No disagreement about “dems”. My sincere question…Do you think the press would cover it and risk being attacked by Trump et al? And question #2, do you think any podcast bros would honestly engage in the discussion?
I honestly believe that ship sailed a while ago, but I would be interested in your take.
No disagreement about “dems”. My sincere question…Do you think the press would cover it and risk being attacked by Trump et al? And question #2, do you think any podcast bros would honestly engage in the discussion?
I honestly believe that ship sailed a while ago, but I would be interested in your take.
1) Yes, the media would absolutely cover it, the dems just aren't leveraging their greatest (and only) asset at a time when they are out of power: the microphone. The media got attacked by Trump & Co for the entirety of our timeline going back to 2016 and they will *still* be attacked by Trump & Co whether they carry these messages or not. For fucks sake, Trump goes after *Fox News* whenever they have too many dems on air. And that's actually the side benefit of dems getting their messages out on places like Fox: it drives a fucking wedge between Trump and Fox News whenever dems are on air on Fox talking shit about him and getting that message out to the viewers that Trump *really* doesn't want hearing those messages. What is he gonna do? Pull Fox News' broadcast license? Oh no!
2) Yes, because conflict generates attention and having combative guests on a podcast are a way to guarantee attention. Podcasts (and YouTube channels) live and survive off of generating attention as their revenue comes from advertisements that get selectively placed based upon how many views/listens/clicks said outlets are routinely generating.
No disagreement about “dems”. My sincere question…Do you think the press would cover it and risk being attacked by Trump et al? And question #2, do you think any podcast bros would honestly engage in the discussion?
I honestly believe that ship sailed a while ago, but I would be interested in your take.
1) Yes, the media would absolutely cover it, the dems just aren't leveraging their greatest (and only) asset at a time when they are out of power: the microphone. The media got attacked by Trump & Co for the entirety of our timeline going back to 2016 and they will *still* be attacked by Trump & Co whether they carry these messages or not. For fucks sake, Trump goes after *Fox News* whenever they have too many dems on air. And that's actually the side benefit of dems getting their messages out on places like Fox: it drives a fucking wedge between Trump and Fox News whenever dems are on air on Fox talking shit about him and getting that message out to the viewers that Trump *really* doesn't want hearing those messages. What is he gonna do? Pull Fox News' broadcast license? Oh no!
2) Yes, because conflict generates attention and having combative guests on a podcast are a way to guarantee attention. Podcasts (and YouTube channels) live and survive off of generating attention as their revenue comes from advertisements that get selectively placed based upon how many views/listens/clicks said outlets are routinely generating.
Point 2 is gospel. Should be obvious to elected officials, shouldn't it?
I dig the part 2 answer!