\n<\/p>\n
Subscribe here: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube<\/em><\/p>\n In this inaugural episode of Galaxy Brain, Charlie Warzel examines the state of the internet as it stands now in November 2025 with Hank Green, a true citizen of the internet\u2014somebody who has made a living riding the algorithmic waves of the social web. Green started his YouTube channel, Vlogbrothers, with his brother, John, back in 2007, and they now have more than 4 million subscribers. Hank is a creator\u2014and not just in the modern sense of the word. He\u2019s an entrepreneur, an educator, a social-media celebrity, and somebody who understands how to build trust and massive audiences online. He\u2019s deeply attuned to the ways that the technological tools we use begin to change us.<\/p>\n In this episode, Warzel and Green look back on a time when the internet felt small, more serendipitous, and inspiring, and try to tease apart what went wrong. Are people starting to leave TikTok? How exactly did the internet turn into a misery machine? What makes a great headline? Why is it easier now for some people to trust creators over institutions? Green helps make sense of the internet we live on and offers his reasons for why it might get worse before it gets better (but it could get better!).<\/p>\n The following is a transcript of the episode:<\/em><\/p>\n Hank Green:<\/strong> Like, the thing that really gives me hope is watching teenagers think that what I do is so goddamn cringe, and I\u2019m like: Yes, I\u2019m gonna do it more, so that you think it\u2019s more cringe and you never do what I\u2019ve done with my life. Stay away from this box<\/em>.<\/p>\n Charlie Warzel:<\/strong> Stay away.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Stay away from the misery square<\/em>.<\/p>\n [Music<\/em>]<\/strong><\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I\u2019m Charlie Warzel, and welcome to Galaxy Brain<\/em>. Thank you for joining me here on the ground floor of this project. I am thrilled that you are here. This show is nominally about the internet and attention and the ways that all the tools and the media that we use and consume change us in weird and unexpected ways.<\/p>\n And for a long time, I used to describe the internet as this black box, right, that we piped culture and politics and the economy and society into. And what came out at the other end was the same thing, only slightly misshapen and unpredictably weird. But technology has always just been a cheat code for me.<\/p>\n It is a way for me to tell stories and figure things out about the world. The internet is so firmly a part of every aspect of our lives that basically every story is a technology story. All the stories that I love to tell are about us as humans, how we come together, how we\u2019re manipulated, how we talk to each other, and how these tools change the way that we see ourselves and the way we see our neighbors.<\/p>\n I want Galaxy Brain<\/em> to explore all of this. I want to delight and obsess over news stories that I can\u2019t stop thinking about because they\u2019re ridiculous or they\u2019re weird. I wanna talk to experts, and I wanna take you into my reporting process. I have so many great conversations in my work, and I want them to show up here. My hope is to have them in public.<\/p>\n I wanna learn, and I wanna think out loud with all of you. I wanna make sense of big news stories, but also I just wanna bask in the absurdity of the internet and go down weird rabbit holes. Being online too much can make me feel insane, but what I love about it is that the internet seamlessly blends high and low culture in our feeds.<\/p>\n When something online feels good, it\u2019s because it\u2019s pairing a bit of informational chaos with this feeling of connection and also this sense of knowledge-seeking. I want the show to feel that way, and that\u2019s why I asked Hank Green to be my first guest. Hank is, as one of his social-media bios suggests, a long-time internet guy, but that\u2019s underselling it completely.<\/p>\n Along with his brother John, Hank started one of the earlier successful YouTube channels all the way back before the iPhone, in 2007. He went on to found Complexly, which is an educational-media company. Another of Hank\u2019s bios says, I might have taught you biology, and that isn\u2019t underselling it<\/em>. It is virtually impossible to list all the things that Hank has done. This summer, he and a friend were messing around with ideas and came up with an app to help people focus. It quickly became the No. 1 free app on the App Store.<\/p>\n There\u2019s a website that you can go to that counts how many days it\u2019s been since Hank started a new project. He is one of the original creators, but he also embodies the creative spirit of the internet. And so I wanted to have Hank here for what I\u2019m calling a State of the Union of the internet in 2025.<\/p>\n This is a look at where things stand. It\u2019s a conversation that\u2019s meant to level-set this podcast going forward. We talked about how the internet has become a misery machine, how institutions have lost trust, how maybe they can begin to win it back. It\u2019s a conversation that touches on this universal frustration of being online and knowing that you\u2019re being manipulated by all these algorithms\u2014and what, if anything, we can do to push back.<\/p>\n Hank is honest, he\u2019s hopeful, he\u2019s funny, and he\u2019s real, which is why he\u2019s the perfect person to kick off this project. Here\u2019s my conversation with Hank Green.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Charlie Warzel, thank you for joining me on the Galaxy Brain<\/em> podcast.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Thank you for doing an introduction for me. Frankly, you know, I\u2019m new at this thing, and you\u2019ve done it once or twice before. So I just, I felt like maybe that would be a good thing. In fact, we may just give you this whole thing if you want it.<\/p>\n Would you like a podcast for The Atlantic<\/em>?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> I\u2019ll ask you some questions. I bet I could come up with something.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Good. Good. This is a total panic mode. Minute one. We\u2019re just, like, throwing the whole thing out the window. Really, thank you. Thank you so much. I think you may be sort of the perfect person to kick a lot of this off. Because you are like truly a person of the internet in ways that are, I think, unique.<\/p>\n But I wanted to start really quickly out the gate, and ask you to think back to a time\u2014it can be yesterday, it could be 1998, it can be any time\u2014that you consider, like when you close your eyes, picture a golden age of the internet. Not objectively\u2014your kind of golden age. Your golden moment.<\/p>\n Like, what is it? What pops into your head?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> 2012.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Why?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Uh, it\u2019s everything until Gamergate was great.<\/p>\n [Laughter.<\/em>]<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> I don\u2019t know. There was like; it was the moment. So I, as a YouTuber, I\u2019m primarily a YouTuber. I think that I\u2019ve moved all around and had, like, places where I\u2019ve had a lot of fun that aren\u2019t YouTube. But ultimately, YouTube has been a very stable place. And that\u2019s where we started as creators.<\/p>\n I mean, I did actually start as an internet creator before YouTube, but YouTube was the place where I had actual success. And there was just this, like, time when there was like, everybody was friends. It wasn\u2019t a very big community. It was big. Like, it felt like it mattered\u2014but to the people who were there, but not to everyone else.<\/p>\n And that\u2019s always the best time on a new platform. Like, when everybody there realizes this is something special. And we\u2019re all here together experiencing this special thing, but nobody outside of the thing knows that it\u2019s special yet. And nobody has ever had the dream of becoming\u2014like, at that point, nobody on YouTube had ever dreamt of becoming a \u201cYouTuber.\u201d<\/p>\n And so all of these people, you know, they had other dreams. But then they were like, What if, like, this is great, though? <\/em><\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I always think about around that same time on Twitter, it really felt a lot like\u2014because that was sort of the place where I had that experience. And it felt so much like walking into\u2014like every day, opening up the app on your phone, just felt like walking into a lunchroom, right?<\/p>\n Like, it was contained in that way. It was obviously bigger than that. There were a million lunchrooms everywhere. But my lunchroom was like\u2014these people. It was like, I\u2019m gonna check in on these people.<\/em> And some of these people are, you know, dicks. And some of these people are, like, my best friends. And some of these people are just the\u2014and you just kind of go to the different tables. And it was like, Okay, you know, I walked through the lunchroom; time to go to whatever class<\/em>.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Time to actually go to work. Yeah.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Time to go to work. Okay, so with that as a little bit of a baseline, in like a sentence or two\u2014like, same sort of thing, closing your eyes\u2014when you feel the internet now, like, when you conceptualize it, what comes to mind? Internet 2025.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Weight. W-E-I-G-H-T. Like, just weight.<\/p>\n It feels so heavy. It feels, it\u2014we have a government run by the discourse, and so it feels like the discourse matters so much. It feels like everything matters a lot. And I don\u2019t know that it does, but I don\u2019t know that it doesn\u2019t. It just feels\u2014it all feels very heavy. It\u2019s very hard. You know, you can go have a fun time in some corners, but it\u2019s always sort of tinged with the weight.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I think so. And I think there\u2019s also this feeling, too, that the big part of that, I think, is made by outside forces. Like, life in 2025, and all the things that are happening that are heavy. But I also think that there\u2019s this\u2014the bigness of all of it. Like, the size and scope and scale of the internet right now is also this way where I think so many of the problems that we have boil down to this notion of: Nobody knows what anyone\u2019s experience is like, right?<\/p>\n Like, what anyone else is doing in this place. And I think that that causes just a lot of like agita, right? Like, even in our conception of politics, and this candidate, and what are they thinking? What do working-class people think, and what do, you know, the elites think? And it\u2019s like we\u2019re all shadowboxing this idea of it, because we don\u2019t know what anyone else is consuming.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> I think that sometimes people can like be legitimately shocked by, like, a majoritarian viewpoint. Like, they\u2019ll hear somebody say something that\u2019s pretty much right down the middle of the road, average-American stuff. And they\u2019ll be like, Whoa, people believe that still<\/em>? And it\u2019s like: You\u2019re in a little corner, and you think it\u2019s everybody. There\u2019s so much of that going on. And the other thing that I\u2019ll say\u2014I wanna hit you with this, and I\u2019m curious what you think. I think that as these things start to feel more important, the stuff that succeeds on them, and of course algorithmically, sort of amplified, recommended platforms\u2014which they all are now\u2014they\u2019re all about like, what keeps people engaged. What keeps people watching, or, you know, clicking or responding or whatever.<\/p>\n The things that are sending those signals to the algorithms become more and more the things that, like, feel very important. And so instead of, you know, TikTok being a place where, Wow, that was a cool couple of twins doing a dance<\/em>, it\u2019s like, I just found out about this thing that the news media isn\u2019t covering that is a very, very big deal.<\/em> It is going to impact, you know, you or the least powerful in society.<\/em> Or is in some way morally stained, is some way outrageous or reprehensible. And the thing that gets selected for goes from being, like, a thing that makes you feel good to a thing that makes you feel bad.<\/p>\n And that happened. And that\u2019s like\u2014almost, it seems to be impossible to not have happen on an algorithmically amplified platform. And the more algorithmically amplified it is, the harder it is for that to not happen to it. I think that Instagram actually intentionally puts the brakes on this. I think that YouTube has some structures that make this happen more slowly, but I think they also might intentionally put brakes on it.<\/p>\n I think that Twitter puts the accelerator on it. X accelerates this for us. But I think that it\u2019s very hard to not have this be a thing. And I think that what it selects for is, like, just some guy. So never like a person with any kind of, like, institutional legitimacy. Just some person reporting on something that is, you know, some combination of hidden, outrageous, disgusting. Makes you feel superior to others, while making you like scared or angry.<\/p>\n And, you know, outrage bait <\/em>is what we generally call this, but I think that, like, a great deal of the internet is sort of made of outrage bait. But as a creator, what I always think is: We make, as creators, we make what the algorithms want. And the algorithms want what the people will watch. And there\u2019s this like\u2014I work with these algorithms.<\/p>\n I know that I have to get views; I have to compete in this environment. And so I definitely, like, I have to fight hard to not do that, even as a person who already has a lot of built-up audience and legitimacy, and like all of that stuff that I have. So I kind of totally understand newer creators who indulge in this, because it\u2019s the only way to get attention.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Yeah. I feel like it is so difficult. This happens sometimes, I find, when I\u2019m trying at The Atlantic<\/em> here to create headlines, right? So you spend all this time going through this process of making something, right? And it\u2019s the research, the reporting, the crafting, the editing, the making everything into what you think is like the most responsible, compelling, interesting unit of information.<\/p>\n And then you realize you have this problem of like, Oh crap, it has to travel<\/em>. Right? And then,, how do I do that? And there\u2019s this, a thing that I find very frustrating with like the term clickbait<\/em>. Like I\u2019ve always been sort of against the term. Only because, of course, every single person who makes something that they think is of value wants people to click on it. Yeah. Like, it is not a bad thing to try to do that. But the process I have felt over time, and especially, like, especially given the different platforms and stuff, I feel like the YouTubers almost have an advantage here, right? Because it is something like, you have the auto-play part of the algorithm; you have the recommendation situation built in. But especially on the text-based social networks, it\u2019s like, okay, how\u2014like getting that moment where you come up with the headline.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> I\u2019ll give you an exact example of this. So, this Tuesday, my brother posted a video on a YouTube channel that was a\u2014he went to the Philippines to like look at how they are doing tuberculosis screening, to try and figure out how to lower the burden of tuberculosis. Maybe on this one island, eradicate tuberculosis from the island\u2014which is like, it\u2019s a possible thing to do.<\/p>\n And he posted the video, and he had three different titles. All of them underperformed tremendously. And I think the best-performing one was\u2014\u201cWe Know How to End TB; They Are Actually Doing It,\u201d was the title. And then, and this video was on track to be our worst-performing video in the last two or three months.<\/p>\n Because, and like, it\u2019s about the most important thing. You know, it\u2019s, like, a really easy way to\u2014and tuberculosis is the most deadly infectious disease in the world. This would be a really easy way to have that not be the case. John texted me, and he was like, \u201cYou\u2019re better at titles than me. Help me. It\u2019s fail. Like, nobody\u2019s watching this video.\u201d And you wanna know what the title is now?<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Please.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> \u201cElon Canceled This. We Are Doing It Anyway.\u201d<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Yeah, yeah.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> It has to\u2014<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Mr. Beast jumped this train into a canyon and, uh, tuberculosis.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> It has to tie into some like narrative that we already have, right? Like, some narrative that we are already caring about. And like, you know, I am, I think, legitimately outraged about the gutting of USAID. And that was, like, one of the most morally reprehensible things I can imagine: for the richest man in the world to cancel aid to the poorest people in the world. And for that to just happen in front of all of our eyes, and we have to keep going on with our lives.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Absolutely. And so, that is perfect.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> It makes sense. It makes sense that that title would work. But, like, that\u2019s not what I wanna say. What I wanna say is, all that should matter is: We\u2019re trying to eradicate tuberculosis. And let\u2019s just have that be a positive message. And like, that\u2019s the game we\u2019re all always playing, all of the time. But what did I do? I made it about something bad.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Right? Right. Yeah. And that just, that affects\u2014<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Everything. Everything. I just think it makes us miserable.<\/p>\n I think that like what we\u2019re living in right now is the world according to misery, and that you get Trump in that world. Of course you do. Like if misery is in charge, then you get, like, a conductor of the misery symphony,<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Right? This was a little bit of\u2014I, I watched this video from Zohran Mamdani\u2019s campaign the other day, sort of like the last-push kind of thing.<\/p>\n And it\u2019s just the thing that I\u2019ve noticed in all those videos. He gets this, you know, a lot of people talking about, like, \u201cHe\u2019s so good at the internet,\u201d right? And like, I think that he is. And he\u2019s charismatic and all that stuff. But he\u2019s also just like found this great way to, like, invert that; flip that. Like, it\u2019s all about\u2014what makes it all stand out to me as someone is, like, Oh wow, here\u2019s one guy who sees campaigning and politics as a joyful thing.<\/em> Yeah. Like it is not\u2014<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> He seems happy all the time.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> It is so outside of the misery machine, right? Like, he just walks around New York, like dapping people up. Like, that\u2019s not who he is like; you know, that\u2019s a character in some sense that he\u2019s playing, too. But it\u2019s so different that it\u2019s almost like\u2014it feels almost alien on this internet.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> And it gives me a little bit of hope. Like, the thing that really gives me hope is watching teenagers think that what I do is so goddamn cringe, and I\u2019m like: Yes, I\u2019m gonna do it more, so that you think it\u2019s more cringe, and you never do what I\u2019ve done with my life. Stay away from this box. <\/em><\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Stay away.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Stay away from the misery square. <\/em><\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I love that, that you, I love that. I think that, yeah, we need to\u2014I think there needs to be a complete change, like cringes.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Yeah.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> We have to take back cringe. Cringe has to be\u2014we have to take it back. I think personally.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Well, something\u2019s always going to be cringe. The thing we need to take back is, like, we can\u2019t let,trying too hard\u2014like that\u2019s, of course, always the cringiest thing is appearing to try very hard. But I do think that a lot of young people now are like\u2014you know, it\u2019s, it\u2019s funny that like Jonathan Haidt\u2019s out here being like, We must protect our children from the internet.<\/em> And the children are like, The internet\u2019s kind of lame.<\/em> It like happens always exactly at the same time. Like, the kids have their own backlash against it. And they\u2019re like, \u201cActually, we shouldn\u2019t try to make this look forbidden and cool.\u201d<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Exactly. No, exactly.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> But for clarity, we should keep them out of schools.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> The phones.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Yes.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Or the children. Maybe the children too. Just keep everyone out of school.<\/p>\n Green: <\/strong>Well, you know, we tried that for a year or so, and that was great. No problems at all.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Oh, well see, you know, actually. But I am sort of curious in terms of thinking about misery and the internet, and also this idea of like, you know, what it\u2019s doing to us.<\/p>\n You had a video. I don\u2019t know, a couple months ago, I think in the summer. The title of it was, \u201cYou\u2019re Not Addicted to Content, You\u2019re Starving for Information.\u201d And like, the genesis of that video, when you\u2019re talking about it, was trying to come up with the right analogy for sort of our information, right?<\/p>\n Or like social-media ecosystem. Correct me if I\u2019m wrong here, but you were grappling with the idea of like, you know, cigarettes is a nice easy frame, but it\u2019s probably not that. And it seemed like in that video you sort of got a little closer to this idea of hyper-processed foods, right?<\/p>\n This, like, \u201cYou\u2019re constantly eating, but you\u2019re never satiated\u201d kind of thing. Is that, I mean, is that separate in your mind from this issue of misery, or is that really the same thing that the hyper-processed stuff is like the \u201cmisery content\u201d\u2014and what we actually want is something nourishing?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Yeah; I think they\u2019re not the exact same thing, but they\u2019re very related. You know. If I mean a little bit, the sort of hypothetical to ask is what would happen if you, like\u2014so step one: Your reality is created by what you pay attention to. So that\u2019s step one.<\/p>\n And I think that that\u2019s kind of philosophically true. No. 2: What would happen if you gave the smartest people in the world the most powerful tools in the world for controlling people\u2019s attention? And then you optimized that for making them never look away. And that\u2019s very similar to asking the question: What if a big food company was like, \u201cWhat is the way in which we will take the ingredients of food and make something that people will never stop eating?\u201d And you get a Cool Ranch Dorito, or you get a Big Mac and fries with a Coke. I mean, god bless a Big Mac and fries with a Coke. It\u2019s very good. I understand why I would eat a lot of it. Sometimes people are like, \u201cHyper-palatable food is so gross.\u201d And I\u2019m like, no, it\u2019s like, in the name. It\u2019s so good. I\u2019m glad that you\u2019ve got your brain in a place where you think it\u2019s gross, but man, I want it now. I want a walking taco right now. Um, which is\u2014I don\u2019t know, do they have those other places? Charlie?<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Walking taco? No, I don\u2019t think so.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> No, that\u2019s, is that like a Mountain West thing?<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I think it is. I think it is the greatest time zone in the world, by the way.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Okay.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Absolutely. Perfect time zone.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Yeah. Oh yeah.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Somehow adding one hour makes working with the East Coast\u2014the bully time zone\u2014makes it nearly impossible, somehow, working in the mountain. Yeah. It\u2019s like you\u2019re basically like, you live in New York or D.C. and\u2014<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Then you just gotta, you just gotta pretend. Don\u2019t even tell people where you live.<\/p>\n Warzel: <\/strong>It\u2019s awful.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> And like, in the same way that you might end up with like, some foods that are very palatable because they are salty and some because they\u2019re very sweet and some because they\u2019re very fatty, I think that you get a variety of kinds of hyper-palatable information. And one of them is the sort of misery-inducing outrage bait.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> So how do you combat this? Like, in some senses, right? Like, because you are a creator in a traditional sense. But you\u2019re also an educator of millions of people all the time. Yeah.<\/p>\n Green: <\/strong>In a nontraditional sense.<\/p>\n Warzel: <\/strong>But like, you are creating. I was talking to one of our colleagues, and I was like, \u201cI\u2019m gonna talk to Hank. Do you know of him?\u201d And it was basically like, \u201cYeah, like I was raised by him.\u201d Like, your bio, you know, is like, \u201cI probably taught you biology\u201d or whatnot, right? But like, I think so much about the way that, you know, you say being trained by these algorithms, trying to use the skill for good.<\/p>\n But also there\u2019s that sense that we just talked about, right? With the headlines. It\u2019s like, sometimes you gotta use the dark arts, right? In benevolent ways, and just get people to care. But like, how are you feeling about your ability to balance that? Like, do you feel like you\u2019re, on a day-to-day basis, like you\u2019re winning this? Or do you feel like the forces are slowly kind of crushing?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Like, do you mean personally? Or like in the work, publicly?<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I mean personally; like in the sense of, do you feel, like personally in your work? I guess so not like, do you feel like those forces are winning? Or do you feel like there are ways like that we can really just keep this at bay?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Um, yeah. No, I think that the forces are winning. But I think that it\u2019s like a long battle. There\u2019s no doubt in, well, if we still exist and everything, there\u2019s no doubt in my mind that there will be a future where we will all look back on, you know, the Twitter era as very similar to the yellow-journalism era.<\/p>\n And like, we will have developed a bunch of new norms and taboos, and certain behaviors will feel very cringe. And certain people will be like, \u201cOh my God, I can\u2019t believe, like, people listened to the things that strangers said to them on Twitter, and that was how reality was created.\u201d<\/p>\n I think that we\u2019re still in the \u201cIt\u2019s getting worse\u201d part, though. There\u2019s lots of signals that, like, I feel like it\u2019s getting worse less quickly.<\/p>\n Warzel: <\/strong>How so?<\/p>\n Green: <\/strong>I think that the fracturing of Twitter, as much as it hurt me. I really, I loved Twitter.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Same.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> I think that the fracturing of Twitter has been, just sort of like\u2014a lot of people went to Bluesky. A lot of people went to Threads. A lot of people just don\u2019t do it anymore.<\/p>\n I think that, like, that\u2019s kind of the best outcome. And Twitter itself has become much worse. Of course, it\u2019s a very difficult place to go if you\u2019re not a racist. And I think that it\u2019s probably not ineffective at turning people who are mostly not racist to, like, more racist than they used to be.<\/p>\n So, I think it\u2019s a bad place to hang out. And I think that Elon is very aboveboard about the fact that he would like to use both the algorithms of promotion and the sort of effects of large language models to change people\u2019s reality. Like he doesn\u2019t shy away from saying. Most of them, I think, do know that they\u2019re doing that, and do kind of like that. They\u2019re doing it a little bit, but they don\u2019t say it. But Elon says it. You might think that with all the sex bots that it would actually make people have less sex. But no, we\u2019re gonna turn the sex dial up, and people are gonna make more babies.<\/p>\n That\u2019s he\u2014he says these things.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Right. Also, the, the notion, too, of like creating his own, you know, Wikipedia. Grokipedia, yeah. And the idea of like, it\u2019s\u2014\u201cThe facts aren\u2019t really fitting the way that I view the world.\u201d<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Yeah.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> \u201cSo we would like to basically take Wikipedia, take the skeleton, strip it, and then inject our reality.\u201d<\/p>\n And it\u2019s like, I do get what you\u2019re saying. There is something minusculely refreshing about like: Okay, well at least it\u2019s like right there. At least we know what the political project is.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> And what it feels like is\u2014it\u2019s starting to seem just kind of gross and unproductive. And like, I see it in my physical world, where people are like, \u201cOh, poor Hank; he has to be on the internet.\u201d<\/p>\n And I\u2019ve seen a lot of people. I\u2019d really like to see TikTok\u2019s numbers, but I feel like people are leaving. I feel like the numbers on TikTok are a lot lower than they used to be. I feel like people have moved more toward Instagram, which is very intentionally kind of more on \u201cAmerica\u2019s funniest home videos,\u201d and to longer-form content.<\/p>\n And there\u2019s something I think, really\u2014as a person who also loved TikTok in its heyday and participated very actively there\u2014I think that there\u2019s something very bad about giving away all of your decision making to the algorithm. So like, you never know the choices that you\u2019re making. You know you are choosing to keep watching, and that\u2019s the big signal that it gets.<\/p>\n But you don\u2019t know you\u2019re making that choice. Whereas on YouTube, you go, and you, like, pick out which videos you wanna watch, based on who you like, what thumbnails are appealing, what titles seem interesting.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> It really does feel, in that way, so much more like going to like the video store, right?<\/p>\n Like yeah, going back to \u201990s or whatever, right? Like, you do that thing. I pull it up; like it blows my mind too: how, more than any other platform, I think the more I put into YouTube, the better my experience feels. You know, I mean, not always a hundred percent of the time. But it\u2019s like, I open that thing up now, and I feel a little bit more like, okay: This thing kind of knows me, and it knows here\u2019s my guilty-pleasure section; here\u2019s my, you know, like I\u2019m being a dude watching sports stuff. Here\u2019s my podcasts. You know, all that kind of stuff. Whereas like with TikTok, it feels, even when it\u2019s good, like being waterboarded, right?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> It\u2019s just, yeah. I mean, it\u2019s there. The hardest time on TikTok for me was when I was going through cancer treatment. And I would get, like \u2026 I had to stop using TikTok. Because I would never know when I was gonna get hit with illness content. Because, of course, I had started to selectively watch that kind of content longer.<\/p>\n And I\u2019d just be scrolling, and then it\u2019d be like a person in the hospital dying of cancer. And I\u2019m like, Well, this app is no longer useful to me<\/em>, because of course I\u2019m gonna watch that. But like, I shouldn\u2019t be\u2014like, that\u2019s not helping me.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> This also, this makes me think of too, is the way that what you just said about, you know, younger people sort of being like, \u201cYo, internet, uh.\u201d You know, we\u2019ve had a lot of that. Like the thank you. I think some of this, too, is just like the only sort of truism I think about the internet and like, younger, generations who\u2019ve just grown up totally immersed in it\u2014is they just have such an innate understanding of the way that they\u2019re being manipulated by these things.<\/p>\n And I think, more so than anyone else, they\u2019re a little bit like\u2014as soon as they can feel that, like heavily, there\u2019s this real, \u201cOh, come on man.\u201d Like \u201cYou know, like, I\u2019m checking out for a moment.\u201d Not forever, obviously.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> But I think there has to be a real pushback against manipulation, which is a lot of what the algorithms are about, and a lot of what the algorithms inspire creators to do.<\/p>\n You know, on TikTok, it\u2019s really important that you keep people watching for the first five seconds. And so you wanna have them kind of be confused for the first five seconds, so that they\u2019re like, \u201cWait, I don\u2019t know.\u201d Because if they think they know what\u2019s coming, then they\u2019ll swipe away.<\/p>\n They\u2019ll be like, \u201cOh, I know what\u2019s coming.\u201d That, you know, reward has already occurred now. And like, but eventually that starts to feel really manipulative, because people get what you\u2019re doing. You\u2019re intentionally keeping them confused. And I think that, like, we need to have a backlash against manipulation.<\/p>\n I also think that we have to have a backlash against\u2014I think we hopefully will have some kind of backlash against outrage, which is like the ultimate form of manipulation. And like, it can be used for good. I\u2019m not saying it can\u2019t be, and it has been. But as we record this, the government is still shut down.<\/p>\n And I think it is in part still shut down because what\u2019s the incentive to open it back up? What\u2019s the incentive for anyone to capitulate, when everybody hates everybody and working together is the thing that loses you the primary? You know, like it\u2019s the thing that\u2019s selected against. And so we need some kind of like awakening.<\/p>\n That\u2019s sort of: \u201cOkay. So it turns out when government doesn\u2019t work at all, that is bad.\u201d It\u2019s bad for everybody. But it\u2019s also bad for the politicians, and so, what are the mechanisms at work here? And I think one of the mechanisms is that there\u2019s like four guys in charge of defining everybody\u2019s reality, and the only thing they\u2019re optimizing for three of them is profit.<\/p>\n And then the last one is optimizing for \u201cBelieve the same things Elon Musk believes.\u201d Which\u2014his entire worldview was defined by algorithms optimized for profit. So he is like the meta-profit. The meta-algorithm has happened inside of Elon Musk\u2019s brain.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Yeah, no, I mean\u2014that\u2019s such a great way to describe this sort of period where it feels like we are. Like a lot of the people in Silicon Valley have been radicalized by their own products, and now they\u2019re exerting just an extreme amount of authority.<\/p>\n But what they are parroting is the reality built by the algorithms, like the ideas. It is this very odd thing. It\u2019s like, finally, like everyone\u2019s getting radicalized or changed by these platforms in weird ways\u2014but it\u2019s like it ended up happening not only to the people who built the project or the tool. But also like the people\u2014the tool made them so much money they can take that money, turn it into influence, turn the influence into policy, or reality, or whatever. And it\u2019s like, oh my lord, like this cycle just built itself into, yeah, into reality. I think that\u2019s a very good way to be thinking about it. And also very sad way.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> A very, yeah. No, I don\u2019t like it.<\/p>\n I hadn\u2019t said it that way before.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Well, that\u2019s what podcasts are about. Okay. Yeah. Figuring out what it is you have to say; it\u2019s like therapy that way. So I wanna talk though a little bit about, with all of this in this maw, and as someone who is an effective communicator and educator, as we just talked about, an effective creator, someone with lots of audience in lots of different places.<\/p>\n After the election, I had a phone call with you in which I was like, trying to make sense of some of the stuff, especially in, like, the media ecosystem. And this idea, this long, tortured conversation on my end, about trust, right? And this idea that institutions have lost tons of trust, and in some ways the parts of the institutions that are meant to build them, right?<\/p>\n Like fact-checking, editing, all these things, are actually weaponized often against them. And it\u2019s this notion that, like, well, \u201cWhy did they edit that? What are they hiding?\u201d Even though it\u2019s just like a quality-control mechanism. Meanwhile, creators\u2014many of whom are doing great work, some who are, you know, doing less great work\u2014but mostly like working very independently, sometimes flying by the seat of their pants.<\/p>\n Again, this is not to demean anything in that space. But just people who are sort of more on their own, not part of these institutions, yeah, have built up so much of this trust. Like they have kind of collected the rest of that trust. They have it. And it\u2019s this very odd\u2014understandable in many ways, but\u2014this very odd balance.<\/p>\n And so you\u2019re somebody who, I mean, you have built up tons of trust with audiences. And I\u2019m curious: What do you think about this interesting inversion of trust in the world as it is right now?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> I think it\u2019s bad. On the whole, I think that there\u2019s lots of reasons why groups of people working together are better than people working alone.<\/p>\n I say this as a person who\u2019s done it both ways. But I also know that there\u2019s\u2014at the moment, people really like it when it\u2019s a person doing it on their own. And I have thought a lot about what it is that has made that happen and what\u2019s driving that. And also I think it\u2019s important to recognize that people are also this way with LLMs. So it\u2019s not just creators. You also can go on to ChatGPT, and you can ask it a question. And it\u2019s easier to trust ChatGPT than it is to trust a news-media organization, which is also very interesting. I think that it is a, not so much\u2014I had a fight with Nilay Patel about this, actually, I\u2019m remembering.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> All right\u2014let\u2019s go.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Um, he\u2014<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Airs dirty laundry.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Well, Nilay is. This was public, so don\u2019t think that it\u2019s\u2014it\u2019s not a secret fight. And it\u2019s a productive fight. We are very good pals. His take was, the platforms want you to believe this, but it\u2019s not actually true. And I think that\u2019s wrong.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> The platforms want you to believe which thing?<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> That individuals are more popular and more trustworthy than\u2014that people trust individuals more than they trust institutions now. And in fact, the platforms are just like, \u201cYes, yes, please believe that.\u201d Because it\u2019s much easier to extract value out of individuals than out of institutions.<\/p>\n Institutions will argue with you about what you could and like\u2014whereas I\u2019m like, Are you gonna gimme attention? Come on, give it, I\u2019ll do anything. I\u2019ll do anything for a little, just a little bit more.<\/em> And especially like, you know, there\u2019s always somebody to come and replace whoever burns out.<\/p>\n You know, there\u2019s always somebody else who will do it for not very much money or just for the clout. So I think that it is part of the misery machine. This is my take. It is part of the misery machine, and you have to ask if you are going to make content that makes people outraged.<\/p>\n Who is the villain? Who are good villains? And news media is good villains, and I see all the time, people will say, \u201cThe news isn\u2019t covering this story.\u201d So there was that flood in Alaska, and I saw a bunch of TikToks about how the news media wasn\u2019t covering the flood in Alaska.<\/p>\n And they were from people who had read news stories about it. And the reality is that nobody was paying attention to the floods in Alaska. But if you lead in with \u201cThe news media isn\u2019t covering this,\u201d then people do start to pay attention. So they weren\u2019t\u2014like, it wasn\u2019t that big of a deal to them.<\/p>\n It didn\u2019t really matter to them that there were a bunch of Indigenous communities in Alaska that had been wiped out by these floods. But then it kind of did matter when it turned out there was a big power structure at play. And that was fitting into a narrative of big, powerful institutions ignoring marginalized people. Or big powerful, or,, this sort of Trump \u201cfake news\u201d stuff.<\/p>\n Big, powerful institutions doing these un-American, dangerous things. And so you can come at it from either direction, and the news media is always a good target. And it\u2019s always a good path into getting views and, like, amping up the stakes, amping up the outrage. Making it seem like it\u2019s somebody\u2019s fault. And it\u2019s not your fault.<\/p>\n So whose fault is it? \u201cIt\u2019s the fault of the person who wrote the publication where I read the story.\u201d Um, like, but that doesn\u2019t count, because like, you know. How does, who determines where the story goes on the front page? Ultimately, you gotta understand that\u2019s determined by what people are interested in. And the newspaper will do everything in its power to have the most interesting story be the one at the top, and like they\u2019re trying to suss that out all the time.<\/p>\n That\u2019s the whole goddamn point of the editorial team\u2014to try and figure out which stories are interesting enough to cover. But anyway, regardless, that\u2019s just one sort of specific example. I think that the news media is just a particularly good target. I think that institutions are good targets, because it seems like they should be perfect. At any time, you can find a way that they\u2019re imperfect, or tell a story about how they are, even if they didn\u2019t make a mistake. Which is also fine. Then that\u2019s just another sort of, like, puzzle piece in the misery puzzle. I think institutions are just easy to attack. And that goes for the CDC, it goes for academia, it goes for the news media, it goes for the federal government. It goes for everything.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> It\u2019s very\u2014there\u2019s so much there. I think so much, too, about, like, I mean, there is a frustration when you\u2019re in the media. Obviously with someone\u2019s, you know, \u201cThey\u2019re not covering this,\u201d and so much so. Though that like, you can kind of push that aside.<\/p>\n But I think a big, like a really big, thing that people don\u2019t talk about enough is this notion that\u2014and people get very mad when you say this as someone in the media\u2014but that audiences, like you said, are in control in ways that they don\u2019t understand. And it\u2019s not that publications don\u2019t have their own, like, ideas about, like, \u201cHey, this is what we\u2019re gonna put, you know, front and center.\u201d But like, there is this feeling all the time. And you see it a lot with the way that people, like when people talk about the news they want covered, right, or the things that they want, versus the things they click on. It\u2019s very different, right?<\/p>\n Like, people just want\u2014we all have our base understanding of our base attention structures in our heads. And, like, we click on the things that are interesting. That, you know, that alarm us, that shock us, that surprise us, that confirm our beliefs. All those things. And often those stories, those things\u2014you know, climate change is an awesome example of this.<\/p>\n Like, it\u2019s hard to get people to care about climate stories in certain ways, despite the fact that everyone cares about the planet, right? And I think it\u2019s very interesting. So in that way, only in the way that people, again\u2014this is like going back to headlines, right? That people want other people to care about what they\u2019re doing.<\/p>\n There\u2019s this way in which so many people in the audience are in control in ways that they don\u2019t understand. Like it is not, I think, a coincidence that around, you know, this birth of the social internet in like 2009, 2010, all newsrooms got these metrics like Chartbeat and the things where you can see what people are doing.<\/p>\n I don\u2019t think it\u2019s like trust in media, you know, declines relatively steadily. But I think that it\u2019s not a coincidence that once we realized exactly what people are seeing and thinking and clicking on and everything, that trust, you know, didn\u2019t go up. And I think that\u2019s a little because\u2014<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Well, do you think that it\u2019s not a coincidence that that trust went down? Do you think that, like, as people were given more of what they actually not wanted, but were more likely to click on, that that degraded trust some? \u2019Cause that\u2019s not really how I see this, but\u2014<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I have that\u2014<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> Piece in.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I have this theory. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s neat, right? But I have this one theory that at least what\u2019s happening now is that there is a audience fatigue of being given what you want. Like, in this sense, I think a lot, you know, there\u2019s this sort of apocryphal quote from like Rick Rubin. But all the creative people say this thing, which is basically just, you know, it\u2019s like: What people want is, like, your<\/em> taste, right?<\/p>\n Like, the thing that they want is for you to not crowdsource and poll-test. What is the creative thing? They want the Red Hot Chili Peppers or whatever to be like, \u201cThis is the sound,\u201d right? Like, no, this is the thing. \u201cThis is who we are, this is our taste, and hopefully you like it.\u201d And people respond to that sort of like, \u201cI made this for you. Take it or leave it.\u201d Not \u201cYou made this for you.\u201d<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> This is definitely advice I give to creators, which is like: If you only chase the thing that\u2019s getting the most views, people will get tired of you. So you have to be making something\u2014you have to be making some stuff that\u2019s like, \u201cThis is gonna get a bunch of viewsand I know it,\u201d and some stuff that\u2019s like, \u201cThis is something that I\u2019m interested in, but I think it\u2019s going to maybe do well.\u201d And some stuff that\u2019s just like, \u201cI just wanted you guys to know that I\u2019m a person, right? And so here\u2019s, here\u2019s like some person stuff.\u201d You know?<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> I\u2019ve been thinking a lot, and I know you have too, about AI slop, right? And you\u2019ve spent some time with the Sora 2 feed, right?<\/p>\n Green: <\/strong>I did. I went on there for the worst 30 minutes of my life. Yes.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> And this sort of deadening, like human-less but human-generated, but not human-made, content thing. Of this sort of, you know, styrofoam packing peanuts of whatever that\u2019s also burning down the Amazon rainforest or whatever.<\/p>\n And I\u2019ve gotten relatively despondent at times about AI slop, right? Just, like, the fact that people just keep doing this and making it, and at the same time everyone kind of thinks it sucks, but everyone is still sort of like, Yeah, whatever<\/em>.<\/p>\n Like, you know, Shove it down my throat. It\u2019s all good<\/em>.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> It\u2019s very hard to know how many people think it sucks, because like the people who don\u2019t think it, who are like, \u201cAh, it\u2019s fine,\u201d don\u2019t say anything. And also they might just be like normal people, you know? I always go on Netflix, and I look at the No. 1 show of the week\u2014oh boy.<\/p>\n And I\u2019m like, Well, I have no idea what\u2019s going on.<\/em> I don\u2019t know what America is, and I don\u2019t know who these people are, \u2019cause I\u2019ve never heard of that show.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Right.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> So that\u2019s one thing to always keep in mind. But I think mostly\u2014I don\u2019t know. I think it\u2019s a fad.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Yeah. But I also\u2014what it makes me think of, though, is this idea, right? That let\u2019s say \u201cslop\u201d is not just the synthetic photos or whatever. But it\u2019s also companies that get, you know, ChatGPT to write an article or SEO copy. And, you know, create websites that\u2019ll help go up their rank.<\/p>\n But it\u2019s all synthetic stuff. There was a recent study\u2014again, take it or leave it\u2014from an SEO company called Graphite. That was just saying that, like, we\u2019ve passed the whatever event horizon of, like, more than 50 percent of this stuff is AI. Is synthetic in some way. On the internet.<\/p>\n And basically what I\u2019m thinking about with this idea is, like, the notion that maybe it\u2019s almost like a controlled burn of like the internet, right? Like in order for these other things to grow, we\u2019re going. We\u2019re so inundated with this stuff.<\/p>\n Green:<\/strong> The Great Chicago Fire of 2025, except it\u2019s the whole internet.<\/p>\n Warzel:<\/strong> Exactly.<\/p>\n