161 episodes

Strongly-held opinions. Open-minded debates. A weekly ideas show, hosted by Jane Coaston.

The Argument The New York Times

    • News
    • 4.3 • 347 Ratings

Strongly-held opinions. Open-minded debates. A weekly ideas show, hosted by Jane Coaston.

    Could Breaking Up Meta Make Things Worse?

    Could Breaking Up Meta Make Things Worse?

    Facebook, Meta — whatever you want to call it, the tech titan has drawn a lot of ire, and not just from privacy advocates and people fighting misinformation. Antitrust regulators are sharpening their knives, too.

    Forty-eight attorneys general want to slice the Big Tech giant into less-powerful pieces. They’ve joined a parallel lawsuit with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to challenge what the agency alleges to be a monopoly engaging in illegal acquisitions. And overseas, Britain’s competition regulator has already directed Meta to sell one of its companies, the gif-sharing platform Giphy.

    Meta reaches 3.6 billion monthly active users across platforms, including Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook itself. Amid a growing techlash, how to fix Meta is a big question.

    In today’s episode, Jane Coaston explores two opposing views on whether breaking up the company might help. Sarah Miller, the director of the American Economic Liberties Project, argues Meta engaged in anticompetitive practices by buying its rivals. And Tyler Cowen, an economist at George Mason University, is a champion of big business who lauds Meta as an “antimonopoly” engine.

    (A full transcript of the episode will be available midday on the Times website.)

    • 40 min
    How to Find Common Ground With Your Most Problematic Family Members

    How to Find Common Ground With Your Most Problematic Family Members

    It’s holiday time again, and this year feels different. Unlike the shelter-in-place aesthetic of 2020’s holiday celebrations, many people are now vaccinated and hoping to take part in the sort of family and friend events that are more reminiscent of the prepandemic time. With that warmth and community, we all may find ourselves in another seasonal tradition: getting into an argument with people over the dinner table.

    Maybe it’s a longstanding rivalry with a cousin, or a nosy aunt asking about your biological clock — or perhaps the uniquely 2020-2021 disagreements over masking, vaxxing and who actually won the election. Whatever your flavor of argument, host Jane Coaston and special guest Dylan Marron are here to help. Gleaning tips and advice from Dylan’s podcast and forthcoming book of the same name, “Conversations With People Who Hate Me,” Jane and Dylan lay out how to engage empathetically with the people who disagree with you, and how to avoid classic pitfalls that keep the discussion from being productive.

    • 37 min
    Why Identity Politics Isn’t Working for Asian Americans

    Why Identity Politics Isn’t Working for Asian Americans

    Asian Americans are the fastest-growing racial group in the United States, and understanding their representation in culture, politics and society is getting increasingly complex.

    In the New York City mayoral election this month, the Republican candidate, Curtis Sliwa, won 44 percent of the vote in precincts where more than half of the residents are Asian, a rate higher than for any other racial group tracked. This came as a surprise, given the popular belief that Asian Americans, particularly the younger generation, are largely liberal.

    One of our guests on this week’s show argues that the conversation surrounding the Asian American identity is often limited to upwardly mobile immigrants with careers in highly skilled sectors like tech and medicine. But a term as vague as “Asian American” includes everyone from an Indian lawyer to a Hmong refugee, and with that comes the complication of identifying with a phrase that is meant to define such a wide range of experiences.

    Jane Coaston speaks to two Asian Americans who look at the term in different ways: the writer Jay Caspian Kang, who thinks it ignores class differences and so is meaningless, and his podcast co-host E. Tammy Kim, who believes there’s value in building political power by organizing around the identity and even across these class differences.

    Mentioned in this episode:

    “Time to Say Goodbye,” a podcast hosted by Jay Caspian Kang, E. Tammy Kim and Andy Liu on Asia, Asian America and life during the coronavirus pandemic

    Kang’s new book, “The Loneliest Americans”

    Kim’s essay “Asian America,” in The London Review of Books

    “An Asian American Poet on Refusing to Take Up ‘Apologetic Space,’” on “Sway,” a New York Times Opinion podcast

    • 38 min
    Got Climate Doom? Here’s What You Can Do to Actually Make a Difference

    Got Climate Doom? Here’s What You Can Do to Actually Make a Difference

    What's an individual to do about the massive, systemic problem of climate change? Recycle? Compost? Give up meat or flying or plastic straws? Protest in the streets? To parse which personal actions matter and which don’t, Jane is joined by the climate activist and author Genevieve Guenther, who argues that for the wealthier citizens of the world, there are real steps that can be taken right away to help fight the current and impending climate catastrophes. Guenther lists them according to one’s ability, time and resources.

    Also joining the debate is the author of “The Uninhabitable Earth,” David Wallace-Wells, who argues that while individual behavior is a good start, it won’t bring the change needed; only large-scale political action will save us. In this episode, Guenther and Wallace-Wells disagree about extinction and blame, but they agree that when individual political pressure builds into an unignorable movement, once-impossible-to-imagine solutions will be the key to saving our future.

    • 41 min
    Why Do We Still Change Clocks Twice A Year?

    Why Do We Still Change Clocks Twice A Year?

    On Nov. 7, most of us will fall back an hour and restart the decades-old discussion of why we shift time twice a year.

    A quick reminder: In spring, we “spring forward” to Daylight Time, giving us daylight well into the evening. But this Sunday, we’ll be back to Standard Time. Which is nice for bright mornings. But it means it’s dark before dinner. The clock change is cumbersome and confusing, and only about 70 countries in the world follow it. Even in the United States there’s no cohesion around Daylight Time; Arizona and Hawaii don’t make the switch.

    And it’s something politicians of all parties can agree on. Senators Marco Rubio and Ed Markey have pushed to make Daylight Time permanent. The Sunshine Protection Act was introduced in 2018, and 19 states have already passed similar legislation to pave the way for year-round daylight savings, should Congress eventually allow it. But some scientists have their reservations, given how Daylight Time affects our body clocks and sleeping patterns.

    This week, Jane Coaston digs into the debate with Dustin Buehler, a lecturer at the Willamette University College of Law and general counsel for Oregon’s governor, and Dr. Joseph Takahashi, the chair of the neuroscience department at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and an investigator at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

    Mr. Buehler thinks Daylight Time should be permanent, while Dr. Takahashi says Standard Time is the way to go.

    Mentioned in this episode:

    “Daylight savings year-round could save lives, improve sleep and other benefits,” in The Conversation in 2019

    “Why We Should Abolish Daylight Saving Time” in Michigan Medicine, March 2021

    Listen to “Matters of Time,” an episode of 99% Invisible

    • 35 min
    I Love True Crime. Should I Feel Guilty?

    I Love True Crime. Should I Feel Guilty?

    Does our culture have a true crime problem? Jane takes the debate around consuming and creating modern true crime content to two true crime creators: Rabia Chaudry, an attorney, the author of “Adnan’s Story” and the host of the “Undisclosed” podcast, and Sarah Weinman, a writer and editor and the author of “The Real Lolita” and the forthcoming “Scoundrel.”

    • 43 min

Customer Reviews

4.3 out of 5
347 Ratings

347 Ratings

redbaron58 ,

Arguing with themselves

A debate between a left wing commentator, an extreme left wing commentator, and a liberation.

Review 4 you. ,

The Agreement

Wow… I thought the NYT stood for science and proper debates, but after listening to the death penalty episode, I realized I was clearly wrong. First off, there is no science here, two religious left leaning individuals who are quoting the bible to make their case (the conservative fellow is clearly a democrat in disguise). If you want to change minds, use empiricism, not antiquated pages from a broken telephone book.

mbp888 ,

Bridges polarized issues

We need more platforms for debate like this one. It’s wonderful to hear these complex topics receive appropriate level discussion by educated people on both sides. I feel as though I appreciate and respect both sides better after listening.

Top Podcasts In News

You Might Also Like

More by The New York Times