Alex Rorty (8:21)

I was a guest host. Guest host. What? Feels like many years ago, not that long ago actually, but it's, it's wonderful to be back. Thanks for having me on.

Mike Pesca (8:30)

Back when there was a definition of a quality candidate among Democrats, that meant something like someone you could trust, someone who would have an appeal to a moderate, or maybe even a Republican voter, maybe someone with public service in his or her past. Ooh, a good thing would be military service. What is the definition of a quality candidate now in Democratic politics? Or is there a standard agreed upon definition?

Alex Rorty (8:56)

It's a great question, and I feel like it's something that Democratic voters are trying to sort out right now. I was going to add to your earlier preamble about what makes a quality candidate. For years and years, it really felt like, well, whoever Chuck Schumer decided was going to be a quality candidate. And now I think that's in question. And I think Schumer's judgment is explicitly part of the judgment now from Democratic voters. Look, when you say, how are Democratic voters sort of adjudicating this, I immediately think of the Maine Senate race, the Democratic primary there, because you, you have a candidate who Chuck Schumer recruited in a race that the party absolutely has to win if they want to retake the Senate majority. Chuck Schumer recruited Janet Mills, who is in her second term as governor. She is an experienced politician. She is relatively popular in her state. She is the definition of what, for years and years and years, people would consider the best available recruitment. Right. Governors are always seen as almost, in almost every case, the best candidate you can recruit.

Mike Pesca (10:06)

Popular governors.

Alex Rorty (10:07)

Yes, popular. Assuming that they're not Rod Blagojevich or

Mike Pesca (10:11)

some kind of scandal rim popular, unindicted governors.

Alex Rorty (10:15)

And Janet Mills is that. However, despite the fact that I think she was telegraphing her entrance to the Maine Senate primary for months, another candidate kind of came out of nowhere, Graham Platner, who is an oyster farmer. You know, that's always, that's always a descriptor attached to him every time you see his name in print. He's also a veteran, has never held office before, never run for major office, certainly. But there is now this major debate both in Maine and I think really across the country about which candidate is better. Because for all of Mills experience and electoral track record, you know, there are a lot of Democrats who say, look, we've been trying this kind of candidate for the entirety of the Trump era and look where it's gotten us, right? The status quo sucks right now. We hate what's going on in the country. We can't believe we lost to Donald Trump not once but twice. We have to try something different. We can't trust the judgment of Chuck Schumer or other party leaders anymore. And so that's where you see this. This big divide. And it's not just in Maine, but I think that that is the sort of quintessential example right now in the Democratic Party.

Mike Pesca (11:30)

Yeah. And the thing that you didn't mention, Janet mills will be 79 if elected.

Alex Rorty (11:35)

Yes.

Mike Pesca (11:36)

85 if she serves out her term. And you didn't mention a lot. Very well observed race. Platner has a tattoo that Nazi ish. He's kind of denied knowing about it.

Alex Rorty (11:48)

Y.

Mike Pesca (11:49)

Not just a tattoo. There's rhetoric of some of the statements he's made where I think more so with other races. We're going to talk about issues Palestinian. But there is the Bernie side of the party, the Schumer side of the party. But this is a big issue. The age, the gerontocracy. And Janet Mills, no matter how great her credentials are, she is very, very old. And so I wonder, here's two questions about Schumer. Does he not get that? Or in this case, was it, you know, okay, we understand it would be better to have Janet mills have been 20 years younger, but she is also running against the septuagenarian. And given all that, we realize the age is a negative, but you still add it all up. We think she's the most quality candidate.

Alex Rorty (12:37)

I think it's the latter, Mike. I think. I think at some level Chuck Schumer is aware of that. I think in a vacuum, sure, he would take younger candidates. We have seen the dscc. At least he and the DSCC tacitly support some younger candidates in other races. Josh Turek has only been serving a few years in the Iowa state legislature, for example, Haley Stevens in Michigan is a relatively young candidate, certainly young relative to the age of a lot of.

Mike Pesca (13:08)

But not run young relative to McMorrow and El Said and her opponents to interrupt. And also, I think these candidates are fine, but they bring to mind the quote about Al Gore, an old person's idea of a young person.

Alex Rorty (13:20)

That is. That is. That is true. That is true. And I think, you know, I think the context with which they see Janet Mills is they're willing to tolerate her age because they have a very difficult. Whoever the nominee is, is going to have a difficult general election against Susan Collins, who is something close to or approaching a unicorn in our politics right now, where she has a reputation and a political identity separate and apart from the national GOP right now, and separate and apart from the go from Donald Trump, you know, I think Democrats were really confident in, in 2020. They were confident across the board in that election and they thought they were gonna beat Susan Collins. That was the last time that she was running for reelection. Susan Collins ended up winning in a blowout over the former House speaker and Maine Sarah Gideon, who had tens of millions of dollars, almost tens and tens of millions of dollars.

Mike Pesca (14:16)

Too much money.

Alex Rorty (14:17)

Too much money. Actually couldn't spend it all. And ultimately it didn't matter because Susan Collins again, just had this reputation. And they're thinking it's like, look, we just can't get at a generic Democrat. We need someone who, who, like Collins, has her own reputation, has her own standing. People in Maine know her and, you know, will be willing, you know, those Collins voters who have been voting Democratic, you know, have been voting for Democratic candidates otherwise, to finally say, you know what she's, this is too much. I can't vote for any Republican. They need some Democratic candidate, you know, who's going to give them permission to do that, who's not seen as a radical, someone that they know and like personally. And so that's where Janet Mills comes in. That's at least the thinking from Chuck Schumer and other Democratic strategists. To your earlier point, though, look, she is older. I think there is a big push among a lot of Democrats and maybe just people just generally in this country that we need younger representation. And that's where Graham Platner comes in. And he's a totally different proposition against Susan Collins. Right. It's not about presenting a more reasonable alternative to Susan Collins and someone who's going to be a moderate. This is more. No, Susan Collins represents the status quo. The status quo in the eye. If there's one thing that unites Republicans and Democrats right now, it's that the status quo sucks. And we need something new and radically different. And who better than oyster farmer, who hasn't served in politics, who a few years ago was hopping on Reddit and spouting off all kinds of things that he now says he regrets in his evolved past? That's someone who's new and he's blue collar and all that. And so, you know, look, that it is a radically different sort of electoral proposition than the one that Janet Mills is offering. The thing is, you know, if you're Chuck Schumer, you're just more comfortable with Janet Mills. I will say too, you know, if you're Chuck Schumer and you're thinking about running A Senate majority next year, you hope at least you know who is going to be easier to handle. Is it Janet Mills or is it Graham Platner? And I think there's a pretty self evident answer to that which he would prefer, which is a little easier to manage right in your caucus.

Mike Pesca (16:21)

So let's also throw a few other things in the mix. Maine is the only state Maine went at large even though they gave Trump an electoral vote. They in Nebraska do that thing. Maine went 6.9% points for Kamala Harris. So therefore it's key pickup opportunity. But as you say, they thought that Sarah Gideon was going to beat Susan Collins last time. Maybe people don't realize couple of things. When you've been in place as long as Susan Collins, you have so many interactions with voters that they might not even think Democrat, Republican, Trump's party, opposite party. Just Susan Collins helped my family. Susan Collins got me an appointment or my neighbor an appointment into West Point. Susan Collins does all these constituent services things that a senator does and have affection. Also means the oldest state in the country. So if anyone's going to not punish an old candidate, it might be the oldest state in the country. I want to go to Texas because if the Democrats are going to win the Senate back, they have to pick up seats. And Maine is the most obvious one and Texas is in some ways the least obvious one. But there is a lot of momentum. There is also, unlike Maine, a crowded primary, two big candidates. We have Jasmine Crockett and we have James Talarico. Recently James Talarico got a spot on the Colbert Report. I think Jasmine Crockett wants her interview. But what's the dynamic there? I don't know if polling is to be trusted. Early Talarico was known locally. Jasmine Crockett's a big, well known source nationally. But I think the conventional wisdom here might be the more conservative or less showy candidate might be a better match for Texas voters. What are you hearing?

Alex Rorty (17:58)

Yeah, I mean, I would say so that the primary between Talaria and Crockett is one of the most different primaries I can, I can remember because look, Jasmine Crockett got into this race in mid December. The primary is on March 3rd. You were talking about a two and a half month battle with in what is basically a nation state in Texas. It is so large, it is so expensive to campaign in.

Mike Pesca (18:23)

That's Six Flags. It was, it was many different nations.

Alex Rorty (18:27)

There are, you know, and again you have this two and a half month race. And I think everyone agrees that when Jasmine Crockett got in, she immediately became the front runner because she is practically a celebrity among a lot of Democratic voters. She has a lot of strong support as a black woman among black voters. And polling bears that out. But James Tallarico is a celebrity in his own right. You mentioned his Colbert show quasi appearance. I guess you could say he's been.

Mike Pesca (18:55)

Yeah, well, they. Streisand defected that one into a bigger appearance than he would normally get, seemingly

Alex Rorty (19:00)

very knowingly how that was gonna happen. And it's been incredibly effective. I saw his campaign said he raised two and a half million dollars based on that appearance alone. He is his own celebrity. He is from an evangelical church, but he comes at it. He has a very liberal perspective, and he comes from a very liberal tradition. He's been on shows like Joe Rogan's podcast. He's been on Ezra Klein's podcast. He's been on Colbert. And the thing that is differentiating the two candidates so far and why people think Talarico is gaining on Crockett in this race is he's been spending a lot of money and Jasmine Crockett hasn't. For all the different unique appeals of their personalities and their candidacies, sometimes the basic blocking and tackling in a campaign, the basic functions of a campaign are still important. Tall Rico and a supportive super PAC have spent millions and millions and millions of dollars on air this year. Jasmine Crockett only went on air last week. You know, and I wrote a story about this. You know, there are a lot of people who, you know, aren't even Talarico supporters, but they're in conversation with the Crockett campaign, and they can't quite figure out what she's doing right now. Or they can figure it out, and they just don't think it's a very good approach. She's focusing on a lot of local retail politics events. She's not running kind of a statewide campaign, or at least hadn't been until her campaign started running ads last night week. And, you know, I know, believe me, talking with the Talarico people, they thought they were down double digits in this race when it started in December. They think they're within single digits now. And that was as of a week ago. You know, there is a real confidence in that campaign that they're going to pull this out.

Mike Pesca (20:45)

Yeah. And also on the Republican side, it's unclear who the candidate's going to be. Incumbent John Cornyn or Ken Paxson, who's the fiery MAGA candidate in the ag, is one of the iterations of race, is there one that's particularly good for the Republicans and one that's particularly good for the Democrats? Meaning I think there are four different possibilities of what the matchup could be.

Alex Rorty (21:08)

Yeah, I think Democrats are all pretty united in thinking that if Ken Paxton, who is the challenger in the Republican primary to the incumbent, John Cornyn, if he wins, Democrats have a real chance in Texas. And I think some of them will say quietly that if John Cornyn wins, their odds of winning go down pretty dramatically. He's seen as more of an old school Texas Republican, more of a at least moderate in tone and some policies, too. He worked with Democrats on some gun control measures and even the recent past. He's seen as, I think, close to unbeatable in a general election. Unless we're just talking about a historic blowout for Democrats. Ken Paxton is not that way. Ken Paxton, where people don't know, you know, was impeached actually as the state's attorney general. Even Republican state lawmakers voted for impeachment because, of course, the GOP controls the state legislation.

Mike Pesca (22:02)

Oh, wait, I want to get this right. Including his wife, or did she abstain in that vote because she,

Alex Rorty (22:09)

his wife, the way she talks now, she would have voted to impeach him. You know, they're getting a very messy divorce last year that national Republicans have actually called attention to. And look, I said at the top of this conversation, Democrats are really united and wanting to face Ken Paxton. A lot of Washington Republicans, they want to do anything to avoid having Ken Paxton as their nominee because they, in a lot of ways see it the same way as Democrats. Look, if Cornyn is the nominee, they think they're fine. And more importantly, they don't think they're going to have to spend $100 million trying to defend the Senate seat in Texas, which in their mind, of course, they think should be a layup if Ken Paxton is the nominee. They're absolutely concerned that it's going to be a competitive general election, particularly if it's a matchup with James Talarico, who a lot of them see as more electable than Jasmine Crockett in a.

Mike Pesca (23:07)

Yes.

Alex Rorty (23:09)

General election. That's a contentious question on the Democratic side, but among Republicans, it's pretty unanimous. They all think that Jasmine Crockett would make for a worse general election nominee.

Mike Pesca (23:20)

Two other quick ones. Thomas Massie, apostate within the Republican caucus. Is he going to hold onto a seat?

Alex Rorty (23:26)

Great question. I'm heading to Kentucky tomorrow, actually.

Mike Pesca (23:30)

Of course you are.

Alex Rorty (23:31)

Apparently, we're just I like when I

Mike Pesca (23:33)

name a proper name. And you're like, talk to him. Going to talk to him on the schedule. Hold on. I got him online, too.

Alex Rorty (23:40)

It's funny. I was talking with a Democrat who just. I mentioned that, too. He's like, is Massey going to win that race? And I don't think people know House races are tricky. You don't get a lot of polling. Certainly you don't get a lot of public polling about the race. You're talking about a relatively small group of folks who turn out. And so there could be swings. Right. Look, the thing about Thomas Massie is he has had. Whether you agree with what he's doing or not, or you think he's going too far, he has had an incredible level of success with the Epstein files. Right. And has gotten more attention and earned media, as we say in the business of politics, earned media news coverage for this than just about any issue you can imagine a congressman getting. And he, of course, would make the argument, with a lot of justification that he's bringing a lot of this to light and he's doing what he said he would do, and he's committed his. To principles. At the same time, he's running against a real opponent that has basically been recruited by President Trump. Trump has seemingly made it his electoral priority number one this year to defeat Thomas Massie in his primary. They're vowing to spend millions of dollars. Trump's super PACs have something like $100 million at their disposal, and they're raising money separate from that, even just purely to defeat Thomas Massie. So it's a really interesting primary. My sense, talking with people, Thomas Massie is a real politician. He's been in that district for years now. He's committed to his principles. He's very good at articulating those principles, if you've ever interviewed him. It's frankly one of my favorite interviews in politics.

Mike Pesca (25:31)

Yeah. Smart guy, dedicated libertarian, MIT engineer. Yep, sure.

Alex Rorty (25:35)

You know, and you've seen things. So one of my questions, when I go out there, you've seen things like, I mean, Donald Trump has gone after. Thomas Massie's wife recently passed very tragically. He has since remarried. Donald Trump has called attention to that in a very negative way, you know, and it's. It feels like it crosses the Rob Reiner line for me, the way that Trump reacted after the death of Rob Reiner. Even Republicans had to say, this is too far. He shouldn't have said that. I think his criticism of Thomas Massie's new marriage falls into the same category, frankly. But look, he's still Donald Trump. He's still a dominant force in Republican politics. I can tell you, watching ads from Republican candidates in primaries all over the country, seemingly every single one of them features Donald Trump. And if they can, they have footage of Donald Trump saying something nice about the candidate, even if it's a literal two second clip in which Trump seems like he doesn't even really know who he's talking about or which name he just mentioned. It doesn't matter. Trump is in every ad. His hold on the GOP is still awfully strong. So it does make it a heck of a race.

Mike Pesca (26:51)

And Steve Cohen, who is. Tell me this was true for a while. I know he's the only white member of the Congressional Black Caucus, he represents a 60% black district in Tennessee. And he's being opposed by one of the Justins, Justin Pearson, who was young, state legislature, state legislator, who got a lot of attention. My question is, are the voters upset with Cohen? Did he do anything wrong or is this more just possibly Democratic, a demographic reality rather, and an up and coming candidate who maybe will tickle the fancy of the voters there more?

Alex Rorty (27:30)

I mean, it's a good question. I think he, you know, there is a demographic reality to that. Memphis is an overwhelmingly black city. Justin Pearson is a young black man with a. He's not just a state lawmaker. He has a lot of ties to the district. You know, Steve Cohen, in talking with him, he will point out correctly he survived a lot of primary challenges in the past. And if you look at his electoral record, he doesn't just win, he blows them out. Right. And in fact, when Justin Pearson called Steve Cohen to tell him that he was going to run against him, he was going to announce the next day, Steve Cohen told him, you're going to lose just like all the others. In a conversation, they both confirmed to me. Is this time different? I think it might be. Again, we open this conversation talking about this feeling, this unsettled, even angry feeling in the Democratic Party that what the party has been doing isn't working, the status quo isn't working. Steve Cohen's been a member of Congress 20 something years. Hard to argue he's not a member of the status quo. And so maybe Democratic voters, and I do think that a lot of people do like him. And Steve Cohen has done a lot for the city. The question is whether that aligns with the moment that Democrats were in. You know, and there's a quote that gets circulated among a lot of liberals in Memphis Right now, Steve Cohen was on CNN saying, look, what else can I do to oppose Donald Trump? Do you want me to chain myself to the White House and have them drag me away? And you know, I'm not gonna do that. And the reaction from Justin Pierce and others is like, no, you should do that. You know, and, you know, and look, you know, and Justin Pearson is campaigning really, really hard. I was out with him at 7 in the morning. He was out at a rally on MLK Day before anyone else was there, setting up his stand, talking to everyone he could. You know, Steve Cohen didn't attend that rally. He was invited. He didn't attend. He told me he had been to those rallies before, you know, and he's doing a lot else in the community. But, you know, sometimes Democratic voters, especially after they lose a presidential election, want change. And this might be that time. Although I'd point out again, again, Steve Cohen survived challenges before. So far be it for me to predict his political doom here. I just think he's facing a little different environment than he has in the past.

Mike Pesca (29:55)

Alex Rorty covers politics and campaigns for notice. He was originally supposed to do this interview on President's Day, but he had a call with Lincoln and then Washington, so he had to reschedule. Thank you so much, Alex.

Alex Rorty (30:06)

Thank you. Appreciate it. Great, great being here.

Mike Pesca (30:08)

It's a good conversation. Too much to capture right here. So for our Pesca plus subscribers, give you a lot more of the insights, specific races, also global issues that they might be talking about with Alex. About 20 more minutes of substantive conversation to subscribe to support the show. To get the show without ads or with all this extra content, go to subscribe.mikepeska.com. Imagine you're a business owner relying on a dozen different software programs. Each one is expensive, overly complicated, and worst of all, none of them are connected. It can be incredibly stressful right now. Picture Odoo CRM, accounting, inventory, manufacturing, marketing, HR and more. Odoo brings all the tools your business needs into one simple platform and all seamlessly connected. Everything works together, giving you the peace of mind that your business is running smoothly from every angle. Odoo's open source applications are user friendly and designed to scale with your business, saving you time and money. Say goodbye to juggling multiple platforms and hello to efficient, efficient integrated management. Stop wasting resources on complicated systems and make the switch to odoo today. Visit odoo.com o d o o.com and discover how Odoo can simplify and streamline your business operations. Odoo Modern management made simple.

Alex Rorty (31:43)

Owning a home is full of surprises. Some wonderful, some not so much. And when something breaks, it can feel like the whole day unravels. That's why HomeServe exists for as little as $4.99 a month. You'll always have someone to call a trusted ready to help. Bringing peace of mind to four and a half million homeowners nationwide. For plans starting at just 499amonth, go to homeserve.com that's homeserve.com not available everywhere. Most plans range between 499 to 1199amonth. Your first year terms apply on covered repairs.

Mike Pesca (32:16)

And now the spiel. You've heard the phrase the attention economy. It means monetizing your attention is the way to make money. But it means something else, something deeper. It means optimizing all products for what can get your attention. It becomes the primary selection criteria for what we pay attention to for our total experience. Before quality has a chance to be assessed, before craft is weighed or merit is discerned, the criterion is has it already seized your attention? So attention's not just the currency, it's the gatekeeper. I've talked about gatekeepers a lot. I kind of like gatekeepers. I at least bemoan their passing and I reject and object to their total denigration. I think we did ourselves a disservice when we so villainize gatekeepers as stuffy old backwards forces that suppressed expression. We took them out back, we lined them up against the wall, we executed them. And now what happened? Has 100 flowers bloomed? As past revolutionaries would have it no more the case that 100000 followers doomed our discernment, overwhelmed our ability to cultivate what wasn't level palatable. So so much that we experience in the media is just the sugary salty confection that our monkey brains glom onto. And yeah, I know I dream of Jeannie and Gilligan's island wasn't anything great. But fast forward 20, 30 years when we got a few more cable channels, when the gatekeepers began to loosen up, when different audiences began to be catered to, when, and this is really important, the average home went from not one but two or three TVs and different could watch different shows for themselves. We began to get a lot of really good and really relevant media. Think back to when attention, the ability to hold it, the ability to earn it was certainly important, but not everything. We had large institutions that were themselves attention getting devices. A good comedy club, a late night talk show, a record label, the op ed pages of a major newspaper. So those institutions, either through legacy or through earning it, had attention. The most important quality of the content provider was not his or her ability to get the attention of the audience. The institutions had the attention. The content provider could be slotted in as deserving of the attention. So the editor of the op ed page could say, what a fascinating voice. We have to serve them to the audience. And then the audience might have a chance to respond. You couldn't bore the audience, the content couldn't be bad. But the gatekeepers and tastemakers could correctly judge who might delight, interest or educate the audience. Yes, the qualities of attention, a bit of flash, beauty, a name brand, those were important. But you didn't have to come packaged and well produced or have a preexisting social media team. Johnny Carson did not need comics to arrive with their distribution mechanisms in place. The show was the distribution. So on a Tuesday no one had heard of a comic. But by Wednesday, that comic became a sought out entity.

Alex Rorty (35:40)

This young man is a young impressionist from Toronto and a little bit different. And he's going to be starring in a new series for NBC this January called the Duck Factory. He's also been in Hollywood about about 10 months and created quite a bit of excitement. This is his first appearance on American television. Would you welcome Jim Carrey, Eddie Murphy, Louie Anderson? Would you welcome Drew Carey, Ray Romano, Bill Maher, Ellen DeGeneres? Would you welcome Jerry Seinfeld?

Mike Pesca (36:02)

A record label did not need a band to prove that it could go viral. Before signing the band, the label concentrated on radio play and press. The op ed page did not require a columnist or just a freelance contributor to demonstrate aud traction beforehand. A beloved radio show could launch a career based on having earned your attention and then use that credibility to steer your ears to a new voice. My costume is green. I wear green velvet knickers, a forest green velvet smock, and a perky little hat decorated with spangles. This is my work uniform. During dress rehearsal, I worked as a Santa elf. For House Number two. A Santa elf greets children at the Magic Tree and leads them to Santa's house. When you work as a Santa elf, you have to go by your elf name. My elf name is Crumpet. The other elves have names like Jingle and Frosty. They take the children by the hand and squeal with forced delight. They sing and prance and behave like cartoon characters come to life. It frightens me. The sequence was. First came the institutional attention, then the judgment, then the amplification and often a parallel track were the attention seekers honing their craft, becoming better, becoming worthy of your attention, but not totally dedicating themselves to getting your attention on their own. Now the sequencing is totally inverted. Creators must demonstrate attention capture before the endorsement arrives, if it arrives at all, if it can arrive. Because the gatekeepers have been so denuded. The algorithm surfaces what already shows velocity. It doesn't ask what might reward sustained engagement judgment. It measures what holds the eye for three seconds and the eyes really important. If the ANR guys at a record label work this way, then everyone, every label ever signed, would be already fairly successful. Bands on the circuit selling out pretty well, who are the best looking or had the flashiest stage shows or kiss or recommended to the audience exactly by the audience, and you'd get this recursive loop of sameness. And that wasn't totally unknown. Bad record executives would say, give me the new white snake. But then someone would break the mold and innovation would exist. The label was not only ratifying momentum. Comedy is a really good example. All comedians now who get attention do so via clips and crowd work. Most comedians will tell you this is not a positive development. It is not easier for good comedians to flourish than it once was, in fact, but it's easier for a certain kind of superficial, flashy comedian to flourish. And then what happens? They do book sold out clubs, and then the club patrons say, well, that guy didn't have enough to sustain a headliner set. Comedy is a meritocracy because it's defined on an involuntary response. If you get a laugh, you are a good comedian. You can't fake it for long, but through social media or clips of crowd work, you kind of can. There was never before this phenomenon of selling out a club and then just dying as a headliner because you were famous for something else. The room would essentially be the barometer online. The metric is engagement per second in a scroll. I was thinking about this all because I watched an Adam Conover, the host of Factually, interview the philosopher C. T Wynn. T. You made me cry. You made me cry thinking about how beautiful games are. Oh, my God. Oh. Oh, my God. Wow, what a podcast moment. That was so beautiful. Well, you can't beat that, folks. You can't beat that. I have nothing to say. I can't summarize anything, but that was absolutely beautiful. And I cannot thank you enough for being here. T. Oh, God. All right, as I recover the name of the book, if you would like to read my new religious Text. It's called the how to Stop Playing Someone Else's Game. You can of course pick up a copy at our special bookshop, factuallypod.com/books. Hey, Conover's interview was good. I'm not picking on a bad interview to dance on the inadequacies of that interview. I endorse Conover's interview. It was an hour and a half with a fascinating philosopher who wrote a great book. I know. I interviewed C T Win a week ago. I think it will air in about a week. I do think my interview is better. Let me clarify that. It's better as a podcast, but. But in the way we find or look at interviews or what we call podcasts. Now as a video, I'm done. I'm cooked. I can't possibly compete. And it's not that Adam Conover has the backing of some million dollar industry, built it himself, but he has good cameras and good lights and good angles and he has a name brand and he has all these things that make the video rise to the top and get your attention. Also as a self assessment, why I might think my interview is good or better is that one criteria of what makes a good interview is when you ask yourself, well, did the host ask what I would have asked? And so I, as the host, will always ask what I would have asked. Conover's YouTube video has over 100,000 views. Again, good for him. I'm sincere when I say that I like Adam Conover, but as a podcast, I do think my podcast was better. If you go ear to ear, me and Conover, well for one thing, his is over an hour long. And so if you could deliver the same amount of content or insights or great moments in 25 minutes, you're doing the audience a favor. And I will shape the interview. He just airs the unedited interview. I'm going to structure the interview for radio podcast. But to know all this, to even compare interviews, you have to see that the interview exists. And on YouTube, Conover has every single advantage. He earned them. It's foolish of me to think I could enter the YouTube Marketplace without any of the advantages that Conover had, including the name brand, including some marketing budget, including the set and the lights and all of that, and somehow think I could get someone's attention. I still think that someone experiencing each interview would at least be equally nourished, pleased, delighted, amused by mine. But that's because I'm thinking the world of podcasts and podcasts are like the slow news movement that actually is no movement. Sometimes you hear that word, but it doesn't go anywhere. Podcasting is a vestige of pre attention economy saturation. Some, like mine, hold on. But there's been this huge move to video. You got to do video. And it really is a move to kill podcasting or to change podcasting to something that isn't podcasting. I once did a spiel early on where I argued that podcasting was radio. It was with a few tweaks, with really mostly improvements. Now Spotify and YouTube want to tell you that podcasting is video, but it's not. It's a different thing because the way in, because the front door is totally different. And podcasting, like I said, is maybe the last technology of prediction. Attention economy saturation. The old system asked, will this reward the attention we've earned? The new system asks, has this already proven it can capture attention? You're going to get out of those two different questions, radically different programming and is really important. Radically different information. You're going to get different facts or a different understanding of what actually constitute facts. Once you change the gate, once you throw open the front door in the way the attention economy does once it's a bizarre a marketplace, sensory overload of competition to deliver that one second of flash that draws you in. What you do is you change the fundamental nature of what we see and what we know and what we have even a chance to consider. In fact, you change reality. And that's it for today's show. Cory Wara produces the gist. He's got his hands in every pot. Kathleen Sykes does the gist list. Go to Mike Pesca. That substack.com it's be. It's more than a gist list. It's video interviews. It's written pieces. What a cornucopia trying to earn your attention. Jeff Craig does what we can to play on the video playground of attention. Ben Astaire is our booking producer. And Michelle Pesca observes it all from on high. Wise in her discernment, judicious in her pronouncements. Improve and thanks for listening.