Speaker 1: This is the most traumatic podcast ever and iHeartRadio podcast.
Speaker 1: Chris Harrison and laurenz Eva coming to you from the
Speaker 1: home office in Austin, Texas. We are back together. Both
Speaker 1: of us were gone this weekend. I was in Vegas
Speaker 1: helping MC and host the Jeremy Renner his Renter Foundation
Speaker 1: for foster kids that he helps in Nevada and Hawkeuy
Speaker 1: and the mayor a little bit more for the mayor
Speaker 1: of Kingstown. I was geeking out a little bit, hanging
Speaker 1: out with the mayor and he was packing heat all weekend.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you, it was wild. He's he rolls around
Speaker 1: like the mayor now and just putting people down. No
Speaker 1: he wasn't You said he was so nice. No, he's
Speaker 1: the nicest guy. He's good looking, he's smart.
Speaker 2: Do you have a crush on Jeremy Runner.
Speaker 1: No, it made me mad. It's like you, you know,
Speaker 1: when you meet celebrities like that, Because so I had
Speaker 1: never met Jeremy. I was brought into MC this event
Speaker 1: and it was fantastic, and I had heard wonderful things
Speaker 1: about him, which is why I agreed to do it,
Speaker 1: and then I I spent time with him. But what
Speaker 1: really struck me is before I met Jeremy. His I
Speaker 1: think future brother in law picked me up at the airport.
Speaker 1: His niece was in the car with me. I met
Speaker 1: his sister who's the president of the foundation. His mom
Speaker 1: was there, and he adores his family. They're all very
Speaker 1: tight and everybody's involved in this. It was all hands
Speaker 1: on deck and it was just like okay, like this
Speaker 1: is a family event. And he really relished that. So
Speaker 1: and he's not one of those guys that just didn't
Speaker 1: show to stuff like he was with the kids. He
Speaker 1: really gets involved and so that.
Speaker 2: Speaks volumes, right.
Speaker 3: I think the people who look fame can change you,
Speaker 3: but if you stay grounded in your family and your friends,
Speaker 3: then you can hold on to Yeah.
Speaker 1: And it was a great event that he you know,
Speaker 1: by the way, the concert and this is the for
Speaker 1: the inaugural event. We had a poker tournament, we played
Speaker 1: some golf and all that, and then there was a
Speaker 1: big concert that like mister mister Cool in the Gang
Speaker 1: Cheap Trick, Rob Bass. It was like Robin Thick. But
Speaker 1: it was like my greatest if you if I had
Speaker 1: gone to the Perfect Bar spring break in college music. Oh,
Speaker 1: I was crushing it. Anyway, it was great and it
Speaker 1: was wonderful to meet Jeremy, a couple friends. Makai Pfeiffer
Speaker 1: was there, who I've known for years, such a sweet guy.
Speaker 1: He and his wife. Rob Wriggle are good friend. And
Speaker 1: comedian Richard Kind was there, who he's another one who
Speaker 1: I've just known for years at through events and just
Speaker 1: so there was I'll just tell you one quick story.
Speaker 1: We get done. The event was at the Brooklyn Bowl,
Speaker 1: which is by the link the big carousel whatever there
Speaker 1: in Vegas, and we were staying at the Plazzo. It
Speaker 1: was really only a ten minute walk, so it's not
Speaker 1: worth getting in a car, and so Rob Wriggle, Richard
Speaker 1: Kind and I decide we're just going to walk back
Speaker 1: and you kind of cut through a hotel. We're on
Speaker 1: the strip. You're walking down the strip for about half
Speaker 1: a mile to get to our hotel. We stopped. I
Speaker 1: stopped to get a slice of pizza. So but to
Speaker 1: watch people walk by and to watch the faces is
Speaker 1: I'm staying there with Richard Kine and Rob Wriggle and myself,
Speaker 1: it was just so it was like, are these are
Speaker 1: these lookalikes trying to take it was.
Speaker 3: Really okay, why are how how far have they fallen?
Speaker 2: Why are they walking down the side of the street.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, it was really really funny. But yeah, so
Speaker 1: that's that's how the whole event ended, was us just
Speaker 1: walking down the strip back to our hotel and Richard Kine.
Speaker 1: As much as I love Rob Wriggil, Richard Kine might
Speaker 1: be one of the funniest human beings. That guy can
Speaker 1: deliver a line. Oh wow, he is phenomenal.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to think.
Speaker 3: And I've heard he's, by the way, like a really smart,
Speaker 3: end upth person. I've heard him tell just really incredible
Speaker 3: stories about his upbringing. I think I knew him best
Speaker 3: from He's one of those faces I know. I guess
Speaker 3: I probably knew him from like maybe mad about you.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: He's been in a ton I know his voice.
Speaker 3: He did voices for a Bugs Life and Toy the
Speaker 3: Toy Story, movies and cars.
Speaker 2: That's why I.
Speaker 1: Think he was just in an inside out too as well.
Speaker 1: I think, well, a.
Speaker 3: Big shout out to the Renovation Foundation, Jeremy Renners Foundation,
Speaker 3: and wanted.
Speaker 1: To go in there in Nevada and shout out to Jeremy.
Speaker 1: It was a wonderful new friend to make in my life.
Speaker 1: Now I got.
Speaker 3: Hawkeye on my side, so I'm sorry I wasn't with you,
Speaker 3: but I had to ditch you for a very good reason.
Speaker 3: I want to give a shout out to my little
Speaker 3: sister who has given birth to her first child. She
Speaker 3: had a baby and they live in Florida, so I couldn't.
Speaker 3: I wasn't able to go meet him yet because of
Speaker 3: the hurricane two hurricanes, two hurricanes, So I had intended
Speaker 3: to go to this event with you, but I just
Speaker 3: had to the first moment I was able to congratulations. Well,
Speaker 3: I'm blessed in so lucky to have your nephews from
Speaker 3: your brother obviously Hank and Sam, who are wonderful kids,
Speaker 3: but my first baby, and I'm so I'm just so
Speaker 3: happy for my sister and her husband. He is the
Speaker 3: cutest and he's perfect, and my mom.
Speaker 2: Is so happy.
Speaker 3: Shout out to Donna because.
Speaker 1: For taking the pressure off thing.
Speaker 3: Thank you Christina for yeah finally giving her this gift.
Speaker 3: We were hearing a lot of I'm this age and
Speaker 3: I still don't have a grandchild. So she's just in
Speaker 3: bliss and I got to have a beautiful weekend with
Speaker 3: my mom and sister, and I stayed up with an
Speaker 3: infant for the first time in my life. I experienced
Speaker 3: that because I wanted to help my sister get some sleep,
Speaker 3: so my mom and I took shifts of staying up
Speaker 3: with the baby.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 3: Wow, wow, I get it on the smallest scale. Now,
Speaker 3: I don't know how parents do it. I was thinking,
Speaker 3: how does a single parent do this? If you've got
Speaker 3: to stay up all night with an infant, then you
Speaker 3: have to go to work the next day.
Speaker 1: God bless him, how does a single.
Speaker 2: Parent do this?
Speaker 3: Deep deprivation is used as a torture device, and yet
Speaker 3: it's also how we have to bring the biggest joy
Speaker 3: into our lives, which is having a baby.
Speaker 1: I mean, wow, it should remind us all you never
Speaker 1: know what someone's going through. Just because they show up
Speaker 1: to work and they are dressed and they showered and
Speaker 1: they look normal. You don't know what someone's going through,
Speaker 1: So be kind, be gentle. Do you persure time or
Speaker 1: is it a blur? It is a blur. I remember
Speaker 1: because I was also you know, hosting the show. I
Speaker 1: got the job. I got the Bachelor. When Joshua or
Speaker 1: my son, the oldest was six weeks old. Oh wow.
Speaker 1: So when I started shooting the first season, he wasn't
Speaker 1: even a year old yet. And I remember, honestly, when
Speaker 1: I went into my first meeting, I didn't know this,
Speaker 1: but one of the folks I interviewed with for The
Speaker 1: Bachelor told me later I had spit up on my jacket.
Speaker 1: I had no idea.
Speaker 2: It was kind of amazing that Josh was there with
Speaker 2: you in some way.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I walked in and they were like, I was like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, sorry, I just my son, and I
Speaker 1: think you spit up on me.
Speaker 2: And I didn't know what if that, like got you
Speaker 2: the job did.
Speaker 1: They mentioned it because they what the Bachelor wanted was
Speaker 1: that guy next door, a family man, and they wanted
Speaker 1: an unknown, which is really rare. Usually they want a
Speaker 1: big name, and they wanted a no name that didn't
Speaker 1: seem like a creeper hitting on the girls. And so
Speaker 1: the fact that I was married and had a kid
Speaker 1: was one of the main reasons they brought me in,
Speaker 1: and then the fact probably I had spit up and
Speaker 1: I hadn't slept it was wait.
Speaker 3: I love that because so often it feels like the
Speaker 3: argument is that marriage and children are a hindrance to
Speaker 3: a jib.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think it was. It was eighty percent of
Speaker 1: the reason why even was being talked to because they
Speaker 1: had seen my tape. They'd seen my performance from another
Speaker 1: friend and they said, well, who is he? They said, oh,
Speaker 1: he's good guys from Texas. He's married and has a kid.
Speaker 1: And they're like, oh, great, that's what we're looking for.
Speaker 1: But yeah, so thanks to Joshua spit Up, I probably
Speaker 1: became host of The Bachelor. Those days were a blur
Speaker 1: because I would stay up all night for the show.
Speaker 1: I would do a rose ceremony. I would come home
Speaker 1: often at seven or eight in the morning because the
Speaker 1: rose ceremonies would go all night, and then I would
Speaker 1: get up, I would walk again and you know, feed
Speaker 1: the baby. You know, you're just walking right into it.
Speaker 1: And then it was, yeah, quite a mess.
Speaker 2: So did you come home and like help as much
Speaker 2: as you could?
Speaker 1: As much as I could, And then I would just
Speaker 1: just pass out for you just grab as you know,
Speaker 1: as parents know, you grab these two and three hour rests.
Speaker 1: They're not even naps because you don't really fully go asleep,
Speaker 1: you just because you're waiting for the baby to cry.
Speaker 3: Or hey, I see that now again on the smallest scale,
Speaker 3: I see that now, I thought, because you.
Speaker 2: Always hear we'll sleep when the baby sleeps, so I thought.
Speaker 3: And then you kind of realize, well, no, but you're
Speaker 3: nervous because you're like, is.
Speaker 2: Are there making noise? Are they okay?
Speaker 3: So you're kind of waking up and then I one
Speaker 3: thing I learned was the feeding takes longer than I thought.
Speaker 3: I thought it was, oh, well, they wake up and
Speaker 3: they eat and then you can go back to sleep. No,
Speaker 3: the whole feeding thing, because you got feedom a change,
Speaker 3: it takes like forty five minutes.
Speaker 2: I'm like, wow, it was very educational.
Speaker 3: I'm glad I did it, and shout out to you
Speaker 3: and to the kid's mom for everything that you guys
Speaker 3: went through when Josh and Taylor were babies, and all
Speaker 3: the love to.
Speaker 1: All the parents out there that are blurry eyed going
Speaker 1: through their life just.
Speaker 3: Trying to you know, I do want to really shut
Speaker 3: that out, and I mean that, and I guess I
Speaker 3: want to circle back to what you just said and emphasize, like,
Speaker 3: I'm glad that you being a dad and a husband
Speaker 3: was considered a good thing when you were getting the
Speaker 3: job of the show because you know the fact the
Speaker 3: birth rate is way down in our country. The birth
Speaker 3: rate is down the world over, and I understand that
Speaker 3: a huge part of that. I remember when we had
Speaker 3: doctor Christine Sterling on our podcast and we asked her, like,
Speaker 3: why is the birth rate down? She was an obgyn,
Speaker 3: and the number one thing she said was finances. You know,
Speaker 3: it's really hard to raise a baby now and most
Speaker 3: houses have to be dual income, and so I know
Speaker 3: it's tougher than ever, but I just want to shout
Speaker 3: out the people who are doing it and thank you
Speaker 3: for having babies. And babies are blessings and I'm just
Speaker 3: so happy for my sister and I can't wait to
Speaker 3: hang out with them again.
Speaker 1: Congrats the family. I'm so excited to be an uncle again.
Speaker 1: I know.
Speaker 2: And I think my sister trusts you with the baby
Speaker 2: more than she trusts me. I'm like, aren't you.
Speaker 3: I know, I'm after this weekend, I got I do
Speaker 3: think i'd deproved myself a little bit of your second.
Speaker 1: But you you were in the trenchney.
Speaker 2: And I wanted to say to her, Hey, I'm your
Speaker 2: older sister. I hope to raise you. Okay, I mean,
Speaker 2: all right, maybe not her.
Speaker 3: I'm only two and a half years older, but honestly,
Speaker 3: my brother's eight years younger than me. I one hundred percent.
Speaker 3: Like I think when I was ten or eleven years old,
Speaker 3: my parents were like, Okay, you got this. We're gonna
Speaker 3: we can go out to dinner for the first time. Yeah,
Speaker 3: I mean, I uh, but I do think. Look, obviously
Speaker 3: a baby sat on. My friends have baby so I've
Speaker 3: been around them. But I wanted to take this ant
Speaker 3: thing seriously. I took an infant safety class. I wanted
Speaker 3: to learn baby CPR. I wanted to learn all the
Speaker 3: things you know you maybe don't know unless you read
Speaker 3: a parenting book. It's kind of crazy, right, anybody can
Speaker 3: become a parent, but we don't have to study it
Speaker 3: at all. It's the one thing you don't have to
Speaker 3: go to school for when you're in charge of human life.
Speaker 1: I told your sister when they were when they were
Speaker 1: going home, I said, it is the weirdest feeling of
Speaker 1: all the feelings, And I wonder if other parents are
Speaker 1: like this. When I got in the car and the
Speaker 1: I forget which which way kids face these days, But
Speaker 1: like at the time.
Speaker 2: You safest way is to face them backwards.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so back when I had a kid, you just
Speaker 1: put them in forwards so you could see their face
Speaker 1: in the rear view mirror. Now they have like the
Speaker 1: double mirror where you look in the rear view and
Speaker 1: then you see the mirror and then you can see
Speaker 1: the child. But anyway, when I had a child, you
Speaker 1: just put them in there and I was looking. I
Speaker 1: just remember driving away from the hospital with a child,
Speaker 1: and it's like, like, gave me this. Shouldn't you at
Speaker 1: least give me like a pamphlet, like some sort of
Speaker 1: a shouldn't.
Speaker 2: I have had to get some kind of certificate, right.
Speaker 1: Like if I buy a desk from my Kia, you
Speaker 1: get an instruction I get an instruction manual and some
Speaker 1: and an Alan wrench and a bunch of tools and things.
Speaker 1: I got a child. Yeah, I had to bring my
Speaker 1: own car seat. And they're just like good luck. It's
Speaker 1: and you just go and you just get home and
Speaker 1: you're like, okay, so I have a human now, And
Speaker 1: it's really wild how you just figured out and you
Speaker 1: do as all parents do, you just figure it out.
Speaker 3: To be a part time employee at Target, I had
Speaker 3: to go through a training. Right, it's not mandated that
Speaker 3: you go through a training to become a parent. Hopefully
Speaker 3: you do, Hopefully you read a book or take a class,
Speaker 3: but it's not required.
Speaker 1: It's a scary, scary feeling. So to all the parents
Speaker 1: that are going through it, are about to congratulations, God
Speaker 1: bless and good luck.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but I do.
Speaker 3: I think I proved. I kind of had to prove
Speaker 3: myself to her this weekend. But she still feels I
Speaker 3: mean when I've said no, but what about when like
Speaker 3: we take and you could come visit us in Austin
Speaker 3: And she's like, yeah, because Chris will be there. So
Speaker 3: we wanted to dive into a few journalistic things that
Speaker 3: have our spidy senses up. And I hope that you
Speaker 3: guys like when we talk about these things, because we
Speaker 3: certainly enjoy it.
Speaker 1: It's when things cross over. It's kind of like when
Speaker 1: we want to talk about the Menindez Brothers or p Ditty.
Speaker 1: It's when social media, journalism, celebrity kind of all comes
Speaker 1: together and we find ourselves debating this at home, and
Speaker 1: so we thought, let's bring it on the most dramatic
Speaker 1: podcast ever.
Speaker 3: So a few things in the news we want to
Speaker 3: talk about journalistically.
Speaker 2: First, should we dive in with the TMZ Liam?
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, let's talk about Liam.
Speaker 3: Big controversy in the past week. Former One Direction member
Speaker 3: singer Liam Payne horrifically tragically dies from a fall from
Speaker 3: a balcony at a hotel in Argentina. It has come
Speaker 3: out that he had multiple drugs in his system. It's horrible.
Speaker 3: He was a father and obviously a beloved member of
Speaker 3: that band and loved by many. And I do think
Speaker 3: prosecutors are looking into the case as to where he
Speaker 3: got the drugs and what really happened. But the big
Speaker 3: controversy is that TMZ, when they first reported the news,
Speaker 3: ran a photo I can't see it now because they
Speaker 3: took these photos down, but a zoomed in photo of
Speaker 3: his part of his body showing his tattoos. And I
Speaker 3: believe they said in the copy you can see here
Speaker 3: his tattoos.
Speaker 1: His torso in his arms. You could see essentially.
Speaker 3: They were coming from the I think in the copy
Speaker 3: they were trying to make it sound like they were
Speaker 3: showing that photo to prove that it was Liam.
Speaker 2: Let me start with that, because I do take issue
Speaker 2: with that.
Speaker 3: I don't think anyone would have questioned, was it really Liam,
Speaker 3: Like these weren't mysterious circumstances a body's pulled from a
Speaker 3: river or something. He was a guest at a hotel
Speaker 3: that he used that Well, I mean he was a
Speaker 3: guest at a hotel who fell from a balcony, and authorities,
Speaker 3: I think we're already involved at that point. I don't
Speaker 3: think there was a need to prove it was him.
Speaker 3: It wasn't someone died in a car wreck and their
Speaker 3: body is mangled, and who is it?
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I just don't think. To me, I think from what
Speaker 3: it seems, the copy of the article was the text
Speaker 3: of what they were saying. They were almost trying to justify, well,
Speaker 3: here's why we showed this photo. But really, they know
Speaker 3: they're going to get more clicks if they have that photo.
Speaker 3: People have an an innate desire. It's like why we
Speaker 3: can't turn away from a car wreck. So, but there's
Speaker 3: a big backlash they take the photos down, and the
Speaker 3: question is coming up of, you know, journalistically, was that
Speaker 3: right or wrong? A lot of people accusing them of
Speaker 3: just being disgusting but for doing that, So what was
Speaker 3: your first reaction when you heard about that?
Speaker 1: Yeah, and then just to further yeah, kind of, the
Speaker 1: outlet also ran a photo of the police tent that
Speaker 1: they later erected over the body.
Speaker 2: So took that down as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and so they you know, I think TMZ is
Speaker 1: a victim of their own success. Harvey Levin, who's a lawyer,
Speaker 1: and I'll say this disclaimer, TMZ is very good at
Speaker 1: what they do. Harvey Levin's a very good lawyer. They're
Speaker 1: very astute, They're they're accurate. A lot of times. They
Speaker 1: are accurate because they don't want to get sued. If
Speaker 1: they weren't, they would have been sued a thousand times
Speaker 1: over and they're they're sued all the time. But with
Speaker 1: that said, the reason I say they're a victim of
Speaker 1: their own success is TMZ became very successful for gotcha
Speaker 1: journalism on a grand scale before social media. They were Instagram,
Speaker 1: they were Twitter, they were first on the scene when
Speaker 1: they were the ones that blew mel Gibson up when
Speaker 1: he went on his big at tirade. I don't know
Speaker 1: if you remember the anti Semitic plant he went on.
Speaker 1: That's kind of where they made their necks. Gotcha journalism, Well,
Speaker 1: they just weren't afraid to stick a camera in anybody's face.
Speaker 1: That's what I would say, blow your life up.
Speaker 3: They were doing it on a level that no one
Speaker 3: had done before, where they were first of all, well,
Speaker 3: a huge part of it is that they're first to things,
Speaker 3: their first to report things. They're first to things. I mean,
Speaker 3: they broke the story that Liam Payne had died. They've
Speaker 3: broken many big, big stories over the years. But yeah,
Speaker 3: first to things and unafraid to kind of take that
Speaker 3: next step. They definitely, I think have crossed boundaries over
Speaker 3: the years that other outlets hadn't and took things to
Speaker 3: a new level, and then other outlets maybe felt like
Speaker 3: they had.
Speaker 2: To keep up.
Speaker 1: But yes, my first visceral reaction was just that it
Speaker 1: was I it's disgusting. They went beyond too far. It
Speaker 1: was callous, it's inappropriate. I think it's bad journalism. As
Speaker 1: you said, what when you you have to ask yourself
Speaker 1: some questions as a journalist. The news director, Harvey Levin,
Speaker 1: this falls on him one hundred percent. This is your
Speaker 1: final decision. Why are you doing it if it is
Speaker 1: just one hundred percent salacious, one hundred percent just clicks
Speaker 1: that you're going to get because you know nobody else
Speaker 1: is going to do it. That's not enough. It was
Speaker 1: not furthering the story. We didn't learn anything. We knew
Speaker 1: Liam had died. A yeah, there.
Speaker 2: Is it necessary.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it didn't add color to the story. It didn't
Speaker 1: educate us. Well, it didn't educate us in any way
Speaker 1: as far as the news of this story.
Speaker 3: It was definitely just to be sillacious. And this is
Speaker 3: not a case where you can say, oh, it was
Speaker 3: like the weekend person was on and they made the
Speaker 3: wrong choice. No, on a story this big, they ran
Speaker 3: it up the flagpole. Everybody was involved. They're consulting their
Speaker 3: deepest sources on this to confirm before publishing that a
Speaker 3: major celebrity is died.
Speaker 1: Everybody who had a decision to make made that decision
Speaker 1: that went to the top.
Speaker 3: My first reaction was, this is reflective of the time
Speaker 3: we're in, because I think what happened here was TMZ
Speaker 3: made a choice and there hadn't really been I was
Speaker 3: trying to think of the most recent surprise, horrific celebrity
Speaker 3: death Kobe Bryant.
Speaker 1: Yeah, which, by the way, TMZ also broke that story,
Speaker 1: and they caught some flat for that because they that
Speaker 1: one now I'll let me before you continue that one.
Speaker 1: I didn't mind because that was breaking news and they
Speaker 1: broke you didn't mind what they broke the story, and
Speaker 1: they caught some heat because it's like, oh, nobody else knew.
Speaker 1: They didn't have the Cherff's department, didn't have time to
Speaker 1: contact the family, and they debunked that story.
Speaker 3: But well, I think it went a little bit both ways.
Speaker 3: From what I remember, they said Kobe's people knew. I
Speaker 3: don't know that every.
Speaker 2: If Vanessa knew or well, no, I'm not saying that.
Speaker 2: I think Vanessa.
Speaker 3: I would hope Vanessa new there were other people's kids
Speaker 3: and other family members from I think the basketball team
Speaker 3: and the helicopter. And I think the argument there was
Speaker 3: I'm not sure that all those families had been identified yet.
Speaker 3: I mean, yeah, yeah, notified yet. And I do take
Speaker 3: issue with that, but.
Speaker 1: I okay, I'll fight you on that later. But yeah, no, no,
Speaker 1: I just it is that was the biggest breaking news
Speaker 1: story in the world.
Speaker 2: I agree. I think that was a tough call.
Speaker 3: I think they had to do it at that point
Speaker 3: if they wanted to break the story.
Speaker 1: I think if they named those kids, and I think
Speaker 1: if they showed pictures. Then that would have been a
Speaker 1: way a bridge too far. But this is that gray
Speaker 1: area of you're a news organization and you broke a story.
Speaker 3: And I would also say that to the authorities. You
Speaker 3: know what world we're living in. You know, we're living
Speaker 3: in the world of social media where everybody has a
Speaker 3: phone by the way on their end. Remember they got
Speaker 3: in trouble because some of their officers were taking pictures
Speaker 3: of the scene and showing it to people.
Speaker 2: You have to be on top of notice that.
Speaker 3: Events.
Speaker 1: I believe the sheriff'sportment, So.
Speaker 3: That to me, that's a back and forth between the
Speaker 3: sheriffs and TMZ. If some of the people's.
Speaker 2: Families already know some family members already.
Speaker 3: Know, well they could call the other people's family. Like,
Speaker 3: if the story's out to family members at that point,
Speaker 3: that's on the sheriff's department. That's on authorities. You need
Speaker 3: to be identifying or I mean notifying people. I keep
Speaker 3: mixing those up.
Speaker 2: Sorry, but.
Speaker 3: I think that going back to reflective of the time,
Speaker 3: I thought about it, and I'm like, I don't know,
Speaker 3: like back in do you think back in the nineties,
Speaker 3: if they'd shown those photos, like say the National inquirer
Speaker 3: had I think people might have looked at it in
Speaker 3: the supermarket and been like, oh, that's gross that they
Speaker 3: showed it, or I think they might have, but but
Speaker 3: they would bought the copy in secret to read it themselves.
Speaker 3: I think today, because people can respond so much on
Speaker 3: social media.
Speaker 2: It's like, that's why the photos came down. You know
Speaker 2: what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Well, in nineteen ninety four, the Seattle Times ran a
Speaker 1: photo of Kurt Cobain's body after the Nevana frontman died
Speaker 1: by suicide. The answer your question is right there. No,
Speaker 1: the Seattle Times did.
Speaker 2: It a much more sort of lauded outlet.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean you have to remember there were such thing
Speaker 1: as newspapers and they were huge at the time, and
Speaker 1: that's a big city and that was huge. It was
Speaker 1: not a big deal and that kind of kind of
Speaker 1: that it was a big.
Speaker 2: Deal, but it was just seen more as part of
Speaker 2: the story.
Speaker 1: The Nationally wire ran pictures all the time. When I
Speaker 1: said they're a victim of their own success, I think
Speaker 1: exactly what you're saying. They got famous by doing this,
Speaker 1: and I think they just forgot times have changed a
Speaker 1: little bit.
Speaker 3: That was my thought was they were kind of moving
Speaker 3: through their normal method and trying to get the story
Speaker 3: up quickly. And I will say journalistically, when you are
Speaker 3: moving fast, you're trying to make all the right choices.
Speaker 3: But I'm not saying things don't slip through the cracks
Speaker 3: because you're moving fast. So I thought they're on their
Speaker 3: regular systemic things what they do, and maybe they didn't
Speaker 3: register that even from the Kobe Bryant thing a few
Speaker 3: years ago, social media has changed a lot and they
Speaker 3: got a major backlash for it and they took the
Speaker 3: photos down, so they're responding to how times have changed.
Speaker 3: But I think they wouldn't do that again from here.
Speaker 1: Maybe I don't think they ever issued an apology or
Speaker 1: said they were wrong. They just took them down editorially
Speaker 1: made that and then they said we have photos.
Speaker 3: I don't think it's going to hurt them as a brand.
Speaker 3: I think people still feel the same way about TMZ.
Speaker 3: I think people knew TMZ kind of again went that
Speaker 3: extra step sometimes, and I think ultimately people will still
Speaker 3: go to them if they break the big stories. You know,
Speaker 3: if they're the ones who are well, you're going to
Speaker 3: want that news. And they are sort of known for
Speaker 3: having like deep connections in law enforcement and in the
Speaker 3: court system to kind of get.
Speaker 2: Notified like, oh, hey, FYI, this paper work got filed.
Speaker 1: They hear about divorces, they hear about houses being sold,
Speaker 1: they hear about people being pulled over for d uys,
Speaker 1: and and you know TMZ works, and that they know
Speaker 1: it's like the DMZ is. That's the play on words.
Speaker 1: It's the thirty mile zone around Hollywood.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'll be honest.
Speaker 3: Part of the reason when we got married legally, we
Speaker 3: got married in Texas because in part we wanted to
Speaker 3: be married in Texas, but also I knew if we
Speaker 3: filed that paperwork at California, like our marriage certificate stuff, yeah,
Speaker 3: then if we up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so, and we wanted to stay in private as
Speaker 1: long as we could. And you have to think those
Speaker 1: things to try. And you know, when you file for divorce.
Speaker 1: I remember when I filed for divorce, we put everything
Speaker 1: in my ex wife's name. It wouldn't be so she filed,
Speaker 1: even though it was amicable and we were doing everything together.
Speaker 1: We put everything in her name and I think maybe
Speaker 1: even her maiden name, so everything would stay off the
Speaker 1: grid and so nobody would find out and.
Speaker 3: They did because no matter how famous you are, you
Speaker 3: still have to do things through the courts, and that becomes.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and sadly you can't trust the courts. It will
Speaker 1: get out like it'll it'll ping and someone's making you know,
Speaker 1: there's a court.
Speaker 3: Right When people wonder how to TMZ get these how
Speaker 3: does TMZ get these stories, it's through those pathways. So
Speaker 3: where do I think we agree on this that they
Speaker 3: probably just as a sign of the times, should not
Speaker 3: have run those photos. And I'm not ethically justifying running
Speaker 3: those photos. I'm just saying I think years ago it
Speaker 3: would have sort of been seen as you just wouldn't
Speaker 3: get the backlash from it.
Speaker 1: They they You're right. They clicked into the mode of
Speaker 1: here we go, we know how to do this, this
Speaker 1: is how we've been successful. And look, we ran into
Speaker 1: this on the Bachelor. For many times, you would be
Speaker 1: doing something and you're like, oh, we've run into this
Speaker 1: situation before. This is how we treated it, and this
Speaker 1: is how we took advantage of it made it successful.
Speaker 1: And then you do it and this new generation had
Speaker 1: there's a backlash to it. You know, all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: you know, TMZ's catching a lot of backlash. This is triggering,
Speaker 1: this activated me, and well, I.
Speaker 3: Think it's more so just like what is it the
Speaker 3: right thing to do or not, because just because it
Speaker 3: happened years ago, I don't think it's the right thing
Speaker 3: to do on a human level.
Speaker 2: Again, I would ask do you need to do it?
Speaker 2: And I don't think you do.
Speaker 3: You don't need to show the photo of him when
Speaker 3: we know what happened, we know it was him. No
Speaker 3: one needs to see it with their eyes to like
Speaker 3: believe it.
Speaker 1: You know, and that and that was the difference to me.
Speaker 1: He's a human with a family, and that was the
Speaker 1: difference in the Kobe Bryant case. You know, I didn't
Speaker 1: you know you And I remember that day vividly because
Speaker 1: I was out just a mile or so from where
Speaker 1: it happened, because that's where we were living. You were
Speaker 1: at work, and I remember you calling me and the
Speaker 1: rumors were swirling, the buzz, and then TMZ broke the
Speaker 1: story very quickly that it had happened. It was confirmed.
Speaker 1: They didn't host a picture, and there were pictures, and
Speaker 1: that's what Vanessa Bryant won a very huge settlement because
Speaker 1: they had taken pictures. The Sheriff's Department. Click took pictures
Speaker 1: of the of the of the scene of the accident.
Speaker 1: Those did not get out, and the press and TMZ
Speaker 1: they just broke the news story that Kobe had passed
Speaker 1: and so that I was okay with because that was
Speaker 1: pure breaking news. They got it first, They broke the story.
Speaker 1: If that had been CNN, CNN would have run the story,
Speaker 1: you know, Fox News would have run the story. TMZ
Speaker 1: just got it because they did a better job of
Speaker 1: investigative reporting. So I don't blame them for that. This
Speaker 1: was just a bridge too far, and there's a there's
Speaker 1: a difference in it.
Speaker 3: Next story, Yes, we wanted to talk about a very
Speaker 3: different journalistic outlet, sixty Minutes. Yeah, so sixty Minutes did
Speaker 3: an interview a few weeks ago now I think YEP
Speaker 3: with Vice President Kamala Harris presidential candidate Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: And what has.
Speaker 3: Come out is that there are two different video clips
Speaker 3: available to see of an answer she gave to a question.
Speaker 3: One answer is much longer and one answer is much shorter.
Speaker 3: And the reason they're different is because one clip of
Speaker 3: this question and answer was edited, I believe for the Internet,
Speaker 3: or maybe no for the show.
Speaker 2: That's why it was shure.
Speaker 1: They released, well, they released before the interview took place
Speaker 1: on sixty minutes, before they aired it on sixty minutes.
Speaker 1: They released it to X. They always do this, They'll
Speaker 1: put out teasers, this is what you're going to see,
Speaker 1: and it's unedited.
Speaker 3: And so it was much longer online, much longer, and
Speaker 3: then it was edited on the television show.
Speaker 1: We all watched sixty minutes. The answer was, and I'll
Speaker 1: just say this, when they put it out on X
Speaker 1: and I watched the whole thing. It was kind of
Speaker 1: what Kamala has been derided for, which was a long
Speaker 1: winded kind of word salad, jumbled up, didn't really make
Speaker 1: sense answer, and it didn't make her look good at all.
Speaker 1: Fast forward to sixty minutes and she gives a very
Speaker 1: solid SoundBite, short, succinct, and the interviewer kind of picked
Speaker 1: up where she left off, finished her thought and then
Speaker 1: moved on and everybody was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's
Speaker 1: not what we just saw. They completely edited this to
Speaker 1: make her look better, and it did. It made her
Speaker 1: look a lot better. It made her look intelligent, succinct, thoughtful.
Speaker 3: I want to read this statement from sixty minutes, because
Speaker 3: they got a lot of backlash online, people arguing, yeah,
Speaker 3: that this editing made her look better, that hey, this
Speaker 3: is a presidential election, and you have a responsibility to
Speaker 3: the American people to show them who they're voting for.
Speaker 3: As a journalistic outlet, people wondering if this was a
Speaker 3: violation of any kind of sort of the codes that
Speaker 3: we have surrounding Yeah, surrounding campaigns. And here's CBS News's statement,
Speaker 3: former President Donald Trump is accusing sixty minutes of deceitful
Speaker 3: editing of our October seventh interview with Vice President Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: That is false.
Speaker 3: Sixty minutes gave an expert of our interview to face
Speaker 3: the nation that used a longer section of her answer
Speaker 3: than that on sixty minutes, same question, same answer, but
Speaker 3: a different portion of the response. When we edit any interview,
Speaker 3: whether politician, athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate,
Speaker 3: and on point. The portion of her answer on sixty
Speaker 3: minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects
Speaker 3: in a wide ranging, twenty one minute long segment. Remember,
Speaker 3: mister Trump pulled out of his interview with sixty minutes
Speaker 3: and the Vice President participated. Our long standing invitation to
Speaker 3: former President Trump remains open. If he would like to
Speaker 3: discuss the issues facing the nation and the Harris interview,
Speaker 3: we would be happy to have him on. So here's
Speaker 3: my first issue with that statement. Why are they making
Speaker 3: it all about Trump?
Speaker 2: I am on Twitter.
Speaker 3: I know Trump said something about the interview, but to me,
Speaker 3: this wasn't a Trump versus them thing. Way more people
Speaker 3: were on x Twitter taking issue and questioning what had
Speaker 3: happened here and questioning why her answer was so succinct
Speaker 3: on the show, but they had seen a much longer,
Speaker 3: more rambling interview answer on the internet. So the fact
Speaker 3: that they made it them versus Trump, to me, comes
Speaker 3: across so immature. It's not what a journalistic outlooks should do.
Speaker 3: It makes the American people have less trust in them.
Speaker 3: And this has been my issue so much in the
Speaker 3: past few months. I don't want the American people to
Speaker 3: lose trust in the media, and I feel like our
Speaker 3: industry is killing itself literally, the losing viewers, losing audiences
Speaker 3: with how they're operating the past few months. If they
Speaker 3: made it about them versus Trump, and the American people
Speaker 3: feel lost in the conversation, like, hey, wait, we had
Speaker 3: questions about this, right, talk to us.
Speaker 2: Why are you making this you versus showing.
Speaker 1: A problem with it? Right, you're journalists, by the way,
Speaker 1: the other journalists and other shows have picked this up.
Speaker 1: This is not a Trump versus and I think that's
Speaker 1: what they're trying to do. But that the funny thing
Speaker 1: about that statement is it was as big of a
Speaker 1: word salad as Kamala Harris's answer. You're lying because what
Speaker 1: you're saying in that statement is we did exactly what
Speaker 1: you are accusing us of. We edited it to make
Speaker 1: her more succinct. That full stop. You said that in
Speaker 1: your answer. You're telling us what you did, and then
Speaker 1: you're saying you didn't do it.
Speaker 3: When they say in the statement, when we edit any interview,
Speaker 3: whether a politician, athlete, or movie star, we try to
Speaker 3: be clear. We strive to be clear, accurate and on point. Well,
Speaker 3: of course you do. The part of you striving to
Speaker 3: be clear and accurate is showing people how their president
Speaker 3: is actually going to address things. So to me, there's
Speaker 3: a big difference between editing for time and editing where
Speaker 3: you make somebody look like they are more succinct and competition.
Speaker 1: You didn't meant to make it accurate or succinct.
Speaker 2: You've you actually made it inaccurate by editing it for time.
Speaker 1: And by the way, you just happened to fix something
Speaker 1: that would have made her look bad. So in sixty Minutes.
Speaker 1: The reason we brought this up is they actually came
Speaker 1: out in this latest episode of Sixty Minutes the other
Speaker 1: night on Sunday to defend themselves and we're Vietment vehemently
Speaker 1: denying everything, and it's like, okay, now thou dost protest
Speaker 1: way too much. So they had the Leslie Stall mistake
Speaker 1: and the gaff with Trump. Now they've had this, so
Speaker 1: CBS News is having a really bad run. And then
Speaker 1: of course they had the disaster of the debate, So
Speaker 1: they're having a really bad run in sixty Minutes, who
Speaker 1: was always held in such high esteem.
Speaker 2: So high the show, yeah it.
Speaker 1: Was the show is really really having a disastrous run.
Speaker 2: And I will hear it.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say one thing, yeah about the media.
Speaker 1: They're so obsessed and captivated by Trump, and I don't
Speaker 1: think they know what to do because they were blamed
Speaker 1: the first time for getting him elected because they they
Speaker 1: were blame for treating him with kid gloves and having
Speaker 1: fun with him and getting helping get him in the
Speaker 1: White House. They're so I think, going the polar opposite
Speaker 1: direction if if Kamala Harris doesn't win, the media will
Speaker 1: be a huge part to blame because, like you just said,
Speaker 1: they're so obsessed with Donald Trump. Just do your job.
Speaker 1: If you guys would just do your job, everything will
Speaker 1: turn out the way it should be. Show Kamala for
Speaker 1: who she is, show Trump for who he is. And
Speaker 1: they do that, by the way, they do let Trump
Speaker 1: go off and talk about Arnold Palmer's junk, which he
Speaker 1: just did in a bizarre way. So they are so
Speaker 1: obsessed and they're making so many mistakes lately.
Speaker 3: That I just think what's happening is is they're really
Speaker 3: looking like they're protecting Kamala Harris, which actually ultimately does
Speaker 3: kind of a disservice to her as a candidate to
Speaker 3: the American people, because the American people are smart and
Speaker 3: have eyes and ears, and they can see that that
Speaker 3: protection is happening, and so it makes them trust her less.
Speaker 3: They're generally pulling the best bits from her and the
Speaker 3: worst bits from Trump, and both things are making the
Speaker 3: American people trust them less and they have to, as
Speaker 3: you just said, go back to doing their job. And
Speaker 3: here's where sixty minutes could have really easily gained some
Speaker 3: trust back release the transcript of the interview. A lot
Speaker 3: of people, a lot of journalists who are more independent now,
Speaker 3: like Megan Kelly, were saying, just release the transcript.
Speaker 2: And I think that's a fair ask.
Speaker 3: Like, for example, when Time interviewed Donald Trump and in
Speaker 3: sixty minutes of sitting here being like, well Trump won't
Speaker 3: come on, Okay, well commel it wouldn't do Time. I mean,
Speaker 3: each candidate is gonna make their choices about what they're
Speaker 3: doing and what they're not and that's up to the
Speaker 3: people to look at.
Speaker 2: Which outlets if they can to help the campaign. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean this is a campaign.
Speaker 3: But Time just released the full, full Q and A
Speaker 3: with Trump, and that's what they published sixty minutes.
Speaker 2: Just release the transcript. Because here's the difference.
Speaker 3: If you are editing for Time, it should still be accurate,
Speaker 3: it should still reflect the person's answer. So why do
Speaker 3: you have an issue with releasing the transcript versus this
Speaker 3: statement that you just gave. And they say in the
Speaker 3: statement here as well. You know, when we edit any interview,
Speaker 3: whether a politician, athlete, or movie star, Well, there's a
Speaker 3: big difference between if a movie star rambles about their
Speaker 3: movie versus a politician ram about or speaking I won't
Speaker 3: even say rambling speaking at length about an issue that
Speaker 3: affects the way everyone in this country lives. Yeah, you
Speaker 3: can edit a movie star down for time when they're
Speaker 3: talking about their latest project. But here the American people,
Speaker 3: it's different. They need to see and hear and understand
Speaker 3: exactly what this candidate intends to do, and they need
Speaker 3: to make a judgment on this candidate in a way
Speaker 3: that really affects their lives in a real way, not
Speaker 3: just what movie they're going to see this weekend.
Speaker 1: Stop treating people like they're stupid. They're not. Stop gaslighting
Speaker 1: us and telling us that we aren't seeing with their
Speaker 1: own eyes what we just saw sixty minutes. Massive fail. Conversely,
Speaker 1: Brett bher Over at Fox News did the sit down
Speaker 1: with Kamala Harris interrupted her. They counted thirty eight times,
Speaker 1: and there was a clip that he called for, and
Speaker 1: I think they thought it was either the wrong clip
Speaker 1: ran or something happened one of the things. I I
Speaker 1: appreciate it about Brett Bears is he's come out and
Speaker 1: kind of faced it. He's like, no, I understand how
Speaker 1: you could have that criticism of me interrupting her thirty
Speaker 1: eight times. I was trying. She was going, you know,
Speaker 1: like she had to your point. She had an agenda
Speaker 1: when she went on Fox News. Of course she did
Speaker 1: her it'd be crazy not to. She was prepared to
Speaker 1: go into the hostile territory and kind of say what
Speaker 1: she needed to say to that side of the aisle.
Speaker 1: And I think she got her point across, and she
Speaker 1: she handled herself. And then Brett bhar his job was
Speaker 1: to try to get her back on point and answer
Speaker 1: some of the questions. So he said, look, I understand
Speaker 1: why people think I interrupted too much, and then he
Speaker 1: admitted the wrong clip ran good way to own it.
Speaker 1: That's what a journalist did. By the way, neither one
Speaker 1: of us are perfect, and you don't expect your journalists
Speaker 1: to be perfect. If sixty minutes made a mistake, say hey, guys,
Speaker 1: you're right. You know what, Let's run this whole clip.
Speaker 1: Let's put it up. This is what she said in
Speaker 1: its entirety. You be the judge but it's just the
Speaker 1: telling us, not giving us the facts, not giving us
Speaker 1: the truth, and then telling us we didn't just see you.
Speaker 3: Well, I think what they're caught up in a little
Speaker 3: bit here is this isn't as their statement alludes to,
Speaker 3: this isn't a crazy practice. You have a TV show
Speaker 3: that has to run for a certain amount of time.
Speaker 3: When I used to interview you, we edited down your answer.
Speaker 3: You had to you go on a red carpet and
Speaker 3: talk to someone, You get X amount of minutes with them.
Speaker 3: You can only share a short clip of that as
Speaker 3: part of entertainment tonight the program.
Speaker 1: Yeah, editing's not know of course.
Speaker 2: And it has to be done.
Speaker 3: You literally have x amount of minutes sixty but commercial
Speaker 3: breaks where you can show your segment on television on
Speaker 3: the internet, you have more time. We would often at
Speaker 3: ET release longer versions of interviews online because you have
Speaker 3: more time and because people would want that content. Like
Speaker 3: if I interviewed you, I might have literally a one
Speaker 3: minute segment as part of ET where I could air
Speaker 3: our interview and then online we would release a longer version.
Speaker 3: Editing happens. But when you have been called into question
Speaker 3: as to whether you edited someone to make them look
Speaker 3: better a presidential candidate. Why not just alleviate the concerns
Speaker 3: and release the full transcript and publish the full transcript,
Speaker 3: which people have a right to read because they're voting
Speaker 3: for the person who's going to.
Speaker 1: Run now, and you're an unbiased news organization, so you
Speaker 1: don't care.
Speaker 2: Why not do that?
Speaker 3: That's the problem, and that's again why they're losing this credibility.
Speaker 3: And like what Brett Bear's talking about, it's tough like
Speaker 3: to give people some context when someone comes in for
Speaker 3: an interview. I mean I only interviewed film and TV.
Speaker 3: People say that I was doing a junk kit. They
Speaker 3: come in, they sit down. Things are always running late.
Speaker 3: Interviews have always run late. People have had to take
Speaker 3: bathroom breaks, equipment issues have happened. Everything's always running late,
Speaker 3: so things are tense. They come in. Maybe you thought
Speaker 3: you had five minutes. They walk in and they say, no, sorry,
Speaker 3: things are running late. You only have three and a
Speaker 3: half minutes, and you, as a journalist, have list of
Speaker 3: all these things you want to get to in three
Speaker 3: and a half minutes. As part of that three and
Speaker 3: a half minutes, you also kind of need to establish
Speaker 3: or a poor so that it's not really awkward. You
Speaker 3: want to try to have some normal human conversation. It's
Speaker 3: not easy. And I know Brett Behar said that he
Speaker 3: came in, he said that they were running late. He
Speaker 3: thought he'd have twenty five minutes. They told him only twenty.
Speaker 3: They were hard wrapping him and waving at him for
Speaker 3: the interview to end. So it can be very stressful.
Speaker 3: And like you said, it's not perfect. But in this case,
Speaker 3: then what you do is you explain it. You tell
Speaker 3: people here's what happened. You give them a fuller picture
Speaker 3: of the story. You don't shut people down with a
Speaker 3: statement and just make it about you versus Trump and
Speaker 3: cut the American people out of the conversation.
Speaker 1: Well, it's funny. The hypocrisy is sixty minutes has always
Speaker 1: been about making things clear and transparent. That's their job,
Speaker 1: investigative journalists, And what they're doing is exactly what a
Speaker 1: sixty minutes interviewer would try to debunk. They would try
Speaker 1: to make this story clear and succinct and transparent. And
Speaker 1: what they're doing is muddying the waters and they're lying.
Speaker 1: And a good journalist would go in and just blow
Speaker 1: this story up because and by the way, a third
Speaker 1: grade journalist, this is not good, this is not hard.
Speaker 1: You release the transcript, I would take a look at
Speaker 1: it and you would debunk this entire lie that sixty
Speaker 1: minutes is perpetrating. But the biggest problem that I think
Speaker 1: a lot of people have is the hill that they
Speaker 1: always run to is blaming it on Trump. And to
Speaker 1: your point, and I say the same thing, journalists, we
Speaker 1: need you to be better. You need to be the
Speaker 1: beacon on the hill, the shining light that we can
Speaker 1: always go to for the truth, for transparency, for a
Speaker 1: little honesty. We need a break. And instead this spokesperson
Speaker 1: for sixty minutes somehow blamed Donald Trump and made it
Speaker 1: all about Donald Trump and then said, well, he was
Speaker 1: invited to come on, but he won't come on. That
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with the facts of this story.
Speaker 1: It is one hundred and eighty degrees polar opposite of
Speaker 1: what we're talking about. We're talking about one interview with
Speaker 1: one human being. It has nothing to do with Donald
Speaker 1: Trump zero. But that's exactly where they went. And that's
Speaker 1: what a lot of media does is they blame him
Speaker 1: as if two wrongs make a right.
Speaker 2: Sixty minutes rise above.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that people generally are tired of the
Speaker 3: toxicity and the and I'm not absolving anyone here, like
Speaker 3: both candidates do it too, but at least leave it
Speaker 3: to the candidates to blame each other back and forth,
Speaker 3: and as the journalists don't do that.
Speaker 2: I don't really care that.
Speaker 3: Donald Trump weighed in on this interview. I think the
Speaker 3: point is you're supposed to be the voice of the people.
Speaker 3: As the media, you're supposed to be looking out for
Speaker 3: the people. And I saw a lot of people on
Speaker 3: Twitter questioning this, So explain it. Talk to the people.
Speaker 2: That's who you're doing the show for, right the people
Speaker 2: at home. So talk to the people.
Speaker 3: And address them, and don't make it about you versus Trump.
Speaker 3: I don't there's enough of the media versus the candidate.
Speaker 3: I need you, the media, to be there for me,
Speaker 3: the viewer. And that's how I feel about it. So
Speaker 3: we continue, and the election is a couple weeks away,
Speaker 3: and we'll see what happens, and maybe we can all
Speaker 3: take a breather after and I hope for the best.
Speaker 1: Will journalism return. We have hope in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 3: There's look that what gives me hope I think is shifting.
Speaker 3: There are a lot of great podcasts out there that
Speaker 3: I listen to. Would be happy to recommend a few
Speaker 3: if anybody's interested, Shoot me a DM and you know
Speaker 3: we will see you guys again next time, and we'll
Speaker 3: hopefully try to be the voice for you because we
Speaker 3: have a lot more to talk about.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening. Follow us on Instagram at the most
Speaker 1: Dramatic pod Ever and make sure to write us a
Speaker 1: review and leave us five stars. I'll talk to you
Speaker 1: next time.