Speaker 1: Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast in
Speaker 1: which we speak with some of the brightest minds working
Speaker 1: in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein, and the
Speaker 1: dog days of summer are traditionally the time psychotherapists of
Speaker 1: all stripes take some well deserved time off. Well, Strictly
Speaker 1: Business has managed to coax one of them back in
Speaker 1: front of the couch to fill the vacuum. But this
Speaker 1: is no average shrink. Doctor Orna Garalmik is the featured
Speaker 1: physician on the Showtime series Couples Therapy, where she helps
Speaker 1: relationships in crisis, letting viewers follow their progress we're lack
Speaker 1: thereof from episode to episode. She's currently shooting a fifth season,
Speaker 1: so we're glad she's making time today to talk about
Speaker 1: what it's like to adapt her practice to the small screen.
Speaker 1: Welcome to Strictly Business.
Speaker 2: Auna, Thank you, thank you for inviting me, Andrew.
Speaker 1: We must explain for the uninitiated and maybe some cynics.
Speaker 1: Your show features real life couples sharing real life problems
Speaker 1: with the world, and of course you are a very
Speaker 1: real practicing clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst. You teach An NYU's
Speaker 1: postdoctoral psychoanalysis program, So you're not just playing one on TV,
Speaker 1: so to speak.
Speaker 2: I'm not playing one at all.
Speaker 1: I'm myself okay, But it begs a question, what is
Speaker 1: a nice, pre eminently qualified therapist like you doing on
Speaker 1: a medium like this, What motivates you to open up
Speaker 1: what is a very private process typically?
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, I join in the question because
Speaker 2: I asked myself that question still, But it was it
Speaker 2: didn't It happened kind of gradually. It was not at
Speaker 2: all my plan. I mean, most people who choose to
Speaker 2: be psychoanalysts, including myself, are generally very private people. We're
Speaker 2: usually in a profession that privacy is like the number
Speaker 2: one frame or rule of the game, right, And we
Speaker 2: like to sit behind our patients and not even look
Speaker 2: at them face to face. So we're typically very private people.
Speaker 2: But I have become gradually somewhat more public being in academics.
Speaker 2: So I teach, and I write, and I write not
Speaker 2: only for academics, I write kind of beyond the scope
Speaker 2: of psychoanalysts. So I've already had somewhat of a public
Speaker 2: reach before, and that's probably what got the makers of
Speaker 2: the show to got to me. Somehow. They reached out
Speaker 2: to me, and first I thought I would consult to
Speaker 2: them just to make sure kind of they're keeping in
Speaker 2: like doing a good job in representing my profession. Sure,
Speaker 2: but we really hit it off and they convinced me
Speaker 2: to actually try and do it myself, which was a
Speaker 2: total strange idea to me, to try to do something
Speaker 2: so private on camera, and none of us knew it
Speaker 2: was going to work. We didn't know that function on camera,
Speaker 2: we didn't know that the work could be done on camera,
Speaker 2: and it was all like one big experiment.
Speaker 1: So what made you, you know, give this a world?
Speaker 2: Many things. First of all, I guess just kind of
Speaker 2: an adventurous spirit, something about the adventure of it. And
Speaker 2: I really liked the filmmakers. They're just incredible people, and
Speaker 2: they felt like I could do something with these people.
Speaker 2: It would be good, it would be of high quality,
Speaker 2: it would be ethical, it would be a real project,
Speaker 2: it wouldn't be some kind of fake representation. But I
Speaker 2: also feel in ways compelled to represent the prefetsion well.
Speaker 2: And I think the world kind of needs a lot
Speaker 2: more psychological and psychoanalytic thinking nowadays. I think it's and
Speaker 2: I think that's one of the reasons the show became
Speaker 2: so successful. It just hit a spot that is desperately needed,
Speaker 2: which is like deeper, slower thought into like the underlying motivations.
Speaker 1: So I mean, I couldn't agree more in terms of
Speaker 1: that public need. But you know, I've also wondered, are
Speaker 1: you want a mission of sorts, maybe even to sort
Speaker 1: of preserve the world of psychoanalysis, which you know is
Speaker 1: often described And please dispute my characterization if you take
Speaker 1: issue with it as something of a dying art approaching obsolescence?
Speaker 1: Did you am? I off both there?
Speaker 2: I have two things to say about that. Honestly, I'm
Speaker 2: not doing the show to promote psychoanalysis or to promote psychotherapy.
Speaker 2: I don't. I mean, there are not enough therapists out
Speaker 2: there in the world. There's obviously a great need, but
Speaker 2: I'm not there to promote therapy. I'm there mostly to
Speaker 2: promote psychological thinking. See, I want people to come out
Speaker 2: of the show thinking about themselves in a deeper way,
Speaker 2: thinking about fellow humans in a deeper way, thinking psychologically,
Speaker 2: not oh, how do I go and find a therapist
Speaker 2: right now? So that's my objective as far as, like
Speaker 2: you know, since I became a psychoanalyst, which was quite
Speaker 2: some time ago. There's always been talk about like the oh,
Speaker 2: it's a dying field, it's a dying profession. That is
Speaker 2: not true. I mean, especially not in New York. Sure,
Speaker 2: you constantly people looking for therapy. They are not enough
Speaker 2: therapists around. People want to do real deep work. They
Speaker 2: start with regular therapy, then they want to go deeper
Speaker 2: into analysis. It is not a dying profession. And there
Speaker 2: are other ways that psychoanalysis is relevant in the world,
Speaker 2: not only by way of therapy. It's it's it's a
Speaker 2: it's a way of thinking. It's a way of analyzing
Speaker 2: the world, and we need it.
Speaker 1: I get it. And so you mentioned that you had
Speaker 1: to be sort of coaxed into trying this out. We
Speaker 1: should mention the names of the producers, by the way,
Speaker 1: Elise Steinberg, Josh Kriegman, and forgive me if I'm miss
Speaker 1: to pray.
Speaker 2: You like to pray?
Speaker 1: Yeah, Okay, there you go. And so they put you
Speaker 1: in the saddle, and I'm curious what that first experience
Speaker 1: was like and were you hooked or maybe still a
Speaker 1: little skeptical.
Speaker 2: I was definitely skeptical. We started with kind of a
Speaker 2: few test sessions with Actually the cameras were still in
Speaker 2: the room when we were doing that, and part of
Speaker 2: what happened was oddly, even though I was nervous and
Speaker 2: confused about how this is all going to play out,
Speaker 2: the work is the work. That was Like I remember
Speaker 2: coming out of the few test sessions and saying, wow,
Speaker 2: I feel like a baker. I know how to make bread.
Speaker 2: Doesn't matter the conditions, you always have to do the
Speaker 2: same thing. So the material just presents itself and you
Speaker 2: know what to do. I've been doing it for so
Speaker 2: many years, so that was like a first surprise. But
Speaker 2: then even the people I was kind of working with,
Speaker 2: even though they were nervous and confused and not exactly
Speaker 2: knowing what's going to happen here, it just you know,
Speaker 2: you listen to people and they want to tell you
Speaker 2: their stories, and then you think together about how to
Speaker 2: problem solve and it just happens.
Speaker 1: It's like, got it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's stronger than the artific context.
Speaker 1: And but you mentioned artificial context. And so the question
Speaker 1: that arises for me is it certainly looks like what
Speaker 1: you're doing is actual therapy, but is it? I mean,
Speaker 1: do you have to explain to participants, perhaps that this
Speaker 1: is maybe like a similacrum of therapy, or you're saying, no,
Speaker 1: this is the real deal, and there's something about I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess I wonder if somehow the cameras corrupt the
Speaker 1: process despite the best of intentions.
Speaker 2: Yeah, really really good questions. It is not therapy per
Speaker 2: se in the sense that, first of all, you know,
Speaker 2: as I mentioned earlier, like the iron frame of confidentiality
Speaker 2: is gone. So whoever starts this work knows that this
Speaker 2: is not private information between them and me. It's potentially
Speaker 2: going to be broadcast to the world. So in that
Speaker 2: sense it's definitely not regular therapy. But also part of
Speaker 2: the contract of therapy is the patient pays the analyst,
Speaker 2: and we don't do that. I mean, this is free,
Speaker 2: so it's not it's a different The whole frame of
Speaker 2: it is not the frame of therapy, right, not that
Speaker 2: aren't pro bono therapies, but the entire frame of it
Speaker 2: is different. So we call them participants, not patients, the couples,
Speaker 2: and it is in its in its contract and its
Speaker 2: ens in its essence, it is a similar croom in
Speaker 2: the sense that certain aspects of the therapy of original
Speaker 2: therapy continue. I think as a therapist, the work we're
Speaker 2: doing is therapeutic. It's hopefully helpful, but the basic tenants,
Speaker 2: the base frame is gone, so it's a similar room,
Speaker 2: but many aspects of the therapeutic process continue and are
Speaker 2: very powerful. So we're sitting together, I'm thinking analytically and
Speaker 2: systematically about what they're presenting me with. They're talking about
Speaker 2: their problems. We're trying to problem solve. Together. We build
Speaker 2: a relationship of a certain kind of trust and mutual care,
Speaker 2: and good things happen, like people get better with the
Speaker 2: material they bring.
Speaker 1: So that's certainly clear to anyone who has watched the
Speaker 1: past four seasons. And I'm actually curious, as you're currently
Speaker 1: shooting the fifth season, has the process changed as your
Speaker 1: approach evolved. Does it get easier because you sounded initially
Speaker 1: almost as if like you still need a little coaxing
Speaker 1: to even do this.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know if it gets I mean, I'm
Speaker 2: convinced now that what we're doing is an incredibly useful
Speaker 2: thing for the public, which is kind of an amazing
Speaker 2: thing to be involved in nowadays. I mean, there's so
Speaker 2: many things that are going wrong with our world and
Speaker 2: to be part of something that is actually helpful for
Speaker 2: the world and pushes whoever is like watching it is
Speaker 2: pushing them towards more compassion and slowness and empathy and goodwill.
Speaker 2: To be part of that is an incredible experience. And
Speaker 2: the team I'm working with is just, you know, just
Speaker 2: the best people on earth. But it's not easy. It's
Speaker 2: not It didn't get easier. No, it's hard work. We
Speaker 2: take our job and we take the mission very seriously.
Speaker 2: So there's like an enormous amount of like thought and
Speaker 2: intention and presence that goes into this project by everyone.
Speaker 2: It's kind of a very intense commitment. Like every season
Speaker 2: that we shoot, it's like a full on dive into
Speaker 2: a few months of just full on commitment to the
Speaker 2: well being of the people to like a dignified representation
Speaker 2: of who they are. It's it's not easy. It's very satisfying,
Speaker 2: and I think we all feel just incredibly lucky to
Speaker 2: be part of this. But it's hard work.
Speaker 1: I do wonder though, you know, I can't help but
Speaker 1: think about the field in which you operate and the
Speaker 1: fundamentals that many insist on, and so I know you've
Speaker 1: gotten compliments. I'm curious though, if you've gotten criticism people
Speaker 1: who say that, well, once you pull out certain frameworks,
Speaker 1: this is not something that is this cheapen or distort
Speaker 1: what the actual process is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, I oddly I did not get a
Speaker 2: lot of criticism. To my face, I don't want.
Speaker 1: To know how that works.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know what's happening behind closed doors. But
Speaker 2: what I have heard and what I've read are legitimate questions,
Speaker 2: really legitimate questions about you know, big ethical questions like
Speaker 2: even people who agree to participate and are supposedly benefiting
Speaker 2: from the show, do they end up regretting it? Do
Speaker 2: they feel exploited? And those are always big questions that
Speaker 2: we take super seriously, and I think it would be
Speaker 2: dishonest to say that there isn't some degree of compromise
Speaker 2: for at least some of the participants experience privacy, and
Speaker 2: they may you know, they consent is like a funny thing.
Speaker 2: They might feel totally gung ho while they're doing it,
Speaker 2: but a year later they might feel very differently about
Speaker 2: it and have regrets or feel like, oh, it would
Speaker 2: have been very different if I did it now, or
Speaker 2: and that's real. So you know, my way of thinking
Speaker 2: about it is that and I think the participants feel
Speaker 2: that way, is that the benefit to the public ultimately
Speaker 2: fit it outweighs this this kind of sacrifice. But yeah,
Speaker 2: they're they're they're ethical questions here. I mean, I were
Speaker 2: super sensitive when when people during the filming, if anyone
Speaker 2: is feeling uncomfortable about what they're going through, they're always
Speaker 2: free to like drop out and stop. It's people are
Speaker 2: always doing it with like a great degree of like
Speaker 2: wanting to do it, being grateful for doing it. There
Speaker 2: there there's never any kind of pressure on them. So
Speaker 2: but it's it's it's a complicated issue.
Speaker 1: How involved are you in choosing which participants participate. I
Speaker 1: assume the producers have their thoughts, but I'm curious if
Speaker 1: you know, producers can say, hey, here's a couple with
Speaker 1: an interesting dilemma, and you may find, you know, what,
Speaker 1: these people need the real deal and maybe aren't suitable
Speaker 1: for TV.
Speaker 2: Yeah. There, there's there's a whole team that is that
Speaker 2: they recruit people and they interview people, and there's there's
Speaker 2: a team of psychologists that interview people before I meet them.
Speaker 2: So I'm not involved in any of that. I basically
Speaker 2: meet the people for the first session on camera. Oh,
Speaker 2: but if I meet people and I feel like, I mean,
Speaker 2: it's been very rare. But if I feel like people
Speaker 2: are too vulnerable or there might be kind of an
Speaker 2: issue that we didn't think about or that didn't come
Speaker 2: up in earlier interviews, I can say I don't think
Speaker 2: this is a good idea, this is too vulnerable a couple,
Speaker 2: or let's say there's a vulnerable kid that's involved in
Speaker 2: the family or something like that, And then I say,
Speaker 2: this is not a good idea. But it's rare because
Speaker 2: usually they do a really good job of screening.
Speaker 1: Sure, I guess I find as I watch that I
Speaker 1: want to pay you the compliment of saying you really,
Speaker 1: you know, you radiate a genuine integrity and it really
Speaker 1: comes across. But it's also a bit of a backhanded
Speaker 1: compliment because I worry about that. I worry about as
Speaker 1: you become a more and more public figure, how you
Speaker 1: protect that integrity and how you preserve it. I mean,
Speaker 1: do you ever fear as you I mean, you're several
Speaker 1: years into this now sort of a corruptive influence, because
Speaker 1: sometimes I see a lot of no one does typically
Speaker 1: what you do, but there are certain people whose names
Speaker 1: I won't name, who are you know, therapists who go
Speaker 1: into various modalities of this in the media, and I'm
Speaker 1: amazed at the transformation over time, let's put it that gently.
Speaker 2: Totally agree. And I'm very aware of the corruptive nature
Speaker 2: that is lurking every corner, whether it's the corruptive nature
Speaker 2: of money, you know, being offered to do something that
Speaker 2: will pay you a lot of money but will be
Speaker 2: kind of a real compromise to the profession, or the
Speaker 2: corruptive nature of like somehow, you know, I don't know,
Speaker 2: somehow fame seems to have some kind of pull for
Speaker 2: people I don't. That doesn't do much for me. But yeah,
Speaker 2: there's always there's always, you know, on the corners of things.
Speaker 2: There's always way that you can forget about your ethical principles.
Speaker 2: And I'm very aware of it, and i try very
Speaker 2: hard to protect myself. And I'm also just like you're
Speaker 2: saying that you're worried, I'm worried too my own. I
Speaker 2: think about it a lot. I'm it's I mean, especially nowadays,
Speaker 2: there's there's just such a sliding slope where like ethics
Speaker 2: and morals are like so cheap. Now, wow.
Speaker 1: Well, but the thing is success always in in the
Speaker 1: biz begets more opportunity. And I'm curious, you know, do
Speaker 1: you have ambitions beyond this show in the media space.
Speaker 2: I don't have ambitions in the media space. I have
Speaker 2: I have, you know, somewhat ambitious mcgallu Mannic hopes to
Speaker 2: contribute something to making the world a better place. That's
Speaker 2: my real ambition is to somehow add to the forces
Speaker 2: that are going against this kind of doggy dog world
Speaker 2: we're facing. You know, I have things that matter to
Speaker 2: me that I want to use this whatever engine I'm
Speaker 2: getting behind me to contribute to things that matter.
Speaker 1: So, you know, I could play Devil's advocate here and say,
Speaker 1: I hear what you're saying. The media is the place
Speaker 1: to advance that cause. If you want to reach the
Speaker 1: most people, So do this other show or produce this
Speaker 1: other thing. How does that strike you?
Speaker 2: If it's something I don't know, if I can produce
Speaker 2: a show that will somehow help people deal with their
Speaker 2: denial about climate or about what's going on, and or
Speaker 2: I would do it. I'm open to doing things about
Speaker 2: to participating in things that matter to me, and I
Speaker 2: will I'm going to join an international peacemaking organization. I will,
Speaker 2: and I want to, and I appreciate kind of having
Speaker 2: the opportunity to do that if I'm asked to join
Speaker 2: in selling a product that doesn't help anyone, No.
Speaker 1: Okay, but how do you think about the prospect of
Speaker 1: what you do and the way you are doing it
Speaker 1: on TV being done elsewhere? I guess I asked the
Speaker 1: question because often when I watch your show, which I love,
Speaker 1: I say, oh my god, I could watch this all day.
Speaker 1: This could be a whole network. Do you feel like
Speaker 1: there's an untapped appeal regardless of whether you're the one capitalizing.
Speaker 2: I think people can benefit and want to see people
Speaker 2: doing therapy. Yes, if it's good therapy. I think the more.
Speaker 2: I don't know if the more the better, but more
Speaker 2: would be better. I think it would be great for
Speaker 2: people to watch a lot of this, to watch people thinking,
Speaker 2: taking their time, thinking, analytically, listening to their unconscious, trying
Speaker 2: to listen to their partner in a way that is compassionate,
Speaker 2: in a way that is not about blaming or winning. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I think it would be great if more of that
Speaker 2: was out there.
Speaker 1: What's also been interesting and I don't know if you've
Speaker 1: seen this is the way your show has taken on
Speaker 1: a second life in social media. I constantly see clips.
Speaker 1: Are you aware of that? Do you have any I'm aware.
Speaker 2: Of that because I go and sit at my regular
Speaker 2: cafe here and people come up to me and they
Speaker 2: say to me, like, I love your social media, and
Speaker 2: I'm like, I don't have social media. I'm aware that
Speaker 2: there's like a lot out there. I'm not part of it,
Speaker 2: but yes, I'm aware that it's out there and that
Speaker 2: that's where a lot of people live.
Speaker 1: Yeah, perhaps even more so than Showtime or Paramount Plus itself.
Speaker 1: But it's also like you kind of have less control
Speaker 1: over that. So I was curious, is it a double
Speaker 1: edged sword where it's like, Okay, there's more exposure, great,
Speaker 1: but less control.
Speaker 2: I don't actually know what to do with that. Do
Speaker 2: you have any suggestions?
Speaker 1: Well, it would start, and I'm not advocating you get
Speaker 1: an official account because that does not sound like your
Speaker 1: cup of tea, And to some degree, I don't think
Speaker 1: you can control it. I mean, I've seen I tet
Speaker 1: to disturb you at this, but like I've seen your
Speaker 1: voice get taken and trained with AI so that it
Speaker 1: looks like there are accounts run by you. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's got to be disturbing, though frankly it's not particularly
Speaker 1: well done, so I don't know who would fall for this.
Speaker 2: Wow. Okay, that's that's.
Speaker 1: A lot, I know. On a less dark note, I
Speaker 1: I don't know if you've seen there. You have imitators
Speaker 1: meaning impressionists who people have sent me funny memes.
Speaker 2: Yes, I love the humor. I mean the more humor
Speaker 2: the better. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1: I will shout out a gentleman on tik toktalk named
Speaker 1: Miguel Luciano who does a flawless and flattering imitation of you.
Speaker 1: And I was just curious if you had seen it,
Speaker 1: and do you Are you disturbed by that or flattered?
Speaker 2: Or I love humor, even.
Speaker 1: If it's at your expense totally? What's the ill Luciano,
Speaker 1: Miguel Luciano, Okay, I want to reward good work by
Speaker 1: publicizing it, and I think you will not be disturbed
Speaker 1: by it.
Speaker 2: No, I love humor and humor at my expense. Please
Speaker 2: bring it on. I'm all for that.
Speaker 1: Well, but it's interesting to hear that I think you
Speaker 1: know a sense of humor isn't necessarily something you get
Speaker 1: to show off in a psychotherapy setting. And my guess is,
Speaker 1: and tell me if I'm wrong. Producers are probably pushed like, hey,
Speaker 1: we want to see more of you outside the office
Speaker 1: on the show, open up your private life. You get
Speaker 1: those pressures. How do you feel about that?
Speaker 2: I originally when we started making the show, the director's
Speaker 2: Josh and Elise and Eli, they were like, well why not?
Speaker 2: And I kept explaining I would I remember like I
Speaker 2: would read them passages from LACAN to explain why it's
Speaker 2: very important to maintain a certain wall of privacy. It's
Speaker 2: why it's important for the trans it's important for the process.
Speaker 2: It's not and I'm also private, but I also really
Speaker 2: believe that the show will do better if it's not
Speaker 2: about my private life. That it's not kind of cheap
Speaker 2: idolization of the therapist. But it's the emphasis on the process,
Speaker 2: not on the person. And they realize as we continued
Speaker 2: making the show, they realize that it's true that people
Speaker 2: don't need personal information about me. They need a way
Speaker 2: of thinking. They need the insights I mean, not the nonsense.
Speaker 1: Got it? And do you correct me if I'm wrong?
Speaker 1: You still maintain an actual, real life practice.
Speaker 2: Yes, that is my real life. I still that's what
Speaker 2: matters to me the most, my patience, and that's never
Speaker 2: going to change.
Speaker 1: But I can't imagine, and again, correct me if I'm
Speaker 1: wrong that your media presence doesn't somehow impact the real life.
Speaker 1: It must your real patients must see this, and who
Speaker 1: knows how that impacts the process.
Speaker 2: Yeah, First of all, not all of my real patients
Speaker 2: see Some choose not to watch. They just know about it.
Speaker 2: And Okay, I've said this in other interviews that I
Speaker 2: feel like my real patients are actually the ones that
Speaker 2: carry the most burden of this show because they didn't
Speaker 2: necessarily ask for it. They didn't, I didn't. They didn't
Speaker 2: start working with me knowing that I'm a public figure
Speaker 2: that I'm going to be and suddenly, you know, their
Speaker 2: mother can see their therapist on TV. It's not necessarily great,
Speaker 2: and so I think it's not great for my private
Speaker 2: practice patients. But that's the price, and I think they
Speaker 2: realize that I'm I think a lot of people were
Speaker 2: worried that it's going to become my primary preoccupation, that
Speaker 2: I'm not going to care anymore about my practice. But
Speaker 2: it's not true. I love my practice. It's really where
Speaker 2: my true self lives.
Speaker 1: It's okay, So yeah, I mean there must be quite
Speaker 1: a balancing act between academia, the show, the real practice.
Speaker 1: Who know, And of course you know you have a
Speaker 1: private life. Do you foresee a time where the show,
Speaker 1: because of all these other demands, has to go? I mean,
Speaker 1: or you're not even looking ahead at this point.
Speaker 2: I don't know. Also, you know, with the way the
Speaker 2: networks are now operating, who knows, like how long this
Speaker 2: go on.
Speaker 1: It's not up to you necessarily, definitely.
Speaker 2: Not only up to me. But I'm sure at some point,
Speaker 2: but either we will stop making it or somebody else
Speaker 2: will replace me. I mean, I'm not going to keep
Speaker 2: doing this forever. I'm not. I'm not a young person.
Speaker 1: So there could conceivably be a version of this show
Speaker 1: that continues with a different therapist. Never thought about.
Speaker 2: That, Yeah, I think that would be interesting.
Speaker 1: M m, certainly, although I would. I mean, we should
Speaker 1: mention you're not the only therapist who appears on the show.
Speaker 1: Your advisor, Virginia Goldner, your colleagues are seen talking about that,
Speaker 1: and to me, it's almost as surprising, if not more
Speaker 1: so that you're on the show in the sense that
Speaker 1: so many from your typically private field are maybe not
Speaker 1: opening up their own practices, but opening themselves up. I mean,
Speaker 1: did that take arm twisting or.
Speaker 2: I think for some of my friends, I mean it's
Speaker 2: a lot of these are friends, colleagues that are in
Speaker 2: my peer supervision group. These are all people that I anyway,
Speaker 2: I have like really strong professional and personal bonds with
Speaker 2: and I think early on people felt a little nervous
Speaker 2: to participate, but they heard from me that it's there's
Speaker 2: something that's really that feels very gratifying about doing this.
Speaker 2: You really feel like you're doing a public service and
Speaker 2: the you know, the team we work with make make
Speaker 2: everything feel very natural and no one's pressuring you to
Speaker 2: think in any one or other directions. So just feels
Speaker 2: like an extension of our regular life. People have just
Speaker 2: joined happily.
Speaker 1: That's good to hear. Well, I'll bet I'm the very
Speaker 1: first person to make this joke at the end of
Speaker 1: an interview with you, But our time is up. Sweet,
Speaker 1: thank you or enough for your time, looking forward forward
Speaker 1: to the following season, and thanks for joining me on
Speaker 1: Strictly Business.
Speaker 2: Thank you Andrew, Thank you for these awesome questions.
Speaker 3: Thanks for listening, be sure to leave us a review
Speaker 3: at Apple Podcasts or Amazon Music. We love to hear
Speaker 3: from listeners. Please go to Variety dot com and sign
Speaker 3: up for the free weekly Strictly Business newsletter, and don't
Speaker 3: forget to tune in next week for another episode of
Speaker 3: Strictly Business