Speaker 1: Hi Katie, Hi Brian, and hello listeners. We hope you
Speaker 1: enjoyed our first dispatch from London last week with Graham Norton,
Speaker 1: who I think is adorable. I was just in parrassed,
Speaker 1: as they say, not in London exactly. We'll be bringing
Speaker 1: you more conversations from the UK in the month to come.
Speaker 1: But today we have another destination podcast for you of
Speaker 1: a very different sort. Is it like a destination wedding Brian,
Speaker 1: something like that, or more like Robin Leach is Lifestyles
Speaker 1: the Rich and Famous. So we recorded this one in
Speaker 1: a mansion overlooking Beverly Hills. We figured what better place
Speaker 1: to interview a household name like Dr Phil than well
Speaker 1: in his house. And let's be clear, this is not
Speaker 1: an ordinary house. From the rolls in the driveway to
Speaker 1: the Morano glass ping pong table, Phil McGraw and his
Speaker 1: lovely wife Robin clearly relish their creature, comforts and each other.
Speaker 1: We've been married forty one years, almost forty two, yeah
Speaker 1: for almost way tow been together forty and we just
Speaker 1: start having more fun than a barrel of monkeys. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's crazy, and we have a good time and
Speaker 1: we love it up here. Sometimes we get behind these gates,
Speaker 1: and sometimes we won't leave for a week or ten.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say, I don't think I'd ever leave
Speaker 1: the house if I lived here. Tennis court here, I
Speaker 1: got a clay court here. Every day, I play summary
Speaker 1: eight times a week. Clearly, he's in really good shape.
Speaker 1: And you know, while he loves living in this house,
Speaker 1: it was Robin who first fell for it. She noticed
Speaker 1: it under construction about a decade ago, and she liked
Speaker 1: it so much she started driving by every few months
Speaker 1: to check on its progress. And Phil noticed how much
Speaker 1: his wife loved this house, so he decided to buy
Speaker 1: it for her. So he just approached the owner and
Speaker 1: wrote a check. And when you host the number one
Speaker 1: daytime talk show in America, like Phil does, you can
Speaker 1: just do that. But here's the romantic part, Brian. Phil
Speaker 1: didn't tell Robin what he had done. He wanted to
Speaker 1: surprise her, so one day he suggested they drive to
Speaker 1: the house together just to check out what was going on.
Speaker 1: And when they arrived, the gate was open, so was
Speaker 1: the front door. Robin was a little freaked out. She
Speaker 1: was wary. She didn't want them to call the police,
Speaker 1: but Phil convinced her to walk with him to the porch.
Speaker 1: And here's what happened next, in Robin mccraw's own words,
Speaker 1: let me tell it, let me tell you. I'm hiding
Speaker 1: behind you because of course I trust you im he'll
Speaker 1: protect me. But I said, phill up, Okay, okay, I've
Speaker 1: seen let's Philip and he laugh. I said, but let's
Speaker 1: get the car. Let's go. And he goes, You're fine,
Speaker 1: let's look and I know, and all of a sudden
Speaker 1: he flips around. He picks me up in his arms,
Speaker 1: carries me over the threshold and says, welcome home. I
Speaker 1: just thought you this house. Wow. Clearly she gets a
Speaker 1: little giddy just talking about it. And so when Brian
Speaker 1: and I asked for a tour of their digs, well,
Speaker 1: the mcgraws were happy to oblige you. None so are
Speaker 1: I think it takes about a week to see all that.
Speaker 1: We have a wine cellar with the ceiling came from
Speaker 1: the Tibetan rainforest, from Tibetan monks, and from the sixteen hundreds.
Speaker 1: It's amazing, Brian, doesn't your wine cellar ceiling wasn't that
Speaker 1: made by Tibetan monks? If I recall, yeah, but in
Speaker 1: the sixteenth century. I mean, I think the seventeenth century
Speaker 1: ones are just junk. So I refused that just so. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: all that wine and even a bar in the house,
Speaker 1: But both Robin and Phil are children of alcoholics, and
Speaker 1: Phil told us he doesn't drink. I just resolved early
Speaker 1: on because I saw what it did, was my dad. So,
Speaker 1: did you ever drink? Did you? I tried in high school.
Speaker 1: I tried to get drunk in high school, and I
Speaker 1: would get a hangover while I was drinking. Brian, who
Speaker 1: needs alcohol. The view from the backyard is absolutely intoxicating.
Speaker 1: You can walk in the front door and see all
Speaker 1: the way across downtown because we love the weather out
Speaker 1: here and we love opening these doors and looking out
Speaker 1: and just seeing everything that we can. It's spectacular. We
Speaker 1: have this big outside area and then it leads to
Speaker 1: a swimming pool, which is beautiful and a spectacular view.
Speaker 1: Just your typical American family house. So listeners, it was
Speaker 1: a lot to take in. We really could have taken
Speaker 1: you with us for this one. I think they all
Speaker 1: fit in the house. Actually, yeah, I think that's I
Speaker 1: don't know what that says about our ratings. Or their
Speaker 1: house or maybe both. They would have been very crowded
Speaker 1: and very tight, but extremely crowded. And when we were
Speaker 1: done peeking around, Katie and I sat down with just
Speaker 1: Phil to talk about really everything. This was one of
Speaker 1: our most thorough and interesting interviews yet, at least in
Speaker 1: my view. I think you also mean long, So get comfortable, everybody.
Speaker 1: We had a lot to cover, from how Oprah was
Speaker 1: instrumental in his success, so the critics who are not
Speaker 1: fans of the medicine, doctor Phil is dispensing, especially because
Speaker 1: they say he's not a real doctor, even though he
Speaker 1: does a PhD in psychology and in fact, Brian, you know,
Speaker 1: when I posted a photo of the three of us
Speaker 1: on Instagram, there were a lot of positive comments, but
Speaker 1: also quite a few negative ones. To one person wrote,
Speaker 1: this guy's con man one podcast, I'll be missing. Someone
Speaker 1: else chimed in Dr Phil is an arrogant jerk, And
Speaker 1: then there was this person who said, not stoked about him,
Speaker 1: but we'll listen because of you. Katie Couric and you
Speaker 1: bribbly wrote that one actually just to give you a
Speaker 1: little boost anyway, Thank you for that. Thank you for
Speaker 1: holding your nose and listening to that listener, but clearly
Speaker 1: not everyone. Brian is a fan of Dr Phil. But
Speaker 1: at the same time Phil show is top rated and
Speaker 1: by the way, is now sixteen seasons in, so he's
Speaker 1: doing something right. So I'll be curious to hear, Brian
Speaker 1: if we change any hearts and minds with this episode.
Speaker 1: After people here a little bit about Dr Phil's backstory,
Speaker 1: so we put him in the hot seat for a
Speaker 1: change and tried to find out what makes him tick
Speaker 1: and by the way, what got him into psychology Long
Speaker 1: before his TV show was ever. Phil trained to be
Speaker 1: a psychologist and he and his dad went into practice
Speaker 1: together in Wichita Falls, Texas. So I wanted to know
Speaker 1: did he always dream of getting into people's heads? There
Speaker 1: was a specific time I can tell you the specific
Speaker 1: moment that I got interested in it. It wasn't something
Speaker 1: that I kind of warm too. There was a specific
Speaker 1: moment in my life that it became a focus of mine.
Speaker 1: I'm excited to hear about this. What was it? It
Speaker 1: involved football and I was in Oklahoma City and we
Speaker 1: were on a team that really had a lot of
Speaker 1: great equipment and great uniforms. I mean everything was. We
Speaker 1: had black uniforms with silver, straight very, Friday night lights
Speaker 1: very and arm bands. I mean, we looked badass, I'm
Speaker 1: telling you. And we thought we were a badass. And
Speaker 1: we had a game rain out, and the Salvation Army
Speaker 1: had a team and they called our coach and said,
Speaker 1: I know he had a game rain out. Could we
Speaker 1: come Monday and play a scrimmage game with you? And
Speaker 1: the coach that sure. So Monday they show up over
Speaker 1: there to play us. Three pickups pull up and these
Speaker 1: kids start piling out the back. It looked like the
Speaker 1: grapes of wrath. I mean, and I'm aging myself, but
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone up. But but I mean the kid,
Speaker 1: for example, that lined up across from me had on
Speaker 1: blue jeans for football pants, and he had them rolled
Speaker 1: up so they kind of looked like football pants. He
Speaker 1: had on loafers for shoes instead of football shoes. He
Speaker 1: had a button up shirt and he had the number
Speaker 1: four on it with masking tape. And I'm thinking, you know,
Speaker 1: we're in a huddle, kind of snicker, and you know, like,
Speaker 1: why didn't he put it on a magic marker that's
Speaker 1: going to come off? Well, he didn't put it on
Speaker 1: a magic marker because that was his shirt. That wasn't
Speaker 1: his shirt for the day that he had to wear
Speaker 1: that to school the next day. And so they don't
Speaker 1: kick off because it's a scrimmage. They just snapped the ball,
Speaker 1: and they snapped the ball. That kid hit me so
Speaker 1: hard it still hurts when it rains. I kid you not.
Speaker 1: They beat us like they were clapping for a barn dance.
Speaker 1: I mean, I thought it was a track meet. They're
Speaker 1: running up and down the field. We can't catch them there.
Speaker 1: They probably beat us fifty to nothing. And I remember
Speaker 1: getting in the car everything heard. I had dirt in
Speaker 1: my mouth, you know, I'm looking out the ear hole
Speaker 1: in my helmet. I asked my dad what the hell happened,
Speaker 1: and he said, well, you just got your gass handed
Speaker 1: to you. Boy. I said, well, I was looking for
Speaker 1: a little more depth of an answer, and he said
Speaker 1: they were just hungry. They wanted it more than you did.
Speaker 1: And in that moment, even at that age I was
Speaker 1: like twelve years old, I thought, if they can do
Speaker 1: so much with so little, what should I be able
Speaker 1: to do when I've got good equipment, coaches a grass field,
Speaker 1: And I was envious. I walked away from their envious
Speaker 1: of those kids. I wanted what they had, and that
Speaker 1: interesting And here I am envious of the Salvation Army
Speaker 1: kids because they had grit, they had they had burning
Speaker 1: in their gut. And at that moment I got focused
Speaker 1: on studying why people do what they do and don't
Speaker 1: do what they don't do. I wanted to know. So
Speaker 1: while all my friends were putting together model airplanes and
Speaker 1: sniffing the glue, I was in the library trying to
Speaker 1: read books on motivation and why some people had it
Speaker 1: and some people didn't. I started at twelve years old.
Speaker 1: I became fascinated with it, and I've never ever stopped
Speaker 1: being fascinated. You spent a lot of time as a
Speaker 1: psychologist studying the treatment of pain, which obviously is a
Speaker 1: very big issue these days, not just with opioids, but
Speaker 1: according to the ni H, more than twenty five million
Speaker 1: Americans experienced chronic pain, which is pain every single day
Speaker 1: for the last three months. Um, I don't think people
Speaker 1: who don't have pain realize how debilitating and depressing it is.
Speaker 1: What do you attribute this epidemic of pain to? Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's interesting that you bring that up, Robin, and I
Speaker 1: just got back we testified before a joint committee Biparisan
Speaker 1: committee in Congress last week about the opioid crisis, and
Speaker 1: particularly with regard to addicted mothers and their children, either
Speaker 1: that they're pregnant with or have just had, and what
Speaker 1: should happen to them, because I feel very strongly about that.
Speaker 1: But there's organic pain and then there's pain that is perceived,
Speaker 1: and there's two very big differences there. And I used
Speaker 1: to run a pain clinic inside a hospital, and there
Speaker 1: are so many alternatives to the management of pain besides
Speaker 1: opioids and these other pain killers. But medicine has become
Speaker 1: a high volume business, and it takes time to teach
Speaker 1: people neurotherapy, biofeedback, do cryotherapy, do other things to manage pain.
Speaker 1: That takes time. It takes two seconds to write a prescription.
Speaker 1: And there are enough opioid prescriptions right now for every
Speaker 1: person in America to have their own bottle. And if
Speaker 1: you take those pills past the eighth day, you have
Speaker 1: a one in seven chance of being addicted at one year.
Speaker 1: If you macome at thirty days, if you're still taking
Speaker 1: you have a one in three chance of being addicted
Speaker 1: at the end of a year. This is an epidemic.
Speaker 1: What should be done when you testify it on Capitol Helleny,
Speaker 1: what do you see as the way out of this mess? Well,
Speaker 1: I think there has to be accountability right now. There
Speaker 1: has to be accountability. I think the doctors have to
Speaker 1: be made highly aware of what's happening with these people
Speaker 1: and the high level of risk for addiction. Look, these doctors,
Speaker 1: most of the doctors that are writing these prescriptions are
Speaker 1: well trained, well intended, responsible professionals. But they need to
Speaker 1: be constantly reminded that these patients will ask for more
Speaker 1: and more and more as long as you'll give them
Speaker 1: to them. And so they have to have a constant
Speaker 1: reminder and they need to give three to five of
Speaker 1: these pills, not thirty. And then the manufacturers have to
Speaker 1: be held to account in that regard. And because what's
Speaker 1: happening now is you have a whole new population of
Speaker 1: heroin addict in the suburbs because they take the opioids
Speaker 1: for a period of time and then they stopped taking
Speaker 1: them because heroin is cheaper. So you've now got soccer
Speaker 1: moms on heroin because they can't afford the opiate. It's
Speaker 1: a whole new population of heroin addicts, and you spoke
Speaker 1: about the danger of mothers and fathers who are addicted,
Speaker 1: and maybe the mom was addicted while she was pregnant,
Speaker 1: or they're addicted while they have a young kid. What
Speaker 1: do they do in that situation? How do we respond
Speaker 1: as a society to those people. What Robin and I
Speaker 1: are advocating for is for them to repurpose dollars in
Speaker 1: the Family First Act, where now the dollars are only
Speaker 1: allowed to be used for fall sster care. And what
Speaker 1: we're advocating is that instead of using those dollars for
Speaker 1: foster care, put these mothers in family based residential treatment
Speaker 1: where the baby stays with them. And you said, well,
Speaker 1: why would you leave a baby with a drug addic mother, Well,
Speaker 1: this may be the only time the mother hasn't been
Speaker 1: on drugs is while she's in the treatment center. And
Speaker 1: she might be there six months, seven months, eight months,
Speaker 1: but she's there with her baby. And what happens is
Speaker 1: you're now you're not putting two people in the system.
Speaker 1: You put one child in foster care, you put a
Speaker 1: mother in prison or whatever. You can't punish your way
Speaker 1: out of this epidemic. So if you put the mother
Speaker 1: and child together in a family based residential treatment center
Speaker 1: A the mother's gonna bond with the baby, they're less
Speaker 1: likely to abandoned the child later. You're not going to
Speaker 1: load up and already overwhelm foster care system, so they
Speaker 1: just need to free up some of that money and
Speaker 1: let it go to treatment. You're not going to punish
Speaker 1: your way out of this. You're going to treat your
Speaker 1: way out of it. Before we talk a little more
Speaker 1: about your road to success, Phil and I know Brian
Speaker 1: is particularly interested in Courtroom Sciences, which you co founded,
Speaker 1: as Brian's a lawyer, but I wanted to ask you
Speaker 1: about recent events. Having just talked about opioid in this epidemic,
Speaker 1: there's an epidemic of gun violence happening in this country.
Speaker 1: As I came over to see you today, as Brian
Speaker 1: and I met you at your house, there was yet
Speaker 1: another shooting in your home state of Texas, outside Houston,
Speaker 1: in a town called Santa Fe. I don't know the
Speaker 1: latest numbers, but it went last I checked, it was
Speaker 1: eight or nine students, at least ten students murdered in
Speaker 1: their high school. And it makes me so upset and
Speaker 1: so infuriated and this of course comes on the heels
Speaker 1: of Parkland, which was what just over three months ago, Phil,
Speaker 1: What are we going to do about this? You know,
Speaker 1: I had many of the Parkland students on my show
Speaker 1: and I had some of the Columbine students there at
Speaker 1: the same time, and uh, there was a really interesting
Speaker 1: dynamic there because these Columbine students, We're saying, every time
Speaker 1: this happens, they get re traumatized. It triggers for them
Speaker 1: and they never really got what they needed in the interim.
Speaker 1: And this is, by the way, almost twenty years ago,
Speaker 1: because Columbine happened in because I covered that shooting. And
Speaker 1: by the way, there was a girl who was interviewed
Speaker 1: today who was at the school and she was asked
Speaker 1: the question that all the reporters asked, that you ever
Speaker 1: think it could happen here? And her response was so
Speaker 1: striking to me. She said, yes, I thought it could
Speaker 1: happen here because it's happening all over the place. I
Speaker 1: expected at some point there would be a shooting here.
Speaker 1: I think there have been. We could look it up
Speaker 1: right quick, but I think there have been close to
Speaker 1: thirty school shooting so far this year. It's like one
Speaker 1: a week, I think, yeah, something that's just terrible. Um,
Speaker 1: here's the problem. From a psychological standpoint, we absolutely do
Speaker 1: not have the ability to predict who's going to do this. UM.
Speaker 1: And you can say, well, if anybody has a history
Speaker 1: of mental illness, don't give him a gun. The mentally
Speaker 1: ill population has a lower incidence of violence than a
Speaker 1: general population. I know. And it infuriates me when people
Speaker 1: say it's mental illness because that is such a red herring,
Speaker 1: and it also stigmatizes everyone with mental illness. And they're real,
Speaker 1: real people in every country, but they don't have this
Speaker 1: gun violence problem. So what is the solution? Um? I
Speaker 1: think what we have to do is have an intelligent
Speaker 1: conversation about this instead of a political yelling match about this. Amen.
Speaker 1: Right now, you've got people on both sides of this
Speaker 1: issue that takes something like this and politicize it. I
Speaker 1: think what you have to do is start out by saying,
Speaker 1: let's see what we agree on. Anytime I'm negotiating with somebody,
Speaker 1: the first thing I try to do is narrow the
Speaker 1: issues and say, before we try to resolve our differences,
Speaker 1: let's see what we agree on. Because when you do that,
Speaker 1: you often find out that you're not nearly as far
Speaker 1: apart as you. Thank you on this issue, though, Phil,
Speaker 1: I honestly really wonder for this super extremists and you
Speaker 1: n r A members actually believe there should be more
Speaker 1: sensible gun laws. But for the extremists who believe there's
Speaker 1: a slippery slope and this is the price of liberty
Speaker 1: and freedom, this is what we have to put up with.
Speaker 1: There's very there's not much of a vent diagram between
Speaker 1: the two groups. That doesn't mean there can't be I mean, look,
Speaker 1: is there any theory under which somebody needs an A
Speaker 1: K forty seven? Is there any theory under which anybody
Speaker 1: needs an assault rifle? I don't care if you're the
Speaker 1: most staunch Second Amendment supporter in the world. Is there
Speaker 1: any reason that there is a recreational use a Second
Speaker 1: Amendment justification for an A K forty seven where you
Speaker 1: can put out so much lead, so much death in
Speaker 1: a short period of time, that let's find out, there
Speaker 1: has to be some sensibility that comes along with it.
Speaker 1: You can't have rights without responsibilities, and you can't say
Speaker 1: we have to throw out the Amendment. That doesn't mean
Speaker 1: you can't have some modifications within the US. You you you
Speaker 1: have people right now that are just so they have
Speaker 1: so much firepower to do so much devastation in such
Speaker 1: a short period of time, that we are setting ourselves
Speaker 1: up for destruction. That has to change. It absolutely has
Speaker 1: to change. It's time now to take a quick break.
Speaker 1: When we come back, Phil tells us about his old
Speaker 1: gig running a trial consulting firm and how this work
Speaker 1: led him to the woman who gave him his big break.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about Oprah people. That's right after this and
Speaker 1: now back to our interview with Dr Phil McGrath. You
Speaker 1: took a turn in your career. You co founded a
Speaker 1: company called Courtroom Sciences, Inc. Predating cs I. You have
Speaker 1: the original c s I, which is a trial consulting firm.
Speaker 1: Can you explain what that business did what you did? Yes, Um, basically,
Speaker 1: in every situation, if you know what your fact pattern is,
Speaker 1: you may have a thousand facts. I'll promise you there
Speaker 1: is a subset of those thousand facts, maybe ten or twelve,
Speaker 1: configured in a certain way that, if presented, are your
Speaker 1: best chance of getting home, your best chance to get
Speaker 1: into a verdict. And trial science is about finding out
Speaker 1: out of that thousand facts, what are those best twelve
Speaker 1: and who are they best presented to and in what way?
Speaker 1: And so we always researched cases. Uh, we trained witnesses
Speaker 1: to tell the truth effectively. There's a big different. It's
Speaker 1: between telling the truth and telling the truth effectively. And
Speaker 1: we we're very active in jury selection. It's really de selection,
Speaker 1: but in shaping who gets on the jury and then
Speaker 1: figuring out what they need to hear to support your case.
Speaker 1: But do you ever feel that's unethical in any way?
Speaker 1: Do you feel like it's stacking the jury? It's kind
Speaker 1: of antithetical to uh, you know, a jury of your peers,
Speaker 1: because only wealthy clients can afford the services of somebody
Speaker 1: like that, and that, Um, I don't know that. There's
Speaker 1: something that just is intrinsically unjust about that telling the
Speaker 1: truth effectively, not so much telling the truth effectively, but
Speaker 1: hand picking people who you believe will help your clients. Well,
Speaker 1: that presumes that the other side is not hand picking
Speaker 1: the jury as best they can. Well, if they have
Speaker 1: a public defender, probably they're not. Oh, we work with
Speaker 1: the public defenders a lot. Really sure, we did a
Speaker 1: lot of proboble in cases. But understand they're trying to
Speaker 1: pick the best jury they possibly can do. I think
Speaker 1: it's unethically to do it better. No, No, I don't
Speaker 1: doing your void dear thing. Right, is how you met
Speaker 1: Oprah Winfrey is So that was back in the day
Speaker 1: when she was being sued for something she said on
Speaker 1: her program about mad cow disease. Right, So tell us
Speaker 1: about that meeting. And obviously there was some kismet for
Speaker 1: both of you, and she had you at hello, or
Speaker 1: you had her at hello. Well, she was sued, and
Speaker 1: again this is a situation where in the court of
Speaker 1: public opinion, and she was sued by ranchers cattleman, which
Speaker 1: was not the case at all. She was sued by
Speaker 1: cattle manufacturers. These were feed lot people that moved cattle
Speaker 1: by the tens of thousands through feed lost. This wasn't
Speaker 1: Joe Rancher out here cow pokin and you know feeding
Speaker 1: this cattle agricultural industrial complex. It was big business, big business.
Speaker 1: And she made a comment about beef and cattle futures
Speaker 1: went limited down on the Chicago Board of Trade that day,
Speaker 1: which equals billions of dollars. And so she was sued
Speaker 1: um unjustly in my opinion, and so they took her
Speaker 1: to trial in federal court in Amarillo, and um, not
Speaker 1: a great place to be. Not a great place to be.
Speaker 1: I remember just as the trial was starting, she leaned
Speaker 1: up to me and said, UM, I don't see any
Speaker 1: peers over there. I don't I don't see black jerors.
Speaker 1: I don't see anybody over there looks like me. And
Speaker 1: that panel derived income directly or indirectly from the beef industry,
Speaker 1: then why couldn't you move to have the trial relocated?
Speaker 1: Because the judge said, no, oh, I hate that. So
Speaker 1: did I think it was unfair to help her? No?
Speaker 1: I didn't think it was unfair to help her. And
Speaker 1: we worked on that. We we tried that case several
Speaker 1: times to figure out what that configuration of facts were.
Speaker 1: And um, we worked on it for two and a
Speaker 1: half years before trial. And then when it went to trial,
Speaker 1: we all lived in a bed and breakfast. Uh myself, Oprah,
Speaker 1: chip Babcock law, you're extraordinaire. Um. Her executive producer Stephen
Speaker 1: was there. Some We lived in a bed and breakfast
Speaker 1: town on the edge of town for a couple of months.
Speaker 1: Like the sister, I never wanted. But if you're going
Speaker 1: to have an extra sister, Oprah is a great one
Speaker 1: to have, right, So we lived together out there and
Speaker 1: tried that for a couple of a couple of months
Speaker 1: and ultimately you prevailed. We zeroed them out. Yeah, we
Speaker 1: zeroed them out, and uh we had a great We
Speaker 1: had some great times during that. We have a state
Speaker 1: dinner to celebrate, No, we had port dinner to celebrate,
Speaker 1: but we used to. We used to go from the
Speaker 1: bed and breakfast to the courthouse and we had to
Speaker 1: put a this big tent up over the portice here
Speaker 1: because there were death threats when we were in cattle country,
Speaker 1: and so there was a lead car and then a
Speaker 1: bulletproof car, and then a chase car and we left
Speaker 1: to load. And many a day and nobody knows this,
Speaker 1: so it's a little but many a day that motorcade
Speaker 1: would pull in there and it would be this big
Speaker 1: flurry and everybody would jump in and zoom off the
Speaker 1: court and about five minutes later, Oprah and I would
Speaker 1: go out the back door and get in my rented
Speaker 1: Toyota and we would pull out and drive around Ambarillo
Speaker 1: and go through the mall and look around exactly hang out,
Speaker 1: do you do you think Oprah should run for president. Uh.
Speaker 1: I think she is a wise woman that has uh
Speaker 1: much more knowledge of international affairs and geopolitics than people
Speaker 1: would ever imagine. Whether she should run or not, you know,
Speaker 1: that's up to how much sacrifice she wants to make.
Speaker 1: But uh, she certainly is better prepared than some and
Speaker 1: you'd vote for I would vote for her because I
Speaker 1: know how well she prepares, I know how smart she is,
Speaker 1: and I know how sincere she is. So you published
Speaker 1: the first of nine best selling books soon after you
Speaker 1: worked with Oprah, and so many of your books deal
Speaker 1: with the challenges families face, especially married couples. We talked
Speaker 1: about the amazing marriage you and Robin have. Um, Katie
Speaker 1: and I are both married. Obviously, I don't think anyone
Speaker 1: made that misunderstanding. So what are your top three or
Speaker 1: four pieces of advice on developing or maintaining a happy marriage.
Speaker 1: I think what you know. First off, preparation, Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think everybody should go through premarital counseling, and by that
Speaker 1: I mean work out what the challenges are going to
Speaker 1: be ahead of time. You need to figure out where
Speaker 1: you both stand with your expectations on family, children, finances
Speaker 1: in laws, religion, geography, division of labor, all of those things. Um,
Speaker 1: I don't think you should ever get married till you're
Speaker 1: uh intended has had the flu. I mean if you
Speaker 1: don't see them, if you don't see them in their
Speaker 1: worst possible light, you don't see them throwing up and sick.
Speaker 1: And I mean you got to see them not on
Speaker 1: a marriage is not a date. It's not three sixty
Speaker 1: five dates put together, and that's a year. You got
Speaker 1: to see them in their most unflattering light. But you
Speaker 1: certainly need to go through marital counseling. And you know,
Speaker 1: it's not what happens in life that upsets people. It's there.
Speaker 1: It's violating their expectation of what was supposed to happen
Speaker 1: in life. If you go into marriage and you think it, know,
Speaker 1: my wife's going to meet me at the back door
Speaker 1: every day with a martini and a big smile on
Speaker 1: her face or wrap, Yeah, exactly like every evening in
Speaker 1: my house my husband is you know, he's just gonna
Speaker 1: take me out dancing everywhere. Look, and then you get
Speaker 1: in a marriage and you have a division of labor,
Speaker 1: you have to go on a budget, you have kids
Speaker 1: getting you up at night, you're gonna think, oh my god,
Speaker 1: this is horrible and you're going to label it a failure.
Speaker 1: But if you expected those things to happen and then
Speaker 1: they do, you go, yeah, this is about what was
Speaker 1: we expected. We're doing okay. So you have to have
Speaker 1: realistic expectations. Really important to to talk about money, I
Speaker 1: think before you get married, because I think that is
Speaker 1: the number one divider of couples. And to have a
Speaker 1: really good understanding about people's priorities and how they feel
Speaker 1: about money, their relationship with it. I think is is
Speaker 1: something that people feel uncomfortable discussing. But not that I'm
Speaker 1: putting my doctor Phil had on, but it seems to
Speaker 1: me really really important. If you talk to the American
Speaker 1: Bar Association family lawyers and asked them what are the
Speaker 1: number one reasons people show up for divorce that's on
Speaker 1: the short list? You know, money, sex, parenting. These are
Speaker 1: things that people clash about because they didn't work it
Speaker 1: out to begin with. And you know, another big thing
Speaker 1: is if you have to stop being all of who
Speaker 1: you are to behalf of a couple, bad deal, bad deal.
Speaker 1: You gotta let your partner be who they are. And
Speaker 1: if they've got to stop being who they are to
Speaker 1: be half of the couple. The cost is too high.
Speaker 1: I couldn't agree more. But I also think a big
Speaker 1: problem I've suddenly become a marriage counselor is that when
Speaker 1: you take your partner for granted, right when you sort
Speaker 1: of stop trying, when you get lazy when you I mean,
Speaker 1: I find like, you know, you have to try to
Speaker 1: look decent when when you're married and take care of
Speaker 1: yourself and um, you know, sometimes I find that I
Speaker 1: fall in that trap that I'm like, I can't believe
Speaker 1: my husband is still married to me. But the way
Speaker 1: I kind of I'm just a hot mess some of
Speaker 1: the time and I don't think he cares most of
Speaker 1: the time. But I think you you have to keep trying,
Speaker 1: I guess is what I'm trying to say in in
Speaker 1: a clumsy way. You know, a relationship, any good relationship,
Speaker 1: is going to be based on a solid underlying friendship.
Speaker 1: And what a friends do. Friends talk to each other.
Speaker 1: They tell each other jokes, they laugh, they share their day.
Speaker 1: And you'll see a married couple that will pass each
Speaker 1: other in the hallway, uh, or they're out at dinner
Speaker 1: and they're not talking to each other that makes that
Speaker 1: breaks my heart. But then you see each of them
Speaker 1: go to work and they see somebody in the hall,
Speaker 1: they go, hey, good morning, how's it going. What did
Speaker 1: you do last night? They'll put their social mask on
Speaker 1: and put an effort in at work with somebody that
Speaker 1: they won't do at home. At least do at home
Speaker 1: what you will do at work. You sound like my
Speaker 1: husband to John Mulner, have you married a wise man? John?
Speaker 1: Stick with it said to return to our episode of
Speaker 1: this is your Life, Dr Phil. So you became a
Speaker 1: regular on oprah Show, and then with her help, you
Speaker 1: developed your own show. And you know, I told a
Speaker 1: couple of people I was going to talk to you,
Speaker 1: and one thing that came up is how much of
Speaker 1: your show is entertainment and how much of it is
Speaker 1: psychological treatment? I mean, how do you think about that question? Well,
Speaker 1: let me I have to stop you for a second
Speaker 1: because you you glossed over that real quick. You said,
Speaker 1: with her help you started your own show. Yeah, with
Speaker 1: their help I started own show. Um, I was at
Speaker 1: five years on the Oprah Show. And she was the
Speaker 1: most generous spirited person. I mean, you know a lot
Speaker 1: of people wouldn't be that way. Uh, Particularly when I
Speaker 1: enjoyed success and there were rating spikes and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: she would just keep just pushing me to the forefront,
Speaker 1: pushing me to the forefront, pushing me to the forefront.
Speaker 1: There were times when I would be on the show,
Speaker 1: she would just go sit out in the audience and
Speaker 1: put a little table next to her chair and get
Speaker 1: some hot tea and say, this is what are you
Speaker 1: gonna do today? I mean, there's nothing. She she did
Speaker 1: everything she possibly could to establish Dr Phil as a brand,
Speaker 1: as a personality, just the most generous, supportive person you
Speaker 1: could ever be. That's so nice. You know, you're right.
Speaker 1: Many people would be like, wait, he's getting higher ratings,
Speaker 1: get rid of them, And I mean, we're I talked
Speaker 1: to her all time. I was just with her last week.
Speaker 1: We spend lots of time together. Um now, so I
Speaker 1: just had to Yeah, then your next question. I've been
Speaker 1: asked this a lot, usually intended as an insult. I
Speaker 1: don't take you so, I don't take you that as
Speaker 1: asking it that way. I get ask it as an
Speaker 1: insult by people saying a lot of what you do
Speaker 1: is entertainment. That's kind of how I get ask it.
Speaker 1: So UM. And my answer to them is God, I
Speaker 1: hope so, UM, Because if I don't present stories in
Speaker 1: a compelling way, if I don't present scenarios in a
Speaker 1: way that really get people intrigued and involved, They're gonna
Speaker 1: go do something else. So I do try to present
Speaker 1: things in a in a way that is interesting and compelling. UM.
Speaker 1: How much of it is entertainment versus psychological treatment? I
Speaker 1: hope it's all entertaining. None of it is psychological treatment, UM.
Speaker 1: I think of it is education, And I think of
Speaker 1: every guest I have as a teaching tool. UM. And
Speaker 1: when I say it's not psychological treatment, I mean I'm
Speaker 1: never under the misapprehension and I'm doing eight minute cures
Speaker 1: up there in segment to UM, people ask me sometimes,
Speaker 1: you know, Dr Phil, do you think problems are as
Speaker 1: simple as you make them out to be. I don't
Speaker 1: think problems are simple at all. I think they're often
Speaker 1: very layered. I think they're often often co morbid. I
Speaker 1: think they occur in parallel with different disorders happening at
Speaker 1: the same time. I think the solutions are often very simple.
Speaker 1: I think we make the solutions too complex. Sometimes it's
Speaker 1: it's kind of the old Joel. If you go the
Speaker 1: doctor and says it hurts when I raise my arm
Speaker 1: like this, and he said, well think quit raising your
Speaker 1: arm like that. You know your fix. Give me ten
Speaker 1: dollars to go home. Sometimes there are two pathways you
Speaker 1: can go when you look at helping someone have a
Speaker 1: better life. You can go down a psychiatric pathway, a
Speaker 1: mental illness pathway, or you can go down to behavioral pathway.
Speaker 1: And a lot of times you can behave your way
Speaker 1: to success. You can manipulate your environment to success. And
Speaker 1: then there are other times where you have a brain imbalance,
Speaker 1: you neurotransmitters are disrupted, you need some biochemical replacement therapy
Speaker 1: something of that nature. Um. But a lot of times
Speaker 1: the solutions you've you've just got in a situation where
Speaker 1: you're rewarding bad behavior or you're not requiring enough of yourself.
Speaker 1: Sometimes the solutions are pretty simple when you step back
Speaker 1: and think about them, but the problems can be very complex.
Speaker 1: It must be challenging though at times, because you want
Speaker 1: things to be interesting, you want them to be educational
Speaker 1: and also entertaining. But do you ever worry that you're
Speaker 1: being exploited? And that to me would be something that
Speaker 1: would be in the back of your mind. I know that.
Speaker 1: You know, we all get criticized when you're in the
Speaker 1: public eye. But but you've been criticized for a couple
Speaker 1: of things, like the having Shelley Duval on the show
Speaker 1: when she was clearly having some serious mental issues, or
Speaker 1: you know, are there other circumstances when you thought, maybe
Speaker 1: I went over the line, maybe this wasn't the best
Speaker 1: use of my skills, or maybe I did exploit this
Speaker 1: individual more than I should have. You know, I could
Speaker 1: tell you that there's I have never done a show
Speaker 1: where I was insensitive to that or decided I'm just
Speaker 1: going to do that. I don't care what. UM. I think.
Speaker 1: There have been times when I've looked back and thought
Speaker 1: there was there might have been a better way to
Speaker 1: have done that, or there it might have been better
Speaker 1: to not to have done that at all. So sure,
Speaker 1: I mean, I've probably done eight thousand guests, and there
Speaker 1: were probably a handful of them that, UM, if I
Speaker 1: had it to do over again, I would have done
Speaker 1: it in a different way or not done it at all. UM.
Speaker 1: But we approached the these guest I think very thoughtfully,
Speaker 1: and we have a real policy in the way we
Speaker 1: approached it, like, for example, we won't book anybody that's
Speaker 1: currently in therapy unless we contact their therapist explain what
Speaker 1: the show is about, what we're gonna do, and get
Speaker 1: their permission in writing, or we don't book. Not one
Speaker 1: time in sixteen years. And there have been some therapists
Speaker 1: that have said no, and we agreed because they said
Speaker 1: there's something you don't know, and here it is and
Speaker 1: said there's something you don't know we can't tell you. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what I mean. There said there's there's some things
Speaker 1: you are not aware of. But you know, I have
Speaker 1: an advisory board on Dr Phil that's made up of
Speaker 1: the top minds in psychology, psychiatry, sociology, medicine, theology, nursing.
Speaker 1: A lot of these are editors of the PERI review
Speaker 1: journals and stuff, and if I have a particularly complex case,
Speaker 1: I'm able to send this out to them and get
Speaker 1: their input and feedback. So we have a check in
Speaker 1: balance system and so we really are very thoughtful about it.
Speaker 1: Not always right, of course, um, but we're really mindful
Speaker 1: of it and try and do a good job. But
Speaker 1: are we perfect? Of course not. Was there is there
Speaker 1: any one that sticks out in your head where you think, Gosh,
Speaker 1: in hindsight, I regret that. You know, most of the
Speaker 1: things that I regret are things I didn't do rather
Speaker 1: than things we did. Like, for example, there was a
Speaker 1: show recently where um, a really defiant team said she
Speaker 1: was talking about something and she said, oh, that girl
Speaker 1: is such a retard, and UM, that's just so offensive
Speaker 1: to my sensibilities. I mean, that's like an F bomb
Speaker 1: to me. And then something else happened, and I was
Speaker 1: going to go back and call her on that and
Speaker 1: make certain that people know I don't endorse that. It's
Speaker 1: not okay to say that something else happened. I got distracted.
Speaker 1: Next thing, I know, the show is over and I
Speaker 1: realized I let that go by. I didn't. I let
Speaker 1: her get away with that and implicitly indorsed it. I
Speaker 1: let that happen, And I hate that. I mean, I
Speaker 1: really hate that. You couldn't have done it at the
Speaker 1: end or done a little add on. I think we did.
Speaker 1: I think we did afterwards. But you know, you should
Speaker 1: have called her right there. I should have stopped what
Speaker 1: was going on right there and said, don't given how
Speaker 1: much care you put into the show, and as you
Speaker 1: just described, Phil, it must really stick in your craw
Speaker 1: when you get criticized by some of these folks. Like
Speaker 1: a sociologist from Middlebury named Laurie Essek. She has said, quote,
Speaker 1: Dr Phil is the modern day equivalent of the Victorian
Speaker 1: freak show. Things are packaged as educational and medicinal, but
Speaker 1: they are really just excuses to show off the most
Speaker 1: vulnerable people in our society and make us feel better
Speaker 1: about ourselves. A Victorian freak show. Yeah, I didn't know
Speaker 1: Victorian's head freak show. I think what she's sort of
Speaker 1: alluding to is sort of during the Victorian era when
Speaker 1: there would be circuses with you know, the bearded lady
Speaker 1: or you know that kind of thing. I mean, that's
Speaker 1: sort of what I took it as. Yeah. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: one of those people that doesn't feel the need to
Speaker 1: be loved by strangers. And of course you want everybody
Speaker 1: to love you, and well you want them to respect you.
Speaker 1: And this wasn't very respectful. And oh, promise you if
Speaker 1: that person came and spent thirty days with us here
Speaker 1: and came home with me on Monday night and went
Speaker 1: through the two hundred and fifty page book that I
Speaker 1: have for Tuesday Morning show and looked at the cross
Speaker 1: sectional history, the longitudinal history, the medical history, the career history,
Speaker 1: the interviews of collaterals that we do to verify everything,
Speaker 1: the research section on O C D. If that's what
Speaker 1: the show is about, or anxiety, neurosis or whatever. UM
Speaker 1: went through everything that we do to prepare for that show. Um,
Speaker 1: I think she would be embarrassed to say what she's said.
Speaker 1: And the difference is I am here Monday night. I
Speaker 1: do go through that book, so I do know what
Speaker 1: we do and how seriously we take it. Uh, So
Speaker 1: I don't give my power away to somebody that doesn't
Speaker 1: know what's going on. On a different topic, I'm curious
Speaker 1: your reaction to this. For years, there was something called
Speaker 1: the Goldwater Rule preventing psychiatrists and psychologists from diagnosing politicians
Speaker 1: from afar. This started when a bunch of people in
Speaker 1: that profession did this to Bury Goldwater when he was
Speaker 1: running for president. And yet a number of very prominent,
Speaker 1: respected psychiatrists and psychologists have not met with Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: but they've said he's delusional, he's paranoid, he's narcissistic. I mean,
Speaker 1: do you think these people should just shut up about
Speaker 1: their concerns. Or do they, as they believe, have a
Speaker 1: duty to warn the public about what they believe is
Speaker 1: president dangerousness. Well, that's a compound question with about five
Speaker 1: different parts, so let me take them one at a time. Uh,
Speaker 1: they don't have a duty. The Tarasoft decision is very
Speaker 1: specific about the duty, and in order for them to
Speaker 1: have a duty, there has to be a specific threat
Speaker 1: against an individual that they consider to be legitimate and
Speaker 1: at that point they have a duty to warn either
Speaker 1: the police or the individual. Um. And that Tarasoft decision
Speaker 1: is a California decision, and that certainly is not the
Speaker 1: case with Donald Trump. So there's no duty for them
Speaker 1: to warn. Now they may feel like they have a
Speaker 1: moral duty, but that's in violation of the canon of
Speaker 1: ethics that they swore an oath too when they went
Speaker 1: into practice. Um, you you cannot diagnose someone from a
Speaker 1: far And if you took all of the transcripts from
Speaker 1: my shows across sixteen years and you did a word
Speaker 1: search on I cannot diagnose you here, it would probably
Speaker 1: come up a thousand times. Because I want to make
Speaker 1: it very clear, they haven't even met him, and I'm
Speaker 1: sitting there with the person, and I say, I can't
Speaker 1: diagnose you here. To do so, I would have to
Speaker 1: do very elaborate interview, probably a set of psychometric tests, um,
Speaker 1: maybe some lab work. I mean, there would be a
Speaker 1: lot of things I would have to do that I
Speaker 1: can't do here in forty two minutes and eighteen seconds
Speaker 1: between commercial breaks. You can't do that. Now. They haven't
Speaker 1: even met him. I have met him many times, um,
Speaker 1: and I again, I can't diagnose him, m Um. What
Speaker 1: they can say is, generally speaking, I observe behaviors that
Speaker 1: caused me to be concerned about what he might be
Speaker 1: capable of doing. They could say, I can't diagnose him,
Speaker 1: but if I was going to, I can tell you
Speaker 1: the short list of my considerations would include narcissistic personality,
Speaker 1: impulse control disorder, UM, paranoia. You know, they might say
Speaker 1: that these are things that would be on my short list.
Speaker 1: Because the diagnostic process is a differential diagnostic process, you
Speaker 1: start wide and go narrow, right. I think they kind
Speaker 1: of have done that with those caveats. I don't think
Speaker 1: they've said, without a doubt, he is a malignant narcissists.
Speaker 1: I think they have use those caveats, but they have
Speaker 1: said pretty much in certain terms some of them have Yeah,
Speaker 1: but but do you so you you don't have a
Speaker 1: problem if people say this behavior seems to me to
Speaker 1: be consistent with blah blah blah. I think anybody can
Speaker 1: opine about someone else's behavior. I think when you're a
Speaker 1: professional that opining has it is going to be looked at,
Speaker 1: uh differently. So I do think they need to make
Speaker 1: those caveats. Um. I've been asked to I think he's
Speaker 1: a narcissist, UM, and I've said, well, here are the
Speaker 1: diagnostic criteria. Make up your own mind, you know, let
Speaker 1: people make up their own mind. I mean, his behavior
Speaker 1: is certainly out there for people to see, but I
Speaker 1: don't think anyone really is in a position to know
Speaker 1: it all is going on with him. I think we
Speaker 1: can say that his behavior is certainly a typical for
Speaker 1: a statesman. Do you worry about his behavior? Philm not
Speaker 1: only is this psychologist, but also as as an American? UM?
Speaker 1: I did not in the beginning, And I'll tell you why.
Speaker 1: I've always thought of the president as being kind of
Speaker 1: a committee function. I mean, didn't you really think there's
Speaker 1: checks and balances around a person like this, There's going
Speaker 1: to be a chief of staff, and there's gonna be secretary,
Speaker 1: there's gonna be a people around that if somebody starts
Speaker 1: going a little rogue, they're gonna, okay, hey, come here. Um.
Speaker 1: I don't have that feeling anymore because it seems like
Speaker 1: they're rotating in and out of there so fast and
Speaker 1: and are so subject to being fired that I don't have, uh,
Speaker 1: the sense that there is a check and balanced system.
Speaker 1: I don't mean executive, legislative, judicial, I mean just a
Speaker 1: dam yeah, yeah, just a dynamic inside there that somebody
Speaker 1: can say, let's pump the brake here and and think
Speaker 1: about this, because I don't think. It doesn't appear to
Speaker 1: me that there are people in that inner circle where
Speaker 1: there's mutual respect. Maybe there is, and we don't hear
Speaker 1: about them, but I don't have the same comfort level
Speaker 1: that I did before. He's kind of gotten rid of
Speaker 1: the guardrails, seems to me. The other thing I wanted
Speaker 1: to talk to you about before we leave and end
Speaker 1: up spending the night here is the me Too movement.
Speaker 1: You know, you've watched this unfold and it's been a
Speaker 1: real awakening for a lot of people about gender and
Speaker 1: about sort of workplace equality, etcetera. And I would love
Speaker 1: to get your views on this movement and if there's
Speaker 1: anything about it that concerns you. Well, I hope that
Speaker 1: people don't think that this is a Hollywood phenomenon, because
Speaker 1: we've been doing shows for sixteen years about this power
Speaker 1: abuse with people from Omaha and Spokane and Cleveland working
Speaker 1: on assembly lines and in all kinds of jobs. And
Speaker 1: you know, we always say rape, for example, is not
Speaker 1: about sex, it's about power. And you know, it always
Speaker 1: gets headlines when pretty people have problems, when famous people
Speaker 1: have problems, and that's not a bad thing. I mean,
Speaker 1: if a really famous person, a beautiful woman or a
Speaker 1: handsome guy, contracts a disease or whatever, and it draws
Speaker 1: a lot of attention to disease, like rock cuts in
Speaker 1: with aids very I mean, that's that can be a
Speaker 1: really good thing to move the needle of awareness. But
Speaker 1: this is happening in school systems all over the country.
Speaker 1: It's happening in factories all over the countries, and grocery
Speaker 1: stores and everywhere that there's a hierarchy, these kinds of
Speaker 1: things can happen. And I just hope that that awareness
Speaker 1: doesn't limit itself to just being a media phenomenon in
Speaker 1: high profile situations. I hope people realize that it's it's
Speaker 1: more than that. What would you say to men who
Speaker 1: seemed confused by this and to other people who are
Speaker 1: worried that all bad behavior is being lumped into one
Speaker 1: big bucket it? Yeah, you know, what I hear from
Speaker 1: a lot of men is that they're taking extreme precaution
Speaker 1: and saying I just simply would rather have a male
Speaker 1: secretary or a male assistant or whatever. And I hope
Speaker 1: that doesn't create a backlash that causes um that hurts
Speaker 1: women ultimately exactly, that causes young women to be left
Speaker 1: out of meetings, left out of dinners where deals might
Speaker 1: be made if something is being negotiated sometimes at a
Speaker 1: dinner meeting or something, or a position is being filled
Speaker 1: and there there's a backlash and they're not considered for
Speaker 1: that position because they're afraid of the exposure. I hear
Speaker 1: that a lot too. Yeah, I hope that doesn't happen.
Speaker 1: But I think the pendulum pendulum is always swing, and
Speaker 1: they go to extreme and then they tend to settle
Speaker 1: back in the middle. And I hope that happens. So
Speaker 1: you've become and I'm not sure how many people know this,
Speaker 1: like a one man entertainment empire. It's not just your show.
Speaker 1: It's like MERV Griffin for crying out loud. You've got
Speaker 1: to start up with your son called Doctors on Demand.
Speaker 1: You've got the CBS drama Bull, which was just renewed
Speaker 1: for a third season, and it's based on your history
Speaker 1: as a trial consultant. You've got the Doctors on Daytime TV,
Speaker 1: which you executive produced. Why why are you doing all
Speaker 1: this stuff? Well, you know, I think, um, I find
Speaker 1: this to be an intriguing, ummind to be an intriguing industry.
Speaker 1: And if you know, if you're in, you're in. You know,
Speaker 1: go do what you're doing. And um, you know, we'll
Speaker 1: produce a thousand episodes of television this year. Uh. From
Speaker 1: Stage twenty nine, we've got another show, Faced the Truth,
Speaker 1: which starts in September, and we have another drama that
Speaker 1: will go to air on CBS All Access very soon.
Speaker 1: And a comic comedy we're working on with Showtime that'll
Speaker 1: be going very soon. And Stage ty nine is your production.
Speaker 1: What's what's a comedy on Showtime? The comedy is just terrific.
Speaker 1: It's based on a true story. It's Women and People
Speaker 1: of Color is the title of it. And it is
Speaker 1: based on a true story of a of a woman
Speaker 1: that was an African American housekeeper that actually, out of
Speaker 1: the blue inherits more money than the people she worked for.
Speaker 1: And so the whole dynamic changes and they start living
Speaker 1: in each other's worlds and start to discover how different
Speaker 1: things are. And it's a much more Norman Lear type
Speaker 1: comedy that I think is going to be really, really great.
Speaker 1: So one project stood out to me. You executive produced
Speaker 1: daily Mail TV one devadd you to do that? It
Speaker 1: sounds pretty tabloid, phil Uh. Daily Mail is the most
Speaker 1: Um it's the most widely read English language website in
Speaker 1: the world, right and they file nine hundred to a
Speaker 1: thousand stories a day, what percentage on the Kardashians and
Speaker 1: a fair amount of the Kardashians, But they do a
Speaker 1: lot of really human interest stories, um. And they've got
Speaker 1: so many correspondents around the world, and you have something
Speaker 1: like this tragic shooting, Um, they really approached that from
Speaker 1: the human angle, not just the ten thousand foot news reporting.
Speaker 1: But they'll really be on the ground and talk to
Speaker 1: the people, and they take a real human interest it's
Speaker 1: not all celebrity and it's just really human interest stories.
Speaker 1: And we've worked with them a lot over the years,
Speaker 1: and so they really wanted to have a television UM
Speaker 1: component to it, so they approached us, and UM we
Speaker 1: approached them about that, and then they came back to
Speaker 1: us and said, we want to do it with with
Speaker 1: you guys, and so we started UM last year and
Speaker 1: we shooted in New York out of w p i
Speaker 1: X and Jesse Palmer's our host. And it's going really
Speaker 1: really well. So to wrap things up, gosh, where do
Speaker 1: we go from here? I guess by asking you where
Speaker 1: do you go from here? Phil? I mean, do you
Speaker 1: think you'll ever retire? Your sixty seven right? Yes? And
Speaker 1: playing tennis every day on the tennis court right down
Speaker 1: the path in the backyard. UM, you know, is there
Speaker 1: anything you'd like to do that you haven't done yet? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know. It's probably something I don't
Speaker 1: know about. But UM, I am so blessed in that
Speaker 1: I have the opportunity to work with both of my
Speaker 1: boys every day. UM. Jay is uh involved in television
Speaker 1: and production and then he has a number of companies
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley based, and um, he travels around a lot.
Speaker 1: But I have an opportunity to work with him every day.
Speaker 1: And my son Jordan, who's a musician, I work with
Speaker 1: him in the music business. So I get to see
Speaker 1: and or talk to them at least three or four
Speaker 1: times a week. And I mean, how lucky is that?
Speaker 1: And we laugh and have a great time, and I
Speaker 1: love that. And I bet they teach you to mentoring.
Speaker 1: Where can you tell you? They're the world is so different?
Speaker 1: And there you know, Jay works with all these venture
Speaker 1: capitalists in the Silicon Valley and and all in uh
Speaker 1: George in this music business with Spotify and all these
Speaker 1: things that I know nothing about, and he's really great
Speaker 1: at I learned so much from them. But that's what
Speaker 1: will keep me from ever retiring, is just having the
Speaker 1: chance to work with both of them and have a
Speaker 1: good time. And UH love having those grandkids over here.
Speaker 1: They don't live far away, so we get to have them.
Speaker 1: So I'm having a good time. So as long as
Speaker 1: I'm healthy and feeling good, I'm gonna keep doing what
Speaker 1: I'm doing. And if you have to offer one piece
Speaker 1: of advice to our listeners. What would that be? You know,
Speaker 1: I think we all have a personal truth, that's what
Speaker 1: we really believe about ourselves when nobody's looking in no
Speaker 1: ways listening. I'm gonna talking about the social mask. We
Speaker 1: all put that on and go out there every day
Speaker 1: and put our best foot forward. But we all have
Speaker 1: a personal truth, and I think it's so important to
Speaker 1: know what that is because we generate the results in
Speaker 1: life we think we deserve. And I grew up with
Speaker 1: a really damn each personal truth because my dad was
Speaker 1: an alcoholic. We were poor, utilities were getting turned off,
Speaker 1: and you know, violence in the home and you feel
Speaker 1: like second class. And if you have a damaged personal truth,
Speaker 1: you got to admit it and work on repairing it
Speaker 1: because you want to generate good things in your life.
Speaker 1: And days turn into weeks, and weeks turn into months
Speaker 1: and months turn into years and you look back and say,
Speaker 1: you know, why did I settle for less than I
Speaker 1: really wanted? And I think people do that a lot.
Speaker 1: So I really encourage people to really, if they've got
Speaker 1: things about themselves that bother them, admit it, put it
Speaker 1: on your to do list, fix it, and watch what
Speaker 1: happens in your life when you do well. That's a
Speaker 1: nice way to end. Dr Phil, Philip, Phil mc graw, Well, Katie,
Speaker 1: we're gonna have to keep meeting like this. We've been
Speaker 1: doing it for a long time. It's so fun. You're
Speaker 1: you're such a pleasure to talk to and to listen to. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you, guys, I appreciate it. A huge thank you
Speaker 1: to Phil and Robin McGrath for hosting us in their
Speaker 1: extraordinary home, and my usual thanks to the stitcher folks
Speaker 1: who helped make this show happen. From soup to nuts,
Speaker 1: Gianna Palmer that makes me hungry, Nora Richie and Jared O'Connell.
Speaker 1: Also thanks to our dream team over at Kasey m
Speaker 1: Katie Kirk Media, Alison Bresnick, Betha Mas and Emily Beena.
Speaker 1: Katie and I are the EPs of this show. Mark
Speaker 1: Phillips wrote our theme music. We cherish your ratings and
Speaker 1: cherish them. Cherishes the word are you going to sing?
Speaker 1: Ch cherishes the word, Oh, that wasn't the one. I
Speaker 1: was thinking of the Madonna one. Cherish cherish and this
Speaker 1: shows our age difference. I'm singing the association you're singing Madonna.
Speaker 1: That's true. We're both old. We appreciate everything you do
Speaker 1: over an Apple podcast, reviews, ratings, etcetera. Please please grab
Speaker 1: to our show if you haven't already. You get every
Speaker 1: episode as it comes out, and it helps us spread
Speaker 1: the word. We love it when you come back week
Speaker 1: after week. So that's all for us. We'll be back
Speaker 1: next week with more from our trip to London. Cheerio,