59
edits
31: Ryan Holiday - Conspiracy, Manipulation & other Pastimes: Difference between revisions
31: Ryan Holiday - Conspiracy, Manipulation & other Pastimes (edit)
Revision as of 19:45, 15 September 2023
, 15 September 2023→Human-edited Transcript
| Line 208: | Line 208: | ||
Eric Weinstein | Eric Weinstein | ||
They're lightly watching it often. | They're lightly watching it, often. | ||
Ryan Holiday | Ryan Holiday | ||
| Line 234: | Line 234: | ||
Eric Weinstein | Eric Weinstein | ||
There’s this culture; I mean, this word, the “commentary”-who in the hell elected these people? And why do they have a culture? And what is it about their jobs that produces this kind of incestuous-‘Well, she did this think piece about this, and then I came back to that, and so-and-so digested the two”-and you’re thinking, ‘Nobody cares!’ | There’s this culture; I mean, this word, the “commentary”-who in the hell elected these people? And why do they have a culture? And what is it about their jobs that produces this kind of incestuous-‘Well, she did this think piece about this, and then I came back to that, and so-and-so digested the two”-and you’re just thinking, ‘Nobody cares!’ | ||
36:15 | 36:15 | ||
| Line 240: | Line 240: | ||
36:15 | 36:15 | ||
Well, and ostensibly that should be the role of the editor; I almost get that there's a commentary of sort of young, opinionated writers who are writing things, but there should be the editor on top who's asking tough questions about | Well, and ostensibly that should be the role of the editor; I almost get that there's a commentary of sort of young, opinionated writers who are writing things, but there should be the editor on top who's asking tough questions about the hot take, or the opinion. | ||
Eric Weinstein | Eric Weinstein | ||
Is | Is it that the system of selective pressures that is choosing these people to sit in those chairs is now imparting such a spin, that the world is tuning it out increasingly because-for example, there is a piece I've never heard, described like a general platonic abstraction-which I call envy porn-the piece talks about fabulously rich people leading shitty decadent lives, and you're supposed to be exactly filled with one part envy and one part pity. | ||
Ryan Holiday | Ryan Holiday | ||
Yeah, | Yeah, or some version of that piece is like, I'm going to write about this person whose life seems very glamorous, but I'm subtly going to show how they're actually a vapid idiot. So, economically, and as far as opportunities go, it's literally never been easier to reach a mass audience to monetize your work, to control your own destiny as a creative person, right? So, imagine looking at the vast opportunity of podcasts out there, the opportunity to write books or to create YouTube videos or to do any of these things and [say] “I don't want to do that. What I would like to do is make $42,000 a year without health benefits and have a full-time job at Business Insider, you know what I mean? You are either insane, or you're fundamentally lacking the talent to cut it in the real world-eat what you kill, sell stuff directly to the audience. | ||
Eric Weinstein 38:04 | |||
So it's a variance reduction model, that you know that you're going to have a job if you do your job, but you don't actually have to test yourself based on whether or not people are dying for your content. | |||
Ryan Holiday | |||
Yeah, | Yeah, If you live in some small town, you might think, ‘Oh, this person is a certified financial advisor. They know more about money than me.’ Which might be true, but they would not be-if they were really good at managing money, they would not be running a Charles Schwab office in, you know, Toledo or something, right? So, | ||
it's like, you just, oh, the people who are writing for this outlet or that outlet are in it, unless, I mean, there's obviously exceptions, like Malcolm Gladwell writes for The New Yorker, but has is also an entrepreneurial creator in other ways. But, you know, you just realize, Oh, you're it's sort of like the survivorship bias. Like all the good people have been all the fundamentally talented people have been siphoned off | |||
and work for them so that I really, I don't know that I hold exactly that take on. There's a selection bias. I think that there's an aspect of People merging with these venerable structures. There is power from an institutional perspective that hasn't been completely lost and frittered I'm not quite sure whether the millennials still pay attention. But that came from Harper's, that came from the Atlantic that came from the New Yorker. However, what I'm very curious about is at what point do the super vital people start going back into the institutional structures? Like I will see things happen on the Joe Rogan program? Yeah. And unless there's an angle to take somebody down, it doesn't filter back into what is this thing I call the gated institutional narrative, because it's mostly an idea that certain organs only talk to each other and themselves. Right. And that the power of that conversation to stay focused on it could be completely irrelevant and wrong things or misleading things are terrible things, but it still has a measure of coherence that the world Wild West LAX, and I'm questioning what happens when the interesting stuff is incoherent. And the other stuff has a coherence, even if | and work for them so that I really, I don't know that I hold exactly that take on. There's a selection bias. I think that there's an aspect of People merging with these venerable structures. There is power from an institutional perspective that hasn't been completely lost and frittered I'm not quite sure whether the millennials still pay attention. But that came from Harper's, that came from the Atlantic that came from the New Yorker. However, what I'm very curious about is at what point do the super vital people start going back into the institutional structures? Like I will see things happen on the Joe Rogan program? Yeah. And unless there's an angle to take somebody down, it doesn't filter back into what is this thing I call the gated institutional narrative, because it's mostly an idea that certain organs only talk to each other and themselves. Right. And that the power of that conversation to stay focused on it could be completely irrelevant and wrong things or misleading things are terrible things, but it still has a measure of coherence that the world Wild West LAX, and I'm questioning what happens when the interesting stuff is incoherent. And the other stuff has a coherence, even if | ||