Not Even Mad: The Commercial Break’s Bryan Green and Carine Hajjar

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Gist – Not Even Mad: The Commercial Break’s Bryan Green and Carine Hajjar Release Date: April 17, 2025
Host/Author: Peach Fish Productions
Guests: Bryan Green (The Commercial Break podcast), Karine Hajar (The Boston Globe)

---

Introduction

In this episode of The Gist, host Mike Pesca delves into pressing contemporary issues by engaging with Bryan Green and Karine Hajar. The discussion navigates through the influence of prominent podcasters like Joe Rogan, the Trump administration’s contentious policies towards Harvard University, and the implications of Donald Trump’s handling of the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case. Additionally, the conversation touches upon lighter topics such as student driver bumper stickers, satirical portrayals in media, and frustrations with streaming services.

---

1. Joe Rogan and the Landscape of Modern Podcasting

Discussion Overview:
The episode begins with a critical examination of Joe Rogan’s podcasting practices, particularly his tendency to host guests who propagate conspiracy theories, including anti-Semitic views. Bryan Green addresses the impact of Rogan’s platform on mainstreaming harmful ideologies and the subsequent criticism from figures like Sam Harris.

Key Points:

• Platforming Controversial Views:
  Joe Rogan, one of the most influential podcasters, has been criticized for giving airtime to conspiracy theorists and individuals with extremist views. Bryan Green emphasizes the responsibility that comes with such a vast platform.

• Free Speech vs. Harmful Ideas:
  The balance between maintaining free speech and preventing the spread of harmful ideologies is a central theme. The debate highlights whether hosts like Rogan should implement stricter guest vetting to avoid legitimizing fringe theories.

Notable Quotes:

• Bryan Green:
  “Joe Rogan knows where his bread is buttered and he's not going to leave it alone. This is what Joe does, and that is where the money and power is.”
  (Timestamp: 08:20)

• Karine Hajar:
  “Joe continues to stoke the fires by bringing those people on because that is what Joe does, and that is where the money and power is.”
  (Timestamp: 13:49)

---

2. Defunding Harvard: A Battle Over Viewpoint Diversity

Discussion Overview:
The conversation shifts to the Trump administration’s aggressive stance against Harvard University, demanding transparency and changes that threaten its substantial endowment. Karine Hajar provides an insider perspective on how these policies could undermine academic freedom and diversity of thought within elite institutions.

Key Points:

• Trump’s Demands:
  The administration has imposed requirements on Harvard, including sharing sensitive data and overhauling academic programs to address alleged anti-Semitism and enhance viewpoint diversity.

• Impact on Academia:
  Karine Hajar argues that such interventions by the federal government represent an overreach, jeopardizing the autonomy of private institutions and setting dangerous precedents for academic freedom.

• Viewpoint Diversity vs. DEI Programs:
  The discussion distinguishes between diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and genuine viewpoint diversity, advocating for the latter without infringing upon institutional autonomy.

Notable Quotes:

• Karine Hajar:
  “I think this is just not the way to achieve [viewpoint diversity].”
  (Timestamp: 29:46)

• Mike Pesca:
  “They save up to 40% your first [e-mail] podcast terms apply.” (Note: This appears to be misplaced as an ad and is likely to be skipped in the summary.)

• Karine Hajar:
  “This seems like something out of an authoritarian playbook and it appears to be dangerous.”
  (Timestamp: 33:57)

---

3. The Kilmar Abrego Garcia Case: Legalism and Political Strategy

Discussion Overview:
Mike Pesca raises concerns about the Trump administration’s refusal to comply with court orders regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadorian immigrant detained in El Salvador. The guests explore the broader implications of this stance on the rule of law and immigration deterrence.

Key Points:

• Administrative Defiance:
  The Trump administration’s refusal to rectify the wrongful detention of Garcia demonstrates a blatant disregard for judicial decisions, signaling a shift towards authoritarian tactics.

• Deterrence vs. Rule of Law:
  While intended to deter illegal immigration, this approach undermines the legal system and promotes a perception of unaccountability among leaders.

• Impact on Public Perception:
  The administration’s actions could erode trust in governmental institutions and exacerbate fears among immigrant communities, potentially discouraging legitimate migration.

Notable Quotes:

• Karine Hajar:
  “Donald Trump and his gang understand that in order to be kind of do whatever we want, we have to ignore the rule of law and we have to ignore the judicial system.”
  (Timestamp: 46:02)

• Bryan Green:
  “What he thinks the upside is? He thinks that this narrative will go far enough to justify his, let's face it, lawless refusal to follow court orders.”
  (Paraphrased from discussion around 50:40)

---

4. Side Discussions: Everyday Annoyances and Cultural Critiques

Discussion Overview:
The latter part of the episode lightens the mood with conversations about mundane annoyances and cultural phenomena, providing a balanced mix to the heavy topics previously discussed.

Key Points:

• Student Driver Bumper Stickers:
  Karine Hajar expresses frustration over the increasing prevalence of bumper stickers warning about student drivers, questioning their effectiveness and authenticity.

• Media Satire and Representation:
  Bryan Green discusses SNL’s controversial parody of actress Amylou Wood, highlighting issues of representation and the gendered nature of satire.

• Streaming Service Fatigue:
  Both guests lament the complexity and cost of managing multiple streaming subscriptions, reflecting broader societal shifts in media consumption.

Notable Quotes:

• Karine Hajar:
  “It really does drive me crazy. And, you know, I think probably rightfully so.”
  (Timestamp: 53:51)

• Bryan Green:
  “I’m just done with the merry go round of free trials, so I actually have to subscribe to the different outlets that I want to watch a show on.”
  (Timestamp: 57:30)

---

Conclusion

This episode of The Gist provides a nuanced exploration of how influential platforms like Joe Rogan’s podcast shape public discourse, the implications of governmental overreach into academic institutions, and the delicate balance between deterrence and adherence to the rule of law. Through insightful commentary from Bryan Green and Karine Hajar, the discussion underscores the importance of maintaining intellectual diversity and the perils of politicizing justice. The episode concludes with relatable discussions on everyday irritations, offering listeners both depth and levity.

---

Notable Speaker Attributions:

• Mike Pesca: Host of The Gist
• Bryan Green: Host of The Commercial Break podcast
• Karine Hajar: Opinion and editorial writer for The Boston Globe

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

1. Bryan Green:
   “Joe Rogan knows where his bread is buttered and he's not going to leave it alone. This is what Joe does, and that is where the money and power is.”
   (08:20)

2. Karine Hajar:
   “Joe continues to stoke the fires by bringing those people on because that is what Joe does, and that is where the money and power is.”
   (13:49)

3. Karine Hajar:
   “This seems like something out of an authoritarian playbook and it appears to be dangerous.”
   (33:57)

4. Karine Hajar:
   “Donald Trump and his gang understand that in order to be kind of do whatever we want, we have to ignore the rule of law and we have to ignore the judicial system.”
   (46:02)

5. Bryan Green:
   “What he thinks the upside is? He thinks that this narrative will go far enough to justify his, let's face it, lawless refusal to follow court orders.”
   (Approx. 50:40)

6. Karine Hajar:
   “It really does drive me crazy. And, you know, I think probably rightfully so.”
   (53:51)

7. Bryan Green:
   “I’m just done with the merry go round of free trials, so I actually have to subscribe to the different outlets that I want to watch a show on.”
   (57:30)

---

This comprehensive summary encapsulates the key discussions and insights from the episode, providing a coherent narrative for those who have not listened to the podcast.

Transcript

[Mike Pesca]

This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. It's tax season and we're all a bit tired of numbers, but here's one you need to $16.5 billion. That's how much the IRS flagged for possible identity fraud last year. Now here's a good number. 100 million. That's how many data points Lifelock monitors every second. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed. Save up to 40% your first [e-mail] podcast terms apply.

[Brian Greene]

Do you like listening to Not Even Mad? Of course you do. That's why you're listening. But what about watching it? Only through watching and we have videos of every show there on YouTube at pesca. Just just Google it or just put it in the search engine of YouTube. Anyway, only there can you see the look of frustration as it flits across the visage of an Anthony Weiner, the shake of the head of a Sarah Isger, the sigh more in sadness than anger of a Michael A. Cohen, the white hot intim intensity befitting her lupine name for Liz Wolf. It's all the Not Even Mad video cash and archive on our YouTube channel. Do check it out. It's Thursday, April 17, 2025. From Peach Fish Productions, it's the gist. I'm Mike Pesca and today is an episode of Not Even Mad. Our guests are excellent Karine Hajar of the Boston Globe, Brian Green of the Commercial Break podcast, and then there's me. I don't know how great a did, but I will give myself a compliment for this excellent casting, excellent pairing of topics that are high in the news and people who you want to hear on those topics. So one of the things we talk about is Joe Rogan and his late propensity not just for all manner of conspiracy theory, but specific kind of pro Hitler, anti Semitic conspiracy theory he lets these people on. Well, Joe Rogan's one of the biggest comedic podcasters in existence, and Brian Green with the commercial break, also one of the biggest comedic podcasters in existence. And as you'll hear, Brian oh, I don't want to tip the hands and say calls out, but this guy Brian does not shy away from criticism of what Rogan is doing. We also talk about defunding Harvard. Karine Hajar went to Harvard. We also talk about something I want to talk about a little now, which is the Trump refusal to go into El Salvador and rectify the error that the administration made in jailing Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Now, we taped the show yesterday, so Some news has broken now. Two days ago on the Gist, you heard me saying, and you'll hear me say on the show, I don't understand what Trump thinks. The upside of this. He is a person who will never admit he's changed his mind but changes tack when the public's not behind him. And I don't see this as being anything other than a loser for Trump. I did say the gist a couple of days ago. I'm waiting to see what they drop in conservative media or elsewhere denigrating Kilmar Abrego Garcia or I guess they would say, further fleshing out the idea that he is a member of Ms. 13 and a terrorist. Well, it dropped today. We saw his records, supposed records of in fact, this was actually confirmed by his wife that she did file a petition to the courts about abuse that she suffered at his hand. His wife actually came out and addressed that, which is the lead one of the lead stories in the Gist List newsletter today. We also talk about ant smuggling. Don't want to give it all away, but please do subscribe to the Gist List by. There'll be a link here and going to substack. And we also saw a more lengthy report detailing his involvement with MS.13, although none of this changes the fact that the administration itself says it was an error. There's no arrest warrant for the guy. There was an order saying he can't go back to El Salvador because his life would be in danger. And also, I don't know how much credence we should give the words of a confidential informant whose identity we still don't know. But as I said, the Trump administration is going to try to smear this guy. I'm not going to predict the future, but I think, I think among many portions of the population, it will work. And then I think this becomes essentially a process dispute which is never a winner in politics. It is true that the process or the legalism of not deporting a person who shouldn't be deported, that stands. On the other hand, I don't know that it will move people who aren't particularly motivated or inspired by legalism to change their minds. They don't want dangerous criminals in the country. Not saying that Abrego Garcia is, but the Trump administration is not just saying he is, but providing some documentation. I do think it changes things and I think that it answers my question. What does Trump think the upside is? This is the answer. He thinks that this narrative will go far enough to justify his, let's face it, lawless refusal to follow court orders. It's not the end all be all. If the Supreme Court rules 9 nothing that you must return the guy, it will be very hard for Trump to stand in the face of that. But we know a lot of his supporters or even a lot of his moderate supporters will say this was a dangerous man and he deserves deportation. All right, that's a little bit explanation, a little bit prologue, a little bit setup. Enjoy. Karine Hajar, Brian Green and as much as you can myself. We're not even mad. Today's episode is sponsored by Greenlight. Think about who taught you about money. If you're lucky, like me, my dad was pretty good at it. He used to listen to a lot of financial talk shows on the radio, so I guess that helped. But you know, the schools don't do it. Not everyone's parents are adept or have the time or even have the knowledge. So most of us just learn about savings and budgeting way later than we should, you know, or we pick it up on the street or we get some bad ideas. But what you can do is give your kids a head start with Green Light. Green Lights, a debit card and a money app made for families that lets kids learn how to save, invest and spend wisely. You could send money to your kids and keep an eye on your kids spendings and savings and they'll learn to build confidence and skills. They'll find their way around money pretty easily. And the app also features this chores feature so you can set up a one time reoccurring chore and customize it to your household and then reward the kids with their allowance tied to actually doing a chore. It's easy. It's convenient. Millions of parents and kids are learning about money the Green Light way. Start your risk free Greenlight trial [e-mail] the Gist. That's Greenlight.com the Gist to get started. Greenlight.com the Gist. Hello and welcome back to Not Even Mad, a show where we defy gravity, defy expectations, but never defy court orders. Today we speak of the country's most popular comedic podcast, dabbling in a wee bit of Hitler revisionism. We'll talk about the merit in an El Salvadoran prison and why Donald Trump is fine with that. And finally, Harvard Fair. Harvard possibly losing up to $2 billion as we do so. We vow to uphold our reputation for refutation while staying not even mad. I say we. This begs the question, I'm using that term wrong, but who are we today? We Are Brian Greene. He is the host of the Commercial Break, one of the most popular comedy podcasts out there, and tied for me as just about the worst haircut in podcasting. Or do you refute that? Do we get an incomplete on the haircut scale?

[Karine Hajar]

I can't disagree.

[Brian Greene]

Karine Hajar is an opinion and editorial writer for the Boston Globe. And you have great hair. Corrine, I just wanted to mention.

[Unknown]

Oh, thank you.

[Karine Hajar]

Yes, I can't disagree.

[Brian Greene]

Yeah, jealous we are. How do you do it? So we have with us in Brian, like I said, no exaggeration, America's 4th to 7th most popular comedy podcast, depending on the polls that day. But America's most popular comedy podcast is Joe Rogan, the Joe Rogan Experience. And Joe Rogan has on, yes, a lot of vaccine denialists and the fun conspiracy theorists, but also recently, a podcaster who praises a nuance and comprehensive view of Hitler and an online conspiracist named Ian Carroll who says that Jeffrey Epstein was clearly working for a Jewish organization on behalf of Israel. So what happened was another very big podcaster, Sam Harris, went on his show to say, Joe Rogan needs to cut it out. He's mainstreaming anti Semitic ideas that were once impermissible, not by law, but by practice.

[Unknown]

Listen, if you get across the table from Joe and you don't have your facts straight about MMA or you're going to say something bad about marijuana, he's going to crush you, right? He'll crush you in five seconds and he will never let up until you start making sense. And if you don't, the conversation's over, right? I mean, maybe he'll change the subject politely, but you're never coming back. And he will make no secret of the fact that he thinks you're a moron, right? He doesn't do that. When Darrell Cooper, the podcast host and amateur historian who he really admires, gets on there and starts spouting David Irving's fake Holocaust history because he doesn't know that he's doing that, right? He hasn't prepared himself to do that. And he doesn't see the liability of talking to a entirely self taught, you know, enthusiast of taboo history and not being, not being prepared to push back.

[Brian Greene]

Against it a day later, maybe two days later. And I think it was just a coincidence. On the Joe Rogan Experience was a debate. And on one side of the debate was Douglas Murray, who writes for the Free Press. He's the author recently of the new bestseller on democracies and death cults, Israel and the future of civilization. And he was on the side of you have to stop giving these people people a platform. On the other side of that was Dave Smith, libertarian comedian, Israel critic, who was saying it is against the ethic of free speech to tell Joe Rogan what to do. And also he and Rogan kind of stood up for Carroll and Cooper, Darrell Cooper. That is not being that bad.

[Unknown]

I'm still slightly bemused about this move from I'm an expert on this and I have views to I'm a comedian.

[Brian Greene]

I've never claimed to be an expert on anything.

[Unknown]

This is the problem, Joe. I mean, if somebody says you have.

[Brian Greene]

To claim to be an expert on.

[Unknown]

Something to have an opinion, you don't have to be. You don't have to be. But I'm not a historian, but I'm pumping out history. But I'm not an expert. But I'm talking all the time about.

[Brian Greene]

But you're not even talking about specifically on what he just said.

[Unknown]

No, I'm saying this is my point about this. You say I'm not an expert.

[Brian Greene]

So what's the solution? To not talk about it?

[Unknown]

No, it's to have more experts around.

[Brian Greene]

Okay, let's go to the comedy expert, the comedy podcasting expert here. Brian, what do you think? How do you weigh those competing principles of you don't want to put out pure anti Semitism. On the other hand, Joe Rogan got to be this behemoth of a podcast by doing something other than suppressing his instinct for. Interesting story. Where do you come down?

[Karine Hajar]

Yeah, I. I mean, what I think Joe should do and what Joe will do are two totally different things. If I had that platform, millions and millions of people kind of cut from the same cloth or made in the same cloth, so to speak, who have decided to take on this distinctly interesting point of view that why not ask the question, why not listen to all different viewpoints in under the guise of being open minded has now turned into something else, which is maybe those other viewpoints are becoming fact in some people's heads. And so Joe continues to stoke the fires by bringing those people on. Because in my opinion, Joe knows where his bread is buttered and he's not going to leave it alone. This. He's chasing the money, the power, the fame he's gotten here because he's created this audience in his own likeness, that he now has 10 years doing this. And so these young men and these young women, they have grown up with him and they are now thinking like him, and he is stoking these fires, because that is what Joe does, and that is where the money and power is. And unfortunately for Joe, there may be no turning back now. I'm not going to platform a Nazi revisionist. Be de platform a Nazi revisionist because that's what my audience wants, because that's what I gave them, and now that's what they like, and now that's what they think. It's a dangerous game that Joe played. And I think he had a choice early on and at times seemed to, I don't know, flirt with principal, flirt with fact checking, flirt with this. You know, this may not be the right way to go, but now after.

[Brian Greene]

Was this after us Spotify a lot of pushback from Neil Young and others, and he issued a video saying, I'm going to do better. Was that the era, Are you saying even earlier than that?

[Karine Hajar]

I. Even earlier than that. I think Joe just seemed to be a little bit more pragmatic about some of these conversations. But now this is clearly what the fire hose is pouring out, and I don't think Joe has any interest in not drinking it. I also think that maybe ideologically, Joe is angry at. He seems angry to me, more angry than he was before, less comedic, more angry, more willing to stoke the fire, more willing to listen to kind of really, I don't know, wacky ideas on his show. And what he may be angry at, if we're just putting it bluntly, black and white is the left and cancel culture. And the thought that any squashing of conversation means that we've all of a sudden become a communist society, that I'm taking it to the exaggerated levels, but for the, for the sake of illustrating a short conversation, I think that's where Joe's head is at. And I don't think there's going to be any interest in turning the other direction, at least not anytime soon. Certainly not during. Under the Trump administration.

[Brian Greene]

Karine, I know you're a. Well, sometimes it's described as a classical conservative, but classical conservatives that say, actually I'm a classical liberal, you very much believe in the ethic of free speech, but of course you're you. I don't know if you think that Jeffrey Epstein was definitely running operations from Assad, but where do you come down on the issue and what Sam Harris said and what Douglas Murray's part of this debate were.

[Unknown]

So I think on the free speech side, Douglas never questioned that Joe had the right to have these people on. I would never question that, that. That he has the right to have these people on Do I think it's the best judgment? No, frankly, I mean, when you're the number one podcast in the world, I think it warrants better judgment. But I think the more interesting part of their debate was less about free speech and more about this. Like, we've just seen the total degradation of authority in every way. This entire populist trend, both people on the right, but also people in the middle, are sort of sick of authority, sick of institutions, sick of experts. And so you can.

[Brian Greene]

Death of expertise, as one book's title called it.

[Unknown]

Yeah, exactly. And, you know, you could say on one hand, well, a lot of these institutions and experts have a bench that is against them. On the other hand, they're usually credentialed. Not everyone has that bent. There's usually a reason an expert is an expert. And I think that Douglas made a really good point about that. I mean, at the end of the day, Joe Rogan is facing sort of an awkward situation because you want to bring on really interesting people, maybe people you agree with, maybe people you don't, but you want to entertain your audience. And then you also want to bring on, you know, the President of the United States. That's sort of like a weird lane to operate in. And I think he has to sort of choose which lane he wants to be in. Do you. Do you want to have conversations with experts, people who have the credentials to be talking about this, or do you want to have conversations with Holocaust deniers that don't have, you know, a history degree or whatever?

[Brian Greene]

Yeah, and I want to. I was trying to square my thoughts with my previous ideologically driven statements about this, which is, of course, I thought Douglas Murray had the right part of the debate. What you said, Karine, is really important. He never said, don't do it. The guest Smith and the host Rogan, or were arguing against him, essentially said a few times, are you saying we can't have these people on why can't we have these talks? And Murray would say in his plummy English accent, I'm definitely not saying you can't have these talks. But what he was saying is it's ill advised and it creates and injects chaos and poor scholarship, to say the least, into the world. But when he was. When there was a threat from Neil Young and a couple others, and Spotify was maybe under a little pressure to take him off the platform because of vaccine conversations he had, I was totally against that. Not that I thought that he was doing a good job promoting oftentimes inaccurate comments about vaccines. I just thought that in that case it was the marketplace of ideas. And in fact, Rogan got a lot wrong about vaccines. And to this day, he chafes when you call Ivermectin a horse dewormer, but he was a proponent of Ivermectin, which doesn't work, and a few other things. But there was enough, right, or at least enough valuable to let that conversation play out in an area where we weren't sure, we weren't 100% sure what the right answer was. I weighed the competing values of shutting this conversation down versus having it, even with the allowance that some bad information might get out. I waited for free speech in that case. In this case, I think there is much less ambiguity, especially what Ian Carroll was saying. As far as the other podcaster. Yeah, he's also engaged in a lot of. He said that Kristallnacht was opposed by Hitler, and that wasn't true. But there's enough that we know about it that we can't say that there's ambiguity. And also, it wasn't a call by anyone above Joe Rogan to silence Joe Rogan. It was an ask by someone that Joe Rogan respects, and he said he respects to think about what you're doing and pull back. So that's why I thought. But Murray had the correct side of that argument. I want to get to the expert stuff in a second, but, Brian, I want to ask you something specific. From what you know about comedy booking comedians, I get the sense that you could have Douglas Murray on say this. Maybe Sam Harris could say this. I don't think a lot of a third of his guests or more are comedians. And I don't think a lot of comedians, even the ones that are political, would want to say the things that Douglas Murray was saying. Not that they disagree with them, just Joe Rogan is so popular and powerful. You don't want to cross Joe Rogan if you're a comedian. You think that's going on with comedians?

[Karine Hajar]

Yeah. Yeah. I think there's a lot of deference that's paid to Joe. I don't think. I don't think anybody would argue, maybe not even Joe, that Joe was the most successful or popular, best at his craft. He was workers, kind of what you might call in golf, like, you know, a weekend warrior as far as comedy was concerned.

[Brian Greene]

He had gold, a ham and egger, a tomato.

[Karine Hajar]

There you go. Yeah, he. But he hit gold with the pod, the long format, the long form podcast, where he could really just kind of let. Let it breathe and Occasionally throw in a punchline and then let comedians, his friends, do the hard work of the punch lining, right. And be in that room with them. And then he far surpassed any goals or aspirations that they had. And I've had a few of his friends on Ari Shafir, who is been on his show more than I think any other guest except for one. And, and there's a lot of deference paid to Joe because Joe is the new Tonight show where you got to sit on the couch. And if you show up at Joe's shows, it changes your career meaningfully. And that's a lot of weight to hold. That's a lot of power to yield. And because Joe is now bending in a certain direction, that's clear to anybody, it doesn't even need to be said. Those comedians are also bending in that direction at times because I think that is a Neil to Joe. It may be their own personal opinions also, but I don't think they would choose to be so openly political about their comedic acts if it wasn't permissible and maybe encouraged by kind of this Rogan esque podcast bro thing that is taking the world by storm. Has taken the world by storm. And I'm not saying it's all negative, because it's not all negative. You know, the podcast bro community. There's a lot to be. I guess there's a lot of. A lot you could cherry pick that is good about that. The free market of information and ideas and the ability to grow an audience and have a conversation in a meaningful way with that audience. But to me, there's just, if you hold that kind of weight and that kind of power, not because you should legally, but because it might be the right thing to do. And I know the right thing to do is kind of passe right now, but, you know, maybe because it's the right thing to do, you should have some guardrails, just like put some guardrails on it. But yes, to answer your first question, I think there's a lot of comedians who show a lot of deference to Joe Rogan.

[Brian Greene]

Do you think his show is going to maintain its popularity?

[Karine Hajar]

No, I don't, because I. Because inevitably the pendulum always swings. It's just the way that the world works. Could Joe Rogan go on forever? Could he be.

[Brian Greene]

But do you think it's because of this sort of thing, dabbling in antisemitism, that he's gonna lose popularity?

[Karine Hajar]

I think it could be a combination of a lot of different things, but I think there will be balance restored in the universe. And what I mean by that is.

[Brian Greene]

I think you're a Jedi.

[Karine Hajar]

Yeah. Some people may decide that this kind of wonky thinking that comes from some of Joe's guests and the ability and like, okay, it's a lot of nonsense. Maybe I wanna turn on someone who has some expertise or some experience, or maybe it was a different point of view, or maybe Stan's with the facts of history rather than questioning everything for the sake of questioning it. I don't know. It seems like a very agenda driven thing when people come on and have more of these wacky conspiracy theories. I don't think that. I think some of them may be just really open minded. I think a lot of them have a card to play. And if that's not obvious, and maybe it's not, but if that's not obvious, and I think some people. There's gotta be a lot of people in that audience that are middle of the road. Right. Because there's millions of them. But we've already seen this playing out in the charts on the, on the, on the podcast charts. The Midas touch is, you know, kind of rocked Joe for the last couple of months. There's many more millions of listeners tuning into them than they are to Joe. There's some balance being restored. Joe will always have a podcast if he chooses to. He will always have listeners if he chooses to. Will he always be the king of the podcasting? I don't. I don't think so. Just my opinion, Kareem, you're going to keep listening.

[Brian Greene]

You enjoy the comic, not just the UFC expertise, but the comic stylings of Dave Smith.

[Unknown]

I did my, I did my time on the Joe Rogan podcast over the election, doing the whole bro beat.

[Brian Greene]

But that was your Joe Rogan.

[Unknown]

That was my Joe Rogan experience, yeah. Three hours of it a week, I guess, more frequently. But I want to push back on something. I think if we're talking about lanes. Right. Okay, maybe if he's talking about World War II history, he may no longer be the go to source for that. But when it comes to comedy in particular, I think what he's done is extremely important. I over, especially throughout the Biden years, late Trump into early Biden years, started just rolling my eyes at comedy. And I think it was just always political. It was within the confines of this ridiculously politically correct narrative. And what Rogan did in particular, just for the business of comedy, I think is super important. Moving it outside of the liberal side, eyeing in New York and going down to Austin, I think was hugely important. So in that lane, I don't. I don't think it's so much that comedians are bending to his will. I just think that they now have the permission to make jokes that they think are funny.

[Brian Greene]

I think. Do you think they would have done that even without Rogan? I think Pendulum swing. I mean, have you seen the latest Kill Tony special on Netflix? Oh, boy. But I do think that comedians were. Yeah, you're right. There was a stifling of comedy for a while, I think, because of massive cultural forces. Did Joe Rogan liberate it, or was he a symbol of its liberation?

[Karine Hajar]

Or maybe was he a megaphone to some of these comedians who wanted to do their comedy? I take issue with. There were some comedians, and of course, there always will be some comedians who have this kind of, you know, again, another passe word, this kind of woke point of view. And they're dancing, dancing in the middle so that they don't offend anybody.

[Brian Greene]

Well, I also. To interrupt. I also think that it seemed that that was more prominent because the late night comics were working in that mode. And Srail was. And these are the most watched and noticed comedians. Yeah, but.

[Karine Hajar]

And those were the only places to go. Right. And then Joe Rogan amassed this huge audience, sometimes on the backs or with the guests of some comedians that otherwise weren't the most popular comedians in the world, and gave them a large megaphone to then tell their style of comic stylings of comedy. The reality is, is that there has always been. That kind of comedy has always been out there. And if you go into the clubs and listen to them where it's a more intimate, discreet experience, where they have the ability to say what they want to say in front of an audience that will probably largely be theirs. Edgy comedy is not new. And Joe didn't make it favorable. He just gave them a large megaphone to blast that all over the place. I mean, you know, I don't want to make it sound like I think that all comedians bend to the will of Joe. I think they just show him a lot of deference because they know, change their career and why wouldn't you? Just like they showed Johnny Carson a lot of deference, even though he was a, by all accounts, a major asshole. Right. So, I mean, you know, it's. It. That's. I. I think that comedians have always been comedians. But, Mike, you bring up a good point. We only heard the ones that were dancing around any particular cultural problems, because they were on late night where the networks had a. Networks and the late night hosts themselves had a clear stranglehold on a point of view.

[Brian Greene]

Brian Greene, Wild, wacky stuff. So based on the idea that maybe the Joe Rogan experience will wane, I can announce that next episode's guests will be UFC champion Jon Bone Jones and Aaron Rodgers. But for this episode, hang around. We'll talk about Harvard, $2 billion poorer, but perhaps braver. Up next on Knock Even Mad. And we're back with Not Even Mad. We have our guests Karine Hajar from the Boston Globe and Brian Greene from the commercial break. Harvard stood up to Donald Trump after the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University chose to buckle and acquiesce. They saved some money in the process. Harvard apparently will be stripped of $2 billion. What was the Trump administration demanding of the Cambridge based institution? Plagiarism checks all around, sharing its hiring data with the administration, providing admission data to the federal government, including information on rejected and admitted applicants sorted by race, national origin, grade point average, voting record. I made that last one up, immediately shutting down any DEI program, which can't really do with a private school, and overhauling academic programs that the administration said had an egregious record on anti Semitism. They also wanted to instill viewpoint diversity in all departments. Karine, I think you know something of Harvard as someone who both reports on it and attended the school for four years. Is that right? What do you think? I want to go right to the viewpoint diversity because that's something I've seen you write about. Even I looked up some of your undergraduate musings. It is true that Harvard does not have a great deal of viewpoint diversity everywhere. I'm going to guess you also think it's true that this is not the way to achieve it, but was it inevitable that it would come to this, given how undiverse the viewpoints are at Harvard?

[Unknown]

I mean, this is just the same pendulum swing we were talking about with Rogan. Right. Are upset at institutions, they're upset at the media, they're upset at experts. And Harvard is like this, the bright red symbol of higher of, you know, leftist higher academia.

[Brian Greene]

Crimson red, if you will.

[Unknown]

Crimson red, yeah. So naturally this was going to happen to Harvard. They also have the biggest endowment. You know, this is when it comes to the viewpoint diversity. Ask here. I happen to agree with the gist of the ask. I think that that Harvard really needs to deal with its viewpoint diversity. They should have a more ideologically diverse faculty. I wrote this as an undergrad. I continue to write it now. I happen to think that some of their DEI program programming is really divisive, unhelpful. I think it would be better for the school if they got rid of it. You could still cultivate diversity and respecting different viewpoints without it. But I don't know that the president and the federal government is the institution to do that. I mean, at the end of the day, it is a private institution and you know, as imperfect as the academic freedom there is, this is still infringing on academic freedom and, and I'm frankly worried about the precedent it sets. And this is the argument I've been making to conservatives in particular. Like, I think a lot of conservatives have their pitchforks out and are valid, have valid frustrations. But at the end of the day, if Trump can do this to Harvard, what happens when, you know, God forbid, as a conservative would think you have President Elizabeth Warren looking at Notre Dame and saying it's a Title 9 infringement, that they don't offer abortions on campus, we give them federal funding. That's really the mindset the conservatives should be in.

[Brian Greene]

Yeah, Brian, speak for the everyman. How much do you, as in every man, care about Harvard?

[Karine Hajar]

Only now, now I do now and I have to say that we, I think we share a lot of viewpoints on this. I also think that DEI can be divisive and that it, it, it may set the wrong marks, it may, you know, grade on the wrong scale, so to speak, at times. You, you. Maybe Harvard does need to have some more diversity in its viewpoints. I don't know, cuz I didn't go there. I've never been on campus. I have no idea. But how can the federal government jump in in private academia and decide what and what not is going on in these institutions? Whether or not you want it to happen is one thing. Whether or not you demand and force it to happen through the means of the federal government is, is clear overreach in, like Trump is doing in so many different ways. I am not a bleeding heart liberal just to make it clear. And I think this is insane that Trump is using his bully pulpit to really push an agenda that seems clearly out of bounds in specially in this case. Let academia do what academia is going to do. And, and if there's federal funding that is against the law, if there's federal funding, when you find out that they are using practices that are against federal mandates or however that goes down, then you have a lever that you can pull. But just to rip it out, rip $2 billion and threaten all these things out from under Harvard because you don't particularly like the way that they think or the way that they teach or the way that they admit or the way that they grade or whatever the, the long form gripe is. Seems to me like something out of an authoritarian playbook and it appears to be dangerous. And be careful, be careful what you ask for because you're right. What happens when AOC is president eight years from now, after Trump's third term and AOC is president and she decides to go after what? Name the school. Name the school.

[Brian Greene]

Well, she probably go after Harvard since she went to Boston University and those teachers have niece.

[Karine Hajar]

I just think this is clear overreach and it's dangerous.

[Brian Greene]

So Kareem, you said something like, you know, I don't know that the executive branch or the administration is the way to do it. No, certainly not. And clearly not this administration or executive branch branch. But what I want to put to you, it's a little like the Doge argument. Obviously, Elon Musk is going about it like a maniac, also being a bit dis. Very dishonest about it. Chainsaw. Not the scalpel. Can you really ever use the scalpel, though? I. Let's take Trump out of it. Let's take all the ridiculous asks and excesses and the wolf in sheep's clothing or the, the actually better animal metaphor, the Trojan horse of saying we want viewpoint diversity when we know what they really want is just their viewpoint represented. Fine. How can you ever. Here we are, we're agreeing, some of the DEI has gone too far and the viewpoint diversity issue is an issue. How could you ever get anywhere on something like that with a place like Harvard with its $53 billion endowment? Or how can you ever, as much as all, even every reasonable Democrat will say, well, of course there are excesses in the federal government and in the amount of funding and there is waste, fraud and abuse. How can you ever correct that? Because we've had decades in the case of the federal government to try to do something about it. And it all becomes worse when it comes to waste, fraud and abuse. And with Harvard, they didn't think they had a viewpoint diversity problem, otherwise they would have done something about it. So that is my question. Take Trump out of it. Is there any other way to get a modicum of reform on these issues without the big huge sweeping overreach? Or Kareem, were you in your head faded to say, I'm going to be writing this column about Harvard's non ideologically diverse campus for the next 30 years of my career, Career And I probably.

[Unknown]

Still will be writing some variation of it, but I want to push back. I think that there are a lot of people at Harvard that think that there is an ideological diversity problem. I think that there are a lot of liberals and progress. I know for a fact when I wrote.

[Brian Greene]

Well, do you think they could ever get a toehold to change?

[Unknown]

Well, they were. I think the last year was really promising. And it wasn't because the way that I, I argue this to conservatives, it was thanks to markets. I mean, donors were wreaking havoc on their bottom line. People were really critical in the media. If for a moment you almost had a bipartisan consensus on just how far gone the school was. And it started to take really promising steps. I mean, they just fired two or they, or they dismissed the two professors who were in charge of the Middle East Center. I forget the exact title of it because there were allegations of anti Semitism and, you know, not covering the Israeli perspective there. Huge step for a place like Harvard. They disaffiliated with the University of Gaza, reaffiliated with the university in Israel. And then, and when you look at more of the political side of things, I graduated in 2021, which was sort of the height of progressive, progressive narratives on race. You could not say anything about race on campus. It was so it was, it was really unbearable to be conservative on campus because you are just simply thought of as a racist. A lot of the groups that were defunct when I was there have flourished since. I mean, the Harvard Salient, which is their sort of conservative heterodox journal, is now being handed out to every door on campus. So there were promising steps being taken. And a lot of the allies that were pushing those on were not necessarily conservatives. Like, I don't think you can call Steven Pinker a conservative, certainly not Larry Summers. But these were the champions of, of these issues and now they are being alienated by an administration and a movement that they might have, you know, been able to cooperate and negotiate with. And I think that's a real disservice.

[Brian Greene]

Yeah, it really does. That's right. It really cuts the Steven Pinker, the non leftist but certainly liberal point of view, off at the knees. And you're there, you're here to not only testify and to report on what was happening, but you're here using the language, Right? I heard you say the lived experience and then I've heard you use a couple phrases that someone who graduated in 21 would use. And if you're saying it's getting more Conservative. If you're saying it's getting a bit more conservative, I take that. I take that on faith. I'll also say it was the center for Middle Eastern Studies, and the two, the two professors were Kamal Kafadar and Rosie Beshear. So, Brian, what do you think this is a school with $53 billion. We always pay so much attention to Harvard. When you need to write a smart guy in a screenplay, just say he went to Harvard. Doesn't cost you anything. Easier. Easier to get that reference into a screenplay than to get into Harvard. Do you think this will have any reverberations for any of the other institutions that the administration has targeted? Either the big law firms, the other Ivy League schools, or some non Ivy League schools?

[Karine Hajar]

Yeah, I think this is where it's. I think this is where for maybe the everyman who may be keeping an eye on the close authoritarian playbook that is being played out out, is that Harvard is taking a stand. They said, okay, you know, play ball, let's go. And the big law firms who have been bending the knee, and big tech, who has been bending the knee, and big papers who have been bending the knee, and big media who has been bending the knee. While I don't agree with all of them or their id, all their ideologies, this is how a healthy democracy plays itself out. A healthy democracy does not, not just. Just genuflect to the altar of whoever is in power. And now sometimes that has always happened, usually behind the scenes. Now it's very much out front. The reality is, is that Harvard took a stand when a lot of other very powerful institutions, law firms, have decided that it's not worth the trouble. We will. We will not paddle the opposite direction. And so I think this is where this Harvard story really gained some steam, is that everyone is looking at Harvard going, yeah, maybe we can push against this authoritarianism a little bit or a lot, and maybe it'll play out well. I think Trump needs some pushback. Every administration needs a little pushback because that's how a healthy democracy plays out. And right now there's been too much genuflection and not enough standing up in the pews. And I appreciate that Harvard is doing this while, again, I didn't go there, and I don't know about the ideology on campus or how it's swinging one way or the other organically, it will probably figure itself out, but this can't be something that the administration just forces upon a private institution. It seems crazy to me.

[Brian Greene]

Karine, one thing I'm curious about is a recent graduate and someone with expertise. Do you, what's your opinion on the notion that this is the place, this is the epicenter of minting the elite? Because obviously you could go to Harvard and fuck up or just go to Harvard and decide to become a public school teacher and that's great, but you won't be the elite. And the elite also comes from other places. But you know, if you really want to be a powerful person, you probably had a little bit of moxie and judge to get in and you probably will be on at least a glide path to power should you want it. So the question is, do you think that's exaggerated? Do you think that the exaggeration hurts Harvard? Maybe as a graduate you're like, no. The more they say it's the, it's the, it's the hothouse of the powerful, the more it helps me because I ask, because I think that that informs why Harvard is being targeted by these, this anti elitist sentiment. So what do you think about that notion?

[Unknown]

Well, now it's going to depend on who, who is looking at you. You know, in conservative circles going to Harvard is becoming like a scarlet or crimson letter. Like it's not good to have gone to Harvard anymore. And it's funny because a lot of the conservative elite in particular are Harvard alums. I'm thinking Tom Cotton, Ron DeSantis. I mean the list goes on. Like a lot of our of the most prominent politicians on the right are prominent in big part because of, I mean, you know, these are all smart and capable people. But the Harvard degree certainly helped and I think it used to, to prove to the right that you sort of were gritty and could make it through without, you know, succumbing to the virus of socialism and all of this. But I think it's good that enrollment is boosting in other schools. For example, like state universities in the south in particular are seeing more enrollment. Schools like the University of Austin are trying something new. I think the competition is good. I don't think that Harvard should have have a monopoly on the elite or the smart guy in the screenplay. I just think that that keeps schools honest in particular. And when we zoom out and talk about federal funding, look, another big problem I had here was going after ideological diversity and anti Semitism and the Trump administration's words amounted to going after cancer research at Dana Farber. And so we're like, we're sort of like talking about different things here. But if the federal government wanted to say, look, we want to Sort of spread the love. And we want to look at what Rice University is doing on stem cell research and whatever, that's fine by me. I just think that the way they've gone about it in this rip, I understand the impulse. I sympathize with the Trump administration's frustrations. I think a lot of them are actually correct, but this is just not the way to do it.

[Brian Greene]

Yeah, it's. Harvard is such a, such a launchpad of elitism that you list the powerful people and you don't even get to. Oh, yeah, most of the Supreme Court, right? Well, four. Right now, four out of nine justices have degrees from Harvard. And before them, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia and Souter. But now it's Roberts, Kagan, Gorsuch and Jackson. That's crazy. If a Supreme Court justice went to Georgia State or Emory, you think Brian and I would be talking about it? We probably would.

[Karine Hajar]

Of course. Of course.

[Brian Greene]

When we, when you were there, was that the sense, though? Did you look around and like, okay, in 10 years, this guy might be a senator, this guy might be writing the laws that govern us all?

[Unknown]

Oh, yeah. And there are certainly people who act like they've already made it, too. I mean, just walk into the, I mean, like any political venue at Harvard. But the thing is, Harvard does attract. It still continues to attract the elite back as well. So that's a huge privilege as a student. Like, you sort of get to meet a lot of high power people. You get a lot of great mentor. Mentorship from, from, from it. So it's not like, it's not this whole Harvard is Harvard for a reason. I mean, like, the professors are fantastic. For the most part, people are reasonable. It's just the leadership has been too prone to caving to this minority of crazies over and over again. But it really does. I mean, it is a remarkable place. And as much as I complain about it all the time very publicly, I am immensely grateful to have gone there.

[Brian Greene]

So Harvard, we'll hopefully be able to get by. Like I said, $53 billion endowment. I want to ask each of you a distinct question about this issue of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who's the Salvadorian immigrant. He's still in El Salvador. President of El Salvador Nayib Bukele said, I can't return him. He's a terrorist. Echoing the sentiment of Donald Trump. And here is my question that I've been trying to figure out. When something is not politically advantageous for Donald Trump. I'm not talking about doing the right thing. I'm not talking about the thing he's compelled to do, but when it stops being political, politically advantageous. He has been shown that he can pivot. He will still hold on to rhetoric and say he's not pivoting or this is my plan all along. But he has shown that he could pivot. Up until this point, he has not pivoted and not done anything to try to get Garcia back into the country. And my question is why? Why do you think he, at least for now, perceives that it's in his interest to have this person who shouldn't be in El Salvador in prison? In an El Salvador in prison? Brian, I'll ask you first.

[Karine Hajar]

Well, I think three reasons. I think number one, it being wrong is weakness in Donald Trump's opinion. And a lot of those around him have taken on that same stance in at least in the public eye. But number two, I think this is full tilt toward some kind of authoritarian playbook. It's not very clear to me. I mean, it's clear to me that it's, that that's what's happening. But I don't exactly know all of the moving parts to it because I think a lot of it's happening behind the scenes. A lot of smoke and mirrors going on right, right now. But I actually think, number three is that Donald Trump and his gang understand that in order to be kind of do whatever we want, we have to ignore the rule of law and we have to ignore the judicial system. And we found they, they didn't ask for it, but they found this fight and now they're picking it. In other words, if we can ignore the Supreme Court and we get away with it, which they will, will, because really, this guy down in El Salvador can just keep saying, no, you can't come in my sovereign country and take my citizens when they get away with it, then they have obfuscated the one check and balance that possibly could have come into play here. That is the Supreme Court of the United States. They were going to pick this fight anyway. It was going to happen at some point and it just came sooner than later. And I really do believe, believe that ignoring the orders of the highest court in the land is part of telegraphing that we are out of reach. You aren't gonna like, we're here and we're gonna do what we want and we're staying and be damned. The judicial system. That's my opinion.

[Brian Greene]

Karine, what do you think?

[Unknown]

Look, I mean, I think he should honor what the Courts are saying unequivocally, full stop, but we should understand sort of how we got here. Here. Here's a man who feels that the courts have been politicized against him, and there have been cases that maybe were just a little too political against him. And it's built, it's built up into this frustration that doesn't make what he's doing right. But I can sort of, I, I understand at least where he, he stands on this and where his supporters stand. You know, they're not thinking about the balance of powers because they don't see a balance anymore. They think that it's been tilted against them. So that's one, I think that's one thing to keep in mind.

[Brian Greene]

That's true. But in the past, he's had some brushback orders by the courts and has always said, no, we're going to follow court orders. It's what we do. We don't like them. And, you know, he's said a few things that injected some ambiguity into that, but he has also said that we appeal court orders.

[Unknown]

Sure. I mean, look, Trump is just not a, he's not a political creature of ideology. He's very much an impulsive person and works. The other thing that I think factors a lot into his calculation is deterrence. And on immigration in particular, it's another one of my beats. I covered the Biden administration's response at the border, and it was just an utter lack of deterrence. You know, they were going out and saying, you can't come. It's illegal. Please don't, you know, arrive in caravans, et cetera, et cetera. But when people got there, they were being let in. It was just an absolute, absolute, absolute failure and deterrence. And here's Trump, a man that doesn't really worry too much about defying court order or flirting with more authoritarian tendencies. These are things that don't bother him. So as long as they work in his favor to create a deterrence effect, then he's going to use them. I mean, if one person is the collateral in this, I don't, I don't think he's going to lose sleep over it. Do I think that's right? No, I think law and order is really important, and you can have law and order and still decrease the traffic at the border. It was already happening. Just the threat of, or just, just the thought of a Trump presidency brought border numbers down drastically, so we didn't have to go this far.

[Brian Greene]

Well, deterrence is a good strategy, and it's why he Has Kristi Noem do these Instagrammed ride alongs on ice raids and as Dr. Phil do him, he wants everyone to know and he doesn't care if he speaks incautiously or if he speaks even cruelly. I just wonder if this is of a different category, category where so many people will be so upset. Does it really deter the illegal migrant from crossing? If this guy who is legal festers in an El Salvador in jail despite the court saying this is improper and his own administration saying yes, we did make a mistake, does that, I guess it shows that you're a strong man, but does it really give you more deterrence than the detriment of it being a gigantic headache and making you look like an unreasonable person who makes mistakes on these issues? That's my question.

[Unknown]

I just think it veers into the wrong kind of deterrence. It still is a deterrent effect, but now you're having, I mean this is completely anecdotal, but I have a lot of family that lives all over the world and they've come to the U.S. they've, they've paid full for their, for their universities, they have these great jobs, they want to start businesses, they want to be productive members, but they can't get, they're afraid that they're not going to get their H1Bs or they're afraid if they go travel back home and come back, they're going to be stopped. Now I think that that's a really bad thing.

[Brian Greene]

But because, but because of the things he's done and meant to do or because of this mistake that he's made. Like I could, I could look at what he's done with detention of students, giving the message that, you know, don't try anything, you might get kicked out of the country based on a pretty thin explanation that Trump actually believes, I don't know that this one logically would convince someone in your family member's position not to come to the country.

[Karine Hajar]

It's not a linear conclusion, but it's a scary thing. And as a, as a married to a Venezuelan and Venezuelan in laws, the entire ecosystem is shaken by this and they don't. So most of them don't even want to come for a visit even if they have a valid visa to get in or some of them have, you know, have Spanish, Spanish passports. It's a really scary thing for everybody else watching this all go down and especially Donald Trump digging in his heels and the administration, by the way, it's not just Trump, it's everybody else behind him and Bannon and Miller and everybody lying to the camera. You know, I just saw Stephen Miller on Fox News saying, we won the Supreme Court case. What are you talking about? The DOJ said we won nine to zero. Lying to everybody, digging their heels in. And I know this is all bombastic bullshit, but it scares everybody, right? This deterrence is now. It's seeping in in a way that I think even most conservatives or moderate conservatives would say, you know, I don't know that that's what we wanted. And so I think this is the wrong. I think this is just wrong in every single way. You made a mistake. Own up to it. Bring him back. Of course you can tell the El Salvadorian president to send him back, because El Salvador needs us a lot more than we need them. And that's just a. That's just a fact. This guy's playing along like he's done, you know, like he's. I don't know. But the reality is that this is not. This is a deterrent to now citizens who are maybe, you know, not naturalized here, but have gotten their citizen, their path to citizenship in other ways ways. This is really becoming scary to a lot of people. And to me, as a father, this is scary as shit. What if I accidentally get swept up in this and then Trump says, yeah, Brian had a traffic ticket. He didn't pay, so, you know, sorry, not bringing him back. Can't do it. It's really nuts. It's really insane.

[Brian Greene]

I am glad I asked. All right, now if that was a major catastrophe to deal with. Let's dial it down about 93 degrees and talk about, oh, life's annoyance, the goat grinders, the things that get your goat or grind your gears. Brian, you want to start?

[Karine Hajar]

I am. What is driving me crazy is the proliferation of student driver bumper stickers. I don't know what's going on, and I don't know if it's happening around the country. We've heard from other people who have texted in. I've talked about this on my show. It seems that every fourth car here in Atlanta has a student driver bumper sticker sticker alerting us to the fact that there may or may not be a student driver inside of the vehicle. To me, I don't know, maybe people are bad drivers and family members have advised them to put student driver stickers on the back of their car so they don't become the victims of road rage. I'm not really sure, but it really does drive me crazy. And, you know, I think probably rightfully so They a lot of bad drivers have student driver bumper stickers, but they don't seem to be students or new drivers to me. I don't know. It annoys me.

[Brian Greene]

Negatively correlates to its intended goal of suppressing road rage. And Brian Green for me, I'm a little grindy over Amy Lou Wood. She's the actress from season three of White Lotus, not to be confused by the breakout actress of season two, Haley Lou Richardson. They love using actresses with the middle name Lou. And she was involved in or a depiction of her was involved in an SNL parody over of not the White Lotus, but the white pot is changing a letter. See what they did there? And the extent of the parody when it came to Amylou Wood, who was great, was that Amylou Wood has big teeth, big old English teeth. And Amylou Wood did not like this. She wrote, yes, take the piss. For sure, she is English, but there must be a clever, more nuanced, less cheap way. If there is, SNL didn't care to find it. New York Post headline, SNL has informally apologized to Amy Lou Wood for controversial White Lotus parody. I don't know what a formal. They have informally apologized. I didn't know that there was a procedure that the UN would oversee perhaps. And she also said to GQ the whole conversation is just about my teeth and it makes me a bit sad because I'm not getting to talk about my work. She said in a major interview with GQ about her work. And I have to go there. I don't know if it was a man. Would we be talking about this much now in the case of snl, doing or depicting a man in a unkind way? Yes, I think they would go there. I'm not sure if it's Pat was a man or a woman, but that was the joke with Dan Crenshaw, the one eyed congressman. Pete Davidson mocked him. They had to give him a shot on the show. David Patterson, the former blind governor of New York, was constantly depicted as rolling around the set. So yes, I think even with a man and the appearance of the man, I don't know. Have you seen the makeup on the guy who plays Trump? They put the neck waddle right in there. They don't have to do that, but they do that. So I would say that to Amylou Wood. Here's my prediction, this whole thing. First of all, I don't begrudge Amy Lee Wood for not wanting to be made fun of as regards her teeth. I've seen her talk about her teeth and that she loves her teeth and people clap and they're all behind the teeth. Given their size, it's hard to position yourself elsewise. But how I think this is all going to play out is she's going to get at least a cameo and possibly a spot hosting Saturday Night Live. So it will all. It will all come full circle. Karine, what do you have? What do you have for your Goat Grinder?

[Unknown]

Quick callback to Rogan. See, I don't think they would have apologized. So for better or worse, I don't know what the mothership would have done, but maybe they would have depicted her in a more funny way. I don't know. But my.

[Brian Greene]

Yeah, I don't think Kill Tony would have asked for forgiveness.

[Unknown]

Yeah, my goat Grinder is streaming. I feel like I. I grew up and became an adult in the golden age of streaming, and now it is, in my opinion, completely gone to trash. I have to. I'm done with the merry go round of free trials, so I actually have to subscribe to the different outlets that I want to watch a show on. So I was really into 1923. I think that was on Paramount. And I really love yellow jackets, but now I'm done with both seasons. Am I supposed to keep paying so I can go watch the last of us on hbo? Netflix currently has nothing that's entertaining me, but luckily I'm on my. I'm still on my dad's subscription, and we'll hold on to that for dear life as long as I can.

[Karine Hajar]

It's called adult.

[Brian Greene]

It's really tough is what happens when you're an adult. You got to pay for it yourself.

[Unknown]

I know.

[Brian Greene]

By the way, on yellow jackets, did they. And this is not a reference to a plot point on season one, did they land the plane? Because I gave up. Because I said to myself, I don't. I don't think they know where they're going.

[Unknown]

They're just about there. They're almost there.

[Brian Greene]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Brian Greene]

All right, all right.

[Karine Hajar]

We cut the cord. We're all going to plug it back in again someday. Trust me on this.

[Brian Greene]

Also, Netflix has. Netflix has Love on the Spot Spectrum, which is just the nice.

[Unknown]

That's true. That might be my next one.

[Karine Hajar]

It is very cute. Yeah. Or the Pit, if you're into gory medical dramas.

[Brian Greene]

All right. My guests this week were Karine Hajar. Thank you so much. Karine. Of the Boston Globe. I don't know the way I said it was like Anne of Green Gables, but thank you so much, Boston Globe writer and editorialist Karin Hajar. Thank you.

[Unknown]

Thank you.

[Brian Greene]

And Brian Green, who hosts a fantastic podcast called the Commercial Break, Brian of the Commercial Break. Good morrow, sir.

[Karine Hajar]

Good morrow to you, Kareem. Good to speak with you. Thank you. Likewise very much for the invitation.

[Brian Greene]

And we are not saying that you're right and we're not saying we're right, but we are saying we're not even mad. That's it for today's show, just as produced by Cory Wara and CBSO Michelle Pasco. Oomproo G Peru do Peru. And thanks for listening.