Speaker 1: Up next, The Truth with Lisa Booth, part of the
Speaker 1: Gang which So the past few months have been really
Speaker 1: hard for Americans across the country with the coronavirus. We've
Speaker 1: seen loss of life, lots of loved ones, loss of income,
Speaker 1: loss of livelihood, riots over the summer, a political election
Speaker 1: that was tumultuous and is divided and fractured this nation.
Speaker 1: If there was ever a time we all needed to laugh,
Speaker 1: it's now. So why does the Left keep trying to
Speaker 1: shut down my next guest. Come for the conversation, stay
Speaker 1: for the laughs. This is The Truth with Lisa Booth.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Truth with Lisa Booth. I've got
Speaker 1: a really special show for you guys this week that
Speaker 1: won't just make you think, but also will hopefully make
Speaker 1: you laugh. That's because my next guest is Seth Dylan,
Speaker 1: the CEO of The Babylon B. If you use social media,
Speaker 1: you are probably familiar with The Babylon B. It's a
Speaker 1: conservative satirical website that has been described as the rights
Speaker 1: version of the Onion, and it is absolutely hilarious. I'm
Speaker 1: such a fan. I'm constantly retweeting their work. It's just
Speaker 1: so funny. So Dylan actually acquired the b from the
Speaker 1: site's creator, Adam Ford, in two thousand eighteen. The Babylon
Speaker 1: Be has been a massive success and attracts millions of
Speaker 1: years each month with its wit and humor. Behind every
Speaker 1: joke is powerful insight into our culture or politics and
Speaker 1: the absurdity of the people who are in charge, and
Speaker 1: it makes people laugh with headlines like this Mexico installs
Speaker 1: stairs to keep Biden out that was after the fall
Speaker 1: that he had, or this powerful protesters spell out love
Speaker 1: with burning homes and businesses and you guys can't see it,
Speaker 1: but there's an image of love written out in flames.
Speaker 1: Or after a CNN reporter took aim at the Babylon B,
Speaker 1: it ran a headline that said, CNN attacks Babylon B.
Speaker 1: The Internet is only big enough for one fake news site,
Speaker 1: so you get the idea. Their content is clever, it's funny,
Speaker 1: but it also serves as commentary on what's actually going
Speaker 1: on in our country. But despite explicitly saying that it
Speaker 1: writes satire and does not actually report the news, the
Speaker 1: Babel and B has somehow become a target of big
Speaker 1: tech and the political left, Twitter, Facebook and mainstream media
Speaker 1: outlets like the New York Times have absurdly accused the
Speaker 1: b of trafficking and misinformation. Remember that this is a
Speaker 1: site that on Twitter it actually describes itself as the
Speaker 1: fake news you can trust. They call themselves a satirical website.
Speaker 1: They make that explicitly clear, so they're not trying to
Speaker 1: deceive anyone. And also, can I just repeat that it's
Speaker 1: the New York Times accusing them of misinformation? That's pretty ironic.
Speaker 1: But besides all that, big tech has taken aim at
Speaker 1: the Babel on b and the left wing fat checker
Speaker 1: snopes dot com actually fact checked the Bees headline that
Speaker 1: read this CNN purchases industrial size washing machine to spin
Speaker 1: news before publication. They really did this, and unlike the
Speaker 1: be snoops, was not joking. I mean, do you all
Speaker 1: actually think that the Onion gets targeted like this? Of
Speaker 1: course they don't, because they're not conservative. We're going to
Speaker 1: get into all of this with Seth Dylan, the Babel
Speaker 1: and Bees CEO, and hopefully laugh a little sad. Thanks
Speaker 1: so much for taking the time to join us today.
Speaker 1: Thank you for having Lisa so tell us a little
Speaker 1: bit so that for the folks at home, if they're
Speaker 1: not familiar with the Babel on Bee, just tell us
Speaker 1: a little bit about it. So we're a satire set.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you if you look at how we're
Speaker 1: characterized and how you know, the media covers us, Um,
Speaker 1: that varies quite a bit, but generally we're described as
Speaker 1: like a conservative version of the Onion. So most people
Speaker 1: know what the Onion is and can make that connection.
Speaker 1: But um, you know, we write news satire, We cover
Speaker 1: the stories of the day, and we do it for
Speaker 1: you know, a right of center conservative and also Christian perspective.
Speaker 1: So we're just bringing a different worldview to the approach
Speaker 1: of how we're doing the satire. But basically, we just
Speaker 1: you know, take whatever bad ideas are out there and
Speaker 1: mock and ridicule the hell out of them, which there's
Speaker 1: kind of an abundance these days, there is. There, truly is. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And that's why that's kind of why when people ask me, like,
Speaker 1: what's you know, why is satire so important today in
Speaker 1: this day and age, and like, well, precisely for that reason.
Speaker 1: Satire ridicules bad ideas well. I mean, it's a target
Speaker 1: rich environment. I mean you've got like I remember over
Speaker 1: the summer you had CNN telling us that the riots
Speaker 1: were mostly peaceful and they're with the Kiroon said mostly
Speaker 1: people peaceful and their fires burning in the background. It's like,
Speaker 1: I mean, you you can't even you can't make that
Speaker 1: stuff up. If we had, you know, that would have
Speaker 1: been a really funny joke just to do is like
Speaker 1: a skit or something like that, But it's hard to
Speaker 1: be I mean, we try to exaggerate it. We did
Speaker 1: an animation skit like that where the where the reporters
Speaker 1: actually like getting stabbed by rioters and like having bricks
Speaker 1: thrown at I mean, he's still insis thing it as
Speaker 1: peaceful um. But it's hard to It's hard to exaggerate
Speaker 1: reality when it's already a parody of itself. Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: which is a sad statement and reflection of where we
Speaker 1: are today in society. But you know here we are.
Speaker 1: So so when did you become CEO? So it was
Speaker 1: started before and then you acquired it? What what sort
Speaker 1: of drew you to UM the babel and be and
Speaker 1: why did you choose to purchase it? I wish I
Speaker 1: could take credit for starting it. I mean it's just
Speaker 1: I was a fan UM. Early on, people were sharing
Speaker 1: the articles with me all the time, and they were
Speaker 1: going viral, and it was really funny, and it was
Speaker 1: like quality comedy. It wasn't cheesy. It was like biting
Speaker 1: and snarky and ironic and full of mockery. And I
Speaker 1: loved it. I've always loved satirical humor, but I've never
Speaker 1: really seen much of it from my political perspective, so
Speaker 1: it was really refreshing to see not only that, but also,
Speaker 1: you know, the inside church jokes. I grew up as
Speaker 1: a pastor's kids, so I have kind of you know,
Speaker 1: the inside church knowledge, and those jokes all made sense
Speaker 1: to me. They didn't go over my head. So um,
Speaker 1: I would really attracted to it for those reasons. I
Speaker 1: thought it was really good quality stuff. But it was
Speaker 1: like a small time, little blog running on WordPress that
Speaker 1: clearly was like not a big time operation. It was
Speaker 1: just getting off the ground but was but was really
Speaker 1: being shared widely. So I mean I got involved just
Speaker 1: because I originally reached out just to see if they
Speaker 1: wanted an investor, you know, to kind of go to
Speaker 1: the next level, if they wanted some some extra cash.
Speaker 1: Um and Adam, who was running it, wanted to sell
Speaker 1: the site. He didn't want to keep running it because
Speaker 1: he was afraid of what might happen with big tech censorship,
Speaker 1: and he didn't like the the spotlight that he was under.
Speaker 1: He was getting a lot of attention he wasn't comfortable with.
Speaker 1: So um, he wanted to kind of step out of
Speaker 1: that role. UM. And I saw it just as a
Speaker 1: great opportunity to get involved because I couldn't pass it up.
Speaker 1: So I really didn't have the intention of running it.
Speaker 1: I really had the intention just of investing in it,
Speaker 1: but when I had the opportunity to buy it, I
Speaker 1: couldn't pass it up. Well, And so take us through
Speaker 1: the editorial process, because we as we've already discussed, it's
Speaker 1: a it's a target rich environment right now, So kind
Speaker 1: of take us through what that process looks like. Uh well,
Speaker 1: I mean, so we wake up every day, we look
Speaker 1: at what's going on in the news, and we have
Speaker 1: our slack channel where all of our writers are and
Speaker 1: we're just kind of chatting with each other and we
Speaker 1: just throw out ideas, like the joke always starts with
Speaker 1: the headline. It's always the headline. Um. You know, most
Speaker 1: of the people I wish they would read the articles
Speaker 1: and click through and then click on all of the
Speaker 1: ads because that's how I get rich. Um. But they
Speaker 1: but most people just read the headlines and that's all
Speaker 1: you really need to get the joke because we we
Speaker 1: we pump, we pump it in there, we include it
Speaker 1: in the headline. So all of them back and forth
Speaker 1: between the writers is just pitching and iterating on headlines
Speaker 1: to try to narrow down something that's that's worded just right,
Speaker 1: that we know is going to connect with our audience. So, um,
Speaker 1: that's really what it is. Now. The liberal media will
Speaker 1: tell you that we wake up every day thinking of
Speaker 1: how many people can we deceive today with our malicious misinformation? Right, Um,
Speaker 1: but really we're just going for laughs, and we are,
Speaker 1: you know, trying to speak truth to culture in some ways,
Speaker 1: but it's but it's just a process of taking what's
Speaker 1: going on in the headlines and exaggerating it and and
Speaker 1: again ridiculing the bad ideas, mocking the hypocrisy and the
Speaker 1: double standards. Um that you see out there. And it
Speaker 1: is a very rich environment. But um, you know a
Speaker 1: lot of people you say it's a target rich environment.
Speaker 1: That is true, Um, but there is an extent to
Speaker 1: which is actually more challenging to do satire in this
Speaker 1: kind of environment than it isn't any other, just because,
Speaker 1: like I said, you know, parody, uh is everywhere in reality,
Speaker 1: and so it's very difficult to exaggerate that which is
Speaker 1: already so crazy and absurd. So we find it actually
Speaker 1: challenging day to day to come up with stuff that's
Speaker 1: even more crazy than what's actually out there in the
Speaker 1: real headlines. But see to that point. I mean, look,
Speaker 1: we had Senna and recently tell us that you can't
Speaker 1: tell baby sex at birth. We have the Energy secretary
Speaker 1: recently telling us that we don't use past definitions of
Speaker 1: infrastructure because of their course trying to redefine the world
Speaker 1: word because Biden's transportation proposal is only like six percent
Speaker 1: actually infrastructure. You've got Marry and web Stir trying to
Speaker 1: change the definition of sexual preference to stick it to
Speaker 1: Amy Coney Barrett. But ironically, these are the people who
Speaker 1: are trying to be the arbiters of the truth. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it is ironic, isn't it. Um, They're they're they're changing
Speaker 1: the definitions of words every like ten seconds. Um, you
Speaker 1: know that everything is two plus two can equal five
Speaker 1: if you want it. To history is racist. Math is racist. Yeah, So, um,
Speaker 1: you do have this weird situation where they are trying
Speaker 1: to be the arbiters of truth and so we actually
Speaker 1: have to It's funny, you know. I sometimes I sometimes
Speaker 1: describe satire as true lies, um, because we are. We're
Speaker 1: actually telling the truth by exposing their lies. But we're
Speaker 1: doing it using fiction. So it's a little a little
Speaker 1: complicated what we do. But but but it is fun.
Speaker 1: You're your Twitter bio says fake news you can try,
Speaker 1: which is just for folks at home. Here are some
Speaker 1: of the headlines. I mean, it's it's genuinely hilarious. So
Speaker 1: they have one that says, Mexico installs Stais to keep
Speaker 1: Joe Biden out. Uh. And then so this other one
Speaker 1: that says Apple releases feminist series who refuses to listen?
Speaker 1: So it's it's it's hilarious. I mean, do you have,
Speaker 1: you know, going through all the different headlines since you
Speaker 1: came on board, do you have a favorite that stands out? Um?
Speaker 1: You know, it's funny. I get asked that question a lot,
Speaker 1: and I do have one that really stands out. I
Speaker 1: wanted I thought I thought it was an original question,
Speaker 1: but I guess I get um uh. You know, I
Speaker 1: had one headline when I first got involved. I was
Speaker 1: pitching so many headlines over and over and over again.
Speaker 1: I was pitching headlines, and like the guys were probably cringing, like, well,
Speaker 1: oh no, this this guy, he doesn't want to run
Speaker 1: the business. He wants to be a writer, you know.
Speaker 1: But I just in the process of getting to know
Speaker 1: the b and its voice and everything, I was really
Speaker 1: trying to like get in that mindset where I was
Speaker 1: able to do what they do. And I must have
Speaker 1: pitched a hundred and fifty headlines before even like one
Speaker 1: of them got published. But one of them did get published,
Speaker 1: and it was um uh, something like uh, Democrats draft
Speaker 1: legislation that would make it a hate crime to eat
Speaker 1: at Chick fil a. In it was right at the
Speaker 1: time when like Chick fil A was in the news,
Speaker 1: you know, for some reason, they were attacking them for something.
Speaker 1: Um And it was something that happened in New York,
Speaker 1: I think. And that that article got snoped, got fact
Speaker 1: checked because a viral a lot of people believed that
Speaker 1: it was true, and so Snopes fact checked it. And
Speaker 1: I was wearing that like a badge of honor, and
Speaker 1: like my first headline got published and it was already snoked. So, um,
Speaker 1: that was kind of cool. That one stands out in
Speaker 1: my memory. Um, we've had a lot that went like
Speaker 1: crazy viral or just meant this like it were like
Speaker 1: this perfect nexus between like the Christian culture stuff and
Speaker 1: like what's going on in the news. Um. We did
Speaker 1: one about how Joel Osteen was handing out copies of
Speaker 1: your Best Life Now to people in like the flooded
Speaker 1: uh area of Houston while he was driving around in
Speaker 1: his yacht, and and it was just critical commentary on
Speaker 1: like his prosperity theology that like you can live your
Speaker 1: best life now. You know when it's like that gospel
Speaker 1: doesn't preach everywhere. Look at look around you and Houston
Speaker 1: everyone's dealing with this flood from Hurricane Harvey. So know
Speaker 1: that those kinds of things they can sometimes go really
Speaker 1: viral and have a really big impact. And those those
Speaker 1: ones make an impression. I mean, it's not like you're
Speaker 1: just taking on democrats or liberals. I mean, you take
Speaker 1: on conservatives. You you know, you took on Trump during
Speaker 1: his administration, So I mean it's you're not just targeting
Speaker 1: the left you sort of target and make fun of,
Speaker 1: you know, just any sort of absurdity that you see. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and that's a lot. I think it's healthy to um,
Speaker 1: hold your yourself up to the mirror, you know, put
Speaker 1: put yourself in the crosshairs a little bit, and do
Speaker 1: some self deprecating stuff. I think it's really healthy for
Speaker 1: people to be able to laugh at themselves. We have
Speaker 1: this weird issue going on today where everybody is so
Speaker 1: offended by everything, and everybody takes themselves so seriously. No
Speaker 1: one wants to laugh. You know, if anyone, God forbid,
Speaker 1: you're the target of a stereotype. Oh, you know, that's
Speaker 1: world ending for you. Come on, you know it's stereotypes
Speaker 1: can be funny sometimes and and sometimes they apply to us. Um,
Speaker 1: So you know, I just think people need to lighten up.
Speaker 1: I think levity is really healthy, and self deprecating humor,
Speaker 1: especially kind of keeps keeps ourselves in check a little bit.
Speaker 1: So we poke it ourselves all the time. And that's
Speaker 1: one of the reasons to be was so refreshing to
Speaker 1: me and I wanted to get involved, is because I
Speaker 1: saw that self deprecating humor and thought it was really healthy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's hilarious. But why do you think that can't or
Speaker 1: doesn't seem to be able to exist as well in
Speaker 1: today's society. Uh. I think people a bit, especially young people,
Speaker 1: have been trained to find things offensive, you know, like
Speaker 1: we have we score points when we're offended for whatever reason.
Speaker 1: You know, you see all this virtue signaling that happens,
Speaker 1: And a lot of the virtue signaling comes from this
Speaker 1: like sanctimonious place of oh, look at me, I'm better
Speaker 1: than you. I I think this is offensive and you
Speaker 1: don't there for I'm a better person than you. Like,
Speaker 1: people have been trained to kind of think in those terms.
Speaker 1: And I think that's just like, first of all, it
Speaker 1: makes you terrible person, it makes you obnoxious, um, and
Speaker 1: it's just immoral. So I don't know, plus full so
Speaker 1: you add all that up and uh, and it's not
Speaker 1: a good idea to to train kids and young people
Speaker 1: to think that way. But but I think that is
Speaker 1: the reason that it's so hard. You know, like Jerry
Speaker 1: Seinfeld won't even do comedy shows on college campuses anymore
Speaker 1: because college kids are offended by everything. So, you know,
Speaker 1: it's a really sad commentary on on where we're at
Speaker 1: And I think that's what people don't understand sometimes is
Speaker 1: if they don't stand behind its sad hire like the
Speaker 1: Babylon b it's not just the babble and be. That
Speaker 1: kind of impact ripples down to all sorts of comedy,
Speaker 1: ripples down to all sorts of speech. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: a much broader issue. Yet, Uh, you know a lot
Speaker 1: of people on the left don't seem to realize that,
Speaker 1: or maybe they do, I don't know. I mean I
Speaker 1: think they've maybe some of them realize it, but they
Speaker 1: think that they're safe because their speech won't be effective,
Speaker 1: because their speech is acceptable. Maybe, um, but maybe what
Speaker 1: they're not seeming to realize is that the standards are shifting,
Speaker 1: like every ten minutes, and whatever was acceptable that they
Speaker 1: were saying yesterday is no longer acceptable. Um. So once
Speaker 1: maybe they start to realize that, they'll realize that they've
Speaker 1: created a app for themselves. Well, and so you you
Speaker 1: guys have been the target. You know, as we've discussed before,
Speaker 1: you've been a big target of Big TEP. I mean
Speaker 1: they've suspended or demonetized you guys as well, which certainly
Speaker 1: puts your business at risk. What's it actually like to
Speaker 1: be on the receiving end of those kinds of efforts. Um,
Speaker 1: what's it like in what sense? I mean, in one sense,
Speaker 1: I think it's encouraging. Um. You know, if you've got people,
Speaker 1: if you've got people attacking you from the left, then
Speaker 1: you've made the right enemies, right. UM. I think that
Speaker 1: I think that it's it's a good thing to be
Speaker 1: on the receiving end of some of that, just because
Speaker 1: it means that you're having an impact. That's one way
Speaker 1: of gauging your success in the culture battle. I think
Speaker 1: um as as difficult as it can be to deal with,
Speaker 1: to deal with like smears and negative criticism and whatever. Um,
Speaker 1: if you're not generating that, God forbid, they were praising us.
Speaker 1: Imagine if The New York Times was praising us or
Speaker 1: CNN was praising us, Um, I'd be I'd be second
Speaker 1: guessing myself real quickly. So I welcome their criticism. But
Speaker 1: you know, what's what's challenging is just in this era
Speaker 1: that we're in where big tech has so much control
Speaker 1: and the media has so much control. You know, these
Speaker 1: are quote reliable sources that are out there smearing us,
Speaker 1: mischaracterizing us, um, calling us UM, you know, fake new
Speaker 1: fake satire, whatever that means, um and and spreading misinformation.
Speaker 1: You know, we're we're really in a situation where we're
Speaker 1: in an uphill battle where we're struggling to have uh,
Speaker 1: we're struggling for the right to be on these platforms
Speaker 1: and to defend ourselves against these attacks that are really baseless.
Speaker 1: But the whole system is rigged against us because you know,
Speaker 1: if the media can get this lie to stick that
Speaker 1: we're a misinformation site, a far right misinformation site, then
Speaker 1: you know, the social networks won't want anything to do
Speaker 1: with us. They're not gonna want us on their platforms. So, UM,
Speaker 1: it's a constant battle. So that that's that's difficult, but
Speaker 1: you know someone's got to be on the front lines
Speaker 1: fighting it, so might as well be us, Right. Do
Speaker 1: you know if The Onion has east any of that
Speaker 1: kind of censorship? Um, If if there's anything that's ever
Speaker 1: happened like them getting dinged on Facebook or something like that,
Speaker 1: I'm not aware of it. Um. I know for a
Speaker 1: fact that the way the media treats them, you know,
Speaker 1: the media never mischaracterizes them. Snopes will always when they
Speaker 1: fact check them, say the Onion is a funny satire site.
Speaker 1: You should laugh. In fact, they're the best and greatest
Speaker 1: satire site. Like it's always it's always understood that they're
Speaker 1: doing satire and comedy. It's never suggested that they have
Speaker 1: ill motives. So they're not in a situation where they
Speaker 1: would ever. I mean, look the New York Times piece
Speaker 1: that was just done done on us, that that called
Speaker 1: that said that we trafficked and misinformation. This is a
Speaker 1: couple of weeks ago, a few weeks ago. Um that
Speaker 1: piece was originally it was really about a left wing
Speaker 1: cartoonist who was sometimes misunderstood he did satire that was
Speaker 1: sometimes taken down off of Facebook because it was misunderstood
Speaker 1: as being real. Well, when we weren't cited as like
Speaker 1: a conservative example of that is that also happens to us.
Speaker 1: You know, instead of saying, oh, we are a conservative
Speaker 1: satire site that sometimes has their content taken down because
Speaker 1: people think it's real, it was. It was treated much differently.
Speaker 1: You know, they treated us as a far right misinformation
Speaker 1: site that somehow gets away with misleading people on these platforms.
Speaker 1: Um and Facebook needs to figure out what to do
Speaker 1: about that. And that's just that just goes to show
Speaker 1: you how, you know, how disingenuous and unfair they are,
Speaker 1: and how they treat the two different sides. You know,
Speaker 1: a left wing satirist is just a misunderstood satirist. A
Speaker 1: right wing satirist is a disinformation a deceptive deceiver, I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: a deceptive source of miss disinformation. Um. It's a mouthful
Speaker 1: to get out. UM. So you know, it's it's unfair
Speaker 1: the way that they do it, but UM, you know,
Speaker 1: obviously that's just the climate that we're dealing with. I mean,
Speaker 1: is it coordinated because it seems like, you know, you've
Speaker 1: got The New York Times attacking you, and O CNN
Speaker 1: has gone after you. Guys, you've got big tech targeting you.
Speaker 1: I mean, is it is there sort of like a
Speaker 1: sense that there's sort of this coordination involved in some
Speaker 1: of it. I don't know that like talking behind the scenes,
Speaker 1: but someone has definitely figured out that that's the way
Speaker 1: to get to to shut us up and shut us down. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, I think three years ago when Facebook really
Speaker 1: started getting serious about um, misinformation spreading and and thriving
Speaker 1: on their platform. Um, that's when this really started happening
Speaker 1: with originally with Snopes and so I think that they
Speaker 1: just see an opportunity. They're like, look, these guys like
Speaker 1: they do fake news, they're trying to be satire. We
Speaker 1: could if we mischaracterize them as actual fake news, then
Speaker 1: we can shut them up. Um. I think it's just
Speaker 1: an obvious I think it's kind of brilliant actually as
Speaker 1: a tactic to to try to make that stick to us.
Speaker 1: But it's just based on nothing, and so they can't
Speaker 1: and they're frustrated. Do you feel like, do you think
Speaker 1: it's maybe because some of the headlines are a little
Speaker 1: too on the nose for them, like it brings a
Speaker 1: little discomfort, as you mentioned, to kind of put the
Speaker 1: mirror up and to take a look you. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think it's that they don't like the targets, right, the
Speaker 1: targets were aiming at. Um. What they'll say is that
Speaker 1: we are too close to the truth. We were we
Speaker 1: were on this thin line between truth and in you know, satire,
Speaker 1: and and we're way too close to the truth and
Speaker 1: it's way too believable. But what they're what they're not
Speaker 1: what they're not taking on board there, and this is
Speaker 1: an important point that people need to realize, is that
Speaker 1: satire just like when you hear that saying like there's
Speaker 1: a grain of truth in every joke. Satire exaggerates the
Speaker 1: truth to make its point. And if there's no truth
Speaker 1: in the joke that you're making, then the joke won't land,
Speaker 1: it won't be funny, it'll just come out of nowhere
Speaker 1: and make no sense. So it's got to be rooted
Speaker 1: in the truth. And if it's believable but not true
Speaker 1: but believable, then that's an indictment of whoever we're satirizing.
Speaker 1: It's not an indictment of satire. That just means that
Speaker 1: whoever it is that we're making fun of, like deserves
Speaker 1: to be made fun of that way they've done something
Speaker 1: um so egregious, are so hypocritical or whatever that the
Speaker 1: satirical piece we we were really resonated with people because
Speaker 1: they thought it could possibly be true about that person. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, that's an indictment of that person. So to
Speaker 1: to turn around and say that satires the problem when
Speaker 1: people believe that kind of stuff, I mean, that's silly.
Speaker 1: And and again if you look at the double standard
Speaker 1: is glaring when you look at how they treat the onion.
Speaker 1: The onion is believed all the time, UM, even by
Speaker 1: heads of state. UM. And there's websites devoted to tracking
Speaker 1: when people have taken Onion story seriously, but they never
Speaker 1: consider that a problem. I mean, I remember, I think
Speaker 1: it was two thousand and twelve, I believe it was
Speaker 1: Congressman John Fleming tweeted out an Onion article about some
Speaker 1: massive abortion plex that Planned Parenthood was creating, and it
Speaker 1: talked about how there was like a three story nightclub
Speaker 1: and a lazy river, and you're like, and I'm pro life, right,
Speaker 1: but it's like, you know, and so it's like it's absurd,
Speaker 1: but like you know, there's an element kerdle of truth
Speaker 1: in there with you know, Planned Parenthood sort of taking
Speaker 1: things to that length. But you know, he he thought
Speaker 1: it was real and tweeted it out. To your point,
Speaker 1: but if you have you ever heard from has anyone
Speaker 1: from the Onion reached out in solidarity with you, because
Speaker 1: you would think that of doing something in a similar
Speaker 1: vein that they would feel protective over speech and supportive,
Speaker 1: you would think. So there aren't many on the left
Speaker 1: to have that mentality. I would say maybe Bill Maher
Speaker 1: is one of them. Um, he really cares about speech
Speaker 1: and protecting the right of people to say things that
Speaker 1: are offensive even if you don't like them. Uh, nobody
Speaker 1: from the Onion has reached out to us to communicate
Speaker 1: anything like that. Now they should. And some of these
Speaker 1: some of the fact checking and stuff is so dumb.
Speaker 1: So like snopes dot Com fact checked one of your
Speaker 1: headlines that said CNN purchases industrial sized washing machine to
Speaker 1: spend news before publication, which as absolutely hilarious but clearly
Speaker 1: a joke. Uh you know, so, so why even fact
Speaker 1: check something like that? I mean, you would have to
Speaker 1: read this and being moron to think that is true.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously they're fake news and it's hilarious to
Speaker 1: poke fun at them, But do you think that they
Speaker 1: actually you know, CNN purchased an industrial sized washing machine
Speaker 1: machine to spend new is before publication. Just defies logic
Speaker 1: and reason. Yet they still fact checked it. So why
Speaker 1: that's remarkable, isn't it. I Mean, it's like, on the
Speaker 1: face of it, that story is so silly, you know,
Speaker 1: some of them When I when I made it comment
Speaker 1: a moment ago about how our satire rides on the
Speaker 1: back of the truth and it exaggerates it. That is
Speaker 1: um that is one of the examples of how satire
Speaker 1: can sometimes just be silly and absurd um and is
Speaker 1: not really believable. So it's kind of funny that that
Speaker 1: was one of the ones that got fact checked and
Speaker 1: actually got us like threatened with demonetization and d platforming
Speaker 1: on Facebook because Facebook was using Snopes as one of
Speaker 1: their fact checkers at the time when that happened. Um.
Speaker 1: But what Snopes will tell you if you ask Snopes,
Speaker 1: you know that the founder of Snopes will say that
Speaker 1: they fact check things based on reports, like things that
Speaker 1: come in. There's a threshold they have and if there's
Speaker 1: a certain number of reports, like if there's a huge
Speaker 1: volume of people who are misunderstanding something are asking is
Speaker 1: this real, then they fact check it. Um I I
Speaker 1: I call bs on that because the story like that,
Speaker 1: I don't think there's one person who thought that was
Speaker 1: actually true. There can't even be one. So I have
Speaker 1: no idea why they fact checked that one. It's just
Speaker 1: silly that they picked that one. But there's other examples
Speaker 1: of silly ones, like did you see that UH USA
Speaker 1: Today fact checked US USA Today, by the way, funded
Speaker 1: by Facebook. Um. Their fact checking department is funded by
Speaker 1: Facebook fact checked us and and rated the claim the
Speaker 1: satirical claim that Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death had been overturned
Speaker 1: by the Ninth Circuit Court. They rated that false and
Speaker 1: they cited fifteen sources in their lengthy refutation of that joke,
Speaker 1: which is just the most absurd joke. Ever, how do
Speaker 1: you overturn somebody's death like that? That doesn't even make sense? Yeah,
Speaker 1: who who are these people that? When? I mean like
Speaker 1: also embarrassing for them. I mean like if if if
Speaker 1: us today reached out to me as a as an
Speaker 1: expert to go on the record talking about how that's fake,
Speaker 1: I mean, when I would be like, this is the
Speaker 1: dumbest thing ever, Like, I have more interesting things to
Speaker 1: do with my day, and I'm not an idiot, So like,
Speaker 1: why does anyone even take the time to do that? Like,
Speaker 1: it's it's embarrassing. It's well, for one thing, it creates
Speaker 1: a paper trail of us having been fact checked. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is one of the things they can look at
Speaker 1: in sight, and this is one of the things they
Speaker 1: do site is these guys keep missing these they keep
Speaker 1: misleading people, They keep getting people to believe things that
Speaker 1: aren't true. Look at how many times they've had to
Speaker 1: be fact checked, So it almost doesn't even matter which
Speaker 1: stories they're fact checking as long as they're fact checking
Speaker 1: us and reading our stuff false. Um, but if you
Speaker 1: go and read that one, you should do it. I
Speaker 1: mean it's it's they're straight faced saying we've checked the
Speaker 1: Ninth Circuit Courts website and it says nothing about overturning
Speaker 1: Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death. It's like, why would it? That
Speaker 1: is absurd, that's ridiculous. You could have just gone to
Speaker 1: our website and seeing that we're the most popular satire
Speaker 1: site on the internet, and said this was satire and
Speaker 1: called it a day, which yeah, I mean, it's like,
Speaker 1: how does anyone ever believe that's real? But you know
Speaker 1: they don't, and you're right, that's the point is there.
Speaker 1: You know they're essentially trying to take you down. Do
Speaker 1: you ever worry that you know they they do that
Speaker 1: they will take us down? Uh? I don't know. I mean,
Speaker 1: I so someone has asked me this before, like Tucker
Speaker 1: Carlson asked me if it worries me, and my answer
Speaker 1: to him was, uh no, because we get so much
Speaker 1: support and there's so much pushback, and it usually bites
Speaker 1: them in the ass, Like they end up regretting how
Speaker 1: they came after us because they get so much negative
Speaker 1: press out of it, and we get so much positive
Speaker 1: coverage and we end up getting more subscribers or whatever.
Speaker 1: You know, Like we kind of thrive off of the
Speaker 1: controversy to some extent, but that will only last up
Speaker 1: to a point. You know. I've started to get with
Speaker 1: what has happened with the New York Times. You know,
Speaker 1: I say this very emphatically, like we can't let these
Speaker 1: lies stick. The minute a reliable source and I use
Speaker 1: that very loosely when I'm describing New York Times, but
Speaker 1: they're considered a reliable source for better or worse, the
Speaker 1: moment they published something and it's allowed to stand that
Speaker 1: says we traffic and misinformation. Well, then we are seriously
Speaker 1: threatened with possibility that Facebook will look to that as
Speaker 1: a reason to take us off the platform, um, regardless
Speaker 1: of what our history is. You know, if New York
Speaker 1: Times said it the reliable source, So there is a
Speaker 1: very real threat of that potentially happening. Uh. And how
Speaker 1: we fight back against that and what the end outcome
Speaker 1: will be, I'm not sure, but it's a it's real
Speaker 1: it's a realistic possibility, you know, because it's you know,
Speaker 1: we're sort of at this interesting place where the left
Speaker 1: has so much power in America. I remember, you know,
Speaker 1: because the alternative always for conservatives was oh, just build
Speaker 1: your own platform, and then you have Parlor that did that,
Speaker 1: and then they got d platform. Yet we see an
Speaker 1: articles that a lot of the planning that took pace
Speaker 1: for January six happen on places like Facebook, but nothing
Speaker 1: happened to them, no recourse taken against Facebook. So I mean,
Speaker 1: what's the path forward for conservatives and all this? As
Speaker 1: you know, we we sort of have this wage, this
Speaker 1: uphill battle against the almighty left. It might be above
Speaker 1: my pay grade to that question, but I do have
Speaker 1: an opinion, um that I'll take an opinion, okay, for
Speaker 1: whatever it's worth, an opinion from fake news. You can trust,
Speaker 1: um that conservatives need to you know, for for for
Speaker 1: better or worse, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, whatever. These main platforms
Speaker 1: the primary social networks that everybody and you're, all of
Speaker 1: your family members and all of your friends are on.
Speaker 1: They are the public square that is in the century,
Speaker 1: that is where um uh, meaningful discussions and discourse take place,
Speaker 1: and where all sides are represented and where everyone should
Speaker 1: be able to have a say. Um. Now, the laws
Speaker 1: haven't caught up with that yet, you know, they're they
Speaker 1: the courts haven't dealt with some of these questions, these
Speaker 1: hard questions yet UM. Section to thirty comes into the conversation.
Speaker 1: But you have this effort, I think, for conservatives to
Speaker 1: set up their own platforms and remove themselves from the
Speaker 1: public square and say, if we're not welcome here, we're
Speaker 1: gonna go. We're gonna take our conversation somewhere else. Imagine
Speaker 1: an actual public square where you know, you get shouted down,
Speaker 1: or you're or you're relegated to a corner somewhere, and
Speaker 1: you have to whisper amongst yourselves because you're not welcome
Speaker 1: to talk in the actual public square. That's not an
Speaker 1: acceptable solution, I don't think. And that's what you end
Speaker 1: up with with some of these With these alternative platforms,
Speaker 1: you're really just talking amongst yourselves and you're not involved
Speaker 1: in the actual discourse that's happening in the real public square. UM.
Speaker 1: So it's really more akin to like a very large
Speaker 1: Trump supporting Facebook group rather than an actual alternative to Facebook, um,
Speaker 1: something like that. So I don't think that's the answer.
Speaker 1: I think we have to assert our right to be
Speaker 1: on these platforms. This is where speech happens is it
Speaker 1: is the public square. We have a right to be there,
Speaker 1: and these platforms shouldn't be exercising viewpoint discrimination to knock
Speaker 1: us off of them, and the and the government, the
Speaker 1: big tech companies are in fact acting as an arm
Speaker 1: of the government to do that. The government wants that happening,
Speaker 1: at least, you know, the Democrats and government want that happening,
Speaker 1: and the big the big tech companies are doing their
Speaker 1: bidding um. And it would be unconstitutional if the government
Speaker 1: did it, but the private companies that align with the
Speaker 1: leftists are able to do it and incite these you know,
Speaker 1: um exemptions that allow them to do it. And it's
Speaker 1: just absurd how the these these loopholes are being used
Speaker 1: against us. So I think we have to fight back
Speaker 1: against that. And I don't know what the answer is
Speaker 1: for how we do that, um, But I'm open to
Speaker 1: suggestions and I'll get involved in shutting down of speech
Speaker 1: and censorship seems to live so healthily on the left.
Speaker 1: Why is that because Um, when you don't have really
Speaker 1: good arguments, you have to shut up the people who
Speaker 1: are saying things you don't like that you can't refute.
Speaker 1: I mean, ultimately, that's what it seems to come down to,
Speaker 1: kind of this childish I don't want to hear what
Speaker 1: you have to say. You know, they don't want to
Speaker 1: be they don't want to be convicted, they don't want
Speaker 1: to be challenged, they don't want to be debated with. UM.
Speaker 1: They want to engage in ad hominem argumentation where they
Speaker 1: slander you, attack you personally. Uh. And they want to
Speaker 1: keep you from responding or saying anything back that would
Speaker 1: be you know, meaningful, or make them look bad or
Speaker 1: might refute their position. Um. It's it's. It is a
Speaker 1: very immature attitude towards discourse and UH and and policy
Speaker 1: and everything. But you know, it's it's. It's certainly effective
Speaker 1: when you control all of these platforms on which people
Speaker 1: actually speak, UM, you can actually you can actually get
Speaker 1: your way that way. UM. But it seems to just
Speaker 1: come from a place of immaturity. In my view, it
Speaker 1: makes me sad that people can't find the humor in things.
Speaker 1: I mean, I've I've gone to you know, the comedy
Speaker 1: seller in New York City when I used to live there,
Speaker 1: and all the jokes were anti Trump, right, And I
Speaker 1: sit there as a Trump supporter, and I laughed because
Speaker 1: it's funny, because I can find humor even if the
Speaker 1: attacks and even if the you know, the jokes are
Speaker 1: aimed at me, I can still find humor in it
Speaker 1: because I'm not a monster, and I have a sense
Speaker 1: of humor, and it's still funny. But I don't understand
Speaker 1: why it seems, you know, on the other side they
Speaker 1: can't do that. But you know, the thing, isn't it
Speaker 1: because I grew up, you know, as a Christian. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm watching shows like The Simpsons or Family Guy or
Speaker 1: South Park, and you know, like Jesus and his followers
Speaker 1: in the Christian Church are just ruthlessly made fun of
Speaker 1: in mainstream culture and television and movies and and sometimes,
Speaker 1: you know, sometimes the jokes are funny, sometimes they're deserved. Um.
Speaker 1: And you know, we've learned to laugh at ourselves because
Speaker 1: we're the butt of these jokes just all over the place. Um.
Speaker 1: It's very uncomfortable for them though, when it comes back
Speaker 1: at them, and maybe they just need to get used
Speaker 1: to it. Yeah, I'm constantly making fun of myself because
Speaker 1: that's also a target rich environment. So you know, it's
Speaker 1: like whatever, I don't really care. It's you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's like the real stuff that ends up hurting you.
Speaker 1: If like your mom's like I'm disappointed by what you
Speaker 1: said on TV and they're like, oh corrupt, you know.
Speaker 1: But like, for instance, one of the Mina or you know,
Speaker 1: not Mina's, but this lady tweeted me one time and
Speaker 1: I thought it was hilarious and I was saying that
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton didn't have a message. This was like back
Speaker 1: in sixteen, and this woman was her messages that you
Speaker 1: should get or you should get paid the same as
Speaker 1: a man for the shitty job that you do. And
Speaker 1: I laughed because I was like, Okay, that's actually really funny,
Speaker 1: like touche, you know, like that that's funny or you know,
Speaker 1: or I had simply tweet me one time and she
Speaker 1: was like, is that is that your arm? Or is
Speaker 1: your ombre hair trashy? Or is it my TV? And
Speaker 1: I was like, it's your TV, you know. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's obviously it's not there, but you know, it's funny, right,
Speaker 1: like it's it's a humor should be uniting thing versus
Speaker 1: you know, dividing thing, and should be some sort of
Speaker 1: shared activity among all of us and being able to
Speaker 1: laugh together. Right, if you look back at humor, like
Speaker 1: the great comedians of the prior decades, you know, going
Speaker 1: back into the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you know, like
Speaker 1: they made fun of everybody, including themselves, but pretty pretty
Speaker 1: ruthlessly stereotyped people and and and you know it was
Speaker 1: you were able to make jokes of things that like
Speaker 1: women typically do, or you're able to make jokes of
Speaker 1: things about uh, that even certain minorities do. Like you're
Speaker 1: able to all these jokes you know, like we're we're, we're.
Speaker 1: You know, they were edgy, but they were they were
Speaker 1: still people still considered them funny, and you were able
Speaker 1: to make them without without considering you necessarily a misogynist
Speaker 1: or a racist for making them. You're just trying to
Speaker 1: be funny. Um. And people were willing to laugh at themselves.
Speaker 1: You know, that was that was possible very recently, and
Speaker 1: it's no longer possible now. Um. And so you know,
Speaker 1: I don't consider that progress by any stretch of the imagination.
Speaker 1: I don't either, and we should all be able to laugh.
Speaker 1: Particularly mean, a lot of people have had, you know,
Speaker 1: a lot of hardships over the past few ones, durring COVID,
Speaker 1: a loss of life, loss of income, and uh, you
Speaker 1: know the people. The humor and laughing is good for
Speaker 1: the soul and good for the country. And making a
Speaker 1: joke at someone else's expense doesn't mean that you hate them,
Speaker 1: you know. Um, it's not necessarily said in a mean
Speaker 1: spirit in some In some cases, it's just said because
Speaker 1: it's a funny observation. Um, you know, you can make
Speaker 1: I saw a video the other day of a woman
Speaker 1: trying to parallel park and it was going kind of viral.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you saw this one, but it
Speaker 1: took her forever to parallel park, and there was another
Speaker 1: woman who it was probably me. It was like her
Speaker 1: hit the parking job done and then immediately got in
Speaker 1: her car and left, and her car was one of
Speaker 1: the cars that was making it difficult for the parallel
Speaker 1: parking job to happen. So the whole thing was just
Speaker 1: kind of this mess. But you know it, it's funny,
Speaker 1: Like you can't even like you can't make fun of
Speaker 1: a woman's ability to like park a car in a
Speaker 1: in a parallel spot without being accused of hating women,
Speaker 1: which is just silly. It's so silly, Like, come on, um,
Speaker 1: these these types of jokes are so harmless, um, and
Speaker 1: and to act like they're super harmful is I think
Speaker 1: in fact harmful. It's also just exhaust staying. I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't understand how people could live each I mean
Speaker 1: just waking up and you know what am I outraged
Speaker 1: about today? I mean it's just exhausting, right, What little
Speaker 1: thing that doesn't even apply to me personally? Can I
Speaker 1: be bothered by? Today? I mean, what an unhealthy mentality
Speaker 1: to have to be is if we don't have enough
Speaker 1: unhealthy things. You know, we're addicted to scrolling our feeds,
Speaker 1: our phones and and responding to notifications all the time,
Speaker 1: and now we're also addicted to just being offended by
Speaker 1: every little thing that doesn't even apply to us. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's just so psychologically and emotionally draining. Well, seth leave
Speaker 1: us on something positive. What what should people know about
Speaker 1: the beer? Or just you know, leave us with something
Speaker 1: good here. Well, I will say that if you want
Speaker 1: to stay on top of like what is going on
Speaker 1: in the news, but from more of like a fun
Speaker 1: and funny perspective. We have a news site now called
Speaker 1: Not the b which is like all the news that
Speaker 1: should be satire but somehow isn't because it's so absurd. Um.
Speaker 1: That is a fun and funny place to kind of
Speaker 1: consume the news because we mocked silly stuff, just like
Speaker 1: we do on The Babylon Be. But we're actually reporting
Speaker 1: real stories rather than doing satire. So um, and that's
Speaker 1: growing like crazy, So I would check that out totally,
Speaker 1: So everyone check that out. I also think that the
Speaker 1: media when they attack you guys, ultimately end up discrediting
Speaker 1: themselves and eroding trust in you know, there are publications
Speaker 1: as well. But again to the listeners, I am a huge,
Speaker 1: huge fan, you know, big endorser of the Babylon Be.
Speaker 1: You guys are absolutely hilarious. I retweet your stuff constantly.
Speaker 1: It always makes me laugh and we need laughs these days.
Speaker 1: So keep up the good fight. You guys are killing it.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, appreciate you. Thanks Seth, take care.
Speaker 1: I want to thank Seth Dylan of The Babylon Be
Speaker 1: once again for such a great interview and if you
Speaker 1: enjoy today's show, please leave us a review and rate
Speaker 1: us five stars on Apple Podcasts. You can also find
Speaker 1: me on Twitter and Instagram at at least some Rebooth
Speaker 1: also just want to give a special thanks to our
Speaker 1: team producer John Cassio, researcher Margaret Smith, and executive producers
Speaker 1: Debbie Myers and speaker New Gingrich, who are all part
Speaker 1: of the sixty Network