker 1: we don't have the ev incentives anymore, so, you know,
Speaker 1: no more bellouts for EV and relaxed standards. What happens
Speaker 1: with market share relative to EV's and it's not hybrids
Speaker 1: but just electric vehicles over the next let's say, five
Speaker 1: to eight years, I.
Speaker 4: Think they're going to level off at a certain there's
Speaker 4: there's going to be a point where it's going to
Speaker 4: feel comfortable as part of the market, maybe ten percent,
Speaker 4: let's say. However, I think that the elimination of the rebates,
Speaker 4: the taxpayer funded incentives for electric cars, I think that's
Speaker 4: going to be good for electric cars in the long run.
Speaker 1: What about the sun costs that all automakers have gotten
Speaker 1: into with evs, and now that we're backing off of that,
Speaker 1: what happens with that?
Speaker 4: That's hard. They're going to have to make some adjustments,
Speaker 4: and we already see companies like Volvo, for example, maybe
Speaker 4: walking it back a little bit. And rather than saying, hey,
Speaker 4: we're going to force an ideological solution onto the consumer,
Speaker 4: they have recently said we're going to let consumer demand
Speaker 4: dictate what we do. So full electric by a certain
Speaker 4: time okay, maybe, but they're not going to artificially set
Speaker 4: those times. They're going to let like you had said before,
Speaker 4: let the market decide. That's always going to work out
Speaker 4: best for the company and for the consumer, because what
Speaker 4: do we pick. We all picked the thing that we
Speaker 4: like best that we can afford.
Speaker 1: Okay, But then, logically speaking, three years from now, let's
Speaker 1: say a Democrat gets elected. Does this all get wiped
Speaker 1: out and we start over again? And how do you
Speaker 1: plan that far ahead, if at all, If you're an
Speaker 1: auto manufacturer or tell a car.
Speaker 4: Dealer, that's a risk. I mean, that's definitely a risk.
Speaker 4: And some could argue that's a weak point in the system,
Speaker 4: that it's too prone to partisan back and forth. It
Speaker 4: would be better to have a middle ground that just said, hey,
Speaker 4: here's a good number for a fuel economy. Let's all agree.
Speaker 4: Let's have like a cross party committee that can just
Speaker 4: agree that this is a number and not politicize it.
Speaker 4: Because most cars today, like the average car, you can
Speaker 4: get a car that's gackling only not a hybrid that
Speaker 4: can get forty miles per gallon on the highway. That
Speaker 4: was unheard of twenty years ago, right.
Speaker 1: Because of well, how much of that is innovation and
Speaker 1: how much of that is government? In that Hey, as
Speaker 1: soon as gas prices go up, people start selling their
Speaker 1: evs and cars and get more fuel efficient things. We
Speaker 1: have another oil prices. Everyone wants an EV or something
Speaker 1: that's going to get more miles to the gown. The
Speaker 1: minute it starts to go back down, we go back,
Speaker 1: whipsaw back to the other things. And that's well, again,
Speaker 1: that's a consumer demand in the thickleness that we have there.
Speaker 2: But I think it's.
Speaker 4: Valid, right, But consumers don't want a twelve mile per
Speaker 4: gallon car and the generation to go or less. That
Speaker 4: was not an unusual thing. Today, people expect their car
Speaker 4: to get reasonable fuel economy, add hybrid to it, and
Speaker 4: like you said, I personally drove a plug in ibridge
Speaker 4: for three months. This won't happen to be a Volvo.
Speaker 4: I've got seventy five to eighty miles per gallon plugging
Speaker 4: it in every day, so I know that's possible. And
Speaker 4: I think what happens is the fuel economy ads convenience.
Speaker 4: You now have cars, especially hybrids, with a driving range
Speaker 4: of five or six hundred miles. That is a lifestyle changer.
Speaker 4: When I hear people with electric cars or who are
Speaker 4: electric car proponents say well, on a long trip, it
Speaker 4: only takes an extra forty five minutes to charge up.
Speaker 4: That's true, it does only take an extra forty five
Speaker 4: minutes to charge up. But that sounds like someone who
Speaker 4: doesn't have toddlers.
Speaker 1: Yeah, right, exactly, and we'll leave it at that again.
Speaker 1: Brian Moody Kelly Bluebook in the Auto Trader, he's the
Speaker 1: executive editor there. So I think this is a great thing.
Speaker 1: Quite honestly, is getting a little bit more common sense
Speaker 1: back in manufacturers will thus they'll be incentive for them
Speaker 1: to reduce an increased fuel efficiency in the future. It's
Speaker 1: not like simply it's going to go well twelve miles
Speaker 1: a gall and we won't stand for that anymore. It's
Speaker 1: all about consumer demand, not what the government wants. And
Speaker 1: this one makes sense to me. Brian, all the best,
Speaker 1: thanks for jumping on this morning.
Speaker 4: Thank you beautiful day.
Speaker 2: Edd.
Speaker 1: Speak of weatherwise, we're gonna push maybe mid fifties today.
Speaker 1: By this time next week we could see sixty the
Speaker 1: big six to oz incredible full forecast in the Way
Speaker 1: Traffic News and when a return, we'll keep it money
Speaker 1: with Andy Schaeffer from all Worth Financial on that and more.
Speaker 1: Just ahead seven hundred WLW time to talk.
Speaker 4: About money, how to make it, how to keep it,
Speaker 4: and how to keep others off your stash.
Speaker 1: This is all Worth Advice with Andy Shaeffer. Yeah's time
Speaker 1: we'll talk a well cash money. He is the cash
Speaker 1: money player. The Minister of Money is Andy Shaeffer. Joining
Speaker 1: us from all Worth Financial this morning on seven hundred
Speaker 1: WW Scott's Loan Show, Little Tuesday Morning check at a
Speaker 1: case and last week ended pretty damn well with the
Speaker 1: Dow Jones closing about fifty thousand dollars for the first
Speaker 1: time ever. Although I'm told that is the old person's index,
Speaker 1: a younger people, younger investors don't give a damn about
Speaker 1: the Dow.
Speaker 6: Andy Schaeffer, Well, I'm not exactly a young person, so
Speaker 6: I kind of care about it. And I mean it
Speaker 6: did it hit fifty thousand on Friday, which was great.
Speaker 6: You know, I celebrated Friday night because I remember when
Speaker 6: I started in this business out in Denver, Colorado, back
Speaker 6: in nineteen ninety nine, it was around nine or ten thousand.
Speaker 6: So you know, that tells you immediately that if you
Speaker 6: just stay the course and have some strategies in place
Speaker 6: to navigate volatility, you know you're gonna come out on
Speaker 6: the other side looking pretty good. And so yeah, fifty
Speaker 6: thousand was a big deal to me. You know, usually
Speaker 6: when you talk about the markets and how the markets
Speaker 6: are performing, I think the S and P five hundreds
Speaker 6: is a little bit better gauge. You have five hundred
Speaker 6: of the largest US companies compared to the Dallas thirty.
Speaker 6: But it was still an exciting day and I certainly
Speaker 6: celebrated Friday night because I think that's a big deal.
Speaker 1: With well, like a ten thousand dollars bottle of wine.
Speaker 6: Yeah, well, you know, we had a good time.
Speaker 1: I mean, I saw Street. I know what happens in
Speaker 1: those limos.
Speaker 2: Amount of money.
Speaker 6: Well, and I think you know, a lot of people
Speaker 6: have made a lot of money over the last three years.
Speaker 6: If you've been invested and didn't panic during the terrorists
Speaker 6: last April, made some adjustments to your portfolio, there's a
Speaker 6: lot of people that have made a lot of money
Speaker 6: over the last three years. And you know, hopefully everybody's
Speaker 6: continuing to participate. You know, our data right now is
Speaker 6: fairly stable, So hang in there. I think there are
Speaker 6: still brighter days to come.
Speaker 1: Yeah, as Cube said, it was a good day. That's
Speaker 1: right at the same time we got fifty thousand the Dow.
Speaker 1: We also saw a little bit how AI can disrupt markets.
Speaker 6: Oh yeah, so AI was interesting last week. You know
Speaker 6: that at one point there was a venture capitalist that
Speaker 6: said that software is eating the work, eating the world.
Speaker 6: And he said that back in twenty and eleven, and
Speaker 6: and what he meant by that was that, you know,
Speaker 6: when we have this new technology, it can make other
Speaker 6: technology a little bit obsolete. And one of the things
Speaker 6: that he said was, you know, the emerging cloud computing
Speaker 6: capabilities and the ability to scale infrastructure with low upfront costs,
Speaker 6: you know, can have a big impact on our general
Speaker 6: production and the way that we do business. And so
Speaker 6: you know, if you fast forward to today, there's some
Speaker 6: fear that AI is kind of doing the same to software.
Speaker 6: And some of that was evident last week when you
Speaker 6: saw Anthropodict showcase some of the new features in It's
Speaker 6: in its cloud agent that basically can handle a lot
Speaker 6: of the complex workflows that you would have with your
Speaker 6: basic CRMs. You know, we use Salesforce here at all
Speaker 6: Worth Financial, and I do love that CRM. But what
Speaker 6: you're starting to see is is that some of these
Speaker 6: AI capabilities you know, can solve a lot of these
Speaker 6: workflows a lot more efficiently than what we see with
Speaker 6: General CRM. So there's some concern there.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 6: I don't think that this is going to you know,
Speaker 6: change the way that we do business overnight or make
Speaker 6: the software obsolete, but there has to be a transition
Speaker 6: on the end user companies to attempt to kind of
Speaker 6: recreate some of those types of AI approaches, and so
Speaker 6: that's something that has a lot of investors concern generally speaking,
Speaker 6: and I think there could be over time some pressure
Speaker 6: on that industry. But you know, it's you have to be.
Speaker 1: Seen, okay, Yeah, and it's it's all changing, its intermingling
Speaker 1: and those things across I guess it. So at some point,
Speaker 1: maybe AI companies become traded on the Dow and then
Speaker 1: the young people who hate the Dow will and lean
Speaker 1: into it because they're older and that's where the money
Speaker 1: is it's more stable. So that's right. It just trickles up.
Speaker 2: It's just I mean, you look at it throughout history.
Speaker 6: You know, when we were in the nineteen twenties and
Speaker 6: nineteen thirties, you know, we had mostly an industrial type
Speaker 6: of economy, you know, general Electric used to be on
Speaker 6: the Dow. They're not on the Dow anymore. And so
Speaker 6: you know, when you when you look at the way
Speaker 6: that we transition from a society where it used to
Speaker 6: be manufacturing was the driver to how you know, our
Speaker 6: total output as far as GDP was more important than
Speaker 6: the services industry. Well, that is flipped on its head.
Speaker 6: You know, now the services industry is way more important
Speaker 6: than our manufacturing industry, and you just have to be
Speaker 6: willing to adapt.
Speaker 1: Okay, very good, that's the volatility. Where at the Dow,
Speaker 1: things are looking good. Everything's holding steady. Right now, Let's
Speaker 1: talk about that job market. The January jobs report laid
Speaker 1: because of the mini meltdown that Congress had last week,
Speaker 1: but there's plenty of labor market data to decipher.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 1: What do we have?
Speaker 6: Yeah, so the January jobs report was delayed last week.
Speaker 6: We're actually going to get those numbers tomorrow, so that
Speaker 6: will be interesting. Yeah, we're looking at kind of lukewarm report,
Speaker 6: maybe seventy thousand new jobs added. I think unemployment might
Speaker 6: hold study at about four point four percent. But we
Speaker 6: did get some some data last week, the Jolts Report,
Speaker 6: which we like to call to take this job and
Speaker 6: Shove it report where if you have a job and
Speaker 6: you're actively seeking another job, and so you know, that
Speaker 6: gives us an indication of how much availability in jobs
Speaker 6: that are out there. And we saw that they fell
Speaker 6: sharply and December at about six point five million, and
Speaker 6: that was its lowest level. So it's twenty twenty. The
Speaker 6: ratio of job openings to unemployed workers further fell below one,
Speaker 6: So that kind of signaled a hiring demand and wage
Speaker 6: pressure are easing a little bit. And so you know,
Speaker 6: when we flip that towards the FED, you know, the
Speaker 6: FED is thinking at this point, well, if we continue
Speaker 6: to see you know, more stress in the labor market
Speaker 6: than things starting to cool down, that might allow them
Speaker 6: to cut rates even further. So we'll see how that goes.
Speaker 1: Now, we saw jobless numbers go up, though.
Speaker 6: Yeah, jobs claims rose from two hundred and nine thousand
Speaker 6: to two hundred and thirty one. Some of that might
Speaker 6: be seasonal around the MLK holiday than a sudden deterioration,
Speaker 6: but I do think, you know, we did have this
Speaker 6: data that came out which is the Challenger Jobs cuts,
Speaker 6: and what that means is that a lot of these
Speaker 6: large companies have to announce cuts before they make them.
Speaker 6: If you have certain meat, certain criteria as far as
Speaker 6: the size of your company and the revenue that you have,
Speaker 6: you actually have to give a heads up, you know,
Speaker 6: from a public standpoint, about what you're planning to do.
Speaker 6: And so we saw those ers to over one hundred
Speaker 6: and eight thousand in January, so that was about a
Speaker 6: over one hundred percent increase year over year. Now a
Speaker 6: lot of that has to do with three of the
Speaker 6: major companies on the S and P five hundred, Ups
Speaker 6: which is about thirty thousand, Amazon about six, and now
Speaker 6: Chemical which is about four point five. So I think
Speaker 6: this is a little bit more concentrated as opposed to
Speaker 6: a more wide ranging issue when we move forward.
Speaker 1: Really interesting too, Okay, So yeah, job as a go to,
Speaker 1: I guess the thing is, I'm looking at the Dow
Speaker 1: when people always connected wrongly. So, but what's going on
Speaker 1: Wall Street and mainstream at the jobs? Okay, so it's
Speaker 1: hard to find Why is it so hard to find
Speaker 1: a job?
Speaker 2: Do you know?
Speaker 4: What I do know?
Speaker 6: And so what we're looking at now is there's still
Speaker 6: uncertainty out there manufacturing, even though we got a positive
Speaker 6: report from the Ism Services for the first time in
Speaker 6: a year. It's still wavering a little bit. And so
Speaker 6: a lot of times what you're looking at is from
Speaker 6: a corporate standpoint, when you go to the c suite
Speaker 6: and they're trying to make decisions as far as payroll
Speaker 6: is concerned, is that they're happy with the employers that
Speaker 6: they have. They're basically holding steady. We still don't have
Speaker 6: full clarity on the impact of tariffs. We still don't
Speaker 6: have deals done with China, Canada and Mexico, and so
Speaker 6: instead of hiring more to begin to ramp up for
Speaker 6: more production, a lot of companies are holding steady. Now
Speaker 6: that doesn't necessarily mean that they're making cuts. But if
Speaker 6: you have a job right now, it's like that you'll
Speaker 6: keep a job. But if you don't, it's going to
Speaker 6: be harder. And I did see a report from economists
Speaker 6: not too long ago, particularly college graduates are having a
Speaker 6: difficult time to find a job. And so you know,
Speaker 6: when I'm explaining what's going on from a corporate standpoint,
Speaker 6: this is more about white collar jobs and it is
Speaker 6: about blue collar jobs. They're hard to find. What companies
Speaker 6: are looking for, if they do hire, is usually somebody
Speaker 6: with experience that has specific, specific talents that are able
Speaker 6: to help them get you know, pass of certain goals
Speaker 6: that they have as opposed to training new people out
Speaker 6: of school. So it's really hard right now for college
Speaker 6: graduates that are coming out now. Blue collar jobs are available,
Speaker 6: so they're to be had, and I'm a big support
Speaker 6: of the trades. You know, it's particularly for young people.
Speaker 6: It's an easy and fast way to begin a career
Speaker 6: that can be very successful in rewarding, and you can
Speaker 6: make good money doing it. So it really just kind
Speaker 6: of depends on the industry that you're looking at. When
Speaker 6: people say it's hard to find a job, it just
Speaker 6: kind of depends on the demographic.
Speaker 1: I think schools are leading into it. Earlier the week
Speaker 1: I had on the present, Miami University talking about that
Speaker 1: new thirty one million dollar tech center that they have
Speaker 1: up there right advanced Manufacturing. They partner you know, they
Speaker 1: partner with Butler Tech. They partner with companies to basically
Speaker 1: create a workforce. And I think University of looking at
Speaker 1: this and going, hey, you know what, the old model,
Speaker 1: the way we taught for your degree, that's not working
Speaker 1: a lot of areas. We got to lean into this
Speaker 1: the workforce development thing, and we got to get people
Speaker 1: interested in manufacturing.
Speaker 6: Again.
Speaker 1: It's all high tech. It's not like the factories of old.
Speaker 1: For sure, the money are really good, but it's good
Speaker 1: to see the educational system, in particular Miami lean into
Speaker 1: this thing.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 6: I actually heard that that was a great interview too.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you, I appreciate it.
Speaker 6: You're pretty good at your job. But yeah, that was
Speaker 6: that was awesome. And one of the things that I
Speaker 6: took away from that was he was talking about, you know,
Speaker 6: you can start a career there, and you can get
Speaker 6: high school students to get involved there as well and
Speaker 6: merge with a lot of the college students. They can
Speaker 6: earn credits, and furthermore, it's not you know, you're there
Speaker 6: for two years or you're there for four years, and
Speaker 6: then you move on to your career and they never
Speaker 6: see again. One of the things I found fascinating about
Speaker 6: your interview was that he's like, he said that, hey,
Speaker 6: you can keep coming back and continue to add credentials
Speaker 6: and continue to add skills and those type of things,
Speaker 6: and I thought that was neat. The other thing that
Speaker 6: stood out to me was when he was explaining about
Speaker 6: what work looks like in factories these days. And I
Speaker 6: have a client that was an executive at Schneider Electric
Speaker 6: down at Lexington, and I went down to visit his
Speaker 6: factory and had a meeting with them. When you go
Speaker 6: in some of these factories these days, they are spotless.
Speaker 6: I mean they're run very well. They take the very
Speaker 6: specific precautions about cleanliness and efficiency. I mean you have
Speaker 6: to you know, mask up and put boots on, you know,
Speaker 6: like slippers and clean Oh my gosh, it's amazing. And
Speaker 6: the efficiency and the technology that's involved with it. It's
Speaker 6: not like it was back in the thirties or forties,
Speaker 6: where you have Greece and the place and you know,
Speaker 6: and you're hammering and all that kind of we still
Speaker 6: battle that. Yeah, it's it's completely different. So, yeah, that
Speaker 6: interview was great. And then you know, it just goes
Speaker 6: to show you that people are not forgetting about the trades,
Speaker 6: particularly Miami University, and they put money into it, and
Speaker 6: that facility up there in Butler County is amazing. So
Speaker 6: I'm really looking forward to seeing how that all plays
Speaker 6: out up there, because I think that's pretty exciting.
Speaker 1: I mean, taking a little paper million you made a
Speaker 1: huge investment there, and I think it's gonna it's gonna
Speaker 1: pay dividends for the future of the workforce. So you know,
Speaker 1: there are jobs out there we just got to get.
Speaker 1: It's also the mind changes that we talked about too,
Speaker 1: is you know that the people, and largely it's influenced
Speaker 1: by mom and Dad and Graham and Grandpa, that it's
Speaker 1: a greasy, grimy job and you know you're gonna get
Speaker 1: hurt and your disability and it's like yeah, and then
Speaker 1: you walk into a place to go, wow, this is manufacturing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it looks like a lab where they would make microchips.
Speaker 1: That's right, you know, and it's it's as safe as
Speaker 1: as possibly can be. You know, the robots and the
Speaker 1: like are doing the that that kind of dangerous work,
Speaker 1: and you kind of supervise. But I'm not saying it's
Speaker 1: it's you know, just watching machines run all day, not
Speaker 1: at all. It certainly involves a skill level, for sure,
Speaker 1: but you know to think that somehow it's it's degrading
Speaker 1: work and you walk into go wow, so are you
Speaker 1: like an engineer? It feels like it right, it's advanced podcast.
Speaker 6: Well that's really the titles of a lot of those workers.
Speaker 6: You know, I was I was walking around freely, and
Speaker 6: they have some very specific skills to be able to
Speaker 6: run these machines. And these machines are you know, hundreds
Speaker 6: of tons, and it's just amazing to watch these workers
Speaker 6: and the delicate balance that they play of operating these
Speaker 6: machines and the efficiency and it's kind of a it's
Speaker 6: a calmer environment. You know, a lot of these workers
Speaker 6: that have their headphones on, they're interacting with each other.
Speaker 6: You can make a good wage at these places. So
Speaker 6: you know, I would encourage young people to consider, you know,
Speaker 6: you work in the trades and you know, in blue
Speaker 6: collar industries because it's not like it was fifty years ago.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: So anyway that's going to make and Hamilton, I'm sure
Speaker 1: that's going to be replicated anywhere. Yeah, it's going to
Speaker 1: be really really good. So there are jobs there, it's
Speaker 1: just again look finding the ones that that most people
Speaker 1: turn their nose up at it. Why he would because
Speaker 1: that's a really really good, playing to paying job. So
Speaker 1: I'll say today snapshot, we talked about the market and
Speaker 1: the now hitting fifty thousand AI being a disruptor. Jobs
Speaker 1: where to find him and what's going on in the
Speaker 1: week between now when we next talk on Tuesday.
Speaker 6: Yeah, we have some data that I have my on obviously,
Speaker 6: the jobs report tomorrow, you know, that's that's a big one.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 6: We're also going to get the CPI index, which is
Speaker 6: the Consumer Price index that is a measure of inflation.
Speaker 6: That's going to be on Friday. Thursday. We're going to
Speaker 6: get existing home sales. I think that, you know, I
Speaker 6: can continue to watch home sales, building permits, things like that,
Speaker 6: and I know you're interested in that too, Scott. And
Speaker 6: I think that as rates continue to come down, you know,
Speaker 6: this might loosen up the housing market quite a bit.
Speaker 6: You know, it's likely that we're going to see at
Speaker 6: least one cut this year, probably in June maybe two.
Speaker 6: But I think if we start to get mortgage rates
Speaker 6: into the fives, I think that will really shake things loose,
Speaker 6: to encourage people to start moving around a little bit.
Speaker 6: So as the year progresses, you know, I think that
Speaker 6: will happen. And we're going to get those numbers on Thursday,
Speaker 6: So I'm interested in that as well. Quick question, Yeah,
Speaker 6: where's gold today? Gold this morning is somewhere around six thousand.
Speaker 6: Let's see, it's at five seventy seven, so it's down
Speaker 6: quite a bit from its ties. You know when we
Speaker 6: talked about three weeks ago and you gave me the
Speaker 6: business because I wasn't a big fan of it, and
Speaker 6: then all of a sudden it went down about a
Speaker 6: thousand points. And I think gold is still high. I mean,
Speaker 6: there's a lot of value there. And the reason that
Speaker 6: it started to come back to reality was is, you know,
Speaker 6: there's some you know, more technical issues that are involved
Speaker 6: with it, with futures contracts and margin calls and things
Speaker 6: like that. But it's a steady hedge against inflation, and
Speaker 6: when you continue to see inflation come down, it becomes
Speaker 6: a less attractive area to put your money. You know,
Speaker 6: gold is fine. I don't have anything against it, but
Speaker 6: as a long term investment, I don't think that's your
Speaker 6: best option.
Speaker 1: Okay, so what about these gold medals. I'm an Olympian.
Speaker 1: I want to unload one of these gold medals? How
Speaker 1: much checking get?
Speaker 6: Well? I think, you know, and what I can tell
Speaker 6: I think the golden medals are about you know, six
Speaker 6: grams or something like that, and so you know, if
Speaker 6: you get.
Speaker 1: What's that an American.
Speaker 6: Yeah, you know, somebody mentioned kilogram the other day. I
Speaker 6: don't know if that's eight pounds or one hundred at
Speaker 6: one point, but I think you know, with a you know,
Speaker 6: six gram of gold, a mouse about a thousand bucks.
Speaker 6: And so if you if you win a silver medal,
Speaker 6: you're probably looking at you know, for the price of
Speaker 6: the medal, you're probably looking at somewhere around eighty dollars.
Speaker 6: Bronze medal, you're probably looking at something about six dollars.
Speaker 6: But that's not why these athletes are out there. It's
Speaker 6: they're not out there for you know, winning a medal
Speaker 6: and turning it in at a pawn shop. They're there
Speaker 6: for you know, the glory of their country and doing
Speaker 6: it for their families, and you know, for competition and achievement.
Speaker 6: And I'm a big fan of the Olympics, and I've
Speaker 6: been keeping up with it and I can expect I'll
Speaker 6: continue to watch throughout the weekend.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, Okay, all the semantics and
Speaker 1: that it's a thousand bucks. A thousand bucks. It's like
Speaker 1: a carping. Yeah, because I'm thinking of unloading my old
Speaker 1: medals and maybe I'll just hold on them.
Speaker 6: I don't know. You know, I think if we gave
Speaker 6: you six months, you might be able to make the
Speaker 6: curling team.
Speaker 1: Listen, I might multiple you know, if farting were an
Speaker 1: Olympic sports schaeffer, I would be. I'd be the Michael Phelps. Anyway,
Speaker 1: He's Andy Schaeffer at all Worth Financial every Tuesday morning
Speaker 1: week chopping up with your money. And it was a
Speaker 1: good week. Let's let's make it two in a row.
Speaker 2: Andy, all the best.
Speaker 6: That sounds good, Scott.
Speaker 1: Hay care man, appreciate you so much. Let me get
Speaker 1: a news update in Willie is standing by afterwards here
Speaker 1: on the Big One. As we start to cross the
Speaker 1: fifty degree threshold today, where so we're close to it,
Speaker 1: some people are saying, like, hey, maybe forty eight forty
Speaker 1: nine catch marks is like fifty five. Hope she's right.
Speaker 1: Meant a little of the snow out. I just hope.
Speaker 1: I just hope your basement stays dry. That's all Sloany.
Speaker 1: Home of the Reds Pitchers and catchers reporting yesterday there
Speaker 1: at Goodyear seven hundred WWT, Cincinnati,