Speaker 1: They will support people in power because they want access
Speaker 1: to power.
Speaker 2: There are no girls on the Internet. As a production
Speaker 2: of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative, I'm brigitad and this is
Speaker 2: there are no girls on the Internet. As much as
Speaker 2: I wish I could kind of ignore it, Yes, election
Speaker 2: season is upon us. We're about one hundred and thirty
Speaker 2: days out from the November election, and as it approaches,
Speaker 2: I'm actually really wondering whether or not we can expect
Speaker 2: that same kind of empty horse race political coverage that
Speaker 2: doesn't so much inform as it does treat elections as
Speaker 2: a game, not something you know, foundational to our democracy,
Speaker 2: with big consequences for all of us. It's one of
Speaker 2: the reasons why I read Popular Information, a newsletter about
Speaker 2: democracy for people who give a damn, And as all
Speaker 2: of my election related anxieties are coming to a head,
Speaker 2: I set down Popular Information's founder, jud Legum, about where
Speaker 2: we're at and where we might be headed. So Popular Information,
Speaker 2: I have to tell you, is one of my favorite newsletters.
Speaker 2: The about page says you are not a spectator and
Speaker 2: democracy is not a game, but so much of what
Speaker 2: is written about politics treat you that way.
Speaker 3: What do you mean by that, I just.
Speaker 1: Think so much of the coverage of politics is premised
Speaker 1: on the idea that citizens are sort of many political strategists,
Speaker 1: and you should think about how, in sort of a
Speaker 1: meadow way, of how your views might influence someone else's
Speaker 1: views and the implications of that, rather than thinking about
Speaker 1: what are the things that are important to me, what
Speaker 1: do I believe in? What do I want to see
Speaker 1: the future like, and what's the best path? You know,
Speaker 1: we've abstracted politics so much that I think we've forgotten
Speaker 1: what it's really about at its core. That's that's my
Speaker 1: that's my fundamental belief.
Speaker 3: That's such a good point.
Speaker 2: I agree, But it's so sad, and I think you're
Speaker 2: right that I see that in the way stories are
Speaker 2: reported or covered over and over again, that sometimes when
Speaker 2: I read them, I think, like, what are the values here?
Speaker 3: Like?
Speaker 2: Like, I do feel that we've sort of lost our
Speaker 2: way a little bit in terms of how we are
Speaker 2: trying to engage people in these larger stories about our
Speaker 2: democracy and our country and our world and what their
Speaker 2: role is in this right, Like, I'm just not invested
Speaker 2: in these conversations about democracy and things that are so
Speaker 2: important in these kind of gamified ways that are like, well,
Speaker 2: this team said that, and so your reactive response should
Speaker 2: be this, Like, I feel like it really minimizes what's
Speaker 2: at stake here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, And I think just for example, like
Speaker 1: one of the big topics in the news is the
Speaker 1: Trump's criminal trial, which has been going on for a
Speaker 1: few weeks now, and so much of the coverage is
Speaker 1: focused on, well, how are his supporters feeling about it,
Speaker 1: how is it impacting the presidential race, and is it
Speaker 1: If it's not impacting the presidential race, maybe it was
Speaker 1: a mistake to bring the case, but there's very there's
Speaker 1: much less coverage on what is the fundamental conducted issue
Speaker 1: and should that be legal or illegal? And if it's illegal,
Speaker 1: should it be punished. I mean, that's the core question,
Speaker 1: and the politics of it are something that we're gonna
Speaker 1: find out about in November. But we spend a lot
Speaker 1: of the time, like so much of our time between
Speaker 1: now and November will be spent just trying to predict
Speaker 1: exactly what's going to happen in November, and most of
Speaker 1: that will just be wrong and wasted time. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's what we do before every election.
Speaker 2: So true, I wonder have you ever have you seen
Speaker 2: like polls that indicate that a lot of citizens aren't
Speaker 2: really motivated by things like, oh, protecting democracy or fostering democracy.
Speaker 2: That I wonder if we've sort of got if we're
Speaker 2: sort of like giving people what they want in a
Speaker 2: kind of way that's like, oh, people don't care about
Speaker 2: you know, was this against the law or not?
Speaker 3: Or is this threatening democracy or not?
Speaker 2: They care about something else, and so these stories that
Speaker 2: are reported in this particular kind of way are sort
Speaker 2: of giving them that thing that they want, which is like,
Speaker 2: they don't care about things like protecting democracy necessarily, that's
Speaker 2: not a motivating thing for them.
Speaker 1: I think that it is true that sometimes people, and
Speaker 1: I think the polling reflects this, are less concerned about issues,
Speaker 1: whether that's democracy or are precise policy on taxes or
Speaker 1: other important issues than they are on some of these
Speaker 1: more cultural or personal questions. But I also think that
Speaker 1: it's too much of a cop out to just say, well,
Speaker 1: people are only interested in these things, and we're just
Speaker 1: giving people what they want, Because what people are interested
Speaker 1: in and what they think is important is dependent on
Speaker 1: what they're reading and consuming and learning about and how
Speaker 1: they're gaining an understanding of what's important and what's not important.
Speaker 1: So for me, as somebody who who writes and is
Speaker 1: dependent on people thinking they are interested in what I
Speaker 1: am writing about, I am of course interested in what
Speaker 1: people are interested in it and what they think. But
Speaker 1: I'm also equally interested in is there a topic that
Speaker 1: I know people are probably not yet interested in, but
Speaker 1: can I figure out a way to explain it and
Speaker 1: to present it to them in a way which they
Speaker 1: will become interested in it? And I think that, from
Speaker 1: the perspective of the media is an important role that
Speaker 1: gets overlooked too much about the process of shaping what
Speaker 1: is important and what isn't important. Not in a hectori way,
Speaker 1: but can you present a story that people might not
Speaker 1: have been aware of, and if they are aware of it,
Speaker 1: they would be interested in if you tell it in
Speaker 1: a compelling way.
Speaker 2: And I think that you do this in a very
Speaker 2: particular kind of way, because there are so many stories
Speaker 2: that come across my newsfeed or whatever about wrongdoing like
Speaker 2: XYZ person, public figure, a elected official, whatever, has done
Speaker 2: something bad or wrong, and something that you an angle
Speaker 2: that you take that I really appreciate that is okay, Well,
Speaker 2: this was a bad thing, whatever, whatever, But what are
Speaker 2: the let's peel back the layers. What are the corporate
Speaker 2: forces that are supporting this person and are they aligning
Speaker 2: with their stated values or pledges or whatever that are
Speaker 2: out in the world, Like, like, who are actually the
Speaker 2: forces that are propping up this person to do XYZ
Speaker 2: bad thing. That's something that I think that you do
Speaker 2: better than almost anybody out there. And I wonder how
Speaker 2: did you come to sort of seeing stories in this
Speaker 2: way and taking that framing, well.
Speaker 1: For better or for worse. I've been looking through campaign
Speaker 1: finance reports since I was I think eighteen years old.
Speaker 1: I'm forty five now, so I've I've been doing.
Speaker 3: It for something that you were into.
Speaker 1: Well, I just want to My first jobs in politics
Speaker 1: was in the research department at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Speaker 1: There were about five or six of us there and
Speaker 1: we had one computer that we shared, but you could
Speaker 1: print out, you know. One of the things you would
Speaker 1: do at that time was create a book. And by
Speaker 1: they still talk about books in the research world, but
Speaker 1: they're no longer physical books. But at that time it
Speaker 1: was a physical three whole punch book and you know,
Speaker 1: whatever what you would do is just print out all
Speaker 1: the campaign finance filings for that candidate and their opponent.
Speaker 1: And you know, things have changed quite a bit, but
Speaker 1: the role of corporate money over those decades has become
Speaker 1: more and more important. And I also think that there
Speaker 1: are especially the way in which we've sliced and diced
Speaker 1: some of these congressional districts, and just the way demographs
Speaker 1: have shaken out. There's people who are in districts where
Speaker 1: they're never they're basically never going to lose, they're not competitive.
Speaker 1: There's not that many competitive districts these days. There's not
Speaker 1: that many competitive states these days. In the presidential election.
Speaker 1: But everyone or almost everyone, to one extent or another,
Speaker 1: requires kind of the buy in or relies on the
Speaker 1: buy in from major corporations and other people who do
Speaker 1: have a desire and a need to be viewed as
Speaker 1: taking broadly acceptable social positions on social issues for the
Speaker 1: rest of the world. And so that's a way to
Speaker 1: bring a level or some semblance of accountability to those politicians,
Speaker 1: or it should be. It's not not always, but at
Speaker 1: the very least, I think the first step is understanding,
Speaker 1: you know, yes, there's this congressman Mike Collins, who is
Speaker 1: you know, saying extremely racist things online and you know,
Speaker 1: praising people who are engaged in the ugliest, most disgusting
Speaker 1: and racial stereotypes you could possibly imagine if you were
Speaker 1: trying to come up with, you know, the worst one
Speaker 1: you could, you wouldn't go too far away. But he's
Speaker 1: not just existing in a vacuum. He's backed by these
Speaker 1: you know, major corporations, American Airlines, Delta, all sorts of
Speaker 1: folks who not only would you think reject this, but
Speaker 1: really present themselves on a corporate level as being champions
Speaker 1: of you know, equality and treating people fairly and equally
Speaker 1: and in both their business as far as attracting customers,
Speaker 1: and also they're recruiting, you know, bringing in the very
Speaker 1: best employees, have have a real interest in being viewed
Speaker 1: as somebody who welcomes you know, all sorts of people,
Speaker 1: regardless of their race or anything else. And so yeah,
Speaker 1: you can kind of I think it's useful for at
Speaker 1: least at the start, for people to know what's going on,
Speaker 1: where the money is flowing, and how that assists some
Speaker 1: of these more radical forces that have taken a pretty
Speaker 1: prominent role, you know, in our political system.
Speaker 2: So I got in touch with Judd after a pretty
Speaker 2: upsetting moment earlier this summer. You might remember it. On
Speaker 2: the campus of University of Mississippi sometimes called Ole Miss,
Speaker 2: a group of thirty to sixty pro Palestinian student protesters gather.
Speaker 2: The group is multiracial, and a group of counter protesters,
Speaker 2: who are mostly white men, two of whom are wearing red,
Speaker 2: white and blue American flag overalls with no shirt, are
Speaker 2: taunting the pro Palestinian students. The whites students encircle a
Speaker 2: black woman. It's journalism student Jayleen R.
Speaker 1: Smith.
Speaker 2: They make monkey noises at her and scratch their under
Speaker 2: arms while chanting like an ape. One calls her Lizzo.
Speaker 2: They shout lock her up. It's heartbreaking, and as a
Speaker 2: black woman who came of age protesting for lefty causes
Speaker 2: like ending the war in Iraq in the heart of
Speaker 2: the Deep South, North Carolina, I was Jayleen, and those
Speaker 2: white Southern frat boys taunting and jeering at her, well,
Speaker 2: I knew them too. It's like it's been twenty years
Speaker 2: and nothing has changed. And that video actually harkened back
Speaker 2: even further for me to the days of civil rights
Speaker 2: sit ins and bus boycotts across the South. Two male
Speaker 2: students were kicked out of their frat by Delta Data,
Speaker 2: and a lot of people rightly denounce their behavior, but
Speaker 2: not Georgia Congressman Republican Mike Collins. Mike Collins tweeted the
Speaker 2: video of the protesters making monkey noises at Jalen, saying
Speaker 2: ole miss is taken care of business. That business being
Speaker 2: pretty obvious racism toward.
Speaker 3: A black woman.
Speaker 2: He tweeted that in May, and it is still up today,
Speaker 2: and Collins didn't really even seem that bent out of
Speaker 2: shape when he got pushed back when people called out
Speaker 2: the fact that the young men in the video that
Speaker 2: he reposted glorifying their behavior, are being blatantly racist toward
Speaker 2: a black woman, Collins put out kind of a tepid statement, saying, quote, Frankly,
Speaker 2: I did not believe that to be the focal point
Speaker 2: of the video shared at the time, but I recognize
Speaker 2: that there certainly seems to be some potentially inappropriate behavior
Speaker 2: that none of us should see to glorify.
Speaker 3: And that was kind of it.
Speaker 2: Collins is not in danger of losing his seat in
Speaker 2: Congress anytime soon, and it was like that was that
Speaker 2: you know, little chance of any kind.
Speaker 3: Of electoral repercussions.
Speaker 2: It kind of felt like the media just moved on
Speaker 2: and didn't know what else they could possibly say about
Speaker 2: this incident except jud for popular information. Judd looked into
Speaker 2: what corporations and businesses donate money to Collins's campaign, and
Speaker 2: he found that a lot of them had made these big,
Speaker 2: flashy public pledges not to use their money to fund
Speaker 2: divisive candidates, and a lot of them talked big public,
Speaker 2: flashy games about things like diversity and inclusion.
Speaker 3: So would they be pulling their funding from Congressman Collins?
Speaker 3: Not so much so talking about Collins?
Speaker 2: You know, I have to say, like the videos and
Speaker 2: the imagery coming out of Old Miss, it hit me
Speaker 2: on a really kind of visceral level. Like I was thinking, like, oh,
Speaker 2: we're gonna see these images and history books or something
Speaker 2: like like. That's the level that I felt those those
Speaker 2: images and videos elicited. I don't, but you know, when
Speaker 2: you know all already they're put out by this guy
Speaker 2: who himself has written for like white supremacist media outlets.
Speaker 2: Then Mike Collins is like, oh, oh, Miss is really
Speaker 2: taking care of business. What was the reaction after Collins tweeted.
Speaker 1: This, well, I mean, I guess it depends on which
Speaker 1: in what group. I think that there were some people
Speaker 1: who were online who were certainly outraged by it. You said,
Speaker 1: you said, you you you think that you might see
Speaker 1: these images in a history book. It was almost as
Speaker 1: if we were watching a history books. Like you felt
Speaker 1: like you were watching something from the fifties or something
Speaker 1: like that. Like it's hard to believe that it's this
Speaker 1: is a this is a scene of life in a
Speaker 1: college campus of any sword in twenty twenty four as
Speaker 1: opposed to you know, nineteen forty four. But I think,
Speaker 1: and again this goes back to where we started, the
Speaker 1: discussion of how so much political coverage is driven by
Speaker 1: what might be the implication in a future election. So
Speaker 1: the fact that Mike Collins has a very red seat
Speaker 1: and oftentimes I think doesn't even attract a I mean,
Speaker 1: he is in his first term, but that particular district
Speaker 1: doesn't always even attract a democratic challenger because people don't
Speaker 1: want to waste their time. Uh, then therefore we're not
Speaker 1: really going to spend time scrutinizing. My view is, no,
Speaker 1: this is this is something that's you know, outrageous, and
Speaker 1: let's look into it, and let's look into who this
Speaker 1: guy is and who's backing him, because the implications are
Speaker 1: much greater than one congressional seat. Meaning, if if this becomes,
Speaker 1: you know, an acceptable level of discourse, you know that
Speaker 1: things things full. I don't think things are going to
Speaker 1: go in a good direction from there. I can't imagine
Speaker 1: how that would things would end up going in a
Speaker 1: good direction. So that's that's really what's motivating. That's really
Speaker 1: what's motivating me. But I think the the overall reaction,
Speaker 1: you know, from sort of a media perspective, is relatively muted.
Speaker 1: I would say, I would say it's it's you know,
Speaker 1: relative to what's happening.
Speaker 2: Maybe I'm being naive and listeners are going to be like, wow,
Speaker 2: what a Pollyanna. But I was genuinely surprised how it
Speaker 2: does seem like this story kind of petered out, and
Speaker 2: I think it is exactly what you're saying. That part
Speaker 2: of it is just like, well, there's no real implications
Speaker 2: for a future election here, so.
Speaker 3: Like what else?
Speaker 2: What else is there that we could possibly talk about?
Speaker 2: If that's the case. And I was genuinely surprised to
Speaker 2: see how little traction it got, which is one of
Speaker 2: the reasons I'm making this episode because I don't think
Speaker 2: that's appropriate. But yeah, I think it goes back to
Speaker 2: what you were saying, how when we have this dynamic
Speaker 2: that treats politics and democracy as if it is a game,
Speaker 2: and if the stakes are one way, there's not even
Speaker 2: really any point of even engaging on some of these
Speaker 2: issues that really go back to like right and wrong
Speaker 2: and what kind of discourse do we want to have
Speaker 2: from our elected officials and what kind of discourse is unacceptable.
Speaker 2: We're not even really having those conversations in a lot
Speaker 2: of cases.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I think the other part of it that
Speaker 1: I think about sometimes is that it's a very shortsighted
Speaker 1: view of the political discourse, Meaning, yeah, there might not
Speaker 1: be implications in Mike College congressional district right now, but
Speaker 1: politics can change pretty rapidly. You know. It wasn't that
Speaker 1: long ago two thousand and eight when all of the
Speaker 1: major Democratic candidates, all of them opposed same sex marriage.
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, you know, and you
Speaker 1: almost forget that that happened, and you couldn't imagine it
Speaker 1: happening today, like you couldn't have a Democratic presidential candidate
Speaker 1: who opposed the same sex marriage. People would be like,
Speaker 1: what are what are you talking about? Like this is
Speaker 1: some sort of bizarro land, But it was really, you know,
Speaker 1: fifteen years ago that that was not only something that
Speaker 1: could happen, but it was essentially table stakes because people
Speaker 1: thought that anything else was too radical. Not all people,
Speaker 1: but the people who were running for president at that
Speaker 1: time thought it was too radical. So yeah, Mike Collins
Speaker 1: might be able to get away with this today. He
Speaker 1: can pretty much say whatever he wants. But we don't
Speaker 1: know what the future holds, and I don't think that
Speaker 1: that should be an excuse if there is something that's
Speaker 1: worth you know, exploring and unpacking and worth people's attention
Speaker 1: from covering it. So that's that's kind of the I'm
Speaker 1: less concerned about, you know, what are the immediate implications
Speaker 1: of this story, and more about what's important what's not important,
Speaker 1: and let's just start there. And you know, things will
Speaker 1: shake out in ways that are are unpredictable, not always
Speaker 1: in a in a great direction. You know, it'll be
Speaker 1: things go in both directions. We've seen that. We've seen
Speaker 1: that too. I think I think one when Obama was
Speaker 1: was elected in two thousand and eight, there were a
Speaker 1: lot of people saying, you know, the demographics of the
Speaker 1: country are changing, and you know, Republicans are never going
Speaker 1: to be competitive and presidential elections and et cetera, et cetera,
Speaker 1: and you know that's clearly, you know, not the case.
Speaker 1: So it's not that it's not that things are always
Speaker 1: just going to get improved, but things are always changing
Speaker 1: and changing in ways that we don't we can't always predict.
Speaker 2: I think it really behooves us to take a long
Speaker 2: view of the landscape. I feel like we're so at
Speaker 2: least for me, I feel like having a very short term,
Speaker 2: narrow view of things is encouraged and just in the
Speaker 2: new cycle that we're in, social media moves so quickly,
Speaker 2: and it can really do who of us to step
Speaker 2: back and take a kind of a longer view of
Speaker 2: all of this sometimes.
Speaker 1: For sure, for sure, And I you know, honestly, that's
Speaker 1: one of the reasons why I like writing a newsletter
Speaker 1: as opposed to before when I was editing a blog.
Speaker 1: And it's just because I write one newsletter a day,
Speaker 1: so that means that there's a whole bunch of stories
Speaker 1: that occur during the day. Then I know people will
Speaker 1: probably be interested in, but they'll either already know about
Speaker 1: or will sort of just be old news by the
Speaker 1: next morning. So you have to try to pick something.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's not exactly long term think as opposed to,
Speaker 1: you know, spending five years reading a book, but it's
Speaker 1: a little bit better. You know that you have to
Speaker 1: think of something that does this have a you know,
Speaker 1: is this still going to be worth thinking about and
Speaker 1: talking about, you know, in the morning.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 1: And I think that's a I appreciate at least having
Speaker 1: that that perspective in that check on myself because I
Speaker 1: think it is it is tempting to think about, well,
Speaker 1: what's going to a people's interest in that moment, and
Speaker 1: that that is what drives a lot of our a
Speaker 1: lot of the discourse.
Speaker 4: Let's take a quick break at our back.
Speaker 2: This is something I feel viscerally because I make this podcast.
Speaker 2: Sometimes there really is this pressure to just be reacting constantly,
Speaker 2: just putting something into the feed that responds to the
Speaker 2: thing that everybody is talking about, you know, just adding
Speaker 2: your take into a sea of however many takes are
Speaker 2: already out there. It's tempting, but does it really make
Speaker 2: us any.
Speaker 3: Smarter or more informed?
Speaker 2: You know, I think there's got to be a better
Speaker 2: way and judge us too. I really appreciate that, you know,
Speaker 2: as somebody who makes a podcast. Our show comes out
Speaker 2: twice a week, and so many of the stories from
Speaker 2: on the beginning of the week, I'm like, oh, everybody's
Speaker 2: talking about this. By the time I'm ready to put
Speaker 2: an episode out about it, it just feels like more chatter,
Speaker 2: like everybody has already got their takes out, And I
Speaker 2: guess I think there's a temptation to add to the
Speaker 2: chatter of like, everybody's talking about this, let me do
Speaker 2: an episode about it. But then you don't get to
Speaker 2: give these stories a little bit of breathing room and
Speaker 2: be like, well, what's going to be the story that
Speaker 2: really does have longer term implications. It's so easy to
Speaker 2: just crank out reactions and content, but it is harder
Speaker 2: and I think more valuable to really spend some time
Speaker 2: being like, well, if people have one story that they're
Speaker 2: going to pour over today, what story should that be
Speaker 2: and why? Like, I think you're really doing some of
Speaker 2: that foundational work of nourishing people via media, which I
Speaker 2: think is so important and done less and less these days.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's an interest. It's difficult, but it's to
Speaker 1: try to think about that, like, what are something that
Speaker 1: is not getting a lot of attention that might get
Speaker 1: attention if people just knew about it. But the reality
Speaker 1: is there are so many stories, so many important stories
Speaker 1: that are untold today. Because you've had with you know,
Speaker 1: Google and Facebook and others sweeping up all the local
Speaker 1: advertising revenue, you've had a really hollowing out of local journalism,
Speaker 1: which used to be you know, there might have been
Speaker 1: ten people covering a state house, you know, in Maryland
Speaker 1: or wherever from Maryland. So that's what I bring it up.
Speaker 1: But you know, it's a similar story at every state.
Speaker 1: You might have had ten people and now you have one,
Speaker 1: or you might have had fifty people and now you
Speaker 1: have five. And that just means there's so many things
Speaker 1: that are going on that people don't know about. So
Speaker 1: it is important when you can to try to in
Speaker 1: my view, or at least what I try to do,
Speaker 1: is to try to find things that I think are
Speaker 1: flying on to the radar a bit because I think
Speaker 1: more and more that's what's happening and and this, and
Speaker 1: the desire to kind of pile on or it's safer
Speaker 1: to write about you know, it's it's safer to write
Speaker 1: about Trump, for instance, you know, because because everyone's interested
Speaker 1: in it, and there's nothing wrong. I mean, he maybe
Speaker 1: our next president. It's not there's nothing wrong with that,
Speaker 1: and it's appropriate to be interested in who's the next president.
Speaker 1: But you know that there's going to be kind of
Speaker 1: a baseline level of interest. You also know that it
Speaker 1: is going to be difficult to break new ground because
Speaker 1: there's so much that's already been said. So I think
Speaker 1: that there may be more opportunities in down the ballot,
Speaker 1: in localities, in states where really important things that are
Speaker 1: happening that impact people's lives but are not getting that
Speaker 1: same level of attention just because of where we are.
Speaker 1: The dynamics of political media.
Speaker 3: Don't even get me started, you know.
Speaker 2: Not that long ago, I was working for an advocacy organization,
Speaker 2: and when Trump is in the White House, we definitely
Speaker 2: leaned on that when we would send emails out to
Speaker 2: our list, because every subject line got to be like,
Speaker 2: what's Trump done?
Speaker 4: Now?
Speaker 3: Trump is terrible?
Speaker 2: Trump is doing this and that and rightly, so, like
Speaker 2: all of that stuff was true, but when Trump left office,
Speaker 2: it was so we had like leaned on that so
Speaker 2: hard that it was like we had trouble engaging people
Speaker 2: or getting them interested when we didn't have Trump as
Speaker 2: this like singular bad guy figure to use. And it
Speaker 2: kind of made me think, like we really sort of
Speaker 2: lost the plot here if we can only talk to
Speaker 2: our community, our people when we are pointing to something
Speaker 2: horrible that Trump has done legitimately, so, but like, there's
Speaker 2: got to be a better way to engage people politically
Speaker 2: than that that like actually speaks to their values or
Speaker 2: you know, a shared future we want to see together.
Speaker 3: That's not just like you know, pointing to him as
Speaker 3: a bad guy.
Speaker 2: It's something that I really think that some of us
Speaker 2: might have used as a crutch for a bit. And
Speaker 2: now we're sort of like, oh, well, the media legacy
Speaker 2: or the media landscape that that has given us is
Speaker 2: really not so great.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And at some point, you know, Trump will go away.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure when that point will be, but at
Speaker 1: some point that will happen. But that doesn't that won't
Speaker 1: be the end of his style of politics. And he
Speaker 1: wasn't the beginning of his style of politics. Either you know,
Speaker 1: we had over many years the development of the Tea Party,
Speaker 1: and one, you know, what Trump does very kind of
Speaker 1: effectively a lot of the time at least is degrade
Speaker 1: confidence and trust in institutions. I mean, that's that's that's
Speaker 1: the whole game ultimately, you know, whether it's saying Barack
Speaker 1: Obama was really born in Africa or saying the election
Speaker 1: was actually stolen or saying all the prosecutors who are
Speaker 1: going after him are corrupt. I mean, it's about undermining institutions.
Speaker 1: But that process did not start with Trump. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is something that has been funded at a very
Speaker 1: high level with the Tea Party and with with other groups.
Speaker 1: And once Trump, you know, kind of exit stage left,
Speaker 1: it will continue. It will continue, and there may be
Speaker 1: people who are who are were even more effective at
Speaker 1: a kind of rallying support around some of these these topics.
Speaker 1: So I do think it is a mistake to present
Speaker 1: the problem as one of a specific personality. Uh and
Speaker 1: what what other thing that I'll just sence I'm on
Speaker 1: a little rant here. One other thing that I'll say
Speaker 1: is I also think it's a problem that what is
Speaker 1: now considered a moderate Pundit is actually some of the
Speaker 1: most conservative people on pretty much every issue who don't
Speaker 1: happen to like Trump stylistically and his style of politics.
Speaker 1: So they're anti Trump, which is fine, but politically they
Speaker 1: are not moderate. And if we come out of this,
Speaker 1: if we come out of this in the example is
Speaker 1: you know that Bill Crystal or whoever, you know, all
Speaker 1: these folks who have kind of you know, are very
Speaker 1: or you know that some people become anti Trump and
Speaker 1: then they come back and they're pro Trump again.
Speaker 3: But there are a.
Speaker 1: Group of people who are pretty consistently pro Trump. But
Speaker 1: that does not make them moderate in any way. It
Speaker 1: just means that they happen not to like Trump.
Speaker 2: It is so true, and it really in me it
Speaker 2: goes back to what we were talking about earlier of
Speaker 2: like I don't know when I think about where I
Speaker 2: was politically and the political landscape and like two thousand
Speaker 2: and seven, two thousand and eight, some of the people
Speaker 2: that I feel like I'm being told like, oh, well,
Speaker 2: that's a moderate voice.
Speaker 4: I like this.
Speaker 2: I just can't believe where the ships have fallen, and
Speaker 2: like where we are in terms of political discourse in
Speaker 2: this country right now.
Speaker 3: It really terrifies me.
Speaker 2: And yeah, I just I don't I when I think
Speaker 2: about where we will be in the future, I genuinely
Speaker 2: don't know.
Speaker 3: I think it's it's.
Speaker 2: Really wild how some of the most extreme voices and
Speaker 2: names out there we kind of are meant to be like, oh, well,
Speaker 2: they're not a Trumper, so they're kind of on the
Speaker 2: right track, and it's like, no, they really aren't.
Speaker 3: Like, well, like what has happened to our landscape here?
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it'll be interesting to see how that how
Speaker 1: that shakes out.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, we're either five years away or a few
Speaker 1: months away from the from the end of Trump. I
Speaker 1: don't think he'll have another run in him after this
Speaker 1: if he were to lose another time. But you know,
Speaker 1: either way, you know they'll be there'll be a new
Speaker 1: uh dynamic, And to be honest, I'm looking forward to
Speaker 1: it because I think it as somebody you know, I
Speaker 1: mentioned that, you know, I've been sort of involved in
Speaker 1: politics in one way or the other for for most
Speaker 1: of my adult life, and I think that the moment
Speaker 1: we're in now is is definitely one of the most
Speaker 1: exhausting moments because I just feel like the dynamics have
Speaker 1: not changed for so long, Like what what's what's interesting
Speaker 1: in in kind of invigorating is when you get sort
Speaker 1: of new dynamics, new figures on the scene, new issues
Speaker 1: at play, new kinds of debates. But today, you know,
Speaker 1: we're engaged in a lot of the old kinds of debates.
Speaker 1: So it can become a little exhausting, but it doesn't
Speaker 1: make it. Of course, the stakes are still just as important.
Speaker 1: So you kind of sold your own. But if things
Speaker 1: do change one day soon, I won't be too upset about.
Speaker 3: It, you and me both.
Speaker 1: More.
Speaker 4: After a quick break, let's get right back into it.
Speaker 2: Given the kind of reporting that you do, what role
Speaker 2: do you see corporate money and corporate funding and corporate
Speaker 2: support having in where we are today, Like when it
Speaker 2: comes to Collins, Like what brands and corporate dentities are
Speaker 2: some of some of the folks who are supporting him
Speaker 2: right now?
Speaker 1: Well, I think when you when you look at it,
Speaker 1: a lot of his supporters are major corporations UH that
Speaker 1: are based in Georgia, which is not so you have
Speaker 1: folks UH like Delta Delta Airlines. You have folks like
Speaker 1: Coca Cola UH, and then some of the other UH
Speaker 1: national big national groups are who are based elsewhere at
Speaker 1: and T Verizon. UH. One thing I thought was really
Speaker 1: interesting about Coca Cola, and this of course goes back
Speaker 1: to its kind of history and in Georgia specifically, which
Speaker 1: is one of the you know, central UH, places where
Speaker 1: the civil rights movement kind of was played out, and
Speaker 1: Coca Cola has always had kind of a forward looking
Speaker 1: perspective on those issues. And I think, really, you know,
Speaker 1: for a whole variety of reasons that's based in Georgia.
Speaker 1: I think it wants to make sure that it could
Speaker 1: attract you know, the best black talent, the best talent overall,
Speaker 1: but particularly a lot of the talent are going to
Speaker 1: be black people, and so they've been pretty forward looking,
Speaker 1: and they actually in twenty twenty one pledged and said,
Speaker 1: we are not going to give any money to people
Speaker 1: who are making these kind of outrageous comments on racial issues.
Speaker 1: Like that is our pledge. And it fits in with
Speaker 1: a lot of the other stuff they've done. And you
Speaker 1: don't want to I don't want to diminish the fact
Speaker 1: that they probably have done a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: important work in this regard. But the thing that I
Speaker 1: find disturbingly cynical is that Coca Cola and the other
Speaker 1: corporations too never really want to be held accountable or
Speaker 1: follow through on pledges like that. They are they want
Speaker 1: the sort of pr win and they definitely want that reputation,
Speaker 1: but they also want to stay on good terms with
Speaker 1: somebody who is a congressman from their state who they
Speaker 1: may need to get a meeting with, or you know,
Speaker 1: might want to be able to bend a zier a
Speaker 1: bit on an important issue. So you know, that's that's
Speaker 1: where I see a much larger role if corporations are
Speaker 1: really serious about this. I mean, that's the whole thing
Speaker 1: with you know, whether you want to call it ESG
Speaker 1: or DEI or whatever acronym you want to call it
Speaker 1: around corporate social responsibility is there's a lot of criticism
Speaker 1: from the right, but the reality is most of this
Speaker 1: is just talk that many corporations are saying a lot
Speaker 1: of stuff. They have a whole fancy website about, you know,
Speaker 1: what they're going to be doing on climate in twenty
Speaker 1: forty five, but they're not doing anything now, you know,
Speaker 1: and now they're going in the wrong direction. So that's
Speaker 1: I think a very you know, we'll have to see
Speaker 1: how that that how that plays out that there's a
Speaker 1: reason why it's a political battlefield right now is because
Speaker 1: it's important and the right has has come back and
Speaker 1: is trying to make it politically unpalatable for corporations take
Speaker 1: any kind of position on political or social issues.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, given all that, like given that, we're
Speaker 2: seeing things like DEI and like conclusion efforts, even the mildest,
Speaker 2: the most toothless things being attacked and kind of made
Speaker 2: politically reactive in these ways, Like where do you see
Speaker 2: corporations and brands landing? And in some way that doesn't
Speaker 2: matter where they land because you know, I have to
Speaker 2: tell you I've taken like a tour of the Civil
Speaker 2: Rights Museum in Atlanta, which they have an entire Coca
Speaker 2: Cola wing, and the person who was giving us the
Speaker 2: tour was from Coca Cola and was like very proud
Speaker 2: to tell us what a big ally Coca Cola was
Speaker 2: in the civil rights movement and how important that economic
Speaker 2: economic flexing was to the civil rights movement and all
Speaker 2: of that, and like here in twenty twenty four, haaven
Speaker 2: then be like, well, we made this pledge, but what
Speaker 2: are you.
Speaker 3: Going to do? Like it is. It is very disappointing.
Speaker 2: But I guess, stepping back, like, do you think these
Speaker 2: brands are going to really.
Speaker 3: Be engaged? Is it all just talk? And on some
Speaker 3: level like does it matter?
Speaker 1: I think it. I mean, I think again it's the
Speaker 1: short term. In the long term, I think short term,
Speaker 1: there's very little in it for brands right now, and
Speaker 1: that's why you sort of see or retrenching. The most
Speaker 1: dramatic thing we saw happen was after January sixth, when
Speaker 1: you did see a lot of corporations pledge to stop
Speaker 1: donating to the members of Congress that voted against certifying
Speaker 1: the election. But quickly we've also seen most of those
Speaker 1: companies roll those back, or they did it for a
Speaker 1: year or two years, and then they said that was enough,
Speaker 1: and now we're going to donate to those companies again,
Speaker 1: donate to those members of Congress again. Because the reality
Speaker 1: is that right now the political environment is pretty it's
Speaker 1: pretty evenly split. You know, maybe it's not completely evenly split,
Speaker 1: but you don't if you want to appeal to everyone,
Speaker 1: you know, it's pretty easy to make people upset. But
Speaker 1: I do think that there's a broader trend where people
Speaker 1: are much more conscious in their consumption. Maybe not right
Speaker 1: now about the politics of the companies who are producing
Speaker 1: the products that they're consuming, but people are much more interested,
Speaker 1: for instance, in you know, if they're buying broccoli, like
Speaker 1: where that broccoli came from. They're much more interested today
Speaker 1: than they were ten years ago. They're much more interested
Speaker 1: in how their T shirt was produced. Not everyone, but
Speaker 1: many more people than were produced. But and I think
Speaker 1: that if people are starting to engage in those kinds
Speaker 1: of questions and think more critically about those kind of questions,
Speaker 1: it is a natural step and certainly a step that
Speaker 1: some people, although maybe not a critical massive people are
Speaker 1: taking to think about what role is this company playing
Speaker 1: in the political issues that I care about? How are
Speaker 1: they using their influence? Because there is a path where
Speaker 1: the companies sort of take a step back and say
Speaker 1: we're not going to do anything. You know, we're not
Speaker 1: going to donate the politicians, We're not going to engage
Speaker 1: in lobbying. We're just going to focus on making our
Speaker 1: widgets and selling our widgets, and we'll let other people
Speaker 1: worry about politics. That's not really where they are right now.
Speaker 1: Where most companies are right now is they will support
Speaker 1: people in power because they want access to power. And
Speaker 1: I do think that there is a point in the
Speaker 1: foreseeable future when a critical massive consumer say that that
Speaker 1: that is not good enough and that I'm going to
Speaker 1: shift my consumption to corporations that either stay out of
Speaker 1: it or corporations that more reflect my values. So I
Speaker 1: do think that this process of, at least at the beginning,
Speaker 1: kind of maybe just exposing the role that corporations play
Speaker 1: in politics, you know, may may lead somewhere.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 1: Maybe I won't be doing this work long enough to
Speaker 1: see it, but it might. It's not hard to imagine
Speaker 1: a world where you know, people are paying much closer
Speaker 1: attention to these kinds of issues.
Speaker 2: Well to that end, you know, in your in your
Speaker 2: newsletter piece about what happened at Old Miss, I noticed that,
Speaker 2: you know, you're like, oh, popular Information reached out to
Speaker 2: H and T, Verizon Coke didn't hear back.
Speaker 3: How much of this worked for you is like being.
Speaker 2: Willing to ask the ask the company an annoying question
Speaker 2: and then being like, I'm We're not going to answer that,
Speaker 2: Like how much of this is just being like, well, yes,
Speaker 2: said x y Z publicly, What's what's the deal.
Speaker 3: Where do you stand now?
Speaker 1: A lot of time doing that, and it is it is,
Speaker 1: it is sometimes frustrating, and you don't always get an answer,
Speaker 1: or if you do get an answer, it's it's sometimes
Speaker 1: it's it's no comment. And I do think that people
Speaker 1: are much less likely. People are much less likely to
Speaker 1: weigh in now than they even were in twenty twenty one,
Speaker 1: because there's been a concerted effort to try to present
Speaker 1: this idea that corporations have gone woke and people and
Speaker 1: they're guarding against the other side of it. So yeah,
Speaker 1: that is a big part of it. But I also
Speaker 1: think it's you know, important work. I mean, we were
Speaker 1: the first people in the newsletter, was the first place
Speaker 1: to report that any companies had decided to not to
Speaker 1: stop donating to the members of Congress who who voted
Speaker 1: not to certify on January sixth, and it's because you know,
Speaker 1: we sent out the you know, inquiries to one hundred
Speaker 1: and seventy seven companies, I think the first for the
Speaker 1: first issue, and we heard back from four of them.
Speaker 1: But those that four turned out to be you know,
Speaker 1: fairly significant and helped create a dynamic where other companies
Speaker 1: filed suit. So I think it's important to ask those questions,
Speaker 1: and I think sometimes even when you don't get an answer,
Speaker 1: it's important to know. It's important for the companies to
Speaker 1: know that it's getting written about, and that it's going
Speaker 1: to be and it's going to be discussed and talked about.
Speaker 1: And I know that they companies do pay attention to this,
Speaker 1: to this kind of reporting, and that's one of the
Speaker 1: reasons why I stick with it. The other reason is
Speaker 1: I know that you know, a lot of readers, you know,
Speaker 1: appreciate it, and a lot of readers are looking for that,
Speaker 1: you know, information. It's probably not the first thing on
Speaker 1: the on the top of everyone's mind when they're you know,
Speaker 1: in the grocery store, whatever they're doing, going about their day.
Speaker 1: You know, people have you have to remind yourself when
Speaker 1: you're working in a political space or the media space
Speaker 1: that people have other things going on. They've got jobs
Speaker 1: and lives and kids and all sorts of responsibilities, and
Speaker 1: so they're not always going to be focused on this stuff.
Speaker 1: But you know, for the people that are or or
Speaker 1: or might be, you know, establishing this factual record I
Speaker 1: think is worth some time.
Speaker 2: I think popular information has completely changed the culture around
Speaker 2: how we think about who is funding what and our
Speaker 2: role in it and all of that. So I completely agree,
Speaker 2: And I guess one of my last questions is, first,
Speaker 2: folks who are listening, who are like, I'm so checked
Speaker 2: out on this, I don't even know, Like, how do
Speaker 2: you stay engaged and not just sit out all of
Speaker 2: this set out your democracy, especially when things are so
Speaker 2: exhausting and everything seems so exhausting to keep up with.
Speaker 1: Well, I think that's a tough question because I think
Speaker 1: it is difficult enough to kind of keep your own
Speaker 1: life on track and your own life in order. Sort
Speaker 1: of taking in all these external things that might not
Speaker 1: be happening in your front door is difficult, and I
Speaker 1: think it's actually okay sometimes. I know this is maybe
Speaker 1: like anathema to people who work in the political space,
Speaker 1: but it's okay sometimes to like check out and just
Speaker 1: focus on yourself. But I do think that the progress
Speaker 1: in politics or things that are more can give you
Speaker 1: some hope don't usually come in the form of this
Speaker 1: one sort of dramatic event where everything is fixed to
Speaker 1: get and everything is good to get. That's not the
Speaker 1: way that it works. But I think that things that
Speaker 1: can impact even one person's life, and or just having
Speaker 1: someone feel like they're more understood or more valued. That
Speaker 1: can be really important. And that's what I, you know,
Speaker 1: try to try to focus on. And so I think
Speaker 1: if you're feeling like what you're doing doesn't matter or
Speaker 1: it's just pointless to be engaged, you know, your contribution
Speaker 1: might just be explaining the importance of you know, let's say,
Speaker 1: expanding the child tax credit to one person and getting
Speaker 1: them to you know, maybe just understand, maybe not even
Speaker 1: change their mind, but maybe just understand that issue and
Speaker 1: why a lot of people rely on it and why
Speaker 1: we have you know, a lot of kids who are
Speaker 1: still living in poverty in the United States. That could
Speaker 1: be I think that's that's like a contribution that you
Speaker 1: can feel okay about. You know, it doesn't have to
Speaker 1: be that you know, you've you've passed a major piece
Speaker 1: of legislation, because that's that's something that that anyone really
Speaker 1: could do these days. So so that's that's I think
Speaker 1: when I'm thinking clearly, I think that's the kind of
Speaker 1: thing that I try to focus on. And I think
Speaker 1: probably the right the better attitude.
Speaker 4: H H.
Speaker 2: Got a story about an interesting thing in tech I
Speaker 2: just want to say Hi. You can read just a
Speaker 2: Hello at tangodi dot com. You can also find transcripts
Speaker 2: for today's episode at tengody dot com. There Are No
Speaker 2: Girls on the Internet was created by me for j Todd.
Speaker 2: It's a production of iHeartRadio and Unbossed creative Jonathan Stricklet
Speaker 2: as our executive producer. Tarry Harrison is our producer and
Speaker 2: sound engineered. Michael Almato is our contributing producer. I'm your host,
Speaker 2: Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and.
Speaker 4: Review us on Apple Podcasts.
Speaker 2: For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.