El Podcast

El Podcast Media

In El Podcast, anything and everything is up for discussion. Grab a drink and join us in this epic virtual happy hour!

  1. Universities Are Creating a New Dark Age | Lord Nigel Biggar (E197)

    2 DAYS AGO

    Universities Are Creating a New Dark Age | Lord Nigel Biggar (E197)

    A top Oxford professor and member of the House of Lords warns that universities are abandoning truth for ideology—and explains why that could push society into a new “dark age.” 👤 GUEST BIO Nigel Biggar is a Professor Emeritus of Ethics and Theology at the University of Oxford and a member of the UK House of Lords. He is the author of The New Dark Age: Why Liberals Must Win the Culture Wars, where he explores how universities, media, and institutions are drifting away from open debate and toward ideological conformity. TOPICS DISCUSSED  The decline of free speech in universities Cancel culture and academic censorship The “Ethics and Empire” controversy at Oxford Why elites stay silent (fear, career risk, conformity) Woke ideology vs classical liberalism Parallels between modern academia and 1930s Germany American cultural influence on UK institutions BLM, DEI, and the global spread of identity politics Luxury beliefs and virtue signaling AI, declining enrollment, and the future of universities MAIN POINTS  Universities are shifting from truth-seeking to enforcing ideological orthodoxy Many academics privately disagree—but stay silent to avoid backlash Cancel culture isn’t about debate—it’s about preventing others from hearing ideas Woke activism often functions like a religion (without humility or self-criticism) Identity politics has replaced class-based concerns in modern politics Elite institutions shape future leaders—so ideological capture has downstream effects Social media and American cultural export amplify extreme ideas globally Overeducated, underemployed youth = recipe for political instability AI + declining enrollment could radically reshape higher education BEST QUOTES  “The danger isn’t that we’re in a dark age—it’s that we’re heading toward one.” “Cancel culture isn’t about forcing you to listen—it’s about stopping others from hearing.” “The majority know better—but they’re too afraid to speak.” “Academics can be brilliant in their field—and completely conformist in politics.” “Bad ideas win when good people stay silent.” “This isn’t about helping the poor—it’s about signaling virtue.” “Woke ideology acts like a religion—but without forgiveness or humility.” “We’ve replaced debate with intimidation.” “The best lack conviction, and the loudest voices dominate.” “If universities stop teaching free thinking, society pays the price.” 📚 BOOKS & ARTICLES DISCUSSED The New Dark Age: Why Liberals Must Win the Culture Wars — Nigel Biggar Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning — Nigel Biggar Ideas from Rob Henderson (luxury beliefs concept) 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    59 min
  2. Why Americans Don’t Trust the Media Anymore (And It’s Worse Than You Think) - E196

    28 APR

    Why Americans Don’t Trust the Media Anymore (And It’s Worse Than You Think) - E196

    A wide-ranging conversation on the collapse of trust in legacy media, the economics driving bias and clickbait, and whether journalism can survive the internet and AI era with Drew Holden.  👤 Guest Bio Drew Holden is the managing editor of Commonplace and author of the Holden Court Substack. He is a journalist and media critic whose work focuses on media bias, institutional trust, and the changing economics of journalism. 🧠 Topics Discussed Collapse of trust in media (historical vs today) Rise of clickbait and incentive-driven journalism Impact of the internet and social media on news Ad revenue → subscription model shift Role of Google in disrupting media economics The “Trump bump” and media profitability Fact-checking, bias, and “experts say” journalism Feminization and credentialization of journalism Loss of gatekeeping / Overton Window shift Decline of local journalism Late-night TV vs podcast model (e.g., Joe Rogan) AI’s future role in journalism Viability of independent media (Substack, creators) 🔑 Main Points 1. Trust in media has collapsed Only 28% of Americans trust media today vs ~70% in the 1970s Causes: bias, sensationalism, and fractured media landscape 2. Incentives shifted from truth → clicks Digital ad model rewards engagement, not accuracy Journalists now think: “How do I market this?” vs “Is this true?” 3. Internet broke the business model 2012: Google ad revenue > all U.S. newspapers combined 2014: subscriptions surpassed ads—not from growth, but collapse of ad revenue 4. Media became audience-captured Outlets increasingly reflect their readers’ political views Example: “It’s not that outlets are biased—it’s that their audience is” 5. Trump both exposed and fueled media problems Revealed bias and hypocrisy Simultaneously became media’s biggest revenue driver 6. Journalism became more elite and less grounded Shift from “shoe-leather reporters” → highly educated, homogeneous class Leads to blind spots and disconnect from average Americans 7. Social media destroyed gatekeeping People can now verify claims themselves Legacy media no longer controls the narrative 8. Media is collapsing economically Overproduced, expensive, and losing money (e.g., late-night TV) Competing with lean creators and podcasts 9. AI may worsen trust, not improve it People trust identifiable humans more than “black box” systems Likely use: support tools, not full replacement 10. Future = fragmentation + rebuilding Legacy media may shrink or fail Smaller, trusted outlets and individuals will replace them 💬 Top 3 Quotes “The goal is no longer to produce truth—it’s to produce something people will click on.” “Trump was the best meal ticket the media has ever had.” “Don’t believe your lying eyes—that’s what modern media often tells people.” 📊 Miscellaneous / Interesting Points Newspaper ad revenue dropped ~50% from 2008–2013 Local advertisers (old model) created higher trust ecosystems “Yellow journalism” existed before—history is repeating Late-night shows lose millions while small podcasts thrive Substack seen as a potential “new journalism layer” Only ~17% of Americans pay for news subscriptions (mentioned in discussion) Media increasingly functions as entertainment (infotainment) rather than reporting Future journalists may bypass universities entirely 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    1hr 9min
  3. Society Is Being Feminized: Here’s What That Means (E195)

    21 APR

    Society Is Being Feminized: Here’s What That Means (E195)

    Dr. Cory J. Clark breaks down how the rise of women in academia may be reshaping institutions—shifting priorities from merit and competition toward equity, harm avoidance, and social dynamics. Guest Bio: Dr. Cory J. Clark is a psychology professor at New College of Florida whose research focuses on moral judgment, political psychology, and academic culture. She is known for her work on sex differences, self-censorship in academia, and her paper “From Warriors to Worriers: The Cultural Rise of Women.” Topics Discussed Sex differences in psychology and behavior Feminization of academia and institutions Rise of DEI, equity, and harm-avoidance culture Cancel culture and social ostracism Self-censorship and reputational fear in academia Incentives behind academic research (publish-or-perish) Mental health diagnosis inflation (ADHD, anxiety, autism) Declining ROI of higher education AI’s impact on education and student behavior Power dynamics: students, donors, and universities Main Points Institutional Shift: As women gain power in academia and culture, institutions reflect more “female-typical” values like harm avoidance, equality, and social cohesion. DEI Alignment: The rise of DEI frameworks aligns with these values—prioritizing equity over merit-based hierarchies. Cancel Culture Mechanism: Social ostracism (cancel culture) mirrors female-typical conflict resolution strategies (exclusion vs. confrontation). Self-Censorship: Academics fear reputational damage more than job loss, leading to widespread self-censorship—even among tenured professors. Vocal Minority Effect: A small, highly active group drives outrage and cancellations, creating the illusion of widespread consensus. Truth vs. Equity Tension: Male academics are more likely to prioritize truth, while female academics are more open to balancing truth with social equity goals. Mental Health Expansion: Increased empathy and institutional incentives may be driving both better diagnosis and overdiagnosis of mental health conditions. Broken Incentives in Academia: Publish-or-perish encourages quantity over quality, contributing to weak or misleading research. Higher Ed Under Pressure: Declining ROI, AI disruption, and enrollment shifts may fundamentally reshape universities. Future Uncertain: Cultural trends may continue—but could reverse if evidence shows negative outcomes. Top 3 Quotes “It would be crazy to think you could change an institution from 100% men to majority women and see no change.” “Most academics don’t support cancel culture—but a very small, loud minority makes it look like they do.” “If you don’t know the truth, you can’t solve any problems—because you have no foundation to act on.” 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    1hr 15min
  4. Immigration: Does It Make Countries Richer or Poorer? (E194)

    14 APR

    Immigration: Does It Make Countries Richer or Poorer? (E194)

    A deep dive with Dr. Garrett Jones on how immigration, culture, and intelligence shape long-run economic outcomes—and why economists sharply disagree on the issue. Guest Bio Garett Jones is a professor of economics at George Mason University and the author of The Culture Transplant, Hivemind, and 10% Less Democracy. His work focuses on how national traits—such as intelligence, culture, and institutions—affect economic growth, immigration outcomes, and political systems. He has also served as an economic policy advisor in the U.S. Senate. Topics Discussed Immigration and long-run economic outcomes Cultural persistence across generations National IQ and productivity differences Selective vs open-border immigration policy Disagreements among economists (e.g., Bryan Caplan debate) AI’s impact on labor and immigration needs Diversity vs productivity tradeoffs U.S. vs Europe vs Singapore immigration models Political effects of immigration (voting, institutions) Social pressure and “spiral of silence” in academia Main Points Traits persist across generations: Immigrants’ cultural and economic behaviors (e.g., savings, trust) often carry into 2nd and 3rd generations.  Long-run > short-run: First-generation immigrants are not representative; policy should focus on long-term population effects.  IQ matters more at the national level: A 1-point increase in national IQ correlates with ~6% higher income across countries.  Spillover effects dominate: Intelligence improves institutions, voting, and cooperation—not just individual wages.  Selective immigration is key (his view): Combine individual merit (education, earnings) with country-level traits.  Economists disagree due to assumptions: Core divide is whether immigrants meaningfully affect long-run institutions.  Diversity has tradeoffs: It can reduce productivity in some settings but add value in others (e.g., corporate boards via outsider perspectives).  AI won’t eliminate labor soon: Workers will remain valuable, especially in healthcare and high-skill domains.  U.S. historically benefited from immigration: Especially when selection mechanisms favored higher-skilled entrants.  Academic silence exists: Many economists privately agree on controversial findings but avoid saying so publicly.  Top 3 Quotes “The first generation walks on water—and you don’t use people who walk on water to model long-run outcomes.” “IQ pays off three to six times more for nations than for individuals.” “A person can fake their résumé—but they can’t fake their country’s résumé.” 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    50 min
  5. Peak TV or Content Overload? A TV Critic Explains the Streaming Era (E193)

    7 APR

    Peak TV or Content Overload? A TV Critic Explains the Streaming Era (E193)

    A wide-ranging discussion on whether we’re truly in a “golden age” of television—or just drowning in content—with sharp critiques of streaming economics, woke storytelling, and modern TV bloat. Guest Bio Graham Hillard is a TV critic for the Washington Examiner and editor at the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal. He writes cultural criticism focused on television, media trends, and the intersection of politics and entertainment. Topics Discussed Peak TV vs. content overload Streaming platforms ranking (Apple, HBO, Netflix, etc.) Decline in storytelling quality vs. increase in access Wokeness and ideology in modern television Binge vs. weekly release models Economics of streaming vs. advertiser-funded TV Survivor and reality TV evolution Sports as the last “live TV” stronghold Overrated vs. underrated current shows The problem of stretched-out storytelling Main Points 1. We Have More Access, Not Better Content Today’s viewers can access all past great TV instantly. But new shows are often weaker than those from 10–20 years ago. “Every era now contains every previous era.”  2. Streaming Incentives Are Hurting Storytelling Shows are stretched into 8 episodes when they should be 90-minute films. Content exists to keep subscribers paying monthly—not to tell tight stories. Result: slower pacing, filler, and weaker narratives. 3. Algorithms and Discovery Are Broken Recommendation systems often push irrelevant or low-quality content. Viewers waste time searching instead of watching. 4. Shift from Ads → Subscriptions Changed TV Structure Old TV: rigid formats (timed scenes, commercial breaks). New TV: flexible runtime—but often abused. More creative freedom, but also more excess and inconsistency. 5. “Wokeness” as a Dominant Narrative Force Many shows are perceived as overly ideological or predictable. Hillard argues: It’s often aimed at elite audiences, not general viewers Good execution (casting, pacing) can still make “woke” shows watchable Key tension: ideology vs. entertainment value. 6. Weekly Releases Are Back (for Money Reasons) Streaming is reverting to cable-style weekly drops. Purpose: prevent binge-and-cancel behavior. Tradeoff: More engagement over time But slower viewing experience 7. Sports = Last Anchor of Live TV Live sports are the only remaining “must-watch now” content. Fragmentation problem: Games spread across multiple platforms (Amazon, Netflix, Peacock, etc.) Result: higher costs and viewer frustration. 8. Reality TV (Survivor) Shows Cultural Shift Introduction of social/political dynamics disrupted gameplay. Hillard argues this “breaks the game structure.” Suggests recent seasons may be dialing this back. 9. Overrated vs. Underrated Shows Overrated: Game of Thrones spin-offs (declining quality) Underrated: Industry (high quality, low recognition) 10. TV’s Core Problem Today Too much content + too little discipline Writers are no longer constrained → stories become bloated “That could have been 3 episodes” is a recurring issue Top 3 Quotes 1. “If you have an hour to watch TV, you can spend 50 minutes just clicking through recommendations.” 2. “Every era contains every previous era now.” 3. “TV has almost totally displaced movies for middle-brow entertainment—and stretched stories that should be 90 minutes into 8 episodes.” 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    1hr 26min
  6. Stop Overpaying for Life—Move to Vietnam (E192)

    31 MAR

    Stop Overpaying for Life—Move to Vietnam (E192)

    A long-term expat breaks down the real economics, trade-offs, and lifestyle realities of retiring abroad—arguing Vietnam and Southeast Asia offer unmatched value if you fully commit. Guest Bio Evan Eh is a YouTuber and long-term expat who has lived abroad for 15+ years across Mexico, Australia, China, and Vietnam. He creates content helping North Americans relocate overseas, with a focus on cost-of-living arbitrage, lifestyle design, and practical logistics of living in Southeast Asia. Topics Discussed Retiring abroad (Vietnam, Thailand, Mexico, etc.) Cost-of-living arbitrage and purchasing power Snowbirding vs full relocation Healthcare systems abroad vs U.S./Canada Cultural differences and integration challenges Dating, community, and expat life Visa systems and common misconceptions Best and worst countries for expats Trade-offs: family, distance, and long-term decisions Main Points 1. Cost Arbitrage Is Real—and Powerful $2.5K–$3.5K/month can deliver a much higher quality of life in Vietnam vs North America. Weak local currencies (like Vietnamese dong) massively boost purchasing power. However, the benefit disappears if you frequently fly back home. 2. Full Commitment Beats “Snowbirding” The biggest gains (financial + lifestyle) come from fully relocating, not splitting time. Snowbirding reduces savings, slows integration, and limits upside. Best use of snowbirding: short-term “scouting phase,” not long-term strategy. 3. Southeast Asia vs Latin America Mexico: easier cultural transition, closer to U.S. Vietnam/Asia: bigger upside financially + stronger long-term growth energy. Thailand: world-class but getting more expensive. Malaysia: modern and affordable but lacks “retirement vibe.” 4. Lifestyle Trade-Offs Are Inevitable You gain affordability, freedom, and adventure… But may lose proximity to family, healthcare systems, and familiarity. Many retirees eventually drift back toward home as they age. 5. Healthcare Abroad Is Often Better Value Tiered systems: cheap public → mid-tier private → world-class elite. Example: knee surgery ~$1,300 vs $30K+ in U.S. High-end hospitals exist across Southeast Asia at a fraction of Western cost. 6. Most People Overthink Logistics Visa concerns, legalities, and risks are often exaggerated. The real constraint is mindset and willingness to act. Many people never move because they “catastrophize” unknowns. 7. The Ideal Profile Typically men in their 50s $2.5K–$3.5K/month income Seeking higher quality of life, not extreme frugality 8. Vietnam’s Unique Advantage Young population, rapid growth, optimism Strong sense of forward momentum Creates a “high-energy” environment missing in the West Top 3 Quotes 1. “Your purchasing power… is shocking. You can exponentially raise your quality of life.” 2. “If you’re sitting around getting stressed about things you don’t control… you’re just being anxious.” 3. “The absolute first step is to buy a plane ticket and go see for yourself.” 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    1hr 5min
  7. I Got Canceled for Studying Bones… Here’s What Happened | Dr. Elizabeth Weiss (E191)

    24 MAR

    I Got Canceled for Studying Bones… Here’s What Happened | Dr. Elizabeth Weiss (E191)

    Anthropologist Elizabeth Weiss argues that expanding repatriation policies and identity-driven academic trends are restricting access to skeletal collections and reshaping anthropology away from empirical science. Guest bio Elizabeth Weiss is a physical anthropologist and professor emeritus in the Department of Anthropology at San José State University. She studies skeletal remains, taught human osteology and forensic anthropology, curated the Ryan Mound collection, and is the author of On the Warpath: My Battles with Indians, Pretendians, and Woke Warriors and Repatriation and Erasing the Past. Topics discussed NAGPRA and the expansion of repatriation rules Loss of skeletal collections in universities and museums How repatriation affects research, teaching, and forensic anthropology Kennewick Man and the reburial of ancient remains The shift from physical anthropology toward identity politics “Pretendians,” academic cancellation campaigns, and administrative pressure The effect of DEI bureaucracy on universities and anthropology departments Why students increasingly go abroad to study osteology and archaeology The future of anthropology in the US, Canada, Australia, and Europe Main points Weiss says repatriation has moved far beyond its original purpose and now threatens to remove not just human remains, but also associated materials, replicas, scans, and even teaching collections. She argues that once skeletal collections are lost, future research is permanently limited, especially in biological anthropology, archaeology, and forensic science. Teaching with real bones matters because students need hands-on experience identifying fragments, variation, and differences between human and non-human remains. Weiss sees Kennewick Man as a major turning point, saying his reburial helped open the door to repatriating other very ancient remains. She argues that traditional knowledge is increasingly being treated as overriding scientific evidence in repatriation decisions. According to Weiss, the field has shifted away from intellectual curiosity and scientific rigor toward identity politics, activist scholarship, and moral posturing. She says university administrators can still pressure tenured professors by cutting off resources, access, and institutional support, even if outright firing is difficult. Weiss also argues that higher education bureaucracy benefits from expanding categories like homelessness, food insecurity, and identity classification. Despite her criticism, she still believes anthropology is too fascinating to abandon and hopes the field can recover. Books discussed On the Warpath: My Battles with Indians, Pretendians, and Woke Warriors — Elizabeth Weiss Repatriation and Erasing the Past — Elizabeth Weiss and James Springer Laws and policies discussed Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (CalNAGPRA) 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    1hr 31min
  8. The American Dream Isn’t Dead—You’re Just Being Lied To (E190)

    17 MAR

    The American Dream Isn’t Dead—You’re Just Being Lied To (E190)

    An economist explains why the American Dream isn’t dead—and how policy, not just personal effort, shapes who gets ahead. 👤 Guest Bio  Dr. Justin Callais is Chief Economist at the Archbridge Institute, co-editor of Profectus, and author of the Substack Debunking Degrowth. His research focuses on economic growth, social mobility, and policy-driven barriers to opportunity. 🧠 Topics Discussed Is the American Dream still alive? How social mobility is actually measured Inequality vs mobility (and why people confuse them) State-by-state differences in opportunity Housing, regulation, and barriers to entry Trade school vs college vs entrepreneurship AI and the future of work The role of mindset vs policy Why people misunderstand the past (1950s vs today) What policies actually increase mobility 🔑 Main Points The U.S. still offers strong upward mobility relative to most countries Mobility ≠ inequality (fixing inequality doesn’t automatically improve mobility) Housing regulation is one of the biggest barriers to opportunity States with less regulation and stronger institutions outperform others Entrepreneurship and economic growth are key drivers of mobility The American Dream is more alive than people perceive Negative narratives distort reality and reduce individual agency AI will change jobs—but mostly by augmenting, not eliminating, work Success paths vary: trades, college, or entrepreneurship can all work Policy environment matters more than individual effort alone 💬 Top 3 Quotes “The American Dream is still alive—people just don’t believe it is.” “Not all inequality is bad—some of it reflects value creation, not exploitation.” “If you make it harder to build, hire, or invest—you make it harder to move up.” 🎙 The Pod is hosted by Jesse Wright💬 For guest suggestions, questions, or media inquiries, reach out at https://elpodcast.media/📬 Never miss an episode – subscribe and follow wherever you get your podcasts.⭐️ If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review the show. It helps others find us.  Thanks for listening!

    1hr 35min

About

In El Podcast, anything and everything is up for discussion. Grab a drink and join us in this epic virtual happy hour!

You Might Also Like