The Day After
30:16 Share

On the Media is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash?

Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try it at Progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states. Hey, Lulu here. Whether we are romping through science, music, politics, technology, or feelings, we seek to leave you seeing the world anew. Radiolab adventures right on the edge of what we think we know, wherever you get podcasts.

Hi everyone, this is Katya, executive producer of On The Media. I said to Michael and Brooke last week, let's gather Wednesday morning and talk about our immediate reflections and, you know, thoughts following the election Tuesday night. We did the same in 2016. It was an experiment for us. I wanted to kind of recreate that. And we wondered what we were going to talk about. Probably something about the Trump campaign campaign

accusing states of stealing votes or rigging the election, maybe something about how Fox News and others were spreading conspiracy theories. We did not expect this outcome. So the following conversation happened with no preps. It's just us discussing the role of the media now and in the last eight years and what we should do on the show this week. Take a listen. All right, I'm setting up my Pro Tools. Let's wait for Eloise and Kat to join.

What time did you go to sleep? I went to sleep at a reasonable hour. I saw the writing on the wall and I was tired and I figured there was nothing, nothing that couldn't wait until the morning. What about you? Well, we stayed up till two, but I just couldn't hang around for Trump. I knew I would hear it the next day or hear about it, but we shouldn't say anything, really. We're supposed to be fresh and raw.

Well, wow. Let's not talk unless we're ready to record. Oh, right. We're recording. We're recording. Don't you worry. Oh, we are. Okay. So, Kat, you threw up all night? I did. I slept on the bathroom floor for a couple of hours. It was a bug, but maybe it wasn't.

So we need to think about this week. I imagine that everybody is pretty darn tired, even on the Trump side. And then there are things that people are going to try to explain. And I want to make sure that we stay away from that. Like, what did the campaign do wrong?

And this is what we all said the last time. There's something going on that those of us on the coasts don't understand. And I can't help but feel it all boils down in the end to the bubbles we're all in and the fact that the...

that a great many Americans aren't familiar with the facts. You said that there are obviously some, there are many Americans who don't know the facts that have been reported repeatedly by the media, the fact checks, the questions about Trump's policies,

Reporting on his last administration, all of that seems to either have been memory hold or not reached people. And I guess, Brooke, does that just mean that the media is fundamentally broken? I think the media delivery system has a great deal wrong with it. And I think probably the mainstream or legacy media or wherever you want to fit us in still has...

comprehension problem. We keep trying to understand. I remember when Bush was elected and there were a lot of evangelicals in that case the first time. We were going, wow, this was happening beneath the surface. We didn't even know. But we should have known this time. And we still don't know. I don't know. What did we not know? I guess I'm confused because a lot of the debates that we had on the show were

were about whether journalists took the threat of Donald Trump seriously and conveyed it clearly. We weren't talking so much about reaching people who had tuned out the media. I mean, right? That's almost a separate topic altogether. I don't know that it is, Micah. I mean, I think it's the same topic. Who are you conveying this stuff clearly to?

The entire nation, hopefully. But of course, we know we don't speak to the entire nation. No one does anymore. So we do a damn fine job of talking to ourselves.

Brooke, I know we've kind of disagreed on this, but I do think that Trump has been really effective at tapping into an anger that Democrats have shied away from. I think they have sort of allowed themselves to be perceived as the party of the rich, despite their policies being much more effective for working class people. And I think we've seen that in

exit polls. We've seen a bigger push of higher income people voting for Kamala Harris as compared to the last election and a bigger push of working class people voting for Donald Trump. And it is about perception. It is about somebody saying that American dream is dead. I don't think I disagree with you at all. Well, I think we may have disagreed on on whether there was a role for a Democrat to say these things. Did we?

I don't know. Perhaps I'm misremembering our conversation. It reminds me of that interview I did with the Harvard economist about tariffs. His point was Donald Trump said these trade policies screwed you. They took your jobs and effectively the elites are screwing you over. They're outsourcing your jobs and we're going to bring them back. He didn't bring the jobs back. He said we're going to tariff the crap out of China.

The effect, as we may very well see, is that American companies will pay the price and they'll pass it along to consumers. And once again, it will hurt people in the United States. But I just think his ability to say, I'm fighting for you and they're the enemy and I will vanquish them for you just continues to be a unifying message. So...

Are you suggesting that the problem for the Democrats is that they didn't fight anger with anger? My opinion is that I don't know if this is relevant to our conversation, but my opinion is that Kamala Harris, uh,

was in a situation where she had to basically defend the Biden administration because she was part of it and tell a story about how actually it's been really good. And over and over, we're just seeing that people are not responding to the metrics that about how good the economy is when reported by politicians and by the media. And a lot of critics I'm seeing online are blaming the media saying you misled people. You didn't tell them how good the economy is. But

I don't know. I mean, if people feel mired in student debt and they don't think they can ever buy a house and their wages are stagnating, it doesn't do much to hear that, well, actually the stock market's doing really well. There is that fundamental disconnect. And I think that the anger on the right captured that disenfranchisement. There was a lot of discussion that the anger on the right was directed at programs that seemed to help students.

college debt. We didn't go to college. We don't get our debts forgiven and so on. There was quite a bit of discussion about that too.

And I just want to add, I don't think that this materialist analysis explains it all. Like, clearly the Trump campaign said, we will crush basically any minority or hated group that you want. You know, like, that seemed to be a pretty damn loud, clear message. Like, we're going to crush the media. We are going to put women back in their place. Yeah.

you know, the minorities who stole your jobs are going to be ripped away from their communities and from their families. Don't worry, we're going to rough them up. I mean, I just, I don't want to make it sound like I don't think that, you know, rampant racism wasn't a huge part of this rampant xenophobia. I don't think there's any one explanation that does this service. So I just want to caveat a lot. But yeah, the question is,

What does this say about the media today? What does it say about the future of our show? There's going to be a lot of discussion about did American readers of the New York Times and the Washington Post and the AP and the Wall Street Journal and listeners of NPR, did they fully understand what a threat Trump was? Did journalists rise to the occasion and did that play a role? And I guess I'm curious to know what you think about that framing. I think that especially...

In the last couple months of this campaign, everybody heard that stuff in full. We heard all about his former staff and generals fearing for the future of democracy. We heard much about the possibility of incipient fascism. We've heard about his policies, you know, that...

His way of making everything good is to pull out of the Paris Accords and eliminate the environmental provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act. We've learned about what tariffs mean with regard to prices. We've heard about his so-called proposals for peace.

And his general expressions about how he was going to fix everything and it was going to be so fixed you'd never need to vote again, that whole business. I don't think anybody lacked for that stuff among our readers, listeners, and so on. The problem is, again, that...

The information about just generally policies don't excite the imagination as much as an idea that things are spiraling out of control, that there's chaos. You know, the great murder sprees in the cities, the immigrants taking over communities and so on and eating your pets. All of this stuff just fed into a feeling and that this is

I guess what I'm getting at then is if you think that enough of the stakes were conveyed by the end of the election and still this was the outcome, does that mean that mainstream media is irrelevant, that it is incapable of...

conveying a basic message. I think they are not. I think that they didn't do a great job. We critiqued on this show the double standards, the false equivalencies. But in terms of the stakes, I think by the end they were doing a really good job. The fact is, is that it was in an echo chamber.

It's not those people necessarily who voted for Trump. I wonder if some of this is... Remember when we did the show a few weeks ago about what was going to happen with the vote in...

in all these different counties. And we did three interviews in a row and the last question was, what can we do? And the final answer was like, local media, local media, local media. Go local, go local, go local. Maybe there's something to be said for this is kind of the end game of the loss of local media that people don't want to be talked to from on high from New York. I love this idea. And I think it really rings true.

I think people do want to hear from the people who live in their community. And the local news business has been devastated. People's habits have changed. I mean, a lot of younger people are not watching their local TV stations or not paying for their local newspaper. There are still communities with access to local news, but people are on YouTube. They're on TikTok. They're listening to podcasts, right? Yeah.

They have just chosen other personalities. They've chosen other people, journalists or those who LARP as journalists to choose their information. There is no news monoculture left. That is dead. But, you know, interestingly enough,

public radio does have local stations. It is a network of local stations. And a lot of local radio stations are actually networks. We've covered that on the show, right wing networks, in many cases, all speaking from the same playbook. So even local media has been not only financially bankrupted, but

Colonized. Colonized, yes. And, I mean, the public radio system is a great local news system. It's not perfect, but it's pretty good at fielding reporters and stories from across the country and elevating. But listenership is down, and we know from Project 2025 that...

They're coming for it. They want to kill it. I mean, I fear for the future of this medium. I really do. Yeah, and every successive Republican administration has said they're going to cut funding. But in those days, yes. And in those days, when we've covered it in the past, we've said, but we have this solid conservative listenership.

And they don't want it to be gone either. And so it would not be a popular decision on the part of any kind of local Republican. I don't know if that's true anymore. I don't know if that's true either. I think it's certainly less true. It's more vulnerable than ever. But let's not make it about us. We haven't talked about the war in Gaza yet. I think it was a disaster for Democrats and the media, personally. I think...

It has accelerated an exodus. It has accelerated a decline in trust among lots of different kinds of Americans. I know you said you didn't want to do a postmortem about the election, but I think it was shameful how little attention Kamala Harris paid. I mean, we had on a media studies professor named William Eumanns who talked about how on the Sunday shows the guests were overwhelmingly negative.

pro-Israel and how the guests, many of those guests were American officials. I do think that media consumers took note of that. They said that a lot of this coverage can be seen as basically American officials explaining why this war needs to happen and why we're giving arms. I mean, I'm still disturbed by how quickly...

very flimsy reporting about UNRWA was elevated by the Wall Street Journal and some other mainstream outlets, leading a couple months later to banning the largest humanitarian aid group in Gaza while people are starving. I am sympathetic to those who feel that mainstream media was complicit in allowing the war to get as bad as it did. And I

I'm sad to think that Donald Trump was able to use the war as a wedge issue. We saw them ramp up the messaging around the war because they knew how much discontent there was among Democratic voters. And I think it will prove to have been effective. So obviously, I don't think that we're going to need to talk about the coming legal challenges to the vote anymore.

Or disinformation around voter fraud. It wasn't a problem, I guess. It was a great election. Free and secure. Move on, everybody. So those plans that we had on the boil are probably defunct at this point. I was thinking at first something that we used to do was just sort of go around the world and see what the world says.

You know, I don't know what, if anything, Putin has said so far. I didn't come across it. But I do know that other representatives of the Russian position on social media have been absolutely thrilled and delighted. We know Viktor Orban is absolutely delighted. We know that all of those...

people that Trump has glommed onto in his years in exile have come out to celebrate and support him. And these are people who work from a totalitarian playbook. Do we want to keep going on about fascism? Are we sick of it? Do we just sort of do a thing of what to look out for?

While we wait for perhaps some more divided government after the next two years, if it seems likely that the Democrats will get the Senate back, there'll be many more Republican seats at issue rather than Democrats like it was this time. We won't know for at least a week if the Democrats have the House. I mean, it's a possibility that this could be the trifecta, in which case,

People have to work within civil society or at the local level. There's a great deal happening at the local level. My feeling is thinking about 2016 compared to now. Remember we spoke to Mashagesson and they gave us this kind of roadmap, like how to survive...

what we were going to go through. The courts will not save us, all these kind of things. The lying is the point. And it was like, okay, we'll just hold on to these instructions. We can make it through four years and then we're back to normal. And now I feel like the Biden four years was a post-pandemic blip, but this country is on a trajectory and it's a serious realignment. And we can't think

We're the normal ones. They're the people who are taking us off track and we'll just get back on track. This is the track. Certainly, there's a possibility that we are on an anti-democratic trajectory and our institutions are so profoundly weakened that that system is in decline. But we don't know. We really don't know. I'm quite frightened that it is.

It's just how do we cover, how do we filter stories? What's our frame? I remember I said exactly that. I'm certain we'll find our correct frame. I didn't even listen back to the 2016 pod we did the day after, but I remember saying I feel confident that we'll find the right frame and we'll be able to tell this story well. And honestly, if this is a realignment, if this is as dramatic as it feels...

I'm not even sure what the frame is now. Well, I think we can't know. I think we have to take it day by day. I love when you say that. I love when you say that. We're living in history. We don't have a roadmap, but we never have. I mean, the show has changed so much. When, you know, Bush v. Gore happened, we've just seen lots and lots of changes.

I think in the end, we keep talking about the messages that are out there, how they get out there, and hope that we can make a contribution. Again, we can't predict the future, but I don't know that we're going to see a Trump bump again.

I think it could be isolated to maybe the New York Times. I'm sure some sub stacks will go gangbuster. I'm sure some TikTok accounts and podcasts will get a whole bunch of new subscribers. But I don't know. I think, yes, I fear that the mass switching off. Well, I don't know. I mean, half the country didn't want Kamala and they went to Trump. Half the country doesn't want Trump.

And they want a majoritarian democracy, which involves really tweaking the system, you know, electoral college, blah, blah, blah. But there's still a lot of people out there who hopefully aren't just looking for confirmation, although we provided plenty of that from our position, you know, in lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. Yeah.

This is going to sound so trivial, but as I was watching the results come in last night, I saw that Mark Robinson lost his race, which, and I thought to myself, maybe journalism still matters a little bit. Maybe a really good investigative story can really take down a politician. Not Donald Trump. He's impervious. But maybe it's a sign that good information matters.

finds its intended audience some of the time. I know, sorry, that's absolutely pathetic, but... No, I mean, what you've been saying is that we don't serve a purpose anymore. I don't... I'm not saying we don't serve a purpose. I really want to stress that I think that the need for information, good information, is as high as ever. I think we're all in complete agreement. The need for great reporting on the upcoming Trump administration is...

absolutely paramount. I just fear that the business model that supports it and the trust that powers it are falling apart. It's so upsetting for me to scroll on TikTok or listen to a podcast, and what I'm hearing is mainstream journalism filtered through people who present themselves as a foil to mainstream media. The source of good information is

is required to fuel everything. But we're just somehow people have just completely lost faith in it. And it's it really scares me. Well, you spend a lot of time on social media, thank God, someone has to, people are getting their information from everywhere, you know, a lot of generational difference, but everybody's existing in the world.

I don't know what else we can do. I mean, it's not like we have the answers. We know how to do this thing. Tell the truth, try to contextualize it, and send it out into the world like a message in a bottle that you throw off the side of a rowboat. That is our role. We can do it differently. We can see what kind of message resonates, but we don't run a campaign.

We don't. We're just trying to be honest brokers. Yeah. I mean, I think the best we can do is just affirm the truth and reality to the best of our ability to the people that we reach. But what do we do this week? I think we should talk about Joe Rogan.

OK, that's certainly something we can do this week. Didn't Trump call him a hero or the greatest of the great or something like that? Yeah, I think that his endorsement meant something. I mean, it's impossible to know if it if it won in the election. But I think Joe Rogan is emblematic of a new media environment that is so potent, that is so easily swayed by Trump's lies.

I was thinking, I was hesitating because I know you're sick to death of the guy, Micah. I know what you're going to say. Stephen Miller, right? No. There was an amazing story about what Elon Musk stood to lose if Kamala Harris won. That, you know, probably Twitter would go or X would go just down the drain ultimately. And there were a bunch of other sorts of possibilities there.

for him in a Trump administration, not just as, you know, the commissioner of efficiency or whatever position invented for him. But a lot of business stuff. Yeah, all those government contracts. Yeah. I think it's useful context for people to understand why he was willing to throw so much money into this campaign. I mean, massive quantities.

You know, the men of Trump or something. Maybe we do it that way. You know, J.D. Vance. Who knows? J.D. Vance is a creation of the medium. We talked about that on the show. Absolutely. Yeah. It's funny. It's like Kamala. It's like even looking at it now, it's like just hours have passed. And that seems like a world that was like a million years ago. Tim Walls, like a traditional, like a guy, just a guy. We hardly knew ye. We hardly knew ye. Yeah.

One thought I was having, I don't know if this will work for the show, is what Elon Musk and Joe Rogan, I think, have in common is they're both champions of the marketplace of ideas. They both presented an image of free speech, which is, well, just hear from all sides, right?

and the good things will rise to the top. I mean, that's what Joe Rogan does on his show. It's quote-unquote that marketplace of ideas thing. They don't really... Another thing they have in common is that they traffic in an enormous number of lies and misrepresentations. Absolutely. And they both tilted their marketplaces for Donald Trump. At the end of the day, this radical neutrality thing was...

a farce whether or not they knew it, ripe for exploitation whether they knew it, and not honest. I mean... They always knew it. What have we hit on or not hit on in this conversation that we think we need to touch? I'll just say like one motivational thought. I'm really glad that we have the show. As ever. I know. So lucky. It's such a privilege.

Not to be a cornball about it, but, you know, I would... It's hard not to wake up this morning, see the popular vote the way it was, and not feel like the world is just completely turned upside down. And not feel like the truth doesn't matter anymore, or whatever hysterical thought you want to articulate. But it mattered to half the country. It mattered to half the country, but a little less than half the country, potentially. I don't know. I mean, could we...

I was posting on social media, like, how are you feeling on our socials? And we were getting a lot of responses. A lot of them were negative. But maybe this is an opportunity to lean into our show being a community for people, a celebration of good journalism, a belief in the truth to our best ability to understand it and report it. Could we say, you know,

Let us know what you want us to cover. Email us. Tell us how you're feeling. I don't know. I'd love to do a show where we collect how our listeners are hearing and make this a little bit more of a dialogue. Well, we could just say if anyone listening to this now does have something they want us to consider or talk about or just want to emote, record it on your phone, send it to onthemedia at WNYC.org.

Go ahead, record your voice memo and send it to onthemediaatwnyc.org. Onthemediaatwnyc.org. You guys out there need to do it fast because we only have two days to put together this show. Okay, so let's wrap it up. We're going to make a show. Sounds good. All right. Okay. Okay, bye. Bye.