0:00

Wow, he means business. Oh, big hit

0:02

by the captain. Not him, the sports

0:05

photographer behind him. Uh, what? He's using

0:07

QuickBooks to auto-track his business income and

0:09

expenses, saving 30 hours each month. Did

0:12

you say 30 hours each month? Yeah,

0:14

that's what makes him the MVB. MVB?

0:18

The most valuable business. Save 30 hours each

0:20

month. That's how your business differs. Intuit QuickBooks.

0:22

Based on a survey of small businesses using

0:24

QuickBooks online in the U.S. in March 2023

0:27

and stated average savings compared with their prior

0:29

solution to spreadsheets. Support

0:32

for pivot comes from Heston's. Since 1852,

0:34

Heston's beds have been renowned for their

0:36

craftsmanship and use of high-quality natural materials

0:38

to help ensure your body temperature stays

0:40

regulated while you sleep. The team visited

0:42

a Heston's sleep spa for an in-person,

0:45

immersive experience to try out some beds

0:47

and found them to be incredibly comfy.

0:49

And for side sleepers, there were specific

0:51

pillows that were particularly user-friendly. You can

0:53

visit one of their stores or go

0:55

to Heston's.com to book a personalized bed

0:57

test or order a catalog to learn

0:59

more. Hi,

1:08

everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and

1:10

the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Cara Swisher. And

1:12

I'm Scott Galloway. Scott, you know what I did

1:14

this weekend? What'd you do? I

1:16

moved. Oh, how'd it go? It was exhausting.

1:18

I was up till 4 in the morning. It's awful,

1:20

right? I got to tell you,

1:22

I have so much stuff. I have so much

1:24

crap. And I have... It's

1:27

very exhausting. But we're now in.

1:29

It is exhausting. We're now in and it'll be a

1:31

couple of, about seven, eight months before we move back.

1:34

I never want to move again. I can't believe

1:36

you're doing it again. I know.

1:38

Especially with kids. Are you back in

1:40

D.C.? Yes, I'm in D.C. temporarily.

1:42

I'm going to New York this

1:45

weekend, to this week. Excuse me.

1:47

The Livingston Awards are on... I'm

1:50

a judge. Is this more awards, really? No, this

1:52

is for young journalists. They're amazing reporting. I know

1:54

you don't love reporting, but these are great reporters

1:56

who do... You know... Oh, let me

1:58

put words in your mouth. I can shame you.

2:01

No, I've decided, I have a bone to

2:03

pick with you about insulting things like the

2:05

Washington Post. They do amazing work.

2:07

But nonetheless... I've not insulted the Washington Post?

2:09

You said they don't matter. These businesses don't matter.

2:11

The Washington Post? Any of them. They don't,

2:13

they're the Paramount or anything else, but the

2:16

Washington Post does matter. No, no, no, no.

2:18

Okay. Come on. I said that

2:20

Paramount's economic value, that it's an amusing story, but

2:22

in terms of real impact, it doesn't mean a

2:24

whole lot. I think Washington Post, in terms of

2:26

influence on the world, dramatically punches above its way.

2:30

Yeah. You know? Yeah. By

2:33

the way, I just want to point out

2:35

that I'm recruiting an editor-in-chief, so anyone at

2:37

the Washington Post wants out of that dysfunctional

2:39

fucking nightmare. Just send me... He's sent me

2:41

that. I'm curious now. We're hiring an editor-in-chief.

2:44

By the way, we're growing, they're shrinking,

2:46

we pay well. I don't know if they

2:49

pay well. And as dysfunctional as we are,

2:51

we seem strikingly functional compared to the shit

2:53

that's going on there. But also

2:55

Scott as a boss. Although we are... It

2:57

is run by a white male. Do we have

2:59

that in common? No, well, your real

3:01

boss is your long-time partner. The

3:04

whole firm is run by women. Yeah.

3:06

But let me say, I have to... So

3:08

the Livingston Awards are given to the young

3:10

journalists under 35, and they're really astonishing stories.

3:14

The nominees and everyone who won, everyone who applies,

3:16

it's really heartening every year that I do it.

3:19

It should be interesting. It should be. And then I'm

3:21

going to Canada to get the Canadian of the Year Award. I'm

3:24

sorry, you're getting the Canadian of the

3:26

Year Award? The Canadian

3:28

Journalists Federation or Foundation? I can't

3:31

decide if that's the weakest flex in the

3:33

world or going

3:35

to be really fun. I'm going to

3:37

Toronto. It can be fun. It'll be

3:39

fun. They're giving it to me. It's another

3:41

lifetime achievement. I got one in San Francisco

3:43

last week, and

3:45

so now I'm getting my Canadian one. Well,

3:49

you know how you get 100 drunk Canadian fraternity

3:51

guys out of your pool. Guys, could

3:53

you please get out of the pool? Exactly.

3:56

Yeah. Yeah, we don't think about

3:58

Canada enough. Yeah, that makes sense. I'm

4:00

excited to go. I love Toronto, so that's

4:03

easy. It's a great city. It's a great city, so I'm going to

4:05

run up there and get that. They have a lot of the same problems

4:07

we do, actually. Oh, it's a beautiful city. And

4:10

then can I tell you one other thing

4:12

I'm doing this week? There's this really cool

4:14

movie coming out called War Games, and it's

4:16

all these high-level people, like Republicans and Democrats,

4:18

who war-gamed out a situation, and they made

4:21

a documentary of it, and I'm going to

4:23

see the documentary and then interview the

4:26

cast, well, not the cast, it's like

4:28

senators and defense officials. I'm

4:30

super weirdly excited for it, because

4:32

it's all about an insurrection. Like

4:34

an insurrection where the military participates.

4:36

So I'm excited to do

4:38

that. And it's a movie, right? It's a movie? It's

4:41

a doc, yeah. It's a doc, but they're going to

4:43

show the doc, and then we're going to talk to

4:45

the participants, which I think will be very timely, given

4:48

Trump's talking about revenge. It's very exciting.

4:50

Yeah, I like it. You know what I discovered this weekend? I

4:52

discovered an amazing hack. I spent a lot of time with the

4:54

dogs this weekend, and

4:56

my little one, the big one's super friendly,

4:59

but the little one occasionally snaps. So when

5:01

someone comes near him, I just

5:04

say, not friendly, and people avoid

5:06

us. And

5:08

when people always stop to see Leia, because

5:13

she's a big, beautiful dog. And when

5:15

I'm in a hurry, I'll just say, not friendly, so I

5:17

can just keep moving. I've started saying

5:19

that even when I'm not with the dogs, and it

5:22

works perfectly. Just anyone

5:24

gets near me, I'm like, not friendly. You're

5:27

Larry David. Not friendly. If you

5:29

wear that MAGA hat, you got to wear the MAGA

5:31

hat like Larry David. Not friendly. Not friendly. Go

5:34

away. Move it along, move along. That

5:36

is funny. Larry David would say that,

5:38

you've become that. There you go. You become that

5:41

guy. So anyway, we've got a lot to

5:43

get today, including a big win for Sandy

5:45

Hook families, who deserve every win they get,

5:47

and the proposed a Texas stocks exchange that

5:50

wants to give New York a run for

5:52

its money. Plus our friends of Pivot, our

5:54

journalists and brothers, Wall Street Journal investigative

5:56

reporter, Brody Mullins, and Politico contributing

5:58

writer, Luke Mullins. They've

6:01

written a new book, The Wolves of

6:03

K Street, The Secret History of How

6:05

Big Money Took Over Big Government. But

6:08

first, more conflict between AI

6:10

companies and news publishers. What?

6:13

Propeccity AI, which some people think is

6:15

really great, is in some hot water

6:17

after being called out for not attributing

6:19

sources. The AI-powered search engine company recently

6:21

released a new feature, Proplexity Pages, which

6:23

is essentially a news summary feature. Then

6:26

a Forbes reporter pointed out similarities between a

6:28

Proplexity news summary and a Forbes article

6:30

saying the company had scraped

6:32

and repurposed investigative reporting without

6:34

acknowledging it. Forbes pointed to

6:36

several cases of Proplexity using

6:38

exclusive reporting from paywalled sites

6:41

with only a small footnoted link to sources.

6:43

In response, the company's CEO said the feature

6:45

is still new. The company is working to

6:47

address the issue. He also said everything on

6:49

the internet is free. He also

6:51

has said that in the past. I used

6:54

to have this problem, but it was more like websites

6:57

from all kinds of sketchy areas that used

6:59

to just suck up all things D stuff

7:01

and spit it out again. But this is

7:03

them doing it as a business. So

7:06

what do you think about this? This

7:08

has happened in a different way. This is

7:10

just faster and more efficient. I'm

7:12

actually more optimistic that this time

7:14

that the Washington Post, distinct

7:17

of all the dysfunction or other media

7:19

companies, are going to find an actual

7:21

revenue source here. And

7:23

another example, I think the more articles that come

7:25

out like this, so the more discovery that they're

7:27

essentially just repurposing other people's IP is

7:30

going to give them more power and court and

7:33

more mojo to say, okay,

7:35

anthropic or llama or open

7:37

AI. What

7:40

Adobe did that was really interesting around generative

7:42

AI for design was they said from the

7:44

get go, where it's going to be their hours or

7:46

we're going to have the licenses for it. So

7:48

when you use Firefly, you don't have to worry.

7:51

It's all, they own it. They've

7:53

created a walled ecosystem of things they own or

7:55

that they have come to a licensing agreement with.

7:58

Yeah, just like with photos or songs, yeah. That's

8:00

right. So I think this is

8:02

actually a good thing for these media companies. The

8:04

Washington Post is dysfunctional, given that it seems

8:07

like we want to talk about it. This is Forbes, yeah. Well,

8:09

but I'm just using Washington Post as an example. I

8:11

mean, Forbes has kind of been left for debt, hasn't

8:13

it? No, actually, interestingly, the editor

8:15

in the tech section used to work

8:17

for me, John Pachkowski, and they do

8:19

some very strong articles. And he texted

8:21

me over the weekend because I had

8:23

always complained of people ripping off our

8:25

stuff many years ago, both the internet

8:27

and other media organizations that wouldn't attribute

8:29

our stories to us, that

8:31

we would break. And I said, welcome to my world. Now

8:33

you can be annoying. And they were always like, why are

8:36

you so mad at these people? I'm like, because you guys

8:38

worked hard, and they just ripped it

8:40

off. But I agree, I didn't

8:42

have anything. I had no recourse in

8:44

that case at all whatsoever. Anyway,

8:47

one of the stories perplexed, allegedly ripped

8:50

off was about Eric Schmidt. This is

8:52

the one the former Google CEO is

8:54

arming his AI powered military drone venture

8:56

with top tech talent. The endeavor named

8:58

Project Eagle has been poaching talent from

9:00

tech giants like Apple, SpaceX, and Google.

9:02

Project Eagle has been testing drones in

9:05

Silicon Valley and Ukraine. After

9:07

leaving Google, Schmidt serves as chair of both

9:09

the Department of Defense's Innovation Board. He was

9:11

very early to this, and the National Security

9:13

Commission on AI. Of course, he's

9:15

probably looking at Andoril and a

9:19

palantir and saying, give me some of this

9:21

sweet defense money, I guess. And so these

9:23

are military drones, which are being heavily used

9:25

in Ukraine. I can't believe they're testing in

9:28

Silicon Valley, although I'd like

9:30

to see that happen in a lot of ways. I'd

9:32

like to see that going on. You like

9:34

the drones to people? Yeah.

9:37

One, I think Eric is, the few

9:39

times I've had conversations with Eric or I've seen him

9:41

speak, I do think he is strikingly

9:44

intelligent. And also if

9:46

you look at the economy or the innovation that's going

9:48

to come out of the Ukraine-Russia

9:51

war, it is drone technology. This

9:53

is innovation, and this is the

9:55

notion that a country

9:57

that doesn't have nearly the capital of

9:59

the Krumf quote, ferocious kinetic power of

10:01

Russia can strike back using

10:03

kind of this cheap and cheerful technology

10:06

where they have independent AI that's not

10:08

dependent upon GPS that actually

10:10

surveys the landscape and can make its own

10:12

way and potentially, supposedly I think

10:14

20 or 30% of what

10:16

is it called the black fleet, Russia's

10:19

Navy has been taken out, but

10:21

drones are the new kind of,

10:23

drones are the new front on

10:25

military technology. There was one, they showed a drone

10:27

show, they

10:30

showed it going through woods with lots of trees

10:33

moving through by themselves autonomously avoiding trees.

10:35

And it was like a, remember Star

10:37

Wars where they had, they were on

10:40

those riders through the forest. That's

10:42

exactly what it looked like, it was crazy. You

10:45

know, I think there's gotta be regulatory things

10:47

on the use of military drones, especially

10:50

autonomous military drones. I mean, think of the,

10:52

I mean, this is cheap and easy to

10:54

use so crazy people will employ it. So

10:57

there should be just like there is with

10:59

cloning or things like that, even if

11:01

people violate it, there should be a

11:03

global decision-making on the application

11:05

of these things, which I think is

11:08

not any time coming. So

11:10

we'll see, Eric is an interesting guy. He's

11:13

been at this for a while. I

11:16

covered him since he was way over,

11:18

Nobel and at Google and et

11:22

cetera. He's a funny guy, it's a funny guy.

11:25

We used to have a ball gag at All Things D,

11:27

every time he said something dopey at Google that would get

11:29

them into trouble. So we had a picture

11:31

of him with a red ball gag on. I'm

11:35

sorry, I heard nothing after you said we used to have a

11:37

ball gag, wait, I'm sorry. He would say

11:39

dumb things sometimes and a lot more

11:41

than most people. And just some, he

11:43

likes to talk. And so we

11:45

had a ball gag, a picture of him with

11:47

a ball gag. John Pachkowski made it. Every

11:50

time he said it, the picture would be Eric

11:53

and the ball gag. Eric today, once again, he

11:55

eats the ball gag. Anyway, that's

11:57

neither here nor there. Let's move on,

11:59

Apple. expect to unveil all things AI

12:01

at its worldwide developers' conference as we

12:03

tape on Monday. I'm going to be

12:05

talking to them afterwards. Apple Intelligence will

12:07

be available for new versions of iPhones,

12:09

iPads, and Macs, and will be powered

12:11

by Apple's own technology and tools from

12:14

OpenAI. Some of the

12:16

features Apple is expected to announce are

12:18

AI summarization of articles and web pages,

12:20

a Siri revamp, thank God, the ability

12:22

to make custom AI emojis on the

12:24

fly, AI-enhanced photo editing. You know, this

12:26

is important for Apple, even if they're

12:28

not running the AI themselves, which I

12:31

assume they will do eventually. This

12:33

is a real good application of

12:35

AI, and they'll probably do it

12:37

well in terms of not

12:40

ripping people off, making it useful,

12:42

making Siri, whatever, I hope they

12:44

rename it. They probably hired

12:46

Scarlett Johansson for this. So

12:48

I think it's probably a good thing. I

12:52

don't know, what do you think? It'll make the iPhones much

12:54

more useful, for sure, or

12:56

any different technology you have. What do you think? Apple

12:59

is the quintessential case study in

13:01

the second mouse, and that is people

13:04

overuse the word innovation. Innovation

13:07

is actually a really true

13:09

innovation. Being first, pioneering, doing things

13:12

at the cutting edge is actually

13:14

a terrible strategy for shareholder value.

13:17

And that is when you're out at the frontier, you

13:19

get mud on your face, arrows on your back, it's

13:21

too expensive to figure shit out. Apple

13:23

wasn't the first in MP3, they weren't the

13:26

first in graphic user interface, they weren't

13:28

the first in laptops. I

13:30

mean, smartphones, they were not

13:32

first. What they do is they wait, they

13:34

come in, they commercialize it, they make it

13:36

more friendly, they use their brand. So I'm

13:39

very excited to see what they do. I hope they

13:41

do something in healthcare. I hope the front

13:44

end for it will be Siri. But

13:47

I hope they do something in healthcare, and I hope they

13:49

do something around, we talk a lot about

13:51

generative AI. I think the real opportunity is what I

13:53

call integrated or integrative

13:56

AI that just makes my life easier by saying,

13:58

Scott, we see you're watching all these videos. videos

14:00

on your shoulder hurting. Here

14:02

are some physical therapists that are also Siri enabled.

14:04

Do you want us to send you free times

14:06

or schedule a point? I mean- It's

14:09

the ultra assistant is what we're talking about. I

14:11

mean, from the, like from the movie her or

14:13

anything like that. Of all the companies

14:15

that can do this, Apple's already very

14:17

helpful when I'm walking. It goes, are you

14:20

walking for exercise? Would you like us to

14:22

record it? You know,

14:24

I give them, but it's all permission based,

14:26

which means they ask me first if they

14:28

want me to do it, which I like.

14:31

And often Apple is telling me things like,

14:33

oh, your car is parked here Kara, like

14:35

just so you remember. And I'd

14:37

like it to talk to me too at the same time.

14:40

Yeah, I just think, I think the place that

14:42

AI is gonna add the most value is

14:45

around really boring stuff. I

14:47

just want everyone to go, okay, Scott, we

14:50

see on Thursdays you like to whatever,

14:52

do the following things or you're in

14:55

this city. I mean, there's just so

14:57

much information they have on that handset and

14:59

all they have to do to respect your privacy is go,

15:02

can we have access and we won't sell it to

15:04

anybody else, but we'll use it. The

15:07

privacy is so overrated in terms of actual

15:09

consumer behavior, especially among young people. We

15:12

exchange privacy for utility at the

15:14

drop of a hat. And

15:16

I think with the interface they

15:18

have with the billion wealthiest people

15:21

in the world, whether it's travel,

15:23

whether it's opportunities, logistics services and

15:25

how friendly the brand is. I

15:28

think it's one of two things, make your life easier, do

15:31

something about healthcare, maybe something about media. I don't

15:33

know, I'm excited to see it. Just so I

15:35

am too, I'm excited. I'm gonna get a briefing from

15:37

them afterwards. I bet you are. Oh,

15:39

I am, oh, I am. Are you gonna get a

15:41

briefing like you did on the mixed, the mixed reality headset?

15:44

Yes, I moved it the other day for watching a

15:46

movie. It was great, it's great here. I bet you did.

15:48

I'm gonna wear it on our next show. I did, I

15:50

watch movies on it all the time. You really watch

15:52

movies on that thing? I do,

15:54

I like them better. They're very immersive. I have very noisy children.

15:57

So it's lovely, it's a lovely- You sit

15:59

there with- with a headset on watching a movie? Well,

16:02

they talk a lot in the morning. Yeah, not in

16:04

the morning, but they talk a lot. Yes, I do.

16:06

I watch the headset with the movie at night. Okay,

16:08

let me get this. The kids are running crazy.

16:11

Amanda's trying to keep a lid on the household

16:13

and you're in the corner with that fucking headset

16:15

on. No, I do it, I do it in

16:17

the office. All I gotta say is you better

16:20

make more money because number three is coming your

16:22

way, baby. No, number. Two words, prenup, hopeful, question

16:24

mark. Yeah, anyway, Apple stock, what's gonna happen?

16:26

Listen, here's what happened to it over the last

16:28

year. It's back up again

16:30

to 194. It had

16:33

a real dip in April, end of April

16:35

or mid-April. Then it went up and up

16:37

and up and then it had a little

16:39

dip because of a cautious outlook on the

16:41

iPhone sales. So

16:43

where do you see it? The

16:47

stock is on a momentum now. It's just

16:49

ran right up over the last, oh,

16:51

about since May 4. Let's go down.

16:53

Since April 22nd, it's been on a run.

16:57

So what do you think? It's been

16:59

an unbelievable performer. It's quadrupled over the last

17:01

five years. I'm an Apple shareholder. I'm

17:03

actually thinking about selling it because I think that

17:05

there's gonna be rotation out of some of these

17:08

high flyers that have done really well. But

17:11

it's been, they have some really big issues. One,

17:15

they seem a little bit late to

17:17

some stuff. And also China is a big

17:19

specter. At some point we're wondering what's the

17:21

next thing beyond the iPhone. And

17:24

also again, see

17:26

above number one, when 20% of your

17:28

business and I don't know, the majority of your

17:30

supply chain is out of a country where we

17:32

keep making threats against each other. Which they've

17:34

been moving to Vietnam and other places. But

17:37

yeah, here's the deal. I think if this stuff

17:39

with AI works really well, it's a lock-in. I

17:41

was using a Windows computer when I was getting,

17:43

I got a storage space. That's another thing I

17:45

did this weekend, went to my storage space. And

17:49

they were having me fill out the form on a

17:51

Windows computer and I didn't use one in years. And

17:54

it was so dumb. I was like, oh my God,

17:56

I forgot. It was like a bad feeling. I just

17:58

think if it locks you in. to Apple, and

18:01

the guy goes, you use Apple, right? And I go,

18:03

yes, I do. Yes, I do. You should too. Anyway,

18:06

we'll see what happens. We'll see what happens.

18:08

I'm really eager to hear and give their

18:11

examples of what they're gonna do and how

18:13

they're gonna introduce it. Because they have been

18:15

behind, but they are, have strictures around privacy

18:17

compared to other companies that they have to

18:19

stick to because it's a brand attribute. Anyway,

18:22

let's go on a quick break. When we

18:24

come back, Alex Jones gets ready to liquidate

18:26

his assets. I'd like Alex Jones to liquidate

18:28

himself. Anyway, we'll speak with friends of Pivot,

18:30

Brody and Luke Mullins about how big

18:33

tech became a huge lobbying force in

18:35

Washington. Support

18:40

for Pivot comes from Miro. At the

18:42

end of any successful project, you wanna

18:44

keep that momentum going. But a retrospective

18:46

is necessary to help you repeat your

18:48

successes and weed out errors. They can

18:50

certainly feel tedious and even demotivating. Too

18:53

often, you're rehashing the same pain points

18:55

from a project over and over again

18:57

instead of focusing on the wins. But

18:59

Miro can help make your retros much

19:01

smoother. Miro is the visual

19:03

collaboration platform that helps you run an

19:06

effective, engaging and actionable retrospective. It makes

19:08

it easy for your team to express

19:10

ideas, share concerns and problem solve together.

19:13

Miro has a ton of helpful features

19:15

to help make that happen like templates,

19:17

icebreakers and even a private mode where

19:19

people can anonymously add notes or vote

19:22

with a built-in timer. With Miro, you

19:24

can innovate faster and feel stronger as

19:26

a team. And that more than anything

19:29

can help keep that momentum going. Whether

19:31

you work in product design, engineering, UX,

19:34

agile or marketing, bring your team together

19:37

on Miro. Your first three Miro boards

19:39

are free when you sign

19:41

up today at miro.com. That's

19:43

three free boards at m-i-r-o.com.

19:49

Support for the show comes from Delete.me. Whether you're

19:51

a digital native or a naturalized citizen of the

19:53

internet, your personal data is precious. If you're not

19:56

careful, there are thousands of ways that thieves could

19:58

try to get ahold of it. If

20:00

you're looking for a way to help scrub your personal data from

20:02

the internet, you might want to try DeleteMe. DeleteMe

20:05

can find and remove personal information you don't

20:07

want online, and keep it off for good.

20:10

DeleteMe sends you regular personalized privacy reports showing

20:12

what info they found, where they found it,

20:14

and what they removed. I actually got a

20:16

chance to try DeleteMe, and I was shocked

20:19

about how much information there is about me

20:21

on the internet, much of which is correct.

20:23

The user experience is easy, it's a dashboard,

20:25

and it's nerve-wracking to know that so much

20:27

of your information is out there, both accurate

20:30

and inaccurate. And so it's nice to

20:32

take control of your data and keep

20:34

your private life private by signing up

20:37

for DeleteMe, now at a special discount

20:39

for our listeners. Today, get 20% off

20:41

your DeleteMe plan when you go to

20:44

joindeleteme.com/pivot and use the promo code PIVOT

20:46

at checkout. The only way to get

20:48

20% off is to go to joindeleteme.com/pivot

20:51

and enter the code PIVOT at checkout.

20:53

That's joindeleteme.com/pivot code PIVOT. Support

20:58

for the show comes from Harvard Business Review.

21:00

You know, there's this idea in business that

21:03

some people are born to be leaders. You

21:05

either got it or you don't, but leadership

21:07

like any skill can and should be learned

21:09

over time. Whether you've climbed to the top

21:12

of the corporate ladder or just starting out,

21:14

you can find valuable insights at Harvard Business

21:16

Review. Harvard Business Review is the leading destination

21:18

for smart management thinking, and on their website,

21:21

hbr.org, subscriptions are just $10 a month, which

21:24

gives you unlimited access to the same

21:26

level of expertise. Things like case

21:28

studies, newsletters, podcasts and articles written by some

21:30

of the world's top minds in business. I

21:33

like HBR and I like hbr.org. I use

21:35

it for ideas when I'm about to do

21:37

podcasts. I want to know more about things

21:39

or get some ideas for questions and things

21:41

like that. It's very comprehensive and on every

21:43

topic known to man in business. While much

21:45

of Harvard Business Review's content is available for

21:47

free after signing up at their site, subscriptions

21:49

to unlimited content start at only $10 a

21:51

month. Go to

21:53

hbr.org/subscriptions and enter the promo

21:55

code PIVOT right now to get

21:58

10% off your subscription. Again, save

22:00

10% off your HBR subscription,

22:02

go to hbr.org/subscriptions and enter

22:05

the promo code PIVOT. Scott,

22:13

we're back with the latest on conspiracy

22:15

theorist, Alex Jones, an all around terrible

22:18

person. Jones may finally pay

22:20

the Sandy Hook family's the

22:22

$1.5 billion in damages he owes them as

22:24

he moves to liquidate his personal assets. I'm

22:26

always thinking he's up to something. So the

22:28

judge is set to rule this week on

22:30

whether free speech systems, a parent company of

22:32

Jones's Infowars will be liquidated. The

22:35

Sandy Hook family's won their defamation suits against

22:37

Jones in 2021, but had not received any

22:39

money since Jones and his company filed for

22:41

bankruptcy in 2022. Jones's

22:43

personal and company financial assets combined are

22:45

worth between 10 and 12 million. He

22:48

said on the show that even if free speech systems

22:51

and Infowars are sold, he could still find a way

22:53

to broadcast. He's gonna keep going, I mean, honestly. You

22:57

know, he'll not have Infowars, which will

22:59

mean he could start something else. I've

23:01

started a million things. So he's still

23:03

popular with the conspiracy theorists. And

23:06

of course if Trump wins, he's back in the gravy

23:08

again. What do you think about

23:10

this? I think it's wonderful.

23:12

I think that when you bring that sort of misery

23:15

to people, knowing that

23:18

you're gonna create that sort of misery against

23:21

people who have already incurred the

23:23

ultimate tragedy. I

23:25

love that he's gonna be near bankrupt and I

23:27

hope they chase him to the four corners of

23:29

the earth for the rest of his life. And

23:31

I hope it sets, I

23:33

hope it sets, look, everything comes

23:35

down to incentives and there needs

23:37

to be incentives in place that

23:39

say, look, if you trade in

23:41

traffic and people's misery, it's

23:44

gonna cost you a lot. And

23:47

he has made a conscious decision to

23:49

make, not only bring shame on

23:51

him and his family, but his kids and his entire

23:54

family is gonna struggle because he's gonna be

23:56

forced to liquidate assets. I just don't, I...

24:00

I would imagine there's some very smart

24:02

people representing the families and

24:04

investigators and they're going to make sure that

24:07

wherever he pops up, whatever assets he manages

24:09

aggregate, it's chapter seven versus chapter 11,

24:11

which means he can't restructure. I

24:15

was even thinking about trying to find, I wonder if the media

24:17

company is going to be sold for sale. I'd like to see

24:19

it go to a liberal news outlet. I was even thinking of

24:21

looking at it. Oh, let's buy it. There

24:23

you go. We have to buy a media company. Let's buy

24:25

it. You don't want

24:27

to do a business with me, do you? I'm

24:29

in business with you, Kara. I'm

24:32

in business with you. I understand, but a

24:34

real business. If we bought InfoWars

24:36

and made it real liberal and

24:38

had trans people on all the

24:40

time, drag quiz. First

24:42

guest, AOC. That's it.

24:45

Brought to you by Mother Jones. Today

24:50

we have Ben and Jerry on as our guests.

24:52

I think that would be hilarious.

24:55

I think we should do that. It would be really fun. If

24:58

I was really rich, I would do stuff like that. If

25:00

I was really rich, I'd fuck people like him. Sure. Why

25:02

not, right? Why not? All

25:05

right. Moving on. Alex Jones,

25:07

fuck you. You're a mendacious fuck.

25:09

You are the mendacious of mendacious

25:11

fucks going. Amazon

25:13

self-driving unit Zooks is going to start testing

25:15

robotaxes in Austin and Miami. The unit has

25:17

been testing its vehicles in San Francisco, Las

25:20

Vegas, and Seattle over the last few years.

25:22

I have ridden in them. The

25:24

announcement comes as Zooks is investigated by the

25:26

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration after two

25:29

sudden braking accidents led to crashes.

25:31

Federal authorities also opened a probe into

25:33

Alphabet's Waymo vehicles last month following reports

25:36

of unexpected behavior. Can companies

25:38

get these robotaxes past safety concerns and go

25:40

mainstream? I think they can. This is part

25:42

of the process. Zooks

25:45

for people who don't know go both ways.

25:48

They're like a box. It's like

25:50

a Dyson. It's like a Dyson. What

25:52

else to say? They go forward and

25:54

backward and you get in and there's compartments

25:57

and you sit in your compartment so a couple people.

26:00

can be picked up by the robo taxi and you

26:02

don't have to touch anybody. So you

26:04

just get in and it takes you to your

26:06

spot and then... Mike Total Recall. Yes,

26:08

yes, exactly. But you can put four people in

26:10

it. I think four or more people in it.

26:13

It's been around in San Francisco. It's a really, the

26:16

woman who runs it's really interesting. It's

26:18

owned by Amazon. You

26:21

know, I think these things are inevitable. I know

26:23

that people are like, oh, they're not, don't work.

26:25

But I just wrote a bunch in San Francisco,

26:27

the Waymos, and I love them. I

26:30

get the problems with them, but the

26:32

problems are people. Like, I'm

26:35

sorry, the problems are people usually in these

26:37

cases. Every now and then it

26:39

has an issue, but there's so many

26:41

human accidents happening. I'm still very bullish

26:44

on these things. They're very expensive getting

26:46

them out there, but eventually I think everyone will

26:48

be riding them. Do you think? It's

26:51

going to happen. I always thought it was going

26:53

to happen in long haul trucking before I have

26:55

them with taxes. I'm in favor of it. I

26:57

can't imagine that's a great job. I

26:59

use something here called Wheelie in London that

27:01

I absolutely adore. I think they do a

27:04

fantastic job. Is that autonomous? Oh,

27:07

no, no. It's actually

27:09

a company. I think it's a Russian company.

27:14

It's essentially a high end Uber and I find

27:16

they just do a better job. And I

27:18

left my keys there and the

27:21

guy came by. I mean, they're just so good. I don't know.

27:24

I find there's not a great deal of what

27:27

I'll call training or professional

27:29

standards around Uber. And I think

27:31

these guys do a great job. But I love

27:33

the idea. For the first time in my life, last couple of

27:35

years, I haven't owned a car and I absolutely love it. So

27:38

would you get an Waymo? I ride them all the

27:40

time. Yeah. I don't know who's driving the subway when

27:42

I get on that thing. Who cares?

27:45

But I get the safety concerns and cities

27:47

being concerned and it's appropriate that federal authorities

27:49

and others look into that, the national highway

27:51

safe. I think the problem will always be

27:53

Elon Musk because he always promises and under

27:55

delivers over promises on these things. He's been

27:58

saying full self-drive and was around the corner.

28:00

And I think it's set expectations

28:03

far too far, you know, that this is

28:05

something that'll work out over time in cities.

28:08

I used to go every, my friend Orlando Marchant had a

28:10

home in Montauk and every year I used to go out

28:13

there for a week and just hang out with him. We

28:15

have the best time. And I remember I was taking a

28:17

taxi from East Hampton Airport and

28:19

this guy had printed out and put

28:21

in like a pasted tape to the

28:23

dash, a printed sign that

28:26

said, $100 surcharge if

28:28

you vomit in car. And

28:30

I just sat there going, what can I do for

28:32

150 bucks? What

28:35

would you let me do in here for like $200? Anyway,

28:39

we'll see where these go. I'm very, we're bullish

28:41

on this eventually. And I think it's probably safe

28:43

for people over time. There, I

28:46

visited Aurora, which is one of the, what the

28:48

truck startups, they're very expensive to

28:50

get started. It just is, it's going to be

28:52

a big investment. And eventually someone will benefit from

28:54

them, but they're testing them in Texas because of

28:57

these straight roads. Speaking

28:59

of Texas, the New York Stock Exchange

29:01

in Nasdaq may be facing some new

29:03

competition from Texas. The proposed Texas Stock

29:05

Exchange, which was backed by Blockrock and

29:08

Citadel Securities, those guys, has

29:10

raised approximately one hundred, you know what I'm talking

29:12

about, 120 million from individuals

29:14

in large investment firms. The exchange, known

29:16

as TXSE, plans to register with the

29:18

SEC later this year, began facilitating trades next

29:20

year and launched by 2026.

29:23

The TXSE just

29:26

flips off the tongue, could be fully electronic

29:28

and would allow dual listings with companies also

29:30

on the New York Stock Exchange. Texas

29:32

governor Greg Abbott told CNBC the new exchanges

29:34

for companies whose only agenda is capitalism. Oh,

29:37

shut the fuck up, Greg Abbott. Anyway, what

29:39

do you think about this? I like a

29:41

new stock exchange, but they're going to like,

29:43

say, we're the not woke stock exchange or

29:45

some stupid marketing thing like

29:47

that. I think it's great. I

29:49

don't like the politicization of everything that

29:51

now we're politicizing stock exchanges that they'll

29:54

try and position NYSE and Nasdaq as

29:56

blue. The Nasdaq and

29:58

NYSE do, I think... get

30:01

out in front of their skis and start

30:03

getting into social engineering and deciding what the

30:06

composition of boards should be, which I'm just

30:08

not sure that's their job. But

30:11

they are, I think you need

30:13

more competition. And Texas, there's no getting around

30:15

it, has done an amazing job. The economy

30:17

in Texas now is larger than Russia, Canada,

30:19

and Italy. It has more Fortune 500 companies

30:22

now than anyone

30:24

but California, it's tied with New

30:26

York. Their value proposition here will

30:28

be more business

30:31

friendly, lower filing fees,

30:34

probably less disclosure requirements. I

30:37

feel like I'm curious if you agree with this,

30:39

I smell Elon Musk here. I

30:41

would bet he's going to be their first customer

30:44

and move all of his companies onto this exchange.

30:47

And if you look at these

30:49

exchanges, now the flip side of having these

30:51

additional standards is

30:54

that the average PE of stocks trading

30:56

on the London or Shanghai exchanges is

30:58

13. The average PE of companies trading

31:00

on the NASDAQ or the NYC is

31:02

26. Because that additional, it's

31:05

like, it's why people get

31:07

a higher salary coming out of Princeton or

31:09

NYU or Stanford is the screening, the ability

31:11

to get into these schools is so great

31:14

that people assume you're better. It's

31:16

the same or more qualified, I should say. It's

31:18

the same when you manage to get listed on the

31:20

NASDAQ or the NYC. People assume that the vetting

31:22

and the screening means you're a real company and you

31:24

should trade at IR multiple. Why dual listings? Will

31:26

you explain it? I didn't quite understand. If you

31:29

allow dual listings, what's the difference? Why would you

31:31

be on one exchange if you can dual list

31:33

on both? I mean, you might as well, right?

31:36

Well, yeah, but on an

31:38

exchange, you're essentially charging the exchange with

31:40

pairing shares. And I don't

31:43

know which shares get allocated to one

31:45

exchange. I just don't think logistically it

31:47

makes sense to be trading on multiple

31:50

exchanges, although some companies do trade an

31:53

ADR on a foreign exchange. But

31:56

look, this is another case study. I think

31:58

competition is good. It'll bring down. on fees,

32:00

it'll put pressure. Texas

32:02

has done a great job putting pressure on other

32:04

states and other companies. And I think that's a

32:06

good thing. I just hate the politicization of it.

32:08

I don't, I don't

32:10

know. It's just their electric grid sucks.

32:13

Remember the energy crisis there? Yeah,

32:15

but that's a different ball of wax. That's a lack

32:17

of infrastructure payments or lack of infrastructure investing. Not no

32:20

taxes, no. But in- We should have

32:22

more than two big exchanges. We used to have the OTC

32:24

in the US. So

32:26

I think it's a cool thing, but my

32:29

gut is Elon Musk, they called

32:31

him and said, would you move?

32:33

And he said, I'm down with it. I

32:35

want the following things. And I don't want

32:37

you to ever ask me for my financials

32:39

or ask me what my CEO compensation is

32:41

or disclosure requirements about X, Y, and Z.

32:44

They'll position themselves as more business friendly and

32:46

less woke. They'll say, because for

32:49

example, I think it's the NASDAQ requires that you

32:51

have at least one female board

32:53

member. And I think,

32:55

okay, that makes sense. And I think, well,

32:57

should the NASDAQ be dictating that? Aren't

33:01

investors smart enough to demand that? Why

33:03

is the NASDAQ in the business of figuring out

33:05

board composition? And I think there's good arguments on

33:07

both ends. They'll exploit that and take advantage of

33:09

it and say, that's not the business we're in,

33:11

we're an exchange. Yeah, yep, I get it.

33:13

I get it. It'll be interesting to

33:15

see what happens. We like competition at the same

33:18

time. If you go on and on about woke,

33:20

you're gonna exhaust us with your stupidity. Anyway, you're

33:22

just a money exchange. So just hush up and

33:24

just see if you can give good services to

33:26

companies. I don't know if people

33:28

are that annoyed by that one, that rule necessarily,

33:30

we'll see. We'll see. I think the

33:32

companies are gonna stick with New York and NASDAQ, I don't know. I

33:34

just feel like. The big ones, yeah. But

33:38

you know, this, I

33:40

would just be shocked if they

33:43

haven't already said to Elon Musk, when

33:46

SpaceX goes public, have you thought about moving

33:48

Tesla? And he's like, right on. Right

33:50

on, yeah, you're right. You're 100%. They're gonna

33:52

come out of the gates. And not only

33:54

that, the CFO or

33:57

the treasurer of Texas will start putting

33:59

pressure on. Texas companies to list

34:01

on the Texas exchange. They'll

34:03

create some regional, like my team

34:05

versus their team, Red State versus Texas

34:08

versus New York. You can just see

34:10

how this is going to shape up.

34:12

And at the end of

34:14

the day- We're bigger in Texas. They're going to do all that

34:17

bigger. Texas has

34:19

a ton of great companies. It'll force

34:21

the NASDAQ and NYC to bring their fees down on

34:24

the whole. I like it. I wonder what the oil

34:27

and gas companies will do. I don't think they

34:29

care. They just want to make money. Anyway, let's

34:31

bring in our friends of Pivot. Brody

34:39

Mullins is an investigative reporter for The

34:41

Wall Street Journal. Luke Mullins is a

34:43

contributing writer for Politico. They are authors

34:45

of a new book, The Wolves of

34:47

K Street, the secret history of how

34:49

big money took over big government. And

34:51

they also happen to be brothers. How

34:53

sweet. Brody and Luke, welcome. Thanks.

34:55

Thanks for having us. The

34:57

book traces the history of lobbying in

35:00

Washington through several dynasties. Tell us

35:02

the story because we're focused on tech and

35:04

media, but we'd love you to give us an

35:07

overall look

35:10

at them and the generations of

35:12

lobbyists from regular people like

35:14

Paul, people we know of Paul Manafort and

35:16

Roger Stone, those lovely guys, and

35:19

the shifts. And then I'd love to

35:21

start talking about tech. Yeah,

35:23

so we start by looking- Say who you

35:25

are. Say which one you are. This is

35:27

Brody Mullins, the older brother in the relationship

35:30

there, which is important. So

35:33

we look at lobbying in the last 40 or

35:35

50 years. And what we found out, which is

35:37

really remarkable is that companies right now are dominant

35:39

in Washington. Big companies have all the power over

35:41

consumer groups and environmental groups and labor unions. But

35:43

it wasn't always the case that

35:46

for most of the last century, companies had very

35:48

little influence in Washington. So we found that sort

35:50

of remarkable. We sort of, we dive into how

35:53

companies got that power, how

35:55

they wield it, and how they bend

35:57

rules and regulations to favor the wealthy

35:59

and the corporate elites and not the rest of us.

36:02

So how? Well, this is Luke

36:04

here. So we

36:06

basically start the book

36:08

in the 1970s, which

36:11

is this pivotal period where corporations

36:13

come to power in Washington. Essentially,

36:17

what happened is, corporations

36:19

were on the defensive for the 60s and the

36:21

early 70s, and

36:25

there was a lot of power in consumer

36:27

groups, guys like Ralph Nader and public interest

36:29

groups. There

36:31

was this sense at that time that

36:34

corporations really just hadn't invested in Washington.

36:37

So basically, there's this revolution of corporate

36:42

power in Washington where they start investing

36:44

a lot of money in direct lobbying, start

36:47

to fund a lot of these

36:49

ideological think tanks, and then also

36:51

develop these more novel techniques, which

36:55

we think of as we call

36:58

outside influence, which is these newer

37:00

tactics that are designed

37:02

to reach out specifically to voters in

37:04

order to

37:06

put pressure on their members of Congress.

37:09

These characters who did this was Manafort

37:12

and Stone or who? We

37:15

trace four or five lobbies

37:17

over time who helped tell this

37:19

story. We're talking about complicated, deep

37:21

issues, and so we try to write them

37:23

as lately as possible. The first one

37:26

is Tommy Boggs, we consider the first

37:29

modern lobbyists. Then we go to Paul Manafort

37:31

and Roger Stone and then to Tony Podesta

37:33

and some other folks. So we

37:35

trace the evolution through the decades. They

37:38

become more aggressive. But one of the companies

37:40

you read about is Google began its lobbying

37:42

efforts and they were

37:44

determined not to repeat the mistakes made by

37:46

Bill Gates in Microsoft. Now, I was in

37:49

a meeting with Bill Gates before the monopoly

37:52

case, and he

37:54

was at the Washington Post and he said, what do

37:56

I need lobbyists for? He had

37:58

some guy up in Rockville. what his name was. He

38:01

became their main lobbyist for years. Jack

38:04

Krumholz. Jack Krumholz. But he's like, I

38:06

don't really care about Jack. He said this

38:08

in this meeting. I put my

38:10

hand up, I was a very young

38:13

reporter. I said, well, they care about

38:15

you and there's a bunch of ex-student

38:17

body vice presidents with subpoena power. So

38:19

I think you should be worried about

38:22

it. But tech wasn't that way, and

38:25

Microsoft has gotten very good since obviously. But

38:27

talk a little bit about the evolution of

38:30

tech. Well, you're exactly right.

38:32

We should have pulled you in as a third byline

38:34

for this book. Sounds like you

38:36

know exactly everything happened. So Microsoft basically, you

38:38

know, thumbed his nose to Washington. They didn't

38:41

care about Washington. Bill Gates

38:43

thought that he was the smartest person in the world and his

38:45

company knew exactly what they needed to

38:47

do in the marketplace and didn't care about these

38:50

bureaucrats in Washington. You know, unfortunately, these bureaucrats

38:52

in Washington from Microsoft have a lot of

38:54

power. And they filed

38:56

a series of cases, lawsuits accusing

38:59

Microsoft of being a monopoly. The

39:01

whole point in our book about Bill Gates

39:03

and Microsoft is that they did it the

39:05

wrong way. They ultimately prevailed in the case,

39:08

but it took them a decade, billions and

39:10

billions of dollars of distractions focusing on Washington

39:12

and paying for lawyers instead of battling out

39:14

in the marketplace. When Google came

39:16

along, they looked at what

39:18

Microsoft did and said, hey, we don't want

39:21

to repeat that mistake. So unlike thumbing, instead

39:23

of thumbing their nose at Washington, they embraced

39:25

Washington. They invested in lobbyists, they invested in

39:27

campaign donations. To this day, you know, they've

39:30

continued to invest in Washington.

39:32

So far, you know, they've held

39:34

off any antitrust decision against them.

39:36

Initially, they didn't. Initially, Larry and Sergey were like,

39:39

what the fuck do we need these people for?

39:41

And there was a real disconnect between the wall.

39:43

I mean, I think it's Susan Molinari was there.

39:45

Initially, that was their first big hire. And

39:48

they really didn't. Like, the

39:50

Googleplex ran everything. The

39:53

complaints were on that side. Scott?

39:56

Sure, nice to meet you guys. So I'll just put forward a

39:58

thesis, and I want you to respond. to it. My

40:01

sense is that the greatest ROI any tech

40:03

company can make is not in human capital

40:06

or AI, but in lobbying. And

40:08

this is the thesis that after

40:11

looking into this a little bit, what

40:13

I found is it's not disappointing or

40:15

surprising that our politicians are whores. What

40:18

really struck me is what cheap whores they

40:20

are, that how much you can get for

40:22

so little money. Your thoughts? Yeah,

40:24

I mean, I think, gosh, you're right on the

40:26

money there. I mean, especially when you look at

40:28

something like antitrust, right, which for a lot of

40:31

these companies is really the only

40:33

way that they can expand, right? They need

40:35

to expand through Washington. So we

40:37

read a lot about Tony Podesta. And one

40:39

of the things he was doing is during

40:41

this period where Google was eating, you know,

40:44

buying up all these companies. And we have

40:46

this sort of antitrust tradition then that was

40:48

pretty lax to begin with in terms of

40:50

waving a lot of these through. But that's

40:52

a lot of what Tony Podesta was doing

40:54

was sort of getting up, getting on the

40:56

hill and sort of framing these mergers

40:59

the way that that

41:02

showing that they would be beneficial to the market,

41:04

they would drive down prices and things along along

41:06

those lines. And, you know,

41:08

that ends up being, you know,

41:10

very influential in terms of Google's

41:12

growth and how it is essentially

41:14

able to to accumulate so much

41:16

power. Now that that is

41:19

sort of changing now, right? We're in this this different

41:21

things are changing at the moment, but for many

41:23

years. Why did they do that? Because I

41:26

had a lot back and forth with the

41:28

Google guys about them when they tried to

41:30

take over Yahoo search, if you remember, and

41:32

I was like, I'm going every federal regulator

41:34

to stop you like this is fucking ridiculous.

41:37

They did pull back from that. But

41:39

now, as you noted, a federal judge just

41:41

ruled that the DOJ is antitrust case against

41:43

Google and sabotage. Neck noise will be decided

41:45

by a judge, not a jury. So what's

41:47

changed because they did nothing like Eric Schmidt

41:49

was in the Lincoln bedroom every five minutes

41:51

with Obama and, you know, not together,

41:53

not to insinuate anything, although not that

41:56

there's anything wrong with that. But but

41:58

what changed? in the shift from

42:01

your perspective? I think there's been a long

42:03

shift, longcoming shift, mainly in the

42:05

Republican Party among the American people.

42:08

More and more Republicans have switched, have sort

42:10

of gotten rid of their views

42:12

that bigger is better when it comes

42:14

to corporate mergers and to tech. And

42:16

Republicans out in the country are turning

42:18

against big corporations, kind of following Donald

42:21

Trump's populism. There's more and more bills

42:23

on Capitol Hill to try to regulate

42:25

tech or to give more power, more

42:27

money to the FTC and DOJ to

42:29

break up big tech. So

42:31

I think it's coming from the people. I

42:33

mean, the people are saying these companies are

42:35

too big, they're too influential, they have too

42:37

much control over my life. And it is

42:39

crazy for Republicans to say, and therefore the

42:41

federal government needs to do something to rein

42:43

them in. Well, I'm just curious, who

42:45

do you think, if you were to name, if you

42:47

were to give an award for who

42:50

has best weaponized Washington, created more

42:52

regulatory capture, and who wins the

42:54

award for best lobbying,

42:57

that has done the best job

42:59

of managing and executing lobbying effort,

43:01

potentially to the benefit or the

43:04

detriment of the Commonwealth

43:06

consumers, investors, who does

43:08

the best job manipulating

43:10

Washington? So I think

43:12

at this point, the award goes to Google. I

43:14

mean, the American people in Congress

43:16

have come after Google for 10, 15

43:19

years. The FTC had an antitrust case against

43:21

Google 15 years ago that

43:23

failed. I mean, they have really, again, going

43:25

back to Microsoft, they saw the mistakes that

43:27

Microsoft made, they invested in Washington. There was

43:29

a point where almost

43:31

all the top tech advisors at

43:34

Obama's White House had either worked at Google or went to

43:36

go work for Google either after.

43:39

So I mean, they really have done a great

43:41

job in terms of blocking any

43:43

attacks against the company. So give

43:46

us two, three, and four. I

43:49

mean, you know, ditto for Amazon, Facebook, I mean,

43:51

they have also, it's the same idea. It's they

43:54

have pushed back on attempts to

43:57

reign in the entire industry. And if you take a list of Joe

44:01

Biden's top donors are top sources of cash.

44:03

It's those three companies plus Microsoft. If

44:06

you look at the top spending lobbyists,

44:08

lobbying firms in DC, it's those three

44:10

plus Microsoft. Yeah, so Luke,

44:12

talk about Amazon is facing an antitrust suit brought

44:15

by the FTC last fall. The trial is set

44:17

to get underway in 2026, which

44:20

is 100 years away. How,

44:22

what's it doing now as the run up to

44:24

the trial, besides Jeff Bezos buying a handsome home

44:27

in DC and

44:29

throwing parties? What

44:33

do you think is gonna happen with

44:35

their case? Well, I

44:37

assume that they're doing a lot of what

44:39

Google did during when

44:41

they were facing the same issue. And the

44:44

idea is one, you

44:47

have your own sort of direct lobbyists that

44:49

are out there talking to members of Congress

44:51

directly, but a lot of the action these

44:53

days are on these, what's known as shadow

44:56

lobbying, right? And

44:59

essentially there you have people that

45:02

aren't necessarily registered lobbyists, but sort

45:04

of public relations

45:07

strategists, grassroots strategists. And basically,

45:09

what I imagine they're doing,

45:12

because it's what Google was

45:14

doing, is trying

45:16

to reach out to sort of

45:18

ordinary members, ordinary

45:20

voters, right? And trying to

45:22

get them whipped up against,

45:27

showing that this is some intrusion

45:29

of federal power into the marketplace.

45:32

Yeah, and there's more than that. I mean,

45:34

Luke's exactly right. They've actually built off of,

45:36

we say that Google learned from Microsoft, Amazon

45:39

has learned from Google. Amazon has actually hired a

45:41

bunch of the people who used to work for

45:43

Google running these outside campaigns. They've hired the people

45:45

who organized their academic opposition

45:48

research campaign. And we've seen the ads

45:51

they've run. I heard that before, a

45:53

few months ago, when Schumer's

45:55

deciding whether to bring those bills up for

45:57

a vote or not, the

45:59

company went out into the states and ran a

46:01

huge advertisement

46:03

campaign basically saying like, if

46:06

you vote for this bill, you know, we're going

46:08

to come out come after with everything we have.

46:10

And the bill never gone both. No,

46:12

because Schumer has almost zero backbone when it

46:14

comes to tech companies. Almost what's less than

46:16

zero. He's been terrible, I

46:19

have to say. I mean, he ran right

46:21

over Amy Klobuchar, I think. Let me ask

46:23

you, what happens with companies

46:25

with the ascendance of right wing companies

46:28

like Elon's companies and things like that?

46:30

How much lobbying do they do?

46:32

Or is it Twitter? Interestingly,

46:34

Elon Musk doesn't do much in terms of the

46:37

lobbying game in terms of Washington. They

46:39

could be making the mistake of Microsoft, by the way,

46:41

which any other companies have learned from it. Elon

46:44

Musk sounds a lot like Gates. He's saying,

46:46

stay away from me, Washington. I'm bigger than

46:48

you. I'm smarter than you. I'm faster. All

46:50

those things are true. But, you

46:52

know, he's ignoring

46:54

Washington. He has a small team of lobbyists at

46:56

SpaceX, a small team at, very small team at

46:58

Twitter. They, as you know,

47:01

don't have any public relations team in

47:03

D.C. And, you know, so far,

47:05

he's winning, but he's left himself exposed. The question

47:07

to me is, is there a scandal

47:09

that something happened in China? Is there some bigger issue

47:12

that could blow up Elon's face? And at

47:14

that point, you want to already have friends.

47:16

He doesn't have, he does not made the

47:18

connections personally in Washington. Now, the exception, of

47:21

course, is that a lot of Republicans and

47:23

members of Congress, Republicans, they love Elon Musk.

47:26

But that's not, those are not personal friendships.

47:28

Those are just, they like Musk because he

47:31

goes after Biden and Democrats. So,

47:34

Mike, when I say my kids, my students will ask

47:36

me, what are the best industries to go into, assuming

47:38

you're just an economic animal? I'm like, okay, first and

47:40

foremost, anything to do with software to anything to do,

47:43

you know, with finance. And if you look at the

47:45

fact we're spending $7 trillion a year on 5 trillion

47:47

in receipts, and every year our government spending increases faster

47:49

than GDP, isn't one of the

47:51

most lucrative jobs in the world to be part of the

47:53

lobbying industrial complex? Isn't this a great career? And it's easy.

47:56

It's easy, you know, come to DC, put in a

47:58

couple years on Capitol Hill. literally

48:01

a couple, three, four, and go

48:03

triple your salary. It's not hard. Yeah,

48:05

no, I would absolutely agree. I mean, we've

48:07

seen that for many years now that a lot of

48:10

these counties have been increasing

48:13

in wealth. And a lot of that

48:15

is coming from, again, not just traditional

48:17

lobbyists, but also this much larger industry

48:20

of foreshadow lobbyists. Yeah, exactly. Yeah,

48:22

so last question I have, you wrote in

48:24

the book, no matter what new obstacles have

48:26

emerged, K Street has always managed, K

48:29

Street's the street in Washington where they all had their

48:31

offices, and I think they're dispersed now. I've

48:33

always managed to invent new ways to exercise

48:35

its power over Washington. Give us each of

48:38

you one thing they're doing new and fresh

48:40

now. What's their newest way? The

48:42

new thing is moving outside of Washington. Lobbyists and

48:44

the influence peddlers for companies

48:46

aren't going to members of Congress asking for

48:48

favors. They're going out into the states and

48:50

trying to gin up support or opposition to

48:52

bills using actual constituents.

48:54

Because if 51% of a member of

48:56

Congress's constituents want a trade bill or

48:58

don't want tech regulation, the member of

49:00

Congress is going to follow. So go

49:02

to the member, or go to the

49:04

voters. Yeah, and one

49:07

of the ways that they do that is by this

49:09

technique that's known as intercepts, which is you

49:11

essentially get someone

49:13

in a congressional district to run

49:15

into a member of Congress and

49:17

have some supposedly

49:20

organic conversation. You

49:23

run into them at the grocery store or in the

49:25

parking lot, and you

49:27

get them to bring up whatever issue that

49:29

they're hired for to say, hey,

49:32

I'm really upset about this. This

49:35

is something you should be paying attention

49:37

to. But again, the whole idea

49:40

is to get around these members of

49:42

Congress outside in their

49:44

home districts, outside of Washington, where

49:46

it looks like it's a real

49:49

groundswell of public support. When

49:51

in fact, it's just being ginned up by lobbyists. I

49:53

hate these people. Anyway, Brody

49:55

and Luke Mullins, again, the book is The

49:58

Wolves of K Street, The Secret History. of

50:00

how big money took over big government.

50:02

Thank you. Thanks, guys. Thank you so

50:04

much. All right. Thank you. All

50:06

right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be

50:08

back for wins and fails. Support

50:15

for the show comes from ServiceNow,

50:17

the AI platform for business transformation.

50:19

You've heard the big hype around

50:22

AI. The truth is, AI is

50:24

only as powerful as the platform

50:26

it's built into. ServiceNow is the

50:28

platform that puts AI to work

50:30

for people across your business, removing

50:32

friction and frustration for your employees.

50:34

Supercharging productivity for your developers, providing

50:36

intelligent tools for your service agents

50:38

to make customers happier. AI built

50:40

into a single platform you can

50:42

use right now. That's why the

50:44

world works with ServiceNow. Visit servicenow.com

50:46

slash AI for people to learn

50:48

more. Support

50:53

for Pivot comes from Vanta. When

50:56

it comes to ensuring your

50:58

company has top-notch security practices,

51:00

things can get complicated fast.

51:02

With Vanta, you can automate

51:04

compliance for SOC 2, ISO

51:06

27001, HIPAA, and more. Vanta's

51:08

market-leading trust management platform can

51:10

help you unify security program

51:13

management with a built-in Risk

51:15

Register Plus reporting, and also

51:17

streamline security reviews with AI-powered

51:19

security questionnaires. Over 7,000

51:21

fast-growing companies like Atlassian,

51:23

Flow Health, and Quora use

51:26

Vanta to manage risk,

51:28

improve security, and real-time.

51:30

You can watch Vanta's

51:32

on-demand demo at vanta.com/Pivot

51:34

to learn more. That's

51:37

danta.com/Pivot. Not

51:46

him, the sports photographer behind him.

51:49

He's using QuickBooks to auto-track his

51:51

business income and expenses, saving 30

51:53

hours each month. Did you say

51:55

30 hours each month? Yeah, that's

51:57

what makes him the MVB. MVB.

52:00

be the most valuable business. Save 30 hours

52:02

each month. That's how your business different. Intuit

52:04

QuickBooks. Based on a survey of small businesses

52:06

using QuickBooks online in the US conducted March

52:09

2023, who stated average savings compared with

52:11

their prior solution to spreadsheets. Okay,

52:15

Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. Would you

52:17

like to go first? Do you want

52:20

to go first? I'm up to you. You

52:22

go first. Okay, so

52:24

my fail is that,

52:29

according to an article in Business Insider, it

52:32

reported that 11% of men, so

52:34

one in 10 men aged 25 to 54 don't have a job and

52:38

aren't looking for one.

52:41

And that's more than triple the percentage recorded

52:44

about 50 years ago. There's some, supposedly

52:46

there's something like, or it's reported that

52:48

two to three million able-bodied working age

52:51

men between the age of

52:53

25 and 54 are

52:56

not even looking for work. And

52:58

this isn't an economy, I wouldn't even call

53:00

them discouraged workers because this is an economy

53:02

that's pretty much at full

53:05

employment. And these

53:08

men, men who drop out of the

53:10

workforce are more likely

53:12

to suffer from opioid addiction. 44%

53:15

of the men who were out of the workforce said that they

53:18

had to take pain meds and

53:20

more than double the portion recorded in employment.

53:24

And some, whereas when

53:26

work used to be physically really

53:28

demanding work was bad for your health, I think there's

53:31

a lot of evidence now that work is actually good

53:33

for your health. And it's

53:35

just sort of strange to see an

53:38

entire cohort of young men who've decided essentially

53:40

just to drop out. They're kind of sequestering

53:42

from society. These are men that don't date.

53:45

They're not taking care of their parents. They've

53:47

just kind of decided it's like we're evolving to

53:49

a different species. And I think it's something to

53:52

do. I wonder if we're

53:54

becoming as a species or

53:57

at least a component of our species is

53:59

becoming asexual, asexual. social and

54:01

much more prone to conspiracy theory will

54:05

die much sooner. Essentially work

54:07

and usefulness are key to

54:09

health and

54:11

that we're becoming, just becoming

54:13

much more prone to conspiracy theory, thinking

54:16

too much about politics, thinking too much

54:18

about envy and

54:20

really ugly. It's

54:24

just a different wing, a different vestige

54:27

of our society

54:29

that's really unhealthy. And I read this

54:31

and I thought, that would just

54:33

be unthinkable. When I was, the only reason, the only

54:36

excuse you could have when I got out of business

54:38

school, only one in three of us

54:40

had jobs, but in a full

54:42

employment economy to decide not to

54:44

make money, which is a lot of fun, when

54:47

you start making money to decide just to

54:49

opt out, it was just very discouraging. Yep,

54:52

that is. All right, what's your positive

54:54

thing? You could probably guess this one. My

54:56

win is the heroic hostage rescue operation in

54:58

the heart of the Gaza Strip, essentially

55:01

under tremendous

55:03

risks. This

55:07

Israeli operation Saturday involved hundreds of troops

55:09

and heavy air support that

55:12

freed captives, Noah, Argamani, Almagh,

55:15

Meir, Jan 21, Andrei Kozlov 27,

55:20

and Shalom Zif 40 were in good health.

55:23

Casualties from the operation, according to Israeli Defense

55:25

Forces were less than 100. The

55:28

Gaza Ministry of Health has announced 274 deaths,

55:32

but I wanna just shout out

55:35

my win is the heroic IDF operation

55:37

that freed these four

55:39

hostages. Okay, all right,

55:42

I have some different ones. I

55:45

think the European

55:47

elections have been really disturbing for

55:49

a lot of people in Europe. It's really upset,

55:52

it was sort of political establishment, which

55:54

is a shift to the far right.

55:56

They don't control everything, but... And

56:01

Macron in France called

56:03

for snap elections because he's betting

56:06

that they won't, he thinks they're

56:08

angry at him but not letting a far-right

56:10

prime minister head the new French government. But

56:13

the indications are very clear that a lot

56:15

of voters have had it with the established

56:17

political class there and voted with their feet.

56:19

So I think it's a really, it's something

56:22

we should pay attention to here

56:24

in this country. I don't think we're in the

56:27

same place. They certainly have a more established establishment

56:29

than we have. I think we have a

56:31

much more dynamic political establishment

56:33

in that regard. So

56:36

it's really, it's something to pay

56:38

attention to and people should, Biden

56:41

particularly should be paying attention to

56:43

those trends. And

56:46

in a positive thing, I would say

56:48

there's a show on Netflix called Hitman,

56:50

which is by Richard, I think, Linklater.

56:53

Wonderful. Glenn Powell, he's a

56:55

very handsome man, but he's very

56:57

delightful in this movie. He looked, to me, he looked

56:59

like a himbo, essentially, but he's actually, he's been

57:02

in a couple of anybody but

57:04

you, a bunch of movies. He was in Top

57:06

Gun. He was the

57:08

Val Kilmer character in the new

57:10

Top Gun, essentially against

57:12

the other guy. Handsome

57:14

man. He's a handsome man. Anyway,

57:16

I really liked it. I really enjoyed it. Which

57:19

one? What's it called? Hitman. Hitman.

57:22

Oh yeah, I thought it looks really good. Yeah,

57:24

yeah. It's that guy he's dreaming. He's

57:27

dreaming. He's dreaming. But I'm not sure

57:29

I understood your fail. You believe, my

57:31

understanding of what's happening in Europe is there's been a

57:33

lurch to the far right and I think you will

57:35

probably see, you will probably see

57:37

our we-risk, a certain amount of Islamophobia as

57:40

people, I think are going to

57:42

have a pretty negative reaction to some of the things that have

57:44

gone on in this country and they'll, they never kind of, we

57:46

can never kind of figure out a middle speed. We

57:49

kind of lurch from one stream to the other and

57:51

I think that's happening in Europe. But explain again what

57:53

you're worried about. I think our country is a

57:55

little different than Europe. I think they have a

57:57

real heavy political establishment that have been running things.

58:00

long, long time. And so this is an

58:02

expression of that. I think we've had a

58:04

much more dynamic, whether you like it or

58:06

not, Trump, we've had years and years of

58:08

all kinds of different things happening in the

58:11

elections. And here, this is the first time

58:13

you've seen a shakeup of this group. And

58:15

especially in Italy, the party there

58:17

has stuck to power and stuff. So it's just,

58:19

I think, it's just a rightward shift they have

58:21

to be paying attention to, because of all kinds

58:24

of reasons, including immigration and

58:26

all kinds of issues. I think we have

58:28

had a more dynamic, as I said, a

58:30

more dynamic political environment than they do there.

58:32

It's much more stasis. It's interesting

58:34

that Macron called for these snap

58:36

elections. So we'll see

58:38

if they gain power, if they really mean

58:41

it. He doesn't think they really want a

58:43

right wing, a far right prime minister. They

58:45

can have, if the right does well here,

58:47

there can be a president and

58:50

a prime minister who are very different parties,

58:52

who are different parties. So that could be

58:54

interesting. That could be an interesting. So it's

58:56

kind of a split government. We'll

58:59

see. We'll see. It's something to pay attention

59:01

to. All right. We want to hear from

59:03

you. Send us your questions about business tech

59:05

or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com/pivot

59:07

to submit a question for the show or

59:09

call 85551 Pivot. On our

59:12

other pods this week, my interview with

59:14

former Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards is

59:16

out. We're talking about the legal threats

59:18

to women's health care and how Cecile

59:21

is using technology to broaden abortion access

59:23

in red states, just as Donald Trump

59:25

is meeting with some

59:27

figures who want a group

59:29

that wants to completely get

59:31

rid of abortion. He's meeting

59:33

with them or he's going

59:35

in front of them, completely

59:37

get rid of abortions. He's

59:40

really working everybody's last nerve on

59:42

this topic. So we'll

59:44

see. It was really great. Cecile

59:46

also has brain cancer and

59:48

she's been battling it. Just a

59:50

really wonderful and she talked about that quite a bit

59:52

too. She

59:54

found out about maybe just late last

59:56

year. Anyway, Scott, that's the show. We'll

59:58

be back on. Friday with

1:00:00

more. Please read us out. Today's

1:00:03

show was produced by Larry Naman, Zoe Marcus, and

1:00:05

Taylor Griffin. Ernie and her Todd engineered this episode.

1:00:07

Thanks also to Drew Brose and Bill Severio. Nishat

1:00:10

Kuro as Vox Media's Executive Producer of

1:00:12

Audio. Make sure you subscribe to

1:00:14

the show wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening

1:00:16

to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. You

1:00:19

can subscribe to the magazine

1:00:22

at nymag.com/pod. We'll be

1:00:24

back later this week for another breakdown of

1:00:26

all things tech

1:00:28

and business and Pivot. Have a good

1:00:30

rest of the week here. Here.