Podcast appearances and mentions of clare malone

Kaitlan Collins was only a couple years out of college when she became a White House correspondent for Tucker Carlson's the Daily Caller. Collins stayed in the White House when she went over to CNN during Donald Trump's first term, and she returned for his second. Trump has made his disdain for CNN clear—and he's not a big fan of Collins, either. At one point during Trump's first term, she was barred from a press conference; he called her a “nasty person” during a Presidential campaign interview. There's never been a White House so overtly hostile to the press than the second Trump Administration, penalizing news organizations for not conforming to the President's wishes. But, as Collins tells the staff writer Clare Malone, she believes that Trump is “someone who seeks the validation of the press as much as he criticizes them publicly. And so, you know, it doesn't really bother me when he gets upset at my question.” Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Kaitlan Collins was only a couple years out of college when she became a White House correspondent for Tucker Carlson's the Daily Caller. Collins stayed in the White House when she went over to CNN during Donald Trump's first term, and she returned for his second. Trump has made his disdain for CNN clear—and he's not a big fan of Collins, either. At one point during Trump's first term, she was barred from a press conference; he called her a “nasty person” during a Presidential campaign interview. There's never been a White House so overtly hostile to the press than the second Trump Administration, penalizing news organizations for not conforming to the President's wishes. But, as Collins tells the staff writer Clare Malone, she believes that Trump is “someone who seeks the validation of the press as much as he criticizes them publicly. And so, you know, it doesn't really bother me when he gets upset at my question.”

Clare Malone, staff writer at The New Yorker covering politics, previews the confirmation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s first of two confirmation hearings as President Donald Trump's nominee for secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Then, Ian Ward, reporter at POLITICO, where he covers the conservative movement and the American right for POLITICO Magazine, discusses the confirmation hearing of Brooke Rollins, President Donald Trump's agriculture secretary nominee and her priorities for USDA.

In case you missed it: back in August 2023 Hugh talked to New Yorker magazine writer Clare Malone about the US presidential election, still then in its early stages. They also discussed the role of legacy media and new media in American politics.This is the first of three back catalogue episodes to come. Inside Politics will return to its regular episodes from January 6th. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tonight on The Last Word: The attorney for witnesses in the Matt Gaetz investigation discusses testimony given to the House Ethics Committee. Also, Democrats urge the House Ethics Committee to release the Gaetz report. Plus, Clare Malone joins Lawrence O'Donnell to discuss the media's challenge covering the second Trump term. Joel Leppard and Andrew Weissmann also join Lawrence O'Donnell.

The New Yorker staff writers Dexter Filkins and Clare Malone join Tyler Foggatt to examine Donald Trump's appointments of former congressman Matt Gaetz and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to his Cabinet.Gaetz, who has been nominated for Attorney General, is one of Trump's most vociferous defenders and the former subject of a sex-trafficking investigation run by the Department of Justice. (Gaetz has denied all allegations.) Trump has chosen Kennedy to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, giving one of the world's most prominent anti-vaccine activists broad powers over public health. How would these men reshape the legal and medical infrastructures of our federal government? And will they even be confirmed?This week's reading: “How Far Would Matt Gaetz Go?,” by Dexter Filkins “R.F.K., Jr.,'s Next Move,” by Clare Malone  “Why Is Elon Musk Really Embracing Donald Trump?,” By John Cassidy  “Trump's Cabinet of Wonders,” by David Remnick “The Most Extreme Cabinet Ever,” by Susan B. Glasser To discover more podcasts from The New Yorker, visit newyorker.com/podcasts. To send feedback on this episode, write to themail@newyorker.com.

In this special episode of The Last Best Hope, we bring you a recording of a live event at the Rothermere American Institute in Oxford on Thursday, November 7. Adam Smith and guests discussed why the election turned out the way it did. The panellists are:Jason Casellas ABC News election decision desk. Jason Casellas is an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Houston. He is an expert in Latino politics and has published widely on state and local politics.Clare Malone New Yorker staff writer. Clare Malone reports on politics, media, and journalism for the New Yorker. She previously covered both the 2016 and 2020 Presidential campaigns as a senior political writer for FiveThirtyEight.Mike Murphy Republican political strategist and media consultant. Mike Murphy has worked on the presidential campaigns of George H.W. Bush and John McCain. He also co-hosts the popular politics podcast Hacks on Tap with David Axelrod.Kimberley Johnson John G. Winant Visiting Professor of American Government. Kimberley Johnson is a Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis at New York University and an expert on racial and ethnic, and suburban and urban politics. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Four years after refusing to accept defeat and encouraging a violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Donald J. Trump has once again been elected President of the United States. The former President, who in the past year alone has been convicted of a felony and has survived two assassination attempts, campaigned largely on a platform of mass deportations, trade wars, and retribution for his detractors. On Tuesday, he secured the Presidency thanks to a surge of rural voters, high turnout among young men, and unprecedented gains with Black and Latino populations. What does a second Trump term mean for America? Clare Malone and Jay Caspian Kang, who've been covering the election for The New Yorker, join Tyler Foggatt to discuss how we got here, and the uncertain future of the Democratic Party.This week's reading: “Donald Trump's Revenge,” by Susan B. Glasser The Americans Prepping for a Second Civil War, by Charles Bethea What's the Matter with Young Male Voters?, by Jay Caspian Kang  Tune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

The author of several excellent books about the history of American conservatism, including The Invisible Bridge, Nixonland, and Reaganland, Rick Perlstein makes his triumphant return to Know Your Enemy. Drawing on Rick's wealth of historical knowledge, as well as his American Prospect column — entitled "The Infernal Triangle" — we explore the failures of American media elites and the Democratic Party to reckon with Donald Trump and his antecedents on the far right. What are the habits and genres of American journalism that inhibit an adequate accounting of Trump's rise and influence? Why do Democrats tend to adopt "conservatism lite," when faced with a far right opponent? How has Rick's perspective on studying the right changed since he began his work in the 1990s?  And how will future historians make sense of these times? Listen to find out! Further ReadingRick Perlstein, Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus, (2009)— "I Thought I Understood the American Right. Trump Proved Me Wrong." New York Times, Apr 11, 2017. — "The Polling Imperilment," American Prospect, Sept 25, 2024.— "The Election Story Nobody Wants to Talk About," American Prospect, Aug 28, 2024.— "Project 2025 … and 1921, and 1973, and 1981," American Prospect, Jul 10, 2024. W. Joseph Campbell, Lost in a Gallup: Polling Failure in U.S. Presidential Elections, (2020)Isaac Arnsdorf, Finish What We Started: The MAGA Movement's Ground War to End Democracy, (2023)Phoebe Petrovic, "Right-Wing Activists Pushed False Claims About Election Fraud. Now They're Recruiting Poll Workers in Swing States." ProPublica / Wisconsin Watch, Oct 16, 2024.Clare Malone, "The Face of Donald Trump's Deceptively Savvy Media Strategy," New Yorker, Mar 25, 2024.Matthew Sitman, "Will Be Wild: Reading the January 6th Committee Report," Dissent, Apr 18, 2023.Listen Again: "On the Road to Reaganland" (w/ Rick Perlstein and Leon Neyfakh), Oct 21, 2020 "The History of the History of the Right" (w/ Kim Phillips-Fein), Jan 17, 2024...and don't forget to subscribe to Know Your Enemy on Patreon to listen to all of our bonus episodes!

The first and only Vice-Presidential Debate of the 2024 campaign was mostly cordial, but J. D. Vance's smooth performance tried to soften the sharper edges of Trumpism in a conversation that stretched from climate policy to child care, gun control, the Middle East, and January 6th. However, with polls tightening and barely a month till Election Day, can Vance's efforts compensate for Donald Trump's poor debate with Kamala Harris, last month? The New Yorker staff writers Clare Malone and Vinson Cunningham sit down with Tyler Foggatt to recap the Vice-Presidential debate and consider its potential impact on what may be the closest election in decades. This week's reading:“Live Updates: The 2024 Vice-Presidential Debate Between Tim Walz and J. D. Vance” by New Yorker Staff WritersTune in to The Political Scene wherever you get your podcasts.

Tuesday's debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump brought fierce exchanges over immigration, abortion and foreign policy, and showed that America's global role matters in this election. Bronwen Maddox is joined by David Weigel from Semafor and Clare Malone from the New Yorker to discuss what we learned and what to watch in the rest of the race. With them is Heather Hurlburt, associate fellow of our US and Americas programme. Read our latest: The Harris–Trump debate showed US foreign policy matters in this election The US election will take place in a polluted information space US dollar dominance is both a cause and a consequence of US power Presented by Bronwen Maddox. Produced by John Pollock. Read the latest issue of The World Today

Kamala Harris successfully prosecuted a case against Donald Trump on issues ranging from abortion to the January 6th insurrection at last night's debate in Philadelphia. How will that fare with voters against Trump's “fan service” recitation of Internet conspiracies? Tyler Foggatt sits down with the New Yorker staff writers Clare Malone and Vinson Cunningham to examine each candidate's performance, along with a surprise Taylor Swift endorsement for Harris, and what it means with less than two months until Election Day. 

The New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone's Profile, What Does Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Actually Want? sheds light on Kennedy's position in this Presidential race—and it also solves a ten-year-old mystery about a dead bear cub found in Central Park. On Sunday, Kennedy tried to get ahead of the publication of Malone's story by relating the bizarre scheme (involving roadkill, falconry, dangerous bike lanes, and more) in a video that he released on social media. David Remnick talks with Malone about Kennedy's highly unusual candidacy, and why he's staying in the race.

Clare Malone of the New Yorker discusses Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s unusual campaign. It doesn’t look like America is in a recession. Greg Ip of the Wall Street Journal examines why, and explains how one could happen. CNN reports on how the alleged Taylor Swift terror plot fits a worrying pattern of ISIS radicalizing teens online. U.S. Olympic figure skaters received gold medals in Paris after a 912-day delay. The Athletic has the story. Romania appealed the gymnastics results that led to American Jordan Chiles winning bronze ahead of Romanian competitors. The Today Show has more. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.

The movement to persuade President Biden—long after the primaries—to drop out of the Presidential race is unprecedented. So is the candidacy of a convicted felon. But this election season went from startling to shocking with the assassination attempt on Donald Trump and the death of a bystander. Despite the unknowns, the contours of the race are becoming clear, the CNN data journalist Harry Enten tells Clare Malone. President Biden's support in national polls following his disastrous performance in the June debate slipped just slightly. But in key swing states, Biden's support has ebbed to a point that has terrified Democrats. Malone spoke with Enten while he was covering the Republican National Convention, in Milwaukee. She asked Enten about how the attempt on Ronald Reagan's life affected his favorability. Malone also spoke with the highly regarded pollster Ann Selzer, who runs polling for the Des Moines Register. Selzer explains how the polls know what they know—even when so many people don't pick up their phones. 

At the beginning of 2021, it seemed like America might be turning a new page; instead, the election of 2024 feels like a strange dream that we can't wake up from. Recently, David Remnick asked listeners what's still confounding and confusing about this Presidential election. Dozens of listeners wrote in from all over the country, and a crack team of political writers at The New Yorker came together to shed some light on those questions: Susan B. Glasser, Jill Lepore, Clare Malone, Andrew Marantz, Evan Osnos, Kelefa Sanneh, and Benjamin Wallace-Wells. Some years ago, the poet Ada Limón moved from New York City to Lexington, Kentucky. In a book called “Bright Dead Things,” she writes about adjusting to a new home, and the constant talk of thoroughbreds. “People always asking, ‘You have so many horses in your poems—what are they a metaphor for?' ” she told the Radio Hour. “I think they're not really a metaphor. Out here, they're just horses.” Limón, who's the current Poet Laureate of the United States, took us on a tour of Keeneland racecourse, in Lexington, and read her poem “How to Triumph Like a Girl.”This segment originally aired on April 13, 2018. 

At the beginning of 2021, it seemed like America might be turning a new page; instead, the election of 2024 feels like a strange dream that we can't wake up from. Recently, David Remnick asked listeners what's still confounding and confusing about this Presidential election. Dozens of listeners wrote in from all over the country, and a crack team of political writers at The New Yorker came together to shed some light on those questions: Susan B. Glasser, Jill Lepore, Clare Malone, Andrew Marantz, Evan Osnos, Kelefa Sanneh, and Benjamin Wallace-Wells.

The New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone joins Tyler Foggatt to analyze how President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump are being skewered on social-media platforms like TikTok and Instagram. She discusses our shifting media habits, why the 2016 election is surfacing in new contexts online, and how both campaigns are relying on algorithms to gain momentum ahead of November.This episode originally aired on January 31, 2024. This week's reading: “The Meme-ification of American Politics,” by Clare Malone  “What the Doomsayers Get Wrong About Deepfakes,” by Daniel Immerwahr To discover more podcasts from The New Yorker, visit newyorker.com/podcasts. To send feedback on this episode, write to themail@newyorker.com.

Hats Off To This Week's Contributors: @RyanMorrisonJer, @geneteare, @mgsiegler, @spyglass_feed, @saulausterlitz, @ClareMalone, @benedictevans, @mikeloukides, @ErikNaso, @kateclarktweets, @finkd, @mattbirchler, @imillhiser, @jaygoldberg, @ron_miller, @btaylor, @sierraplatform, @eladgilContents* Editorial: * Essays of the Week* AI Leads New Unicorn Creation As Ranks Of $1B Startups Swells * Behold: The Sports Streaming Bundle* 40 Years Ago, This Ad Changed the Super Bowl Forever* Is the Media Prepared for an Extinction-Level Event?* Video of the Week* AI and Everything Else - Benedict Evans from Slush* AI of the Week* The OpenAI Endgame* OpenAI Sora– The most realistic AI-generated video to date* I Was Wrong. We Haven't Reached Peak AI Frenzy.* News Of the Week* I tried Vision Pro. Here's my take* The Quest 3 is better than you might expect* The Supreme Court will decide if the government can seize control of YouTube and Twitter* Arm Results Set The World On Fire* Startup of the Week* Bret Taylor's new AI company aims to help customers get answers and complete tasks automatically* X of the Week* Elad Gil on AIEditorial: And The Oscar Goes to SoraOpenAI teased its new video creation model - Sora - this week.In doing so it released a technical report and several examples of prompts and outputs.Cautious to not over-state the end game the company said:We explore large-scale training of generative models on video data. Specifically, we train text-conditional diffusion models jointly on videos and images of variable durations, resolutions and aspect ratios. We leverage a transformer architecture that operates on spacetime patches of video and image latent codes. Our largest model, Sora, is capable of generating a minute of high fidelity video. Our results suggest that scaling video generation models is a promising path towards building general purpose simulators of the physical world.All of the videos are incredible, albeit only a minute or less each. My favorite is the Dogs in Snow video:Although the ‘Closeup Man in Glasses' is also wonderful.I mention this because the speed at which AI is addressing new fields is - in my opinion - mind-boggling. Skills that take humans decades to perfect are being learned in months and are capable of scaling to infinite outputs using words, code, images, video, and sound.It will take the advancement of robotics to tie these capabilities to physical work, but that seems assured to happen.When engineering, farming, transport, or production meets AI then human needs can be addressed directly.Sora winning an Oscar for Cinematography or in producing from a script or a book seems far-fetched. But it wasn't so long ago that a tech company doing so would have been laughable, and now we have Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Apple TV Plus regularly being nominated or winning awards.Production will increasingly be able to leverage AI.Some will say this is undermining human skills, but I think the opposite. It will release human skills. Take the prompt that produced the Dogs in Snow video:Prompt:A litter of golden retriever puppies playing in the snow. Their heads pop out of the snow, covered in.I can imagine that idea and write it down. But my skills would not allow me to produce it. Sora opens my imagination and enables me to act on it. I guess that many humans have creative ideas that they are unable to execute….up to now. Sora, DallE, and ChatGPT all focus on releasing human potential.Google released its Gemini 1.5 model this week (less than a month after releasing Gemini Ultra 1.0). Tom's Guide has a summary and analysis by Ryan MorrisonGemini Pro 1.5 has a staggering 10 million token context length. That is the amount of content it can store in its memory for a single chat or response. This is enough for hours of video or multiple books within a single conversation, and Google says it can find any piece of information within that window with a high level of accuracy.Jeff Dean, Google DeepMind Chief Scientist wrote on X that the model also comes with advanced multimodal capabilities across code, text, image, audio and video.He wrote that this means you can “interact in sophisticated ways with entire books, very long document collections, codebases of hundreds of thousands of lines across hundreds of files, full movies, entire podcast series, and more."In “needle-in-a-haystack” testing where they look for the needle in the vast amount of data stored in the context window, they were able to find specific pieces of information with 99.7% accuracy even with 10 million tokens of data.All of this makes it easy to understand why Kate Clark at The Information penned a piece with the title: I Was Wrong. We Haven't Reached Peak AI FrenzyI will leave this week's editorial with Ryan Morrison's observation at the end of his article:What we are seeing with these advanced multimodal models is the interaction of the digital and the real, where AI is gaining a deeper understanding of humanity and how WE see the world.Essays of the WeekAI Leads New Unicorn Creation As Ranks Of $1B Startups Swells  February 13, 2024Gené Teare @geneteareFewer startups became unicorns in 2023, but The Crunchbase Unicorn Board also became more crowded, as exits became even scarcer.That means that 10 years after the term “unicorn” was coined to denote those private startups valued at $1 billion or more, there are over 1,500 current unicorn companies globally, collectively valued at more than $5 trillion based on their most recent valuations from funding deals.All told, fewer than 100 companies joined the Unicorn Board in 2023, the lowest count in more than five years, an analysis of Crunchbase data shows.Of the 95 companies that joined the board in 2023, AI was the leading sector, adding 20 new unicorns alone. Other leading unicorn sectors in 2023 included fintech (with 14 companies), cleantech and energy (12 each), and semiconductors (nine).Based on an analysis of Crunchbase data, 41 companies joined the Unicorn Board from the U.S. and 24 from China in 2023. Other countries were in the single digits for new unicorns: Germany had four new companies, while India and the U.K. each had three.New records nonethelessDespite the slower pace of new unicorns, the Crunchbase board of current private unicorns has reached new milestones as fewer companies exited the board in 2023.The total number of global unicorns on our board reached 1,500 at the start of 2024, which takes into account the exclusion of those that have exited via an M&A or IPO transaction. Altogether, these private unicorn companies have raised north of $900 billion from investors.This year also marks a decade since investor Aileen Lee of Cowboy Ventures coined the term unicorn for private companies valued at a billion dollars or more.In a new report looking at the unicorn landscape 10 years later, Lee said she believes the unicorn phenomenon is not going away, despite a sharp downturn in venture funding in recent years. She expects more than 1,000 new companies in the U.S. alone will join the ranks in the next decade.Unicorn exitsIn 2023, 10 unicorn companies exited the board via an IPO, far fewer than in recent years. That contrasts with 20 companies in 2022 and 113 in 2021.However, M&A was more active in 2023. Sixteen unicorn companies were acquired in 2023 — up from 2022 when 11 companies were acquired and slightly down from 2021 with 21 companies exiting via an acquisition.December numbersEight new companies joined The Crunchbase Unicorn Board in December 2023. The highest monthly count last year for new unicorns was 10 and the lowest was two.Of the new unicorns, three are artificial intelligence companies. Other sectors that minted unicorns in December include fintech, cybersecurity, food and beverage, and health care.The new unicorn companies minted in December 2023 were:..MoreBehold: The Sports Streaming BundleIt just makes sense. Sports was the last thing holding together the cable TV bundle. Now it will be the start of the streaming bundle.That's my 5-minute reaction to the truly huge news that Disney, Warner, and Fox are launching a new sports streaming service, combining their various sports rights into one package. Well, presumably. The details are still quite thin at this point. Clearly, several entities were racing to this story, with both WSJ and Bloomberg claiming "scoops" by publishing paragraph-long stories with only the high level facts. I'm linking to Varietyabove, which at least has a few more details, including (canned) quotes from Bob Iger, Lachlan Murdoch, and David Zaslav.Fox Corp., Warner Bros. Discovery and Disney are set to launch a new streaming joint venture that will make all of their sports programming available under a single broadband roof, a move that will put content from ESPN, TNT and Fox Sports on a new standalone app and, in the process, likely shake up the world of TV sports.The three media giants are slated to launch the new service in the fall. Subscribers would get access to linear sports networks including ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, SECN, ACCN, ESPNEWS, ABC, Fox, FS1, FS2, BTN, TNT, TBS, truTV and ESPN+, as well as hundreds of hours from the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL and many top college divisions. Pricing will be announced at a later date.Each company would own one third of the new outlet and license their sports content to it on a non-exclusive basis. The service would have a new brand and an independent management teamYes, this is essentially running the Hulu playbook of old, but only for sports content. No, that ultimately didn't end well, but Hulu had a decent enough run before egos got involved.1 Here, the egos are once again being (at least temporarily) set aside to do something obvious: make money. Sports is the one bit of content that most people watch in one form or another, live no less (hence why it was keeping the cable bundle together). And increasingly, with the rise of streaming, it was becoming impossible to figure out what game was on, where. You could get access to most games online now, but it might require buying four or five different services. And again, then finding which one the game you wanted was actually on...More40 Years Ago, This Ad Changed the Super Bowl ForeverAn oral history of Apple's groundbreaking “1984” spot, which helped to establish the Super Bowl as TV's biggest commercial showcase.By Saul AusterlitzPublished Feb. 9, 2024Updated Feb. 10, 2024Four decades ago, the Super Bowl became the Super Bowl.It wasn't because of anything that happened in the game itself: On Jan. 22, 1984, the Los Angeles Raiders defeated Washington 38-9 in Super Bowl XVIII, a contest that was mostly over before halftime. But during the broadcast on CBS, a 60-second commercial loosely inspired by a famous George Orwell novel shook up the advertising and the technology sectors without ever showing the product it promoted. Conceived by the Chiat/Day ad agency and directed by Ridley Scott, then fresh off making the seminal science-fiction noir “Blade Runner,” the Apple commercial “1984,” which was intended to introduce the new Macintosh computer, would become one of the most acclaimed commercials ever made. It also helped to kick off — pun partially intended — the Super Bowl tradition of the big game serving as an annual showcase for gilt-edged ads from Fortune 500 companies. It all began with the Apple co-founder Steve Jobs's desire to take the battle with the company's rivals to a splashy television broadcast he knew nothing about.In recent interviews, several of the people involved in creating the “1984” spot — Scott; John Sculley, then chief executive of Apple; Steve Hayden, a writer of the ad for Chiat/Day; Fred Goldberg, the Apple account manager for Chiat/Day; and Anya Rajah, the actor who famously threw the sledgehammer — looked back on how the commercial came together, its inspiration and the internal objections that almost kept it from airing. These are edited excerpts from the conversations.JOHN SCULLEY On Oct. 19, 1983, we're all sitting around in Steve [Jobs's] building, the Mac building, and the cover of Businessweek says, “The Winner is … IBM.” We were pretty deflated because this was the introduction of the IBM PCjr, and we hadn't even introduced the Macintosh yet.STEVE HAYDEN Jobs said, “I want something that will stop the world in its tracks.” Our media director, Hank Antosz, said, “Well, there's only one place that can do that — the Super Bowl.” And Steve Jobs said, “What's the Super Bowl?” [Antosz] said, “Well, it's a huge football game that attracts one of the largest audiences of the year.” And [Jobs] said, “I've never seen a Super Bowl. I don't think I know anybody who's seen a Super Bowl.”FRED GOLDBERG The original idea was actually done in 1982. We presented an ad [with] a headline, which was “Why 1984 Won't Be Like ‘1984,'” to Steve Jobs, and he didn't think the Apple III was worthy of that claim...MoreIs the Media Prepared for an Extinction-Level Event?Ads are scarce, search and social traffic is dying, and readers are burned out. The future will require fundamentally rethinking the press's relationship to its audience.Clare MaloneFebruary 10, 2024My first job in media was as an assistant at The American Prospect, a small political magazine in Washington, D.C., that offered a promising foothold in journalism. I helped with the print order, mailed checks to writers—after receiving lots of e-mails asking, politely, Where is my money?—and ran the intern program. This last responsibility allowed me a small joy: every couple of weeks, a respected journalist would come into the office for a brown-bag lunch in our conference room, giving our most recent group of twentysomethings a chance to ask for practical advice about “making it.” One man told us to embrace a kind of youthful workaholism, before we became encumbered by kids and families. An investigative reporter implored us to file our taxes and to keep our personal lives in order—never give the rich and powerful a way to undercut your journalism. But perhaps the most memorable piece of advice was from a late-career writer who didn't mince words. You want to make it in journalism, he said? Marry rich. We laughed. He didn't.I've thought a lot about that advice in the past year. A report that tracked layoffs in the industry in 2023 recorded twenty-six hundred and eighty-one in broadcast, print, and digital news media. NBC News, Vox Media, Vice News, Business Insider, Spotify, theSkimm, FiveThirtyEight, The Athletic, and Condé Nast—the publisher of The New Yorker—all made significant layoffs. BuzzFeed News closed, as did Gawker. The Washington Post, which lost about a hundred million dollars last year, offered buyouts to two hundred and forty employees. In just the first month of 2024, Condé Nast laid off a significant number of Pitchfork's staff and folded the outlet into GQ; the Los Angeles Times laid off at least a hundred and fifteen workers (their union called it “the big one”); Time cut fifteen per cent of its union-represented editorial staff; the Wall Street Journal slashed positions at its D.C. bureau; and Sports Illustrated, which had been weathering a scandal for publishing A.I.-generated stories, laid off much of its staff as well. One journalist recently cancelled a networking phone call with me, writing, “I've decided to officially take my career in a different direction.” There wasn't much I could say to counter that conclusion; it was perfectly logical.“Publishers, brace yourselves—it's going to be a wild ride,” Matthew Goldstein, a media consultant, wrote in a January newsletter. “I see a potential extinction-level event in the future.” Some of the forces cited by Goldstein were already well known: consumers are burned out by the news, and social-media sites have moved away from promoting news articles. But Goldstein also pointed to Google's rollout of A.I.-integrated search, which answers user queries within the Google interface, rather than referring them to outside Web sites, as a major factor in this coming extinction. According to a recent Wall Street Journalanalysis, Google generates close to forty per cent of traffic across digital media. Brands with strong home-page traffic will likely be less affected, Goldstein wrote—places like Yahoo, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Daily Mail, CNN, the Washington Post, and Fox News. But Web sites that aren't as frequently typed into browsers need to “contemplate drastic measures, possibly halving their brand portfolios.”What will emerge in the wake of mass extinction, Brian Morrissey, another media analyst, recently wrote in his newsletter, “The Rebooting,” is “a different industry, leaner and diminished, often serving as a front operation to other businesses,” such as events, e-commerce, and sponsored content. In fact, he told me, what we are witnessing is nothing less than the end of the mass-media era. “This is a delayed reaction to the commercial Internet itself,” he said. “I don't know if anything could have been done differently.”..Much MoreVideo of the WeekAI and Everything Else - Benedict Evans from SlushAI of the WeekThe OpenAI EndgameThoughts about the outcome of the NYT versus OpenAI copyright lawsuitBy Mike LoukidesFebruary 13, 2024Since the New York Times sued OpenAI for infringing its copyrights by using Times content for training, everyone involved with AI has been wondering about the consequences. How will this lawsuit play out? And, more importantly, how will the outcome affect the way we train and use large language models?There are two components to this suit. First, it was possible to get ChatGPT to reproduce some Times articles very close to verbatim. That's fairly clearly copyright infringement, though there are still important questions that could influence the outcome of the case. Reproducing the New York Times clearly isn't the intent of ChatGPT, and OpenAI appears to have modified ChatGPT's guardrails to make generating infringing content more difficult, though probably not impossible. Is this enough to limit any damages? It's not clear that anybody has used ChatGPT to avoid paying for a NYT subscription. Second, the examples in a case like this are always cherry-picked. While the Times can clearly show that OpenAI can reproduce some articles, can it reproduce any article from the Times' archive? Could I get ChatGPT to produce an article from page 37 of the September 18, 1947 issue? Or, for that matter, an article from the Chicago Tribune or the Boston Globe? Is the entire corpus available (I doubt it), or just certain random articles? I don't know, and given that OpenAI has modified GPT to reduce the possibility of infringement, it's almost certainly too late to do that experiment. The courts will have to decide whether inadvertent, inconsequential, or unpredictable reproduction meets the legal definition of copyright infringement.The more important claim is that training a model on copyrighted content is infringement, whether or not the model is capable of reproducing that training data in its output. An inept and clumsy version of this claim was made by Sarah Silverman and others in a suit that was dismissed. The Authors' Guild has its own version of this lawsuit, and it is working on a licensing model that would allow its members to opt in to a single licensing agreement. The outcome of this case could have many side-effects, since it essentially would allow publishers to charge not just for the texts they produce, but for how those texts are used.It is difficult to predict what the outcome will be, though easy enough guess. Here's mine. OpenAI will settle with the New York Times out of court, and we won't get a ruling. This settlement will have important consequences: it will set a de-facto price on training data. And that price will no doubt be high. Perhaps not as high as the Times would like (there are rumors that OpenAI has offered something in the range of $1 million to $5 million), but sufficiently high enough to deter OpenAI's competitors.$1M is not, in and of itself, a terribly high price, and the Times reportedly thinks that it's way too low; but realize that OpenAI will have to pay a similar amount to almost every major newspaper publisher worldwide in addition to organizations like the Authors Guild, technical journal publishers, magazine publishers, and many other content owners. The total bill is likely to be close to $1 billion, if not more, and as models need to be updated, at least some of it will be a recurring cost. I suspect that OpenAI would have difficulty going higher, even given Microsoft's investments—and, whatever else you may think of this strategy—OpenAI has to think about the total cost. I doubt that they are close to profitable; they appear to be running on an Uber-like business plan, in which they spend heavily to buy the market without regard for running a sustainable business. But even with that business model, billion-dollar expenses have to raise the eyebrows of partners like Microsoft.The Times, on the other hand, appears to be making a common mistake: overvaluing its data. Yes, it has a large archive—but what is the value of old news? Furthermore, in almost any application but especially in AI, the value of data isn't the data itself; it's the correlations between different datasets. The Times doesn't own those correlations any more than I own the correlations between my browsing data and Tim O'Reilly's. But those correlations are precisely what's valuable to OpenAI and others building data-driven products...MoreOpenAI Sora– The most realistic AI-generated video to dateERIK NASOOpenAI Sora is an AI text-to-video model that has achieved incredibly realistic video that is hard to tell it is AI. It's very life-like but not real. I think we have just hit the beginning of some truly powerful AI-generated video that could change the game for stock footage and more. Below are two examples of the most realistic AI prompt-generated videos I have seen.Prompt: A stylish woman walks down a Tokyo street filled with warm glowing neon and animated city signage. She wears a black leather jacket, a long red dress, and black boots, and carries a black purse. She wears sunglasses and red lipstick. She walks confidently and casually. The street is damp and reflective, creating a mirror effect of the colorful lights. Many pedestrians walk about.Prompt: Drone view of waves crashing against the rugged cliffs along Big Sur's garay point beach. The crashing blue waters create white-tipped waves, while the golden light of the setting sun illuminates the rocky shore. A small island with a lighthouse sits in the distance, and green shrubbery covers the cliff's edge. The steep drop from the road down to the beach is a dramatic feat, with the cliff's edges jutting out over the sea. This is a view that captures the raw beauty of the coast and the rugged landscape of the Pacific Coast Highway.Prompt: Animated scene features a close-up of a short fluffy monster kneeling beside a melting red candle. The art style is 3D and realistic, with a focus on lighting and texture. The mood of the painting is one of wonder and curiosity, as the monster gazes at the flame with wide eyes and open mouth. Its pose and expression convey a sense of innocence and playfulness, as if it is exploring the world around it for the first time. The use of warm colors and dramatic lighting further enhances the cozy atmosphere of the image.Sora can generate videos up to a minute long while maintaining visual quality and adherence to the user's prompt. OpenAI SOra states they are teaching AI to understand and simulate the physical world in motion, with the goal of training models that help people solve problems that require real-world interaction...MoreI Was Wrong. We Haven't Reached Peak AI Frenzy.By Kate ClarkFeb 15, 2024, 4:16pm PSTAfter Sam Altman's sudden firing last year, I argued the chaos that followed his short-lived ouster would inject a healthy dose of caution into venture investments in artificial intelligence companies. I figured we'd finally reached the peak of the AI venture capital frenzy when a threatened employee exodus from OpenAI risked sending the value of the $86 billion AI juggernaut almost to zero. There was plenty of other proof that the hype for generative AI was fading. Investors were openly saying they planned to be a lot tougher on valuation negotiations and would ask startups harder questions about governance. Some companies had begun to consider selling themselves due to the high costs of developing AI software. And an early darling of the AI boom, AI-powered writing tool Jasper, had become the butt of jokes when it slashed internal revenue projections and cut its internal valuation after having won a $1.5 billion valuation in 2022. I forgot that everyone in Silicon Valley suffers from short-term memory loss. After a week sipping boxed water with venture capitalists from South Park to Sand Hill Road, I'm convinced I called the end of the AI frenzy far too soon. In fact, I expect this year will deliver more cash into the hands of U.S. AI startups than last year, when those companies raised a total of $63 billion, according to PitchBook data. Altman's fundraising ambitions will surely boost the total. A recent report from The Wall Street Journal said Altman plans to raise trillions of dollars to develop the AI chips needed to create artificial general intelligence, software that can reason the way humans do. Even if that number is actually much smaller, talk of such goals lifts the ceiling for other startup founders, who are  likely to think even bigger and to be more aggressive in their fundraising. Investor appetite for AI companies is still growing, too. These investors claimed last fall that they were done with the FOMO-inspired deals, but they're pushing checks on the top AI companies now harder than ever...MoreNews Of the WeekI tried Vision Pro. Here's my takeThe Quest 3 is better than you might expectPosted by Matt Birchler13 Feb 2024Alex Heath for The Verge: Zuckerberg says Quest 3 is “the better product” vs. Apple's Vision ProHe says the Quest has a better “immersive” content library than Apple, which is technically true for now, though he admits that the Vision Pro is a better entertainment device. And then there's the fact that the Quest 3 is, as Zuck says, “like seven times less expensive.”I currently own both headsets and while I'm very excited about the potential in the Vision Pro, I actually find it hard to fully disagree with Zuck on this one. I think a lot of people have only used the Vision Pro would be surprised how well the Quest 3 does some things in comparison.For example, the pass-through mode is definitely not quite as good as the Vision Pro's, but it's closer than you might expect. And while people are rightly impressed with how well the Vision Pro has windows locked in 3D space, honestly the Quest 3 is just as good at this in my experience. When it comes to comfort, I do think the Vision Pro is easier to wear for longer periods, but I find it more finicky to get in just the right spot in front of my eyes, while the Quest 3 seems to have a larger sweet spot. And let's not even talk about the field of view, which is way wider on the Quest to the point of being unnoticeable basically all the time. I kinda think field of view will be similar to phone bezels in that you get used to what you have and anything more seems huge — you can get used to the Vision Pro's narrower field of view, but once you're used to wider, it's hard to not notice when going back.The Vision Pro has some hardware features that help it rise above (the massively higher resolution screen jumps to mind), but I'm just saying that if you're looking for everything to be 7x better to match the price difference, I don't think that's there.Beyond this, the products are quite different, though. As Zuckerberg says, the Quest 3 is more focused on fully immersive VR experiences, and while the Vision Pro has a little of that right now, it's not really doing the same things. And when it comes to gaming it's not even close. The Quest 3 has a large library of games available and that expands to almost every VR game ever made with Steam Link.On the other hand, the Vision Pro is much for a “computer” than the Quest ever was. If you can do it on a Mac or an iPad, you can probably already do it on the Vision Pro. And I'm not talking about finding some weird alternate version of your task manager or web browser that doesn't sync with anything else in your life, I'm talking about the apps you already know and love. This is huge and it's Apple leveraging its ecosystem to make sure you can seamlessly move from Mac to iPhone to iPad to Vision Pro. And if you can't install something from the App Store, the web browser is just as capable as Safari on the iPad. If all else fails, you can always just bring your full Mac into your space as well. I will say the Quest 3 can do this and has the advantage of working with Windows as well, but if you have a Mac, it's much, much better.This is more words than I expected to write about a CEO saying his product is better than the competition's (shocker), but I do think that Zuck's statement is less insane than some may think it to be...MoreThe Supreme Court will decide if the government can seize control of YouTube and TwitterWe're about to find out if the Supreme Court still believes in capitalism.By Ian Millhiser Feb 15, 2024, 7:00am ESTIan Millhiser is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. He received a JD from Duke University and is the author of two books on the Supreme Court.In mid-2021, about a year before he began his longstanding feud with the biggest employer in his state, Florida's Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation attempting to seize control of content moderation at major social media platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter (now called X by Elon Musk). A few months later, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, also a Republican, signed similar legislation in his state.Both laws are almost comically unconstitutional — the First Amendment does not permit the government to order media companies to publish content they do not wish to publish — and neither law is currently in effect. A federal appeals court halted the key provisions of Florida's law in 2022, and the Supreme Court temporarily blocked Texas's law shortly thereafter (though the justices, somewhat ominously, split 5-4 in this later case).Nevertheless, the justices have not yet weighed in on whether these two unconstitutional laws must be permanently blocked, and that question is now before the Court in a pair of cases known as Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton.The stakes in both cases are quite high, and the Supreme Court's decision is likely to reveal where each one of the Republican justices falls on the GOP's internal conflict between old-school free market capitalists and a newer generation that is eager to pick cultural fights with business...MoreArm Results Set The World On FireFebruary 13, 2024 · by D/D Advisors · in Analyst Decoder Ring. ·Arm reported its second set of earnings as a (once again) public company last week. These numbers were particularly strong, well above consensus for both the current and guided quarters. Arm stock rallied strongly on the results up ~30% for the week. These numbers were important as they go a long way to establishing the company's credibility with the Street in a way their prior results did not.That being said, we saw things we both liked and disliked in their numbers. Here are our highlights of those:Positive: Growing Value Capture. One of our chief concerns with the company since IPO has been the low value they capture per licensed chip shipped – roughly $0.11 per chip at the IPO. That figure continued to inch higher in the latest results, but critically they pointed out that their royalty rate doubles with the latest version of their IP (v9). This does not mean that all of their royalty rates are going to double any time soon, but it does point very much in the right direction. Critically, they noted this rate increase applies to architectural licenses as well.Negative: The Model is Complex. Judging from the number of questions management fielded on the call about this rate increase no one really knows how to model Arm. The company has a lot of moving parts in its revenue mix, and they have limits to their ability to communicate some very important parts of their model. We think that at some point the company would be well served by providing some clearer guide posts on how to build these models or they risk the Street always playing catch up with a wide swing of expectations each quarter.Positive: Premium Plan Conversion. The company said three companies converted from their AFA plan to the ATA model. We will not get into the details of those here, but these can best be thought of in software terms with customers on low priced subscription plans converting to Premium subscription plans. This is a good trend, and management expressed a high degree of confidence that they expect to see it continue. They have spent a few years putting these programs in place and seem to have thought them through. This matters particularly because these programs are well suited for smaller, earlier-stage companies. The old Arm struggled to attract new customers in large part because of the high upfront costs of Arm licenses. Programs like AFA and ATA could go a long way to redressing those past wrongs.Negative: China remains a black box. Arm China is of course a constant source of speculation. In the latest quarter it looks like a large portion of growth came from China which does not exactly square with other data coming from China right now. It is still unclear to us how much of Arm's revenues from China's handset companies gets booked through Arm China as a related party transaction and how much is direct. Investors are confused too. There is no easy solution to this problem, digging too hard into Arm China's numbers is unlikely to make anyone happy with the answers, but hopefully over time it all settles down.Positive: Growing Complexity of Compute. Management repeatedly mentioned this factor, noting that this leads to more chips and more Arm cores shipping in the marketplace. Some of this is tied to AI, but we think the story is broader than that. It is going to be tempting to see much of Arm's growth as riding the AI wave, but this does not fully capture the situation. The AI story is largely about GPUs, which are not particularly heavy with Arm cores. But those GPUs still need some CPU attach, and AI accelerators can sometimes be good Arm targets.Negative: Diversification. Arm remains heavily dependent on smartphones, and we suspect the return to inventory stocking by handset makers is playing a big role in their guidance. When asked about segmentation of their results the company declined to update the model provided during the IPO. We hope to see some diversification here when they do update their figures later in the year.Overall, the company did a good job in the quarter. They still have some kinks to work out with their communication to the Street, but this was a good second step as a public company...MoreStartup of the WeekBret Taylor's new AI company aims to help customers get answers and complete tasks automaticallyRon Miller @ron_miller / 6:36 AM PST•February 13, 2024Image Credits: mi-vector / Getty ImagesWe've been hearing about former Salesforce co-CEO Bret Taylor's latest gig since he announced he was leaving the CRM giant in November 2022. Last February we heard he was launching an AI startup built with former Google employee Clay Bavor. Today, the two emerged with a new conversational AI company called Sierra with some bold claims about what it can do.At its heart, the new company is a customer service bot. That's not actually all that Earth-shattering, but the company claims that it's much more than that, with its software going beyond being an extension of a FAQ page and actually taking actions on behalf of the customer.“Sierra agents can do so much more than just answer questions. They take action using your systems, from upgrading a subscription in your customer database to managing the complexities of a furniture delivery in your order management system. Agents can reason, problem solve and make decisions,” the company claimed in a blog post.Having worked with large enterprise customers at Salesforce, Taylor certainly understands that issues like hallucinations, where a large language model sometimes makes up an answer when it lacks the information to answer accurately, is a serious problem. That's especially true for large companies, whose brand reputation is at stake. The company claims that it is solving hallucination issues.Image Credits: SierraAt the same time, it's connecting to other enterprise systems to undertake tasks on behalf of the customer without humans being involved. These are both big audacious claims and will be challenging to pull off...MoreX of the Week This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thatwastheweek.substack.com/subscribe

In a Presidential race with two leading candidates who are broadly unpopular, any small perceived edge can make a tremendous difference. According to Clare Malone, more and more people will have their judgments formed by memes—visual jokes about the candidates floating on social media. Republican memes capitalize on widespread discomfort with President Biden's age, by highlighting his stumbles, verbal or otherwise. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is a master of turning bad press to his advantage: he propagated his own mug shot on social media, feeding his outlaw image. Malone says that conservatives also have a leg up here because their beliefs suit the medium. “The right wing can ‘go there'—they can say the thing everyone thinks, but doesn't actually say out loud.” Now the partisan fight on social media has roped in a relatively innocent bystander, Taylor Swift. The pop star, who has endorsed Biden in the past, and her boyfriend, Travis Kelce, have been labeled a “psy op” by right-wingers online. “My theory about American politics, especially in the past decade, is basically none of it's really policy,” Malone argues. “It's all political pheromones.” Plus, Michelle Zauner, the front woman for the indie band Japanese Breakfast, talks about her memoir, “Crying in H Mart,” with The New Yorker's Hua Hsu, author of “Stay True.” 

Clare Malone, staff writer at The New Yorker, covering politics discusses how the internet, and meme culture, is continuing to having an influence on politics ahead of the 2024 election.→ The Meme-ification of American Politics

As more and more people get their news from social media, how have political memes come to play such an outsized role in the discourse? On Today's Show:Clare Malone, staff writer at The New Yorker, covering politics discusses how the internet, and meme culture, is continuing to having an influence on politics ahead of the 2024 election.

As more and more people get their news from social media, how have political memes come to play such an outsized role in the discourse? On Today's Show:Clare Malone, staff writer at The New Yorker, covering politics discusses how the internet, and meme culture, is continuing to having an influence on politics ahead of the 2024 election.

If your Instagram Reels and TikToks are inundated with videos of President Joe Biden tripping or stumbling over his words, you're not alone. Americans are increasingly tuning out the news and turning to social media for their political fix, and the online world is delivering an abundance of right-wing memes and misinformation. The New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss our shifting media habits, why the 2016 election is surfacing in new contexts online, and how both campaigns are relying on algorithms to gain momentum ahead of November. 

Covering a War, Reinventing the Newspaper, and NFL Press Conference Questions With The New Yorker's Clare Malone On the Final Edition, The New Yorker's Clare Malone joins Bryan. First she talks about her piece that discusses Clarissa Ward's coverage of the war in Gaza (2:00). Then they get into Tampa Bay Buccaneers coach Todd Bowles's response to questions about the upcoming weather in Detroit even though the game will be played in a dome (12:39). Then they discuss what newspapers will look like in 2024 (19:30), Mark Thompson's reinvention of CNN (32:22), and a journalist's thoughts when someone calls their work a “great write-up” (51:50) Host: Bryan Curtis Guest: Clare Malone Producer: Brian H. Waters Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This month marks the anniversary of when most of us first heard about George Santos and his ever-expanding list of lies from a New York Times report published after the midterm election, but a local newspaper called the North Shore Leader was sounding the alarm months before. The New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone took a trip to Long Island to speak with the Leader's publisher, Grant Lally, and its managing editor, Maureen Daly, to find out how the story began. “We heard story after story after story about him doing bizarre things,” Lally told her. “He was so well known, at least in the more active political circles, to be a liar, that by early summer he was already being called George Scamtos.” Lally explains how redistricting drama in New York State turned Santos from a “sacrificial” candidate—to whom no one was paying attention—to a front-runner. At the same time, Malone thinks, “the oddly permissive structure that the Republican Party has created for candidates on a gamut of issues” enabled his penchant for fabrication. “[There's] lots of crazy stuff that's popped up in politics over the past few years. I think maybe Santos thought, Eh, who's gonna check?” This story first ran on the New Yorker Radio Hour in January of this year.   

In September, The New Yorker published an article by Clare Malone titled “Hasan Minhaj's Emotional Truths,” fact-checking moments from the comedian's stand up specials. The article reportedly cost Minhaj the hosting gig for The Daily Show, and Minhaj posted a lengthy Youtube video responding to its claims. The New Yorker has stood behind its story, even after Minhaj called it misleading. The scandal, which has been covered by almost every major news outlet, brings into question what audiences expect from comedians — especially ones who do Jon-Stewart-style political commentary. This week, Brooke speaks to Jesse David Fox, author of Comedy Book: How Comedy Conquered Culture and the Magic That Makes It Work, about why the saga provoked such a strong reaction. Plus, Fox explains the changing role of truth in comedy: from the authentic acts of Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor, to the vulnerability of Tig Notaro. Fox also notes that the fall from grace of Louis C.K., who pre-#MeToo was often proclaimed the "most honest" comedian, informs the rise of the hyper-performative, absurdist comedy of John Early and Kate Berlant.

In September, The New Yorker published an article by Clare Malone titled “Hasan Minhaj's Emotional Truths,” fact-checking moments from the comedian's stand up specials. The article reportedly cost Minhaj the hosting gig for The Daily Show, and Minhaj posted a lengthy Youtube video responding to its claims. The New Yorker has stood behind its story, even after Minhaj called it misleading. The scandal, which has been covered by almost every major news outlet, brings into question what audiences expect from comedians — especially ones who do Jon-Stewart-style political commentary. This week, Brooke speaks to Jesse David Fox, author of Comedy Book: How Comedy Conquered Culture and the Magic That Makes It Work, about why the saga provoked such a strong reaction. Plus, Fox explains the changing role of truth in comedy: from the authentic acts of Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor, to the vulnerability of Tig Notaro. Fox also notes that the fall from grace of Louis C.K., who pre-#MeToo was often proclaimed the "most honest" comedian, informs the rise of the hyper-performative, absurdist comedy of John Early and Kate Berlant.

We discuss Hasan's video clapback to the New Yorker hatchet job, conspiracize about Muslims in positions of media authority, Usama's epic bomb at a gala for doctors in Texas, and more!

Clare Malone is a staff writer for The New Yorker. Her latest article is ”Hasan Minhaj's ‘Emotional Truths.'” “You're going to work a lot of hours if you want to be successful, and you're probably not going to make as much money as your dumb friend from college does. You're choosing it for a different reason, but I do think we have to make efforts to have the [journalism] industry be a middle-class profession.” Show notes: Malone's New Yorker archive Malone's FiveThirtyEight archive 03:00 "CNN's New White Knight" (New Yorker • Sep 2023) 08:00 "Ben Smith Can't Say What His New Media Venture Is" (New Yorker • Jan 2022) 09:00 "How Trump Changed America" (FiveThirtyEight • Nov 2020) 18:00 Just Like Us (The Ringer • 2022) 25:00 Semafor (Newsletter) 25:00 Confider (Lachlan Cartwright • Daily Beast) 27:00 "Inside the Meltdown at CNN" (Tim Alberta • Atlantic • Jun 2023) 27:00 "What the Shakeup at CNN Says About the Future of Cable News" (New Yorker • Jun 2023) 28:00 "David Zaslav, Hollywood Antihero" (New Yorker • Aug 2023) 37:00 "Ann Selzer Is the Best Pollster in American Politics" (FiveThirtyEight • Jan 2016) 39:00 Politics Podcast (FiveThirtyEight) 48:00 The Ankler (Newsletter) 49:00 "The E-Mail Newsletter for the Mogul Set" (New Yorker • Dec 2022) 57:00 ”Hasan Minhaj's ‘Emotional Truths'” (New Yorker • Sep 2023) 58:00 Patriot Act (Hasan Minhaj • Netflix • 2020) 61:00 "Hasan Minhaj Eyed For ‘Daily Show' Host" (Brian Steinberg • Variety • Aug 2023) 65:00 "Episode 1273 - Hasan Minhaj" (WTF with Marc Maron • Oct 2021) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today, the guys discuss the controversy surrounding comedian Hasan Minhaj  and the recent New Yorker article ‘Emotional Truths' by Clare Malone (1:52). Ali summarizes the bombshells in the article, including the fact that several of the stories Minhaj recounts in his stand up specials were untrue. The guys then compare Hasan's case to other famous cases including Stephen Rannazzisi, who lied about being in the Twin Towers during 911 and news anchor Brian Williams who lied about being shot down in a military helicopter. The guys then discuss how the article causes one to re-evaluate Minhaj's stand-up specials and if they feel the controversy will jeopardize him inheriting ‘The Daily Show' from Trevor Noah.    Then the guys discussing Narcissistic personality disorder (30:23) (N.B. there is no evidence Hasan Minhaj has this disorder). Asif talks about the Greek myth it is based on as well as the diagnostic criteria. Asif discusses how it is diagnosed and how ‘countertransference' can be a clue to the treating therapist that a patient has NPD. Asif then talks about the treatment and tip for practitioners who are seeing a patient with NPD. Finally the guys discuss whether Donal Trump had NPD and how psychiatrists were reminded to refrain from armchair analysis of public figures in 2016.      The opinions expressed are those of the hosts, and do not reflect those of any other organizations. This podcast and website represents the opinions of the hosts. The content here should not be taken as medical advice. The content here is for entertainment and informational purposes only, and because each person is so unique, please consult your healthcare professional for any medical questions.    Music courtesy of Wataboi and 8er41 from Pixabay   Contact us at doctorvcomedian@gmail.com   Follow us on Social media: Twitter: @doctorvcomedian Instagram: doctorvcomedian   Show notes: Hasan Minhaj's “Emotional Truths”: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/hasan-minhajs-emotional-truths Lying in Comedy Isn't Always Wrong, but Hasan Minhaj Crossed a Line: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/arts/hasan-minhaj-comedy.html  The League star admits he lied about 9/11 escape: https://ew.com/article/2015/09/16/league-rannazzisi-lied-911 Free Brian Williams: https://www.pushkin.fm/podcasts/revisionist-history/free-brian-williams Current understanding of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-advances/article/currentunderstanding-of-narcissism-and-narcissistic-personality-disorder/4AA8B04FB352F8E00AA7988B63EBE973 Narcissistic Personality Disorder: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556001/ Psychiatrists Reminded To Refrain From Armchair Analysis Of Public Figures: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/08/13/489807468/psychiatrists-reminded-to-refrain-from-armchair-analysis-of-public-figures

Good looking, charismatic, and experienced, comedian and political commentator Hasan Minhaj is reportedly a frontrunner for Trevor Noah's hosting slot at The Daily Show. But when a writer starts looking into some of his standup stories, she realizes that he may be telling tall tales. This week, Natalie talks to New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone about her reporting on the scandal, and what questions it raises about comedy's increasingly complicated relationship to truth. Click ‘Subscribe' at the top of the Infamous show page on Apple Podcasts or visit GetTheBinge.com to get access wherever you get your podcasts. A Campside Media & Sony Music Entertainment production. Find more great podcasts from Sony Music Entertainment at sonymusic.com/podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There's never a dull moment when it comes to US politics, as proved again today with the announcement of fresh criminal charges against former president Donald Trump. In this episode, Staff writer at the New Yorker Clare Malone joins Hugh to take a look at the state of US politics through the lens of current media trends, what we can expect from the year ahead and how an election paralleled with multiple criminal trials might play out. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jack Teixeira is the 21 year old US airman charged with leaking confidential intelligence and defence documents. They appeared on the gaming platform Discord and revealed US assessments of the war in Ukraine as well as sensitive secrets about American allies. The New York Times managed to identify Teixeira as the suspect before the FBI arrested him. Also in the programme, a new BBC podcast that investigates the cold case of a boy from London who went missing over 40 years ago, and what next for Murdoch after the Fox News defamation lawsuit pay-out. Guests: Aric Toler, Director of Training and Research, Bellingcat; Haley Willis, Video Journalist, The New York Times; Colin Campbell, investigative reporter, "Vishal" podcast on BBC Sounds, Shaun Keep, retired police detective, and Clare Malone, staff writer, The New Yorker. Presenter: Katie Razzall Producer: Simon Richardson

Felix Salmon, Emily Peck and Elizabeth Spiers are joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone to recap the latest episode of HBO's Succession. Will Kerry get on ATN? Will the Kids squash the GoJo deal? Is anyone going to come to Connor's wedding?  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week. You'll also be supporting the work we do here on Slate Money. Sign up now at slate.com/moneyplus to help support our work. Podcast production by Patrick Fort and Ben Richmond.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Felix Salmon, Emily Peck and Elizabeth Spiers are joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone to recap the latest episode of HBO's Succession. Will Kerry get on ATN? Will the Kids squash the GoJo deal? Is anyone going to come to Connor's wedding?  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week. You'll also be supporting the work we do here on Slate Money. Sign up now at slate.com/moneyplus to help support our work. Podcast production by Patrick Fort and Ben Richmond.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Felix Salmon, Emily Peck and Elizabeth Spiers are joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone to recap the latest episode of HBO's Succession. Will Kerry get on ATN? Will the Kids squash the GoJo deal? Is anyone going to come to Connor's wedding?  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week. You'll also be supporting the work we do here on Slate Money. Sign up now at slate.com/moneyplus to help support our work. Podcast production by Patrick Fort and Ben Richmond.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Felix Salmon, Emily Peck and Elizabeth Spiers are joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone to recap the latest episode of HBO's Succession. Will Kerry get on ATN? Will the Kids squash the GoJo deal? Is anyone going to come to Connor's wedding?  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week. You'll also be supporting the work we do here on Slate Money. Sign up now at slate.com/moneyplus to help support our work. Podcast production by Patrick Fort and Ben Richmond.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Felix Salmon, Emily Peck and Elizabeth Spiers are joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone to recap the latest episode of HBO's Succession. Will Kerry get on ATN? Will the Kids squash the GoJo deal? Is anyone going to come to Connor's wedding?  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week. You'll also be supporting the work we do here on Slate Money. Sign up now at slate.com/moneyplus to help support our work. Podcast production by Patrick Fort and Ben Richmond.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

George Santos is hardly the first scammer elected to office—but his lies, David Remnick says, are “extra.” Most Americans learned of Santos's extraordinary fabrications from a New York Times report published after the midterm election, but a local newspaper called the North Shore Leader was sounding the alarm months before. The New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone took a trip to Long Island to speak with the Leader's publisher, Grant Lally, and its managing editor, Maureen Daly, to find out how the story began. “We heard story after story after story about him doing bizarre things,” Lally told her. “He was so well known, at least in the more active political circles, to be a liar, that by early summer he was already being called George Scamtos.” Lally explains how redistricting drama in New York State turned Santos from a “sacrificial” candidate—to whom no one was paying attention—to a front-runner. At the same time, Malone thinks, “the oddly permissive structure that the Republican Party has created for candidates on a gamut of issues” enabled his penchant for fabrication. “[There's] lots of crazy stuff that's popped up in politics over the past few years. I think maybe Santos thought, Eh, who's gonna check?”

George Santos is hardly the first scammer elected to office—but his lies, David Remnick says, are “extra.” Most Americans learned of Santos's extraordinary fabrications from a New York Times report published after the midterm election, but a local newspaper called the North Shore Leader was sounding the alarm months before. The New Yorker staff writer Clare Malone took a trip to Long Island to speak with the Leader's publisher, Grant Lally, and its managing editor, Maureen Daly, to find out how the story began. “We heard story after story after story about him doing bizarre things,” Lally told her. “He was so well known, at least in the more active political circles, to be a liar, that by early summer he was already being called George Scamtos.” Lally explains how redistricting drama in New York State turned Santos from a “sacrificial” candidate—to whom no one was paying attention—to a front-runner. At the same time, Malone thinks, “the oddly permissive structure that the Republican Party has created for candidates on a gamut of issues” enabled his penchant for fabrication. “[There's] lots of crazy stuff that's popped up in politics over the past few years. I think maybe Santos thought, Eh, who's gonna check?”

What do you get when you mix Boston, bad accents and a lot of explosions? The 1994 thriller “Blown Away” starring Jeff Bridges and Tommy Lee Jones! Jamelle and John are joined by Clare Malone of The New Yorker to talk Irish-American identity, Irish nationalism, the racial politics of Boston and much, much more.Connor Lynch produced this episode. Artwork by Rachel Eck.Contact us!Follow us on Twitter!John GanzJamelle BouieUnclearPodAnd join the Unclear and Present Patreon! For just $5 a month, patrons get access to a bonus show on the films of the Cold War, and much, much more.

It's September 19th. In 1986, the city of Cleveland decided to stage a charity event in which they released millions of balloons into the air. It went very, very poorly. Jody, Niki, and Kellie are joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone, a Cleveland native, to discuss why balloonfest went so wrong, and what to make of Cleveland's many attempts at rehabilitating its image. Here's a video of Balloonfest: https://youtu.be/n0CT8zrw6lw Be sure to check out Clare's Ringer podcast series “Just Like Us.” David's new book is American Psychosis: A Historical Investigation of how the Republican Party Went Crazy - it's available for purchase now! Sign up for our newsletter! Find out more at thisdaypod.com And don't forget about Oprahdemics, hosted by Kellie, out now from Radiotopia. This Day In Esoteric Political History is a proud member of Radiotopia from PRX. Your support helps foster independent, artist-owned podcasts and award-winning stories. If you want to support the show directly, you can do so on our website: ThisDayPod.com Get in touch if you have any ideas for future topics, or just want to say hello. Our website is thisdaypod.com Follow us on social @thisdaypod Our team: Jacob Feldman, Researcher/Producer; Brittani Brown, Producer; Khawla Nakua, Transcripts; music by Teen Daze and Blue Dot Sessions; Audrey Mardavich is our Executive Producer at Radiotopia

Why haven't we been talking about JLo more here? Well, we're about to remedy that—and fill ya in on more, more, more design trends that are speaking to us right now.   The women artist biographies/books Claire will be picking up include Ninth Street Women: Lee Krasner, Elaine de Kooning, Grace Hartigan, Joan Mitchell, and Helen Frankenthaler: Five PaAnne Truittinters and the Movement by Mary Gabriel, Daybook: The Journal of an Artist by Anne Truitt, and Everything She Touched: The Life of Ruth Asawa by Marilyn Chase.   If you're also looking to do a JLo deep-dive, we recommend reading How to Fake It in Hollywood by Ava Wilder, Funny You Should Ask by Elissa Sussman, the story of the full-page ad Ben took out back when, Vulture's Peoria, Illinois, analysis re: Marry Me, and this GQ article about THE dress. Also, listen to Just Like Us: The Tabloids that Changed America hosted by Clare Malone and watch the music video that Ben made to “On My Way To You” for Jen for Valentine's Day.   In the home-design realm, some inspiration comes from two incredible New Orleans hotels, Hotel St. Vincent and Hotel Peter and Paul.    Fellow lovers of yellow furniture should bask in Billy Cotton space for Grace Morton, Sophie Ashby's giant yellow velvet couch, and this kid's room.    If you're thinking of doing some furniture-painting on your own (inspiration: Matilda Goad's London home!), see Erin Boyle of Reading My Tea Leaves make-over a dresser on IG and read her guides for refreshing trim and kitchen cabinets.    Wood paneling—SO COOL. See: Sound View Hotel, ​​Les Arcs ski resort, Jane Hallworth for Tinder co-founder Sean Rad and his Wife Lizzie Grover Rad, and Wall for Apricots.    On the Swedish tile stove front, we love painter Mary Nelson Sinclair's dining room, Victor Hugo's fireplace, Lindholm Kakelugnar, and this explainer from Messy Nessy Chic.   Your favorite niche JLo stories need an audience! Share ‘em at 833-632-5463, podcast@athingortwohq.com, or @athingortwohq.   So many more recs coming at you with a Secret Menu membership!   Get professional counseling with BetterHelp and take 10% off your first month with our link. Download Best Fiends—it's free!—on the App Store or Google Play. Grow hair that's thicker and healthier with Nutrafol. Your first month's subscription is $15 off with the code ATHINGORTWO. Help those muscles chill: Try Theragun for 30 days. YAY.   Produced by Dear Media  

On the 20th anniversary of the premiere of ‘The Osbournes,' Juliet Litman and Clare Malone talk about the family and the show that was the progenitor of all the reality TV that was to come. Hosts: Juliet Litman and Clare Malone Producer: Kaya McMullen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Bryan is joined by The New Yorker's Clare Malone to break down The Ringer's new podcast, ‘Just Like Us: The Tabloids That Changed America.' They talk through the era of Bennifer, the evolution of celebrity, and discuss the values of America seen through celebrity media (0:33). Then, Bryan is joined by musician and novelist John Darnielle to dive into the genre of true crime, touch on writing songs vs. novels, and discuss his new book ‘Devil House' (31:52).  Host: Bryan Curtis Guests: Clare Malone and John Darnielle Associate Producer: Erika Cervantes Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Clare Malone is a staff writer at The New Yorker who recently wrote about Gettr, a rising conservative social network. David Thiel is the big data architect and chief technology officer of the Stanford Internet Observatory, where he's researched Gettr's usage. The pair join Big Technology Podcast to discuss Gettr — and its counterparts' — potential to take on incumbent social networks. We dig into the network's growth, its funding sources, and how mainstream social network policies open the door for its success. Here's Clare's story: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/can-gettr-become-the-online-gathering-place-for-trumps-gop Here's David's research: https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/io/news/topologies-and-tribulations-gettr

As a once-in-a-lifetime election campaign nears its end, still so many questions remain unanswered. The largest question, of course, is who will win. But beyond that, other questions – such as projected turnout, the impact of mail-in voting, and the importance of ‘Never Trump' Republican groups, remain outstanding. To answer these questions and more, Professor Adam Smith chaired a discussion with FiveThirtyEight senior political writer Clare Malone as well as two well-renowned political consultants from different sides of the aisle, Bob Shrum and Mike Murphy. The event was held on 30 October, 2020. 

With only days to go before the US Election, Julia speaks to Clare Malone, a Senior Political Reporter with data driven news site, FiveThirtyEight on what we can expect to see when ballots are counted.Clare explains the current state of play – what is the data telling us about who will win the presidency, what might happen on election day and in the weeks and months after, and how things look for Trump compared to 2016.Clare and Julia discuss how American women are voting this election, why they are voting differently to 2016, and what issues are influencing their vote.Julia asks Clare about the sexist treatment of female political candidates, how media and community perceptions of gender stereotyping have evolved in politics as we've seen more women run for high office, and the performance of Kamala Harris as the Democratic Vice Presidential Nominee.Clare talks about her experiences as a young journalist, and how she navigated her path through a male dominated environment.“The past few decades of American life have been about revealing that while the white male experience has been the predominant force in American life thus far, that is changing and…it will not be the case for much longer”.If you enjoyed this episode or any others, please rate and review us on your preferred podcast provider. It really helps us reach more listeners with our message of a more gender-equal world. Any earnings from the podcast go back into funding for the Global Institute for Women's Leadership, furthering the work we do to create a world in which being a woman is not a barrier to becoming a leader. Sign up to receive updates and event invitations from the Global Institute for Women's Leadership. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Plus... Dan Rather on coverage of Trump's physical and mental health; Tom Friedman calls out 'voter suppression enterprise;' is there 'reticence' to report on Biden's big lead in the polls? Dan Rather, Tom Friedman, Jennifer Mercieca, Oliver Darcy, Brandon Borrman, Ryan Lizza and Clare Malone join Brian Stelter. To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy