Happy(ish) birthday, Facebook.

Support for the show comes from Saks Fifth Avenue.

Sacks Fifth Avenue makes it easy to shop for your personal style.

Follow us here, and you can invest in some new arrivals that you'll want to wear again and again, like a relaxed product blazer and Gucci loafers, which can take you from work to the weekend.

Shopping from Saks feels totally customized, from the in-store stylist to a visit to Saks.com, where they can show you things that fit your style and taste.

They'll even let you know when arrivals from your favorite designers are in, or when that Brunello Cacchinelli sweater you've been eyeing is back in stock.

So, if you're like me and you need shopping to be personalized and easy, head to Saks Fifth Avenue for the best follow rivals and style inspiration.

Now now you can do that do that with the all new acrobat it's time to do your best work with the all new adobe acrobat studio

hi everyone this is pivot from the vox media podcast network i'm kara swisher and i'm scott galloway clapping back at you kara

you're in florida again right correct you're in florida i am i'm in i'm in delroy beach i'm actually in boca but i think

my mom's going to johns island or something i don't know down there something like that.

Down there.

Johns Island.

How much do you love the clap?

How much does Kara love the clap?

I love everything about Nancy Pelosi these days.

You know, I know her pretty well, and she has always been like.

Of course, you do.

Of course, I do.

I know everybody.

I know everybody, but

she's my representative from San Francisco.

I know her.

Her husband's on the board of Georgetown that I, that Paul Pelosi is fantastic, hunky.

He's real hunky.

He's lovely.

So I know them.

And so she's always been like this.

And I think people are starting to get a taste of what she's actually like versus the picture that the right wing has painted her.

And sometimes she's walked right into, you know what I mean, the idea.

But she's really sort of come onto her own.

She's moved into the tough grandma phase, like taking no shit.

So I like the whole, I like the whole thing.

Well, and the left wing.

Yeah.

She wasn't a lock on the leadership speaker's position.

She gives no fucks now.

I like the whole thing.

And the clap was fantastic.

Like her whole jam is working for me.

And I think for a lot of people.

Someone definitely coached her.

Someone did not know.

No, she's like that.

I'm telling you, she's like that.

Some people do not break through until much later in their life.

So here she is in terms of people.

I'm waiting.

Where's my breakthrough, Cara?

Oh, by the way, speaking of breakthroughs, I've thought of a couple nicknames for you.

You told me

that, which I think is key.

You told me that you're supporting Kamala Harris.

Is that right?

Well, no, I'm supportive.

I like her the best of the one so far.

Okay, you like her, whatever.

Supporter.

Amy Klobuchar is announcing on Sunday.

Carla Swisher.

Carla.

Oh, my God.

Carla.

No.

Okay, I got to pick up.

Amy Klobuchar is announcing on SpaceX.

Supposedly, there's been some hit pieces on her about how her staff has a lot of turnover.

It'll be interesting.

And Biden's will sometime come in sooner or later.

There's going to be a lot of people.

Don't try and move on from my nicknames.

This is a good one.

You're going to like this one.

Listen to me.

We have to get started.

Kay Star.

No, K-Swish.

Not K-Swish.

K-Swish.

People of Carl.

Oh, that's awesome.

That's okay.

That's awesome.

I'm going to call you.

Here's my nickname for you, Scott.

Okay, Scott.

Facebook turned 15 this week, and at Recode, we've been talking a lot about whether or not that's been a net gain or loss for the society as a whole.

We did a whole series of things, and

a lot of people weigh in and write little essays about whether it's a net plus or minus to humanity.

So we're friends of the pivot.

We reached out for their take.

They had written stuff for Vox and Recode.

And so we're going to play them.

First, Antonio Garcia Martinez thinks we're all overreacting.

He's a former Facebook employee.

I think 15 years from now, we're going to look back at a lot of the sort of panic panic reactions we're having now and find them kind of amusing.

You know, it's the destiny of new media to sort of burst on the scene, freak everyone out, cause more than one negative outcome, which Facebook certainly has, and then go on to become a completely unremarkable utility that's part of the sort of technological landscape and that nobody notices anymore.

Lest we forget, radio used to be one of these inflammatory media that people as vile as Adolf Hitler or various other demagogues, even in the U.S., used to much effect in the 30s and 40s.

And now here we have NPR begging us for cash in exchange for a tote bag.

The reality is that cultures and societies adapt to new media, and we return to some equilibrium state after the shock of that media has worn off and we've adapted to it.

All right.

So that's what he has to say.

What do you think of Antonio's thoughts?

He's very active on Twitter and he's been sort of pushes back at the media and everything else.

What do you think of his take?

Okay, so the latest talking point that has been, that has co-opted

Mr.

Garcia or Mr.

Garcia Martinez is the notion that we can conflate Facebook and these vehicles with other media communication.

He does this

somehow that Mark Zuckerberg, if you've noticed, is now saying a lot of the criticism Facebook has fallen under is similar to all the criticism of the internet.

He's trying to bear hug the internet and stuff like that.

Yeah, he went back to the Gutenberg Bible, though.

He was like, he's reaching back for the Gutenberg, not the Gutenberg Bible, but printing press, the original printing press.

Yeah, but

the people who were actually owned the rights to the printing press weren't ignoring bad things.

Had they had the options, the tools, and the capital to make books less dangerous, they would have and they did.

And that is what this management team is failing to do.

So to conflate himself with the Internet is just another, again, delayed.

That's what I call it, the Gutenberg poll.

There you go.

Anyway, all right, right, the next one.

Your colleague at NYU thinks we should put Facebook back in Pandora's box.

Let's hear from Adam Alter.

He's an associate professor of marketing at NYU.

I think Facebook is a force for bad in the world.

I think there's only one good thing that Facebook has done, and that's allowed people who have existing offline relationships to rekindle those relationships if they've lost touch with people.

But I think in every other context, Facebook has done much more bad than good.

It is a time suck.

It fuels political division.

It's designed to sell things to people that they don't need.

It violates our privacy and then weaponizes the information that it gathers to keep us glued to the screen.

It fuels a very unhealthy reliance on other people for social approval.

It's a portal to bullying and ostracism.

I mean, the list goes on.

And so I feel pretty firmly that Facebook is essentially a force for bad more than it is a force for good in the world.

All right, Scott, what do you think of your colleague about this thing?

Well, I'm biased.

I think Adam is a gangster.

He's one of the, he's a rock star in the world of marketing and he's and he's got an Australian accent and dreamy, so he ticks every box for me.

What do you think?

I think he's right.

I think I don't know if you can put it back in the box.

It's all well and good to say you can.

I mean, I had a quote in there saying, there's really nothing to be done.

They broke these things and can they fix them?

I think that's the question.

So putting them back in the box is not really an option.

But he thinks it's a force for bad more than good in the world.

So I'm not sure what we can do.

I don't think you can regulate yourself out of this.

So I think

that's the problem.

All right.

Next one: Representative RoConna.

He is a Silicon Valley representative in Congress.

I just had lunch with him this week in the Senate dining room.

It was lovely.

With Nancy?

You and Nancy and Roe?

No, it was just Roe for lunch, and we ran into Kristen Gillibrand.

It's quite a scene up there, I have to tell you.

It's fascinating to watch.

Washington in the Congressional College?

In that dining room.

I had a lovely crab cake.

It was very nice and some navy bean soup.

It was lovely.

But it's just the whole scene here, Jam, here, makes me laugh in many ways.

I met you.

You had the best line line

at that event you hosted in D.C.

You said, it's great to be in D.C.

I feel 10 times sexier when I'm here.

That was the best line.

That was true.

That was the best line.

I shouldn't have done that.

That was bad.

All right, let's go.

So I'll ask you after this clip what you think of Representative Conna.

Facebook is an extraordinary platform that has done extraordinary things and also has, unfortunately, a dark side.

On the positive note, you have a platform that has enabled Parkland kids to make the nation aware of gun violence.

You've had a platform that's allowed for the rise of candidates like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

It's given a voice to insurgents.

You have a platform that's mobilized on issues of the Green New Deal and human rights.

All of that said, the downside has been dramatic.

I mean, there's no doubt there was election meddling in 2016 that distorted our democracy, systematic disinformation campaigns of hate and propaganda that is totally unacceptable and it's a real threat to American democracy.

So, in short, I believe that Facebook will do more good than bad.

It has the potential certainly to do that, but it's going to require thoughtful leadership

of people who are going to stop the platform for being used to incite violence and who are going to make sure that we don't have election interference in the future.

All right.

What do I think of RoConna?

I think he's very smart.

I had a really enjoyable lunch with him.

I think he's thinking about these issues and sort of he's trying to stay balanced.

That's the problem he's got.

Is that he it's not that he represents Silicon Valley because he doesn't, but he, the companies are in some of the companies, the big companies, I think Google's in his constituent area.

And so I think he's trying to do sort of the middle ground.

And he's the one I wrote about this Internet Bill of Rights to come up with different regulation based on that.

And I think he's very thoughtful.

I think he has to toe a really unusual line to be sort of in the middle of this.

And I think that puts him, it's a problem for people like him that do that.

What do you think?

Yeah, I think he threads the needle well because he's sort of, I mean, if anyone's sort of paid for or should be kind of the spokesperson for the industry, it's him.

But he strikes me as a pretty thoughtful guy.

I think the interesting thing about this question or this navel gazing that everyone's going through on the 15th birthday of Facebook is the dangerous word in all of this is

big tech, are we net gainers from big tech?

And the word I don't like, or I think is dangerous is the the word net, and that is that we do this calculus and decide if, on the whole, they're a net positive, then argument over, leave them alone.

And pesticides, we're likely net gainers from pesticides, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have an FDA.

We're likely a net gainer from fossil fuels.

We're likely a net gainer from coal, as angry as that gets people.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have emission standards.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't have carbon cap and trade.

And just because I do believe we're net gainers from big tech, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be liable for incenting violence.

That shouldn't mean they are not held liable when there are skyrocketing rates of depression among teenage girls.

That doesn't mean they shouldn't be hit really hard when it's clear they don't put in place the safeguards to ensure our elections or their platforms aren't weaponized to flip our elections.

And let's go one by one.

I would argue Google is a net positive.

Still things we should do.

I I would argue that Apple, a net positive.

Amazon, as much as I hate to say it, I think it's a net positive.

I think Facebook and possibly Twitter are net negatives.

I believe the damage they have done, those two platforms, is greater than the net positive.

That is what the other companies think too, including Mike and others.

I had that quote in the column last week about Facebook contagion.

Like they cause, they're the ones causing behaving badly and everyone else has to pay the price.

And I think that's true.

I would agree with you on that.

And I think those are the two platforms most irresponsible in managing them.

Sloppy management.

That's the kindest way of saying it's sloppy.

So I agree with you on that.

I can't believe we agree.

We're not supposed to agree as much, several different people.

I know I've heard we need more attention.

You're an irritation.

We need more attention.

No.

But I do think that

I do think in general, if I had to weigh it all, right now we're in a net negative position for tech, I would say, among people.

But, you know, maybe not general people, but I think definitely the chattering class is certainly irritated by tech more than it's ever been.

All right, last one, Amina Tauso.

She is a friend of mine, and she also is a great writer.

She has a great

podcast called Ask Your Girlfriend, all kinds of stuff.

She was the more like she loved Facebook and now she does she wants to break up with it.

So let's listen to her.

The idea of whether Facebook is good or bad 15 years in is very complicated.

It was very good for a time.

Like, are you kidding me?

Got to like hang out with all your friends online.

You got to like make crushes in your various college classes.

And also just like connect with all of your friends who were far away.

I was an international student at college.

And so something like Facebook was actually like insanely valuable in the sense that it connected all of the far-flung pieces of my world.

It's accurate to say that for me, I did not think of privacy and security when I was making these like intense, amazing human connections because it just seemed fun.

And as the years wore on, you you know, like the matrix became quite clear that we were in a real conundrum.

And so I would say that Facebook today, it is not a place that sparks joy

at Marie Kondo.

It is a place that sparks a lot of anxiety and an intense amount of guilt.

It is not a company that morally I can support.

And I know that.

I'm a living, breathing, like thinking person.

I should get off of Facebook.

But, you know, for the friends that still stay on there and the family that still shares the baby photos that I want to to see

and just like the tangled web that we've woven for ourselves on there.

Like, I think about that all the time.

All right.

I think Amin of all of them really does express this great hope idea of it being something good.

And then it's sort of,

it's like a bad boyfriend.

Like, it suddenly occurs to you that this is a bad boyfriend kind of thing.

What do you think, Scott?

You lost me a bad boyfriend.

You hope, wait, you hope it, you mean you hope it works out well.

Yeah, you're like, you believe in love and then life intervenes kind of thing.

And then he weaponizes you and you throw the, and you ruin America?

Argue about like logistics and things like, you know what I mean?

Like it's not quite as delightful as it seemed kind of thing.

That's, I think she was expressing that, that there was a great hope, like the Arab Spring and this is how we can connect and this is so cool.

And then

the reality settles in that it's a lot more complicated.

I think she does represent a lot of people I talk to, regular people.

I think the better angels strategy is a flawed and a dangerous one.

I think all of us, including myself, keep hoping that, and I do believe you call it shaming them, I do think that's an effective tool and an important tool.

But I think we keep

hoping that the better person who's more concerned with the Commonwealth is going to show up.

And that doesn't happen.

Just as I think

going into Starbucks or you deciding at home you're not going to have plastic straws, that's all fine and nice and turning your thermostat down.

But until we elect people who actually put regulations or just outright ban plastic, we're going to have more plastic in the ocean than fish in 2050.

Just say no.

And so until we actually create economic disincentives, i.e.

start adding a zero to every fine, start making these companies subject to the same liability laws that every other media company is liable to,

hoping that the better Jeff Bezos shows up is just not going to happen.

Better.

What is your theme?

What is your theme?

Your better?

I have the Gutenberg ploy, but what is yours?

The better

Bezos?

The better Bezos.

The less evil twin shows up.

By the way, did you see he was at Super Bowl?

Who?

Bezos?

Was he?

Bezos is at the Super Bowl.

You probably watched the Super Bowl.

By the way, this guy, and I recognize this because I'm in kind of a

50, 60 year long stage called a midlife crisis that just keeps going and going and going.

This guy, we are literally watching a midlife crisis.

on steroids.

He might as well put out a reply all email that says, I'm about to start sleeping with my secretary and get hair plugs.

Okay.

You know what?

This guy is seriously,

seriously at the Super Bowl, what is he doing?

He might like the Super Bowl.

Leave him alone.

He's a billionaire.

He's the richest man on earth.

He can do whatever he pleases.

Keep it to yourself, Jeff.

No, no.

Keep it to yourself.

He's a person, even if he's Jeff Bezos.

I'm sorry.

You are absolutely incorrect.

I think that's the nicest thing you've said about him.

He's a person.

I like Jeff in a lot of ways.

You know, I do admire what he's done.

He just delivered fantastic things to my house again, once again, flawlessly.

It's just really kind of fascinating.

Like, I have yet to see them screw up on anything that I've done.

I'm really kind of amazed.

Do you think the $3 billion he's taking out of Long Island school system?

Yes.

I think that's going to be a good question.

Do you think that's an awesome move by John?

No, I think that's not an awesome move, and I think they're going to push that one back.

I think that's going to be pushed back.

So you think that, you think that, you know, they just appointed someone who could possibly kibosh it, who has been a vocal critic of it.

You think, and you might be making news here.

This is a prediction, Carla.

You believe, you believe that

HQ2 in Queens is not going to happen?

I didn't say it wasn't going to happen.

I said they're going to have to to not get all the gimmies.

I think some of the gimmies are going to be rolled back.

That's all.

So it's, it's, you know, I don't know if you saw

Farhad Manju's column in the Times today called Abolish Billionaires.

Oh, okay.

I thought it was like up on Billionaire Mountain or

People of Means Mountain, which is my new name for it, Billionaire Mountain.

They're very upset by this column.

That's such an awesome name.

Farhad Manju.

That's seriously.

He can walk into any newsroom and say, don't question me.

I'm fucking Farhad Manju.

You know, he's a very sweet man.

He's not, he doesn't do that like you might.

He's very, he's very self-effacing.

He needs to start.

Anyway, what do you think about his abolished billionaires?

And then I want to move on to Angela Ahrens at Apple.

Well, abolish billionaires.

There's definitely a level of class warfare.

Look, income inequality and what billionaires or all of us don't realize long term or don't acknowledge is that whenever we get to massive levels of income inequality throughout history, the good news is they're always self-correcting.

The bad news is, well, that's the bad news.

The bad news is that the vehicles of self-correction are always consistently three things, war, famine, or revolution.

And we're in the midst of what I would call a slow revolution, largely brought on by income inequality.

So it is in everyone's best interest to figure out a way not to have the levels of income inequality we are barreling towards.

And rather than going after billionaires as a class, I think that the real culprits here are the citizenry that has decided that the class or the economic class that has benefited the most and kind of killed it over the last 20 years should probably pay more taxes.

And it's a fair, I think it's an economic argument.

It's an argument about policy.

But it doesn't have to be an argument that says the moment you become worth a billion dollars, you're less noble and you're less of a good person.

People will avoid their taxes.

They will make excuses.

They will give to philanthropy, which is consumption.

I don't think we should excuse anybody.

Pablo Escobar built parks after becoming a billionaire.

We need to have, and this goes to the clip your winner last week, we need to have an adult conversation around which economic group can afford to offset the massive escalation in debt we're incurring because the notion that we're going to reduce spending in this nation is a popular notion and it never happens.

But I don't like where we're going with the whole 70%.

The far left is using the number 70% or trying to somehow label this class as lesser people or that they're the enemy.

That's not a productive conversation.

Yet.

And yet that's where we're going.

That's where we're going.

And what did you think of the article?

Or what?

You know, I think he was trying to be,

you know, do an article or got noticed.

Like, right, you know what I mean?

The idea.

I don't, you know, he was sort of bringing in the let us bring up this idea.

And then he talked to Tom Steyer, which made me laugh because there's a billionaire that's trying to stop billionaires, like, whatever, Tom.

And then, you know, I think the note, there is a feeling of, you know, when I think about it, you know, $164 billion that Jeff Bezos has, or $64 billion that Marks, I'm like, there is something way out of whack in terms of taxes.

There's something going on.

And I know some of it was made through innovation and things like that, and he deserves it.

He made it, but

it's going to make people,

it's like,

not so much when we don't have basic services and things like that.

When 27 people have more wealth in the Southern Hemisphere.

It's incredible.

But we have,

this is the world we wanted in America.

We have deliberately chosen a Hunger Games-like economy

where everybody believes they might be the lottery winner.

And they're not.

And so rather than post-World War II, I think America's collective goal with our tax policy and the way we viewed celebrities and wealth was we wanted to create millions of millionaires.

I think that was our collective goal economically.

And it appears that we have shifted that goal to we want to crown the first trillionaire.

That we're willing, everybody realizes the lottery economy and like playing the lottery is a bad idea, but my ticket's going to win, baby.

Or my son could go to work for Google, or my son could be the next billionaire.

So we've created a protected, privileged class, and people are just coming to grips with the fact.

I think it's good to do that.

But the lottery is a bad thing.

Yep, I agree.

I agree.

I'm going to be the world's first trillionaire.

Anyway, very quickly, Angela Arendt's leaving Apple.

She ran the Apple stores in the retail division.

She's a very talented woman from Burberry's.

Yep.

One of the few women executives at

Apple.

She's replaced by another woman.

But what do you think of the store's situation and this?

I don't know.

I don't know the backstory.

Angela pulled off an incredible gangster move in the world of luxury, and that is she rebranded and repositioned Burberry, which was this tired British brand that meant plaid and bad merchandise, and using digital more as a marketing vehicle, you know, talking about how we can make it rain on Instagram and we're going to live stream the fashion show from Singapore, which I would call kind of fake innovation.

But to their credit, they essentially were able to reposition the brand on the backs of at least the PR around digital innovation, accreted huge shareholder wealth, And good for her, leverage that incredible repositioning of the brand to go become the highest paid person at Apple, which, by the way, is a great reflection on Tim Cook.

I always thought that the best CEOs are the ones that are always the number two or number three best paid person in the company each year.

And over the long term, they're almost always the best paid, and that's fine.

But each year, there should be someone in the company that's outperformed to the extent where they make more than the CEO.

And she made, by my math, about a quarter of a billion dollars over the last five years working at Apple.

Now, having said that, I love Apple stores, number one per square foot in the world, revolutionized the world of retail.

People will say, what is the most accretive decision in the history of business?

People would say it's Apple's decision to release the iPhone.

I think they get the brand right, but the decision wrong.

I think it was their gangster decision to open 600 stores and reallocate capital out of broadcast television into stores where people still went in and touched the brand, if you will.

I would argue, though, and I want to get your viewpoint, that in the last five years, I'm not sure the head of stores has been worth a quarter of a billion dollars.

And I believe the conversation that took place was, Angela, thank you.

Angela, the multi-channel is good.

The click and collect, the pickup is better.

But we probably, you know, the quarter of a billion, I mean, I'm trying to think of an athlete that was a great, a great athlete, but probably wasn't worth what they were being paid.

I think the guy Sue on the Rams that came from the Dolphins, the Dolphins cut him up because he wasn't amazing.

I wasn't going to lose sports, sports, because I don't know what you're talking about.

Yeah, I'm going to lose it too.

I'm in over my head on sports, but you hear what I'm saying.

I think she was great, and I think she was...

Was the question, is she amazing or was she overpaid?

The answer is yes.

All right, that's your take.

Well, are stores going on?

Where do you think stores are going?

Oh,

there will be fewer stores, but they will be strategically more important.

So organizations like Simon Properties or General Growth that have the nicest malls will be fine because the death of story has been greatly exaggerated.

And while broadcast, television, or all the things you do to build a brand pre-broadcast are getting weaker and weaker, because what does media that's growing have in common, Kara?

It has no advertising.

I mean,

how do you know you're wealthy?

You don't have to subject yourself to this shitty thing called advertising.

Advertising has become a tax.

The poor and the technologically illiterate have to pay, but you still have to go into stores.

Not as often, but still 80% of the time, maybe 80% of the time.

I still like it.

I was there yesterday.

Oh, they're wonderful.

They're wonderful.

The question is, have they changed anything?

No, they need to be a little more exciting.

I think they need to be clean.

They need a little refresh, as they say.

And people are catching up.

There's some really interesting innovations.

They say they need refresh.

So we'll see.

What is the one thing you would do in an Apple store?

What's the case?

What about coffee shop?

Yeah.

High margin.

Coffee shop.

Their coffee.

The best coffee.

The most delicious.

And then

whoever is overseeing the coffee division should run as a centrist candidate for president.

All right, Scott.

We're going to go.

We're going to take an ad break now.

When we get back, we're going to do wins and fails and predictions.

Adobe Acrobat Studio, so brand new.

Show me all the things PDFs can do.

Do your work with ease and speed.

PDF spaces is all you need.

Do hours of research in an instant.

With key insights from an AI assistant.

Pick a template with a click.

Now your Prezo looks super slick.

Close that deal, yeah, you won.

Do that, doing that, did that, done.

Now you can do that, do that, that, with Acrobat.

Now you can do that, do that with the all-new Acrobat.

It's time to do your best work with the all-new Adobe Acrobat Studio.

Support for Pivot comes from LinkedIn.

From talking about sports, discussing the latest movies, everyone is looking for a real connection to the people around them.

But it's not just person to person, it's the same connection that's needed in business.

And it can be the hardest part about B2B marketing, finding the right people, making the right connections.

But instead of spending hours and hours scavenging social media feeds, you can just tap LinkedIn ads to reach the right professionals.

According to LinkedIn, they have grown to a network of over 1 billion professionals, making it stand apart from other ad buys.

You can target your buyers by job title, industry, company role, seniority skills, and company revenue, giving you all the professionals you need to reach in one place.

So you can stop wasting budget on the wrong audience and start targeting the right professionals only on LinkedIn ads.

LinkedIn will even give you $100 credit on your next campaign so you can try it for yourself.

Just go to linkedin.com/slash pivot pod.

That's linkedin.com slash pivot pod.

Terms and conditions apply only on LinkedIn ads.

Okay, we're here with Scott Galloway, who keeps saying boom and called me Carmela.

I don't know why.

Carla.

Carla.

You know what?

Stop.

We're going to stay on this idea of

rich people.

Let's trash the rich.

Let's trash the rich right now.

So

Howard Schultz, who I do like very much, is still going around talking about rich people in a bad way.

He's giving billionaires a bad name, I think.

And he wants to change the way we talk about billionaires.

So let's listen to what he has to say.

The author of Winner Takes All sent in a question and said, Do you agree that billionaires have too much power in American public life?

Yeah,

you know,

the moniker billionaire now has become the catchphrase.

I would rephrase that and I would say that people

of means have been able to leverage their wealth and their interest.

All right, so he doesn't like the moniker billionaire and he wants to be called people of means, which is like.

Oh, Jesus crimines.

Crimines Howard.

He's so thoughtful.

He really is.

He writes the most thoughtful emails.

He's a very thoughtful man.

But man, is he not going?

He just, oh, God, Lordy Lou.

what what do you think about people of means look everybody's piling on he's come on he's about to figure out he's about to figure out that it's pretty hot in the kitchen right

people let me put it this way people of means tend to surround themselves with people of brown noses because you have people around you who kiss your ass and tell you how awesome you are laugh at your bad jokes and when you say something like don't refer to people as billionaires but people of means he's used to people around him going that's genius Howard.

You're absolutely right.

We need to change that.

And the wonderful thing about our process is people get put through the ringer in the kitchen, and the ones that emerge emerge stronger.

I mean, you do have a, I mean, this is the mother of all vetting processes, right?

And my prediction, and I'll use this as my prediction,

I think he's going to decide not to run.

If he were to really wanna make a difference, he would probably decide what issues are important to him and then go out and use some of his capital and his star power to support candidates who are willing to put up with the bullshit that I think he's going to decide he is not willing to put up with.

All right.

Okay.

Because he wants to get back in his thing.

All right.

Okay.

And your fail or win of the week?

My fail or win.

Oh, my fail is I'm angry at Jack Dorsey again.

Me too.

Do you see my fight with him on Twitter?

Do you see him's response to me, his obnoxious response about me asking him to do an interview?

He actually responds to you?

Oh, yeah.

It was a whole big thing.

He goes, he wrote, I love, podcasts are fun or something like that.

And I wrote, I have a podcast because I've been asking him to do an interview.

And he wrote back, he's like, you know, I've talked to you many times.

I'm trying to branch out.

And I was like,

you've got to be branching.

And most people were like, you're just too scared to get on, get in an interview.

100%.

You know what I mean?

And so he responded with something else.

And then I went, every day I'm going to just.

pillory him.

But go ahead.

Hey, Adjac, reach down, fill those round things and come on the show.

Anyways,

so look,

I'm on Twitter and I tweeted out.

I've been thinking a lot about there's so much noise around

how San Francisco and New York need to be made more affordable and a lot of navel gazing and

thought pieces.

My feeling is that that's a ridiculous conversation.

I've never understood how you make a city more affordable.

And I also think that's actually, in many ways, a function.

It has negative externalities.

You've got to address low-income housing.

But

I think the objective should be to make Detroit and and St.

Louis more expensive or figure out a way to invest in those categories so more businesses and more people or those cities want to move there, thereby, if you will, driving up prices.

And I basically put out a tweet saying

the problem is in SF and New York affordability, the problem is St.

Louis and Detroit should be more expensive.

And a bunch of tweets,

a lot of good arguments back saying, Scott, that's the wrong problem.

A lot of thoughtful things.

Some of the things I love about Twitter.

And then a comment from somebody that said,

so translation, I've got mine.

Fuck the rest of of you.

And I thought, wow, that's a really incendiary thing to say.

That's not what I meant at all.

And

I looked at the person, I looked at the account, and I went onto their Twitter page, and they had been sending out Andrew, you know, AOC, 70% tax rate, all these very, very kind of far-left statements.

And then

all these far-right statements.

And I'm like, okay, this is an arsonist.

This is an account run by somebody else, whether it's a troll farm in Albania or whether it's somebody trying to get somebody elected or suppress the vote who's identified me as one of the, I don't know, 7 million most influential people on Twitter,

maybe,

and is purposefully trying to pick fights and divide us.

And if I can figure this out in about 30 seconds, then the notion that Jack Dorsey is trying to figure it out is just a lie.

And when he stands in front of Congress and raises his right hand and says, we have a responsibility to promote a positive dialogue, he is lying to Congress.

So my fail or my loser is Jack Dorsey, who despite the silence retreats, despite the Namaste bullshit, despite the beard, despite the nose ring, is making America a worse place.

All right, then.

Okay.

Boom.

Boom.

Where are my antidepressants?

I want to know if you think it's a loser-win Gimlet media.

I'm moving on to another thing.

I really appreciate your dorsey.

But come on the show, Jack.

But come on the show.

I'm trying to get him to come on the show.

You know, at work with Elon, I just kept texting at him.

I'm doing it to Alexandra Casio.

I'm being nice to her because I like her.

But Jack, I'm being somewhat aggressive with.

He's not coming on the show.

Whatever.

Whatever.

He's coming.

He's going to do it.

When he does, you're going to give me like $10.

So

Gimlet Media, the Spotify thing.

What do you think?

Peter Kafka broke the story.

Talked to Alex Blungberbug about the deal.

You can hear the rest of the interview on Peter's podcast, but here's a little short.

short little tape.

Like our basic idea, the thing that motivates us is that we're at the second golden age age of with the dawn of the second golden age of audio.

And there's just this explosion, this flourishing of new kinds of storytelling, new kinds of programming that's made possible by on-demand audio.

And that's growing quite fast just globally, and it's growing really fast on Spotify.

But the actual size of the industry is still very small.

Podcasts are probably half a billion dollar industry this year.

And there's basically a disconnect between the number of people who are listening and the amount of shows they're listening to and the amount of money coming into podcasting.

What do you think about this?

Scott.

Well, Kara, you're the king and queen of podcasts.

What do you think?

I think I need $400 million.

I'm thinking I should have gone and done only podcasts.

You need to be a person who means.

I need to be a person who means, and I should have done it.

I had the sense of podcasts early and I should have built a company like Alex.

I think I was capable of it.

I feel...

stupid.

No, no, I'm kidding.

No, I'm not kidding.

I think it's interesting.

I think it's podcasts are really good good businesses right now, and the really good ones are going to rise to the top.

So I'm pretty excited about it.

I think there'll probably be a shakeout.

Yeah.

So the total market for podcasts is $350 million or about one quarter of the, you know, one quarter's worth of ads in the Super Bowl is the entire market for all podcasts.

That's the bad news.

The good news is it's growing fast.

What's interesting about podcasts is the audience over-indexes on young and wealthy, which advertisers love.

And the really interesting thing about podcasts, and I'm new to this whole medium, is that the advertising, I find the advertising less offensive and interruptive than in other formats, which might be

what makes podcasting the only growth medium that is ad support.

They are.

They're kind of fun, too.

We've done some fun ads and stuff.

You know, it's interesting.

I'll tell you, my take on it is I have never had such fervent fans.

Like, literally, last night I was speaking at Johns Hopkins

Center for Advanced Whatever, whatever, something, some fancy think tank thing.

And two people hugged me, hugged me, like, I love you.

Like, it was like, okay.

Like,

I do not get that when I was a writer or do my conference.

Same thing.

It happens every day.

Someone comes up to me and wants to talk to me and is excited to meet me.

And it's really, and they say that, how is Galloway?

Like,

they see you as a

character that they like.

And then I was

down at Anthem in

down at the wharf in Washington, D.C.

and John Lovett had a sold-out show of 3,200 people for Love It or Leave It.

It was just really interesting.

You know, $30 a pop.

That's a really good business.

Anyway.

Yeah, you know how, to be honest, Kara, though, you know how it feels when someone comes up and interrupts me in the middle of the day and says, oh, I really like what you do.

You know how it really feels?

What?

It feels wonderful.

It's really nice.

It feels wonderful.

I love it.

It makes me feel affirmed.

We enjoy it.

People act as they're embarrassed because they're literally think they interrupted me.

I'm like, I'm sorry, do that again.

What did you say?

You like me?

You really like me?

Right.

Yeah, I really like it.

It's nice.

Absolutely.

It's really nice.

So, Scott, very quickly, prediction.

We got to go.

So, Snap had,

I think their stock bumped 20%

because they're not losing users.

It was the first time that they reported flat user growth.

I'm pulling for them.

You're pulling for them.

Yeah.

So my prediction is, my prediction is that

when people are near death, oftentimes there's this effect where they will literally have a burst of energy and get up and go garden or cook a meal and then they go back to the room and die.

This was literally Snap getting a burst of energy

going into the kitchen and cooking.

The deceleration,

the decline, and the death rattle of Snap is about to resume.

You're wrong.

I think they've got some really interesting people, including several really prominent women were just hired.

I think they can do something.

I think he's a very creative guy, and

he's got to professionalize that company.

But, you know, I like, I like what they're doing and we'll see if they can do it.

I agree with you.

It's hard.

It's going to be hard.

It's going to be super hard.

But I do like, it's so creative.

I was at their headquarters in New York and literally, even the room was creative.

This room they had that you're not supposed to talk about, but it has all the Snapchats on the walls and stuff like that.

It was a wonderful place to be.

And I just, they have a, they have a creativity that is very enjoyable whenever you're around them.

Thank you very much.

I think you're wrong.

I think they can pull it out.

They're going to need more than prominent women in an an escape.

I know, they just hired some executives I really like.

I'm going to go on.

He is so number two, your man crush.

First is Elon.

The second is Evan.

And the third is John Lovitt.

Do you know?

I love John Lovett, but it's

it.

No, love it.

Love it or leave it.

Love it.

You know who I have a man crush on?

Paul Pelosi.

That's what I have a man crush on.

Thank you very much.

Paul Pelosi?

Yeah.

I know nothing about Paul Pelosi.

North and Killian Conway's house.

He's a tremendous guy.

He's on the board.

He's just, I really like him.

And I think someone should write about him because he's a really interesting fellow.

All right.

I have no other producers beside that.

Scott, thank you so much.

I'm looking forward to seeing you next week.

Where will you be coming from?

I'll be in New York, maybe, I think.

New York.

You know, it's a bad sign, but I have absolutely no idea where I'm going to be next week.

All right.

Then I won't see you in New York when I'm there.

But I'm looking forward to talking.

There's going to be lots to talk about coming up.

Rebecca Sinanis produces this show.

Nishat Kirwa is executive producer.

Thanks also to Eric Johnson.

Thanks for listening to Pivot from Vox Media.

We'll be back next week for more of a breakdown of all things tech and business.

If you like what you heard, please subscribe on Apple Podcasts or wherever you're listening.

This month on Explain It to Me, we're talking about all things wellness.

We spend nearly $2 trillion on things that are supposed to make us well.

Collagen smoothies and cold plunges, Pilates classes and fitness trackers.

But what does it actually mean to be well?

Why do we want that so badly?

And is all this money really making us healthier and happier?

That's this month on Explain It to Me, presented by Pureleaf.

Support for the show comes from Mercury.

What if banking did more?

Because to you, it's more than an invoice.

It's your hard work becoming revenue.

It's more than a wire.

It's payroll for your team.

It's more than a deposit.

It's landing your fundraise.

The truth is, banking can do more.

Mercury brings all the ways you use money into a single product that feels extraordinary to use.

Visit mercury.com to join over 200,000 entrepreneurs who use Mercury to do more for their business.

Mercury, banking that does more.