Biden nominated a FCC commissioner over a year ago and there hasn’t been a vote.
this podcast is usually a pretty technical deep-dive interview format, this episode is more investigative. Just the list of people who refused to comment for the story at the beginning is pretty infuriating.
btw if anyone stopped listening to Revolutions after he finally wrapped up the russian revolution, you’re missing out, the appendix episodes have been incredibly good IMO at analyzing commonalities across different revolutions and picking out patterns and outliers. A+++ stuff.
It’s bizarre that if you had asked me “If you could force any two podcasters to collab, which would they be?” I would have said these two in a heartbeat.
With that said, interesting episode but nothing earth shattering. I’m assuming they’re going to back-and-forth host like YWA, and I’m really interested to hear Peter host one.
Michael Hobbes is the debunking guy (he did a great job on the abortion lowers crime stuff), Peter the broad strokes of society guy, should be a very solid podcast. Mainly I’m glad Peter will be making content full time now.
I also liked Freakonomics - I’m pretty sure I read the book when I was working in the University of Chicago area, so it’s not surprising that I buy into Levitt’s ideas more than most here. So this first episode is going to be a risky listen for me.
And, while I generally like Hobbes, that feeling is not universal - I thought his obesity episode on YWA was absolutely terrible.
I’m not a podcast guy and haven’t listened to 5-4 or Maintenance Pod, but I had to catch the first episode of If Books Could Kill because I absolutely detest Freakonomics in the most sincere and humorless way possible. Anyway, it is great, five stars, wish it was longer. Anyone who posted on 2+2 between the years of 2005-2010 should be legally required to listen to it. Therapeutic.
I honestly don’t remember the specifics of the studies within Freakonomics but it did get me to think deeper about things I otherwise took at face value as an early 20-something. I was also an undergrad econ major which is likely what influenced me to buy the book. I found it far more interesting than my actual econ classes which often seemed detached from real world examples and as a result came off as boring and useless. So I was happy to see it in use in situations where I once didn’t think it mattered.
The undergrad econ curriculum I was in was far more propagandizing than Freakonomics could ever be.
I guess I am alone but I hate this podcast. They never explain why we should believe their takedowns, provide zero backup or citations and it’s clear the guy from 5-4 hasn’t even read the books.