PodSearch

The Talk Show

408: ‘Good Enough to Be Pesky’, With Taegan Goddard

 

00:00:00   I'm the kind of guy who doesn't have a lot of interests. I like a few things a lot, and one of

00:00:05   them is technology and Apple stuff, and another is politics. And I could have just as easily gone the

00:00:13   route that you did. Instead, I thought politics would be just a little easier. Well, you know that

00:00:19   I almost, I might have even used the name Daring Fireball for it, but when I was like, "I should

00:00:24   have a blog. I could do this." I've said this many times, but I've considered making the focus

00:00:31   politics rather than Apple/technology/design. And/or having two blogs, one where I write about

00:00:41   the stuff everybody knows me for at Daring Fireball, and one where I dedicate to politics.

00:00:45   I mean, because for obvious reasons, of all the possible things you could mash together into one

00:00:53   website, the one that doesn't really go with anything else is politics, right? I mean...

00:00:59   Exactly. No, I think that's why you have to stay on topic. And that's what works on the internet,

00:01:04   is staying on topic. I think that that's what makes Political Wire appealing to people, is that

00:01:10   I do not deviate from politics. And what was interesting is when I first started the site,

00:01:16   way back when, I wrote the pros and cons. It was actually on a piece of yellow legal pad,

00:01:22   which tells you how old I am, right? But I wrote on each side, and the only con I could think of

00:01:29   to starting a site like this was politics might get boring. And anyway, that did not happen, Jon.

00:01:35   Well, here we are. So, your first time on this show, and trying to have as many first-time guests

00:01:44   as I can, I get lazy and go back to my favorites. But I feel like because you come from a different

00:01:50   sphere, you actually need a proper introduction. I don't know if I know how to make a proper

00:01:55   introduction. But Tegan Godard, welcome to the talk show. And you are the proprietor,

00:02:02   publisher, and blogger, writer at Political Wire, which is politicalwire.com, which are easily

00:02:09   what you're best known for. I would say Political Wire and Tegan Godard are to politics,

00:02:16   what Daring Fireball and John Gruber are to Apple and technology.

00:02:20   Well, that's a huge compliment. So, thank you, Jon.

00:02:24   Oh, I would say the other way around. We don't have to pat each other on the back here. But

00:02:29   now, when did you start Political Wire? So, let's do some history. I actually done the famous words,

00:02:35   "Don't ever ask a question you don't know the answer to." I decided I'm not going to do the

00:02:39   research. I'm just going to ask you. So, which is perfectly fine. So, there was actually a

00:02:45   predecessor site because I always wanted the domain politicalwire.com. And back when I started

00:02:51   it, it was not available. Somebody had taken it. And the reason that I wanted it was because when

00:02:57   I was in college, I became fascinated with the devoted reader of the Wall Street Journal. And

00:03:02   on the right-hand column of the front page of the paper Wall Street Journal, every Friday, there was

00:03:08   a column called Washington Wire. And I devoured that column. It was fantastic. It was all these

00:03:14   interesting tidbits that came out of the journals, Washington Bureau, and things that didn't really

00:03:20   fit in their news stories. And I had this vision that I wanted to create a site which would

00:03:27   replicate that idea, but not just for Washington, politics across the country and even across the

00:03:34   world, but not just one source, not just the Wall Street Journal, every source. And so, at the time

00:03:42   when I started this, there was a predecessor site. It was called Political Insider because I could

00:03:49   not get the domain name. And my co-author and I, we wrote a book together for Simon & Schuster.

00:03:55   We started this site. And what it was was a morning briefing of politics. And this was 1997,

00:04:01   John. And the technology was very different because I had a day job in New York City,

00:04:07   and I took the commuter train into the city. And at 4 a.m., I had my computer would dial up on a

00:04:14   modem, download web pages, save them to my hard drive. And when I got on that train, I would put

00:04:21   together a daily briefing of politics. And I did this every morning. And I did it really because

00:04:27   before I worked on Wall Street, I had actually worked in politics. I worked for a governor. I

00:04:32   worked for a U.S. senator. And it was my way to kind of get back into politics through this site.

00:04:38   And that's how it all started. Short time there later, I think it was in 1999, so about two years

00:04:44   later, I managed to acquire politicalwire.com. The person who had registered it just let it lapse.

00:04:53   And so I picked it back up again and shortly thereafter launched Politicalwire. And it's

00:04:58   been up ever since. Pete: Wow. I've had Katke on the show a few times, but one of the few people,

00:05:03   and I haven't yet had Dave Weiner. I should at some point soon get Dave. But one of the handful

00:05:09   of people who easily can say that they've been writing at their blog longer than I have at mine.

00:05:16   Which is getting to be— It's funny because back in the day, I actually thought, the vision was,

00:05:24   I thought that there must be some way that I can automate this. And so I actually had a lot of

00:05:29   conversations via email with Dave Weiner and with Aaron Schwartz, who were really just at the

00:05:37   forefront of RSS feeds and inventing them, modifying them. It was one of the great

00:05:42   compliments I had back then is that Dave actually posted on scripting.com. He called me a visionary

00:05:49   in the way I was using RSS. And I was like, wow, that's the biggest compliment I could ever get,

00:05:54   because I'm not really a tech guy. I know just enough about programming to be dangerous,

00:05:58   but that's not what I studied in school. It's not what I did. And anyway, it was a great compliment.

00:06:04   And ever since, I've been trying to see if you could automate what I do, but it turns out that

00:06:10   humans are still pretty necessary in creating websites. So.

00:06:13   Pete: Kotke went down that route a while, a long time ago. Remember, I forget the name of it. He

00:06:19   had that thing with the Plaid border where he tried to automate himself out of a job.

00:06:27   Dave: I remember, yeah.

00:06:28   Pete; And it didn't work, thankfully. I'll find a link to the thing and put it in the show notes,

00:06:35   but I'm glad it didn't. Yeah, I would say with Dave and alas, the departed young Aaron Swirly.

00:06:43   It's so weird when somebody dies young, because now I always think of Aaron as a kid, even though

00:06:49   he'd be probably like 40 years old at this point. And I don't want to devolve into a discussion of

00:06:57   RSS. But RSS originally, the original RSS spec definitely belongs to Dave Weiner as every bit as

00:07:03   much as Markdown belongs to me as a creation. And then Aaron, there was like this weird fork of

00:07:11   versions of RSS. And I forget, the version numbers were weird. It was like RSS 0.97 and then an RSS

00:07:17   1.0. And Aaron had something to do with formalizing one of those specs, but Dave had nothing to do

00:07:24   with it. And I don't think, as prickly as Dave Weiner can be, I don't think that was a dispute.

00:07:29   I just, it was just a weird fork and it was like Yahoo supported one version of RSS and somebody

00:07:34   else. And it was really kind of a mess. And Dave fixed it with RSS 2.0, which is like the thing

00:07:42   everybody uses now. But the thing that made them both visionary in their own ways wasn't just

00:07:47   coming up with the spec. It was the ideas for how it could be used. Right?

00:07:54   Pete: Yeah, no, exactly. Exactly. And to me, the biggest, single biggest feather in RSS's cap,

00:08:00   and again, Dave Weiner was there making it, saw how it could happen is podcasting itself, right?

00:08:07   Every open, other than if you're in the Spotify app and subscribe to a Spotify exclusive, which is

00:08:12   only in the Spotify app, the thing the rest of us all call podcasts, the thing that every podcast

00:08:17   says, or wherever you find your podcasts, that whole phrase, wherever you find your podcast,

00:08:22   and that you can use whatever, that's all, they're all RSS feeds. And it was Dave who's,

00:08:28   even though he made it to publish his blog in serial form, it was him who thought, well,

00:08:34   we could just use the RSS extension thing to put a link to an MP3 file. And then an RSS feed could

00:08:40   be a list of episodes of a show. And here we are.

00:08:43   Pete: No, it's fantastic. And we, and we all use it and we're all grateful to Dave for doing that.

00:08:48   Another thing that happened right along the time when I reacquired the domain politicalwire.com

00:08:54   was I started using the software. The software came out by a kid, Noah Gray, who had created

00:09:02   Gray Matter. And for the first time, the vision that I had for what politicalwire could become,

00:09:09   it just, just this huge ray of light came out because Noah Gray had created the software,

00:09:16   server-run software that allowed you to create a website of reverse chronological posts.

00:09:23   It was literally the first blog that, that out there, otherwise other than people coding it

00:09:28   themselves. And it was fantastic. And it ran on the server. It allowed me to post items from

00:09:34   again, anywhere in the world. And it was just game-changing. And that's when politicalwire really

00:09:40   blossomed because it was no longer a daily briefing. It was, it became an all-day briefing.

00:09:47   And as anyone who reads politicalwire, it's literally updated all day long. And

00:09:52   Pete: Here's my funny story about that. I'm, of course, late to the start of you and me recording

00:10:00   this podcast. We were supposed to start at six. I was not, I was kind enough and ahead of myself

00:10:05   to text you a few minutes ahead that I was going to be late. And then right before we started

00:10:09   recording, I checked and you have one that you posted at 604. So after I told you I was going

00:10:14   to be late, you're like, okay. And then you went and posted something. Well, John, don't,

00:10:20   I don't be surprised if I post something while we're talking here. That would be the best.

00:10:24   I could never do it, but I could believe you could do it. Yeah. So gray matter is interesting.

00:10:29   Nobody uses it anymore. I don't even, it's sort of defunct, but it was ahead of its time, was cited

00:10:37   as largely as an inspiration for movable type, which I'm still using, but which is also largely

00:10:43   fallen out of favor. And WordPress was originally, was every, everything. There was a gray matter

00:10:51   came out and then their movable type came out and then WordPress came out. I'm not quite sure if

00:10:56   that's the right word. I know gray matter was first, but, and now it's sort of the whole world

00:11:00   sort of settled on WordPress, which I presume is what politicalwire uses now. It is. I went,

00:11:06   I went actually, I went to movable type, movable type, movable type was a great improvement on gray

00:11:12   matter. And then I made the transition to WordPress, I think probably in around 2000,

00:11:19   2006, 2007, something like that. But I can't be quite sure, but in any event, yeah, now I'm on

00:11:27   WordPress. I'm actually impressed that Daring Firebill is still on movable type because when

00:11:33   I switched there were, there were band-aids keeping it together. And the fact that you've been

00:11:36   able to keep it together must mean that you've made some changes to it yourself just to.

00:11:40   Pete: I have, which is one of the reasons, I mean, I don't want to devolve into nerding out on CMS

00:11:45   stuff, but you know, we're talking old blog stuff, but part of it is my general laziness and

00:11:52   procrastination. Part of it though, is that if there's one language I can program in with any

00:11:59   competence, it's Perl and that's what movable type is written in. And I haven't really customized

00:12:05   movable type itself much. I mean, I should check my notes and see, I know I've done a few things,

00:12:11   but it's mostly that the extension interface is also Perl. So marked in my version of Markdown is

00:12:18   a movable type extension. And it's, if there's a second language that I'm pretty competent in,

00:12:25   it is PHP, but it's, that's what WordPress is written in, but I'm just much more comfortable

00:12:32   with it. And the other thing is I don't really use much of movable type. Movable type never is

00:12:37   exposed to the readers of Daring Fireball. It's like this complete layer that only I interact

00:12:43   with. And now there's this whole thing, it's not even recent at this point, but people call static

00:12:51   site generators. And typically they run on people's computer. You install like Hugo is a well-known

00:12:56   one. There's a bunch of them, but you install this thing on your computer and like in the terminal or

00:13:02   whatever, and then you make text files, run a command and the whole folder of text files gets

00:13:09   turned into HTML files, and then you can sync them to a server and that's your website. And it's

00:13:16   static because they're just like HTML files that go to a site and, you know, super high performance

00:13:23   right out of the box, even with like a $5 a month hosting account. If something happens and you

00:13:29   suddenly have an explosive viral moment, your server will probably keep up with it, et cetera.

00:13:34   Movable type for me works that way. I deal with movable type and then movable type,

00:13:40   every time I post emits a static file for the post, the RSS feed gets updated. But the fact

00:13:50   that it's outdated and doesn't get, I haven't installed a software update for movable type in,

00:13:55   I don't know, 15 years. It just runs and runs and runs. It's like old Unix utilities. I don't know,

00:14:01   when's the last time the CD command in the terminal got an update? It just works. But

00:14:06   you have things like comments and stuff like that, where it's more interactive and people

00:14:10   are actually dealing live with the site. I do. And there's a lot of reasons why WordPress works

00:14:15   for political wire, but the main one, and we don't have to geek out about CMSs right now, but it is

00:14:21   this idea. I've heard you talk in the past, how you had designed, you had wanted to be a columnist.

00:14:28   And that's what I always wanted to be. I wanted to be a columnist, but what political wire became

00:14:34   was a living column. And I think that's what Daring Fireball is too. It's

00:14:39   something that is, it's different than the column that we grew up with in the newspaper.

00:14:44   It's a totally different thing. And that's why I think a site like political wire still,

00:14:51   why it still does well. I mean, we're in the midst of a presidential campaign and keeping the site up

00:14:57   sometimes during heavy news like we've had over the last month, month and a half,

00:15:01   is sometimes hard, partially due to the nature of the way the site is generated coming from a

00:15:07   database in every page recreated on the fly. So when you talk about these static text files,

00:15:13   I'm kind of jealous about that right now, because it would make things a little bit easier. But

00:15:18   this idea of creating something that is living, that can be updated at any time.

00:15:23   When I make a mistake, which I do, I get readers who tell me pretty quickly, you've told me in the

00:15:29   past that I've made a mistake. I value that because I tell you mistakes last for only a few minutes

00:15:36   before someone tells me. And I always kind of grip my teeth and go, "Oh, I can't believe I did that."

00:15:41   But I can fix it. And then the vast majority of readers don't see that. And that's what I love

00:15:47   about this medium. It's just a fantastic, we're just very privileged to have been there at the

00:15:54   forefront and to be able to continue to create these sites and have readership.

00:15:59   Pete: I'll hold that thought because I want to come back to it. But I also don't want to let

00:16:04   too much time pass before I hit the money bell and thank our first sponsor of the show, our good

00:16:10   friends at WorkOS. Go to workos.com. There's no special slash daring fireball or anything that,

00:16:18   just workos.com. And what they are, if you're building a business-to-business,

00:16:24   software as a service app, B2B, S-A-A-S, at some point, your customers are going to start asking

00:16:30   about enterprise features like SAML authentication, SCIM, which is spelled S-C-I-M, provisioning,

00:16:38   role-based access control, audit trails, et cetera. Well, I don't know anything about

00:16:44   business-to-business, software as a service. So, none of that stuff makes any sense to me.

00:16:48   I don't know what they are. But if you're listening to me and you do build business-to-business,

00:16:53   software as a service apps, you'd probably know what all of them mean. And WorkOS can make all

00:16:59   of them easier. They provide easy to use and flexible APIs that help you ship enterprise

00:17:05   features on day one without slowing down your core product development. Let WorkOS handle all

00:17:11   that stuff and you focus your time, energy, and engineering on the features specific to your app.

00:17:17   Just you do your stuff. Let WorkOS do all of this hard software as a service B2B stuff. They are

00:17:24   used by some of the biggest startups in the world, including Vercel, Plaid, and Perplexity.

00:17:29   Perplexity has been in the news just this week. Really big companies using WorkOS.

00:17:34   WorkOS also provides, this is amazing to me, a generous free tier of up to 1 million monthly

00:17:41   active users for its user management solution. Comes standard with rich features like bot

00:17:47   protection, MFA, roles and permissions, and more. You don't pay a cent until you hit a million

00:17:54   active monthly customers. What a deal. I honestly find that hard to believe. I would love to have

00:18:00   a million active readers at Daring Fireball. If you are currently looking to build your SSO,

00:18:06   single sign-on, for your first enterprise customer, you should consider using WorkOS.

00:18:11   At least check them out, see what they have to offer, see how easy it is.

00:18:14   Integrate in minutes, start shipping your enterprise plans today. Go to WorkOS.com.

00:18:20   Yeah, the whole columnist, I know what you mean. And going back to like 25 years ago,

00:18:27   when, I don't know when I first started thinking I should start a blog, but it's part of my

00:18:32   procrastination. I often say, one of the other things that I often say is, in some not too

00:18:38   different universe, there's a version of me who still hasn't started Daring Fireball. I mean,

00:18:46   he's much more miserable and probably, he probably is miserable in a way that I'm not.

00:18:52   But there's a part of, part of my struggle was just like, ah, but what exactly should it be like?

00:19:00   And in the 90s, I got my start writing at the student newspaper at Drexel, The Triangle,

00:19:06   became the, worked my way up to be the editor-in-chief, learned graphic design,

00:19:11   but basically did all that because I wanted to be in charge of the newspaper so that my weekly

00:19:18   column got the best placement on the op-ed page and looked as good as it possibly could.

00:19:24   I've told this story before, but the first year, Drexel's, I had a five-year program there. My

00:19:30   freshman year, I didn't go to work at the student newspaper. Instead, I published my own newsletter

00:19:36   in the dorm. And a friend who did, as a freshman, go to write for The Triangle said, "You should go.

00:19:42   I mean, you're such a better writer than everybody there. I mean, you read The Triangle. Half the

00:19:48   people can't even write." I don't know. I just hated the idea of submitting a column and maybe

00:19:56   getting rejected. I just, I don't know. I'll just make my own goofy thing and put it in the dorm.

00:20:02   But the second year, I thought, "Oh, I should do it." And I did it, and they were like, "Oh,

00:20:06   my God, we love this. This is great." And the way you submitted columns back then,

00:20:10   it was you came in with a floppy disk and gave it to somebody in the office who would take it and

00:20:16   put it on one of their machines because there was no, in 1992, most of the, I had internet access

00:20:24   because I was a computer science major, but most of the people at Drexel didn't. So, there was like

00:20:29   a physical interaction. And I don't know, after the fourth or fifth column that I submitted and

00:20:36   they all ran, I'd notice each week what got changed. And usually it was subtle, and I tried

00:20:42   to proofread my own stuff, especially in the early days as closely as I could. But one time there was

00:20:48   a joke that in the middle of the column that got rewritten. I mean, in a way where it was like,

00:20:56   I don't know, I thought the joke was gone. And I was annoyed, but I thought, "I don't know,

00:21:01   I must have, what did I do wrong?" It wasn't offensive. It couldn't have been. I was just so

00:21:07   curious. So, the next week I came in, and the guy's name, he was the op-ed editor at the time,

00:21:13   his name was Francis. And I gave him the floppy disk. He said, "Ah, good to see you." And I say,

00:21:19   "I have a question." And I took out like the issue from the week before and pointed to my column and

00:21:23   said, "Hey, I wrote this, but here's how it ran. Why?" And he was like, "Ah, yeah, your column was

00:21:31   one line too long." And so it flew instead of ending straight, it needed to be shortened a

00:21:37   little. And so I changed that to shorten it up by one line. And by the time he finished telling me

00:21:43   that, I just immediately thought I need to become the op-ed editor of the newspaper so that this

00:21:49   never happens again. It all clicked in my head, and I thought, "Oh, I need to be the op-ed editor."

00:21:56   And I don't think I became the next op-ed editor, but I started hanging around the newspaper and

00:22:03   before too long became the op-ed editor. And then from there, I started thinking,

00:22:09   once I learned QuarkXPress and started learning graphic design, I more or less realized I needed,

00:22:15   I wanted to redesign the whole newspaper to make the whole thing look better, but the only way to

00:22:19   do that was to be the editor-in-chief. And I'm not saying I had no other interest in being, you know,

00:22:24   you don't get to be the editor-in-chief without some interest in news, but I had very little

00:22:30   interest in the typical college newspaper news, right? The, "What's the provost doing?" or saying,

00:22:36   I just, I delegated that, but more or less made it fun, made the whole thing funnier and look better.

00:22:42   Well, I had to admit it. I'm out of college for a couple of years. I want, I'm reading Dave Weiner,

00:22:48   I'm reading Kotke, I'm reading other blogs. I think I could do that, but what is the format,

00:22:53   right? Is it an issue, right? And that's what you're talking about with the newsletter that

00:22:58   you started with at Political Insider, right? You were coming out with a daily issue, right?

00:23:03   Exactly, yeah. Yeah, no, it was published to the web and it was once a day. If it was today,

00:23:10   it would be a sub stack or something like that, but you know, but that's what we had at the time.

00:23:14   Coming from a newspaper sort of broke my mind a little or cemented my mind around issues. You

00:23:23   could start a website, you know, and suck.com was a super, super famous site. Everybody of our era

00:23:31   sites suck as a seminal and forming the independent web, but it was daily, weekdays, right? It was,

00:23:40   there's the Monday issue, Tuesday issue. It wasn't posts, it was, oh, here's the Wednesday issue of

00:23:47   suck.com. And that just isn't a great format. And all sites, big and small, sort of struggled with

00:23:54   that, right? I mean, it's like a recurring joke, but there was a time where the New York Times

00:24:00   website got updated like once a day, right? I mean, or twice a day. I don't know. It was like

00:24:06   the old, going back to the heyday of print newspapers, like the afternoon edition

00:24:10   of the newyorktimes.com. And it's like having your brain cemented by the limits of the old medium

00:24:20   prevents you from seeing the potential of the new medium. And that's where somebody like Dave Weiner

00:24:26   is such a genius in terms of ahead of when it's even technically possible seeing the potential

00:24:33   of, oh, this could be so much better. I could just write one sentence updates.

00:24:37   Pete: No, definitely, definitely. Back when I started the predecessor to Political

00:24:43   Insider and it was that one page, one page a day type site that came out in the morning,

00:24:49   most newspapers at that time didn't even have proper websites and the bulk of their content

00:24:55   wasn't online. And not only that, but it really just followed the natural paper newspaper. There

00:25:02   was a, for instance, the New York Times back then, they did have a website, but the website was,

00:25:07   you know, world news, and then there was national news, and then there was the Metro desk, and then

00:25:13   there were sports. And that's the way that the website followed just the same way that the paper

00:25:19   did. There was no politics section. And so, Political Wire almost became the front page

00:25:25   for politics because I and I became the editor for political news. And so, what I like to think of is

00:25:33   that it's the site where you come and you can come at any time and I will tell you what's important

00:25:38   in politics right now. And the site is living, it's live, it's updated around the clock,

00:25:44   and it is just ready to go. So, if you want to know what's important, what's breaking in politics,

00:25:50   go to Political Wire. There's a reason why people call my readers political junkies because they're

00:25:56   junkies. They hit that refresh button all day long. I mean, I'm right there with them. I mean,

00:26:02   I am one of them. But I think one of the things, and I think, yeah,

00:26:11   I'm sure there's a fair number of people listening to us talk who are familiar with both our sites.

00:26:16   Obviously, almost everybody listening is familiar with Daring Fireball. But those who do follow

00:26:21   Political Wire will know exactly what I'm about to say. Nobody would mistake the style, tone,

00:26:32   and format of Political Wire. It's not just like Daring Fireball or vice versa. It's different,

00:26:39   and it's in the way that we've both settled into our personal, made the sites fit our minds, right?

00:26:48   But at a broad sense, they're pretty similar, right? Like, you're kind of doing the same thing

00:26:54   for politics that I'm trying to do for Apple and technology. And one of the ways that I feel like

00:26:59   they're both similar is that you can refresh five or six times a day and be rewarded with

00:27:09   something new more often than not. Although in your case, it's almost always. You are,

00:27:14   in terms of number of posts, if not the most prolific blogger I've ever known among them.

00:27:25   But you could also come every day or every two days if you're busy and just read to catch up.

00:27:31   Like, what's happened? You know, I've been busy for two or three days. What has happened in

00:27:36   politics? Go to Political Wire and you'll have to scroll, but you can scroll until you—oh,

00:27:42   I remember reading this one a couple days ago, and now you're caught up. And you can close the tab,

00:27:46   and you can come back in two days, and you can be a very happy, satisfied, habitual reader of

00:27:53   Political Wire without really being a junkie, right, in terms of your time allocation or

00:27:58   how often you load the tab. It works either way. And it—

00:28:02   That's a good point, yeah.

00:28:03   And to me, that's very satisfying. I was on vacation last week with my family. We went to

00:28:09   Disney World, and I checked Political Wire a lot less than I usually do while I'm at my desk. But

00:28:16   I got that feeling of, "Oh, now I don't have to worry." And there was the political junkie in me,

00:28:23   I realized this a couple months ago when my wife booked the trip. I was like, "Oh,

00:28:27   that's during the DNC." And I can't because I've chosen—she's not going to—she knows not to book

00:28:35   a trip to Disney the week the iPhone's coming out two weeks from now. And if she did, I could say,

00:28:40   "That's not going to work. We're going to have to reschedule." And she'd be like, "Oh, I can't

00:28:43   believe I did that." She knows that I'm going to California for the iPhone event. I don't want to

00:28:48   say, but I'm such a—in some other world, I'm a political blogger too. And so I can't go on

00:28:54   vacation during the DNC. But it was, in terms of being an interesting week to be a political junkie

00:29:02   consumer, political—all I did was check Political Wire, really. I mean, because I knew I'd catch up.

00:29:09   And then the other one who sort of has eked out a different path than either of us would be

00:29:16   Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall's site. When Josh started Talking Points Memo was just Josh,

00:29:23   and it was just his blog. And I'm sure, again, talking about other multiverses, there's some

00:29:30   world where Josh is still doing it that way, but instead he built TPM up into sort of a newsroom,

00:29:36   dozen-ish to 15-ish employees with multiple sections. But other than that, and again,

00:29:44   and he started right around when I did Daring Fireballs, so it's like 20-some, 25 years.

00:29:49   But other than that, I felt like just by checking A, your site first, and then TPM just for any

00:29:55   commentary from Josh about speeches or whatever, I felt completely caught up on the political news.

00:30:00   And so in terms of being a political junkie who heretofore—this is the first time I didn't watch

00:30:09   the DNC since probably 1988. So 1988, I was 15, and I did not watch Michael Dukakis,

00:30:20   but I'd starting in '92 with Bill Clinton and as a 20 or 19-year-old was enough of a political

00:30:28   junkie that of course I'm not going to miss the Democrats' acceptance speech. Your site made me

00:30:34   feel like I wasn't missing out. That's great to hear, and you are correct. I mean, I will get

00:30:38   many readers who say what's nice about political wire is that I can very efficiently, I can consume

00:30:45   the political news. And I try to keep—very similar to Daring Fireballs in this way—is I try to keep

00:30:50   the site very clean. I don't have a lot of extraneous things. I don't famously—like,

00:30:55   you rarely use images. I rarely have images as well. And when I do, you know, it's something

00:31:01   pretty important, but I mean, I will go months and months without ever having an image on the site.

00:31:05   So it's very text-heavy, but you know, the reality is that a lot of people, that's what they want to

00:31:10   consume. They don't want to watch YouTube videos. They want to read text. Yeah.

00:31:14   I'm going to say a couple months ago, but I think it was more like a year ago, but at some point,

00:31:21   I don't remember the context, and it doesn't really matter, but there was

00:31:26   something where I just offhandedly mentioned on Daring Fireball about one reason I don't even

00:31:33   embed YouTube videos. I'll just link to them and just describe it, but rather, you know,

00:31:38   and it's free to do the embedding so they can just hit play there, but just said something about

00:31:44   video fatigue. And I got—it was one of those little offhand—you never know, and I'm sure

00:31:50   it's the same way. Sometimes you never know when you have an audience of our size when you'll just

00:31:55   make an offhand comment that you didn't even think twice about, but then all of a sudden your inbox

00:32:00   fills up with email from readers. Yes, yes. I had been waiting for someone to mention video fatigue.

00:32:05   I'm so tired of hitting play and watching video. I read so much faster than I can watch a video,

00:32:12   even with the playback controls, and get so much more out of it. I love that your site doesn't have

00:32:18   videos. Love. Yeah. Every five or so years, I try to do a survey of readers, just the internet

00:32:26   changes, the web changes, people's consumption habits change, and I just try—I want to stay

00:32:32   up to date. I mean, that's what's—to me, that's what's exciting about publishing on the internet,

00:32:36   is that it is constantly changing, and you want to stay up to date with the new technologies and

00:32:42   what's happening. But I put out a survey, and the last one that I put out there, people took it the

00:32:48   wrong way. They're like, "Oh, my God. Are you going to change the site?" They didn't want to change.

00:32:53   And granted, I know every time I've done a redesign, people kind of push back. Nobody

00:32:58   likes change. But there were some very basic responses that they wanted. They wanted

00:33:04   a lot of white space. They wanted clean, to the point. And maybe it's because I don't have the

00:33:10   best grasp of the English language as a journalist might, but I'm very concise in terms of what I

00:33:19   feature. So I just get right to the point. Pete: Yeah, I'm going to say that your writing

00:33:24   is much better than that of the average journalist, but that's the criticism about today's average

00:33:31   journalist that's afield from our discussion. You do have a concision, and part of your style

00:33:38   that I find interesting and is different is I love block quotes when I'm quoting to something.

00:33:46   And in fact, it's one of the reasons I made it so easy in Markdown to create block quotes,

00:33:51   because I was already using them before I made Markdown and wanted it to be as easy as possible.

00:33:56   But you almost never use them. And instead, you'll just use actual quotation marks to quote

00:34:04   the passage from CNN or from the New York Times or whatever. And then I think it's pretty recent,

00:34:11   within the last year, where you added the new, it's sort of a new paragraph style that often,

00:34:16   sometimes when it does come, comes at the end of a post where it's sort of like

00:34:20   Tegan's quip. It's sort of in the shape of a cartoon bubble. But for the most part,

00:34:25   you just quote from the sources you're linking to, but without block quotes. It's just sort of

00:34:31   a quote style. I'm curious if you've given that a lot of thought or if it's just the way it comes

00:34:36   naturally to you to write about it. Well, what's interesting, so people over the years have asked,

00:34:42   "I'd like to know more about your point of view." And I just tell them, "Read the website and you'll

00:34:48   see my point of view." And you get my point of view in some ways. Sometimes I'll use those little

00:34:54   comment bubbles at the end of a post. And that's if I'm going to be explicit. Sometimes I'm going

00:35:00   to be snarky. But I try not to. I don't run a very snarky site. But every once in a while,

00:35:06   there's a story that deserves it, particularly in politics these days, right? But if you want

00:35:12   to know what I think, it's really kind of like in the editorial selection, is in the things that I

00:35:18   find interesting. And I don't need to beat readers over the head with that telling them what I think,

00:35:23   because they're smart. They can see what I say. I put my name on the site. It's my take on politics.

00:35:28   It's what I think is interesting right now in politics. If you don't like it, that's fine. It's

00:35:34   a big internet. You can go somewhere else. Fortunately, there are many people who like it

00:35:40   and have kept it in business all these years. But I try to be subtle about that. I don't like to beat

00:35:48   people over the head with my opinion. It's the way I am in real life. When I talk politics,

00:35:54   that's not how I have. I don't engage in these long heated debates about politics, typically.

00:35:59   Every once in a while, I do. But typically, that's not what I do. But I do love politics. It's a

00:36:05   fascinating medium for how humans interact, how they try to get things accomplished, how they try

00:36:11   to achieve power, when they achieve power, what do they do with it? Are they interested in fixing

00:36:17   public problems? Do they have other motivations? And I've been fascinated. Literally, the first

00:36:24   campaign I covered, it was with my father at age 10, sitting in front of a television with Walter

00:36:31   Cronkite talking about the Electoral College. To me, the whole idea that we had this Electoral

00:36:36   College, and that's how we chose our presidents, it was amazing as a 10-year-old. And it continues

00:36:42   to be amazing today. And over the course of Political Wire's history, we've had two elections

00:36:47   where the Electoral College decided it, not the popular vote. And so it's been an interesting time

00:36:53   to do this. Yeah, I'm a little younger than you. But I remember in the '80s, at some point,

00:37:00   learning about the Electoral College and high school civics or history, whatever the name of

00:37:04   the course was. And the way that we were taught it, I'm quite certain of this, we were taught it

00:37:10   as a sort of quirk of the system, that it's almost like a footnote. Like, technically speaking,

00:37:18   whoever gets the most votes nationwide doesn't win. It actually goes state by state. And whoever

00:37:24   wins the most votes in each state wins that state. And the state gives their electoral votes that way

00:37:30   when they're electoral votes, except for this one weird place in Nebraska and Maine, I guess,

00:37:36   is split. It's like a footnote on a footnote. But it was all presented as, but of course,

00:37:41   except for like one time in 1882, that whoever wins the national vote popular-wise wins the

00:37:50   Electoral College. So it's all, who cares? And then comes 2000, then comes 2016. And now,

00:37:57   everybody who pays attention at all knows exactly how the Electoral College works and knows that

00:38:04   with these relatively, well, last two elections have been very close, both ways, popularity-wise

00:38:12   and Electoral College-wise, that the campaigns need to strategize to win the Electoral College,

00:38:18   not to win the popular vote. And it's such a different world.

00:38:23   Tim Cynova And interestingly,

00:38:26   during that 2000 recount was when I was playing around with Noah Gray's Gray Matter. And what I

00:38:34   was doing was, at the time, the site would put up a daily briefing in the morning. But then all of

00:38:39   this stuff would happen during the day. And it would have to wait till the next morning before

00:38:44   I posted it. And when I saw this, when I saw this first blogging software that came out, it just,

00:38:51   the light bulb went off. I was like, this is exactly it. This is exactly what I want this site

00:38:57   to be. And I wonder if that recount had not happened, and had not drawn out over those five

00:39:03   weeks in late 2000, whether Political Wire would be a very different site, because that's what

00:39:08   really drove my desire to have something that updated regularly.

00:39:12   David Schanzer The other thing that used to bother me before

00:39:16   I started Daring Fireball, because Daring Fireball has always just been chronological on the homepage,

00:39:21   whatever the most recent post is, is at the top, and you scroll down. Every once in a while,

00:39:28   I will change the date on a post, not the date, but the time on a post to move it up or move it

00:39:34   down slightly. If I just, if I publish a 4000 word review of the iPhone 16, and some other little,

00:39:45   really truly minor thing happens, and I post it right afterwards, I might change the times

00:39:51   to put my big review above it, something like that. But for the most part, it's chronological.

00:39:56   But I, before I created or launched Daring Fireball, when I was thinking, what would the form

00:40:01   be, when I mentioned before my sort of preoccupation with issues, or the world of print, it was the

00:40:08   fact that like in the print world, and you mentioned the Wall Street Journal front page of

00:40:12   the physical paper before, which is a real—I haven't looked at it in a while because I don't

00:40:17   read printed newspapers. But really, the Wall Street Journal in the heyday of print was a marvel

00:40:23   of information density. I mean, just not just the fact that they didn't run photographs,

00:40:30   and therefore could get more text in there. But just the, they had the Washington Wire thing on

00:40:37   this Fridays that you mentioned, there was the news and brief every day. It was a true marvel

00:40:45   of information design that knew their audience too. What can you, what if the, what if it's a

00:40:51   business person who's only got five minutes right now? It's 830 in the morning, they're about to

00:40:57   start the workday, they've got coffee in one hand, and the top half of the Wall Street Journal

00:41:02   in the other hand, because they've got coffee in the one hand, so they can't unfold the whole

00:41:06   broadsheet. How much information can you give them in five minutes in one hand from the top

00:41:11   half of the fold of the front page? A lot, right? It was every day. Every single day, it was a lot,

00:41:18   right there. But there's also, because it's print, if something big and important happened,

00:41:26   it looked big and important, even in the Wall Street Journal. And I just was obsessed with that

00:41:31   with Daring for a while. I don't know, if you just go chronological, it's like you're not really

00:41:36   telling by the design what's more important than anything else. Turns out it doesn't matter,

00:41:42   people will find it. Just go chronological. And now the whole media world revolves around feeds

00:41:48   like Twitter and Threads and Mastodon and Instagram, that people argue about the

00:41:56   chronological versus algorithm ordering, but it still is just a thing that people scroll until

00:42:01   they find one that they like and they stop. People are willing to scroll, right? That's sort of the

00:42:05   trick. Well, it's the, yeah, we're now in the world of the feed, and it's also why you're

00:42:12   co-host on Dithering, Ben Thompson. What he always loves to talk about is the feed is what made the

00:42:18   monetization then work is because all of a sudden, as you're scrolling, you could put within that

00:42:23   feed advertising, and that could at least begin to pay for some of this good publishing that's

00:42:29   going on the web. And he's 100% correct. In those early days of the web, they're just putting up

00:42:35   newspapers in the sections the way that they had the paper newspaper and slapping ads around them,

00:42:41   and it just didn't work. And it's no wonder that so many of those newspapers have gone defunct at

00:42:48   this point. Not to mention the geographical issues when all of a sudden a newspaper becomes available

00:42:54   to the world. It's a very different publication than it once was. So The Wall Street Journal back

00:43:00   in the day, it really was a design wonder. And the saddest thing, interestingly, a week or two ago,

00:43:07   I had a conversation because I had been sending so much traffic to The Wall Street Journal's website

00:43:14   that it came up on someone's radar, and they wanted to have a conversation with me, and it

00:43:20   was from their audience modernization group. They wanted to talk to me, and would you like to have

00:43:25   an arrangement, do a deal, or whatever? And I said, "Look, I'll talk to you about whatever."

00:43:29   And anyway, bottom line is, I just said at the end of it, I said, "You guys had it made. I don't

00:43:33   know why you changed everything." I mean, you knew that front page, that was everything. And you knew

00:43:40   how the internet worked long before there was an internet. And anyway, unfortunately,

00:43:46   these people I was talking to, they were much younger than me and had no idea what I was talking

00:43:52   about. I do think though that's one of those areas where you're in my sights overlaps so much,

00:43:58   which is that we not just are willing to throw our readers' attention to the thing we're linking to,

00:44:06   we almost expect them to, right? And I don't know what you call it, but there's so few sites that do

00:44:12   it that way, and there's so many other sites who the nature of their format is that everything

00:44:20   kind of has to be a 500 to 700-word post. And so, if every post has to have a certain

00:44:29   number of words and just sort of looks big enough on the page, when somebody else breaks the news or

00:44:37   writes the exclusive or has the opinion that you want to link to, the only way to make it work in

00:44:42   that format is to sort of regurgitate the whole post. And then at the end, you put in, "Here's

00:44:48   the link to the original thing that we're referring to," but people don't really follow the link from

00:44:54   those sites, and those sites aren't getting a call from the Wall Street Journal talking about

00:45:00   acquisition because they don't send a lot of readers. The readers just read their regurgitation

00:45:05   of it, and most of them, I don't think, follow it. Whereas you and I, to me, the shorter the

00:45:12   quote that I pull and the shorter my post, sometimes the better the post is. And I'm

00:45:18   saying, "If this little nugget that I've pulled out entices you and this interests you,

00:45:23   click the link and go read the original, please." And it was a joke for a while that I don't think

00:45:31   a sign that Daring Fireball is less popular or sends less traffic, but before caching was built

00:45:38   into WordPress, it would often, if I link to a WordPress site from Daring Fireball, it frequently

00:45:45   broke the site because if every page view was coming, pulling from the SQL database on each page

00:45:52   view, it was too much traffic. It doesn't happen much anymore just because web servers have gotten

00:45:57   better, computers have gotten faster, and again, specifically because WordPress itself out of the

00:46:03   box comes with good caching built in, and it was the lack of caching that made it so susceptible

00:46:09   to being fireballed. But it pleased me to no end that getting fireballed became a verb.

00:46:15   It really, really made, I mean, that just made my day because, A, getting verbified is just

00:46:23   kind of cool, but B, what a cool thing to be known for, for sending too much traffic to other people's

00:46:30   sites. You know, it's the opposite of stealing. It is being generous with the attention of readers.

00:46:37   I mean, that's what I want to do, and then here was proof of it. I linked to somebody's

00:46:43   WordPress site and it broke. Well, it's proof that I send a lot of traffic. I tried my best.

00:46:48   Pete: Exactly. 15 years ago, I had a partnership with the Economist Group. They sold advertising

00:46:53   on political wire, and I remember this very clearly. I was driving back from Vermont,

00:46:59   and Senator Evan Bayh from Indiana had given an interview with the Indianapolis Star

00:47:05   that he was retiring and that he was going to leave the Senate. Well, anyway, I got that alert,

00:47:11   and I pulled over on the side of the road. I updated political wire with a one-sentence post

00:47:17   saying exactly what I just said. And two, three hours later, the site from The Economist,

00:47:24   Washington, D.C., called Roll Call, had the Capitol Hill newspaper still had not had a article

00:47:32   on their website about Senator Evan Bayh retiring, and I didn't know what was going on. And about

00:47:39   three to four hours later, they finally posted an article, and all it did was regurgitate what he

00:47:46   told the Indianapolis Star. They didn't interview him. They didn't do anything. And then I was asked

00:47:52   by some of the editors, they're like, because they were selling advertising, they could see the

00:47:56   traffic to political wire. They could say, "How did you get so much more traffic on a one-sentence

00:48:03   post than we got on our story?" I said, "I gave readers exactly what they wanted," which was

00:48:09   the source where Evan Bayh told exactly why he was retiring. And so sometimes that's all people want

00:48:16   is they want the news, and then, you know, this is what you do and what I do is I always link to

00:48:22   the source so that if people want more, they can get it. And there's a total transparency.

00:48:28   Pete: Yeah. And the other similarity then is, like you said, the way that we've become our own form

00:48:36   of columnist is that you can read one post, then the next post, then the next post as you scroll

00:48:44   down, and there's like a rhythm to it or an irregularity if it's like for you right now,

00:48:51   something about Harris campaign, something about the Trump campaign, but then something else odd,

00:48:57   just out of left field, like a crazy statement from Nancy Mace or something like that. That has

00:49:03   nothing to do with the election. But that's the third post. It wasn't expected, but here's a crazy

00:49:09   quote of the day from somebody about something else. And it forms a rhythm. Do you remember,

00:49:15   I always say it's like, I know people think I'm joking when I say that it was one of the numerous

00:49:22   inspirations for me, but do you remember Larry King's column in USA Today?

00:49:27   Pete: King's things.

00:49:28   Pete and Pete laugh

00:49:29   Pete; Of course I do.

00:49:31   Pete; Larry King had a long-running column in USA Today that I think was the best thing ever in USA

00:49:38   Today. And it was just, I don't know how often it ran. I'd never bought USA Today on a daily basis.

00:49:47   I mean, who does? I mean, it's what you get what used to be. You'd always read it when you check

00:49:52   into a hotel, right? Because the way they got a million daily circulation was they worked out

00:49:59   a deal with all the major hotel chains to get a copy a day for everybody who stayed in a hotel.

00:50:04   But when I did read Larry King's column, I just lapped it up. I loved it because it wasn't like

00:50:10   700 words making a cohesive argument from start to end. It was just like a bunch, it was like a blog.

00:50:18   It was just like 700 words of paragraphs that were all over the place. Like, one comment about

00:50:26   the president, another comment about Zaza Gabor, another comment about why can't you get a good

00:50:32   sandwich in the airport, all in one column. I was like, "Why aren't there more columns like this?

00:50:38   This is so great. This guy is kind of interesting. I love the way his mind works. And this column is

00:50:45   just so clearly what's on his mind." It was a great name, King's Things, right? It was like,

00:50:52   in some ways, it was one of the most honest newspaper columns anybody's ever written.

00:50:57   Because it was really just what was on, what the hell was on his mind. Here it is,

00:51:01   USA Today for everybody.

00:51:02   Pete: You know, and years later, it became Twitter, right? And we can all

00:51:05   do the exact same thing.

00:51:07   Joe: Yeah, more or less King's Things, I know a zillion people have made the same observation.

00:51:13   It was more or less like he was posting 20 tweets as his column before 10 years, 20 years before

00:51:21   Twitter existed. But it was, to me, a better way to read them though, because instead of being

00:51:26   interspersed every couple hours with hundreds of other tweets from other people, it was like,

00:51:31   you got 20 King Thing tweets all in a row. And they somehow, even though topically weren't related,

00:51:40   flowed together. And I feel like that's what I'm always hoping for at Daring Fireball. And it's

00:51:47   definitely what I get as a reader at Political Wire, that they flow together and form,

00:51:53   effectively, a column made out of 20 different posts.

00:51:57   Pete: Yeah, and I think that's a good observation. I'm actually trying to think,

00:52:02   do you think the same thing has happened with podcasts and radio and TV? Were there things,

00:52:11   were there radio features 30, 40 years ago that actually just work better as a podcast? Or

00:52:18   is the way the podcasts are, it's just, for instance, the one that we're on tends to run

00:52:24   long, Jon. It's a long podcast, it's a long show. We all love it, but it's one of those,

00:52:29   it's one of those longer ones where nobody would give you that airtime, I guess, back in the day.

00:52:34   Pete: Public access, maybe, right.

00:52:35   Pete: But then you also have one of the shortest podcasts,

00:52:38   you know, with Ben Thompson, Dithering, you know, you keep it to 15 minutes and

00:52:45   they both serve their purpose, but they both serve their role. But was there, you know,

00:52:50   when you started Dithering or when you started this show, was there anything that you were

00:52:54   modeling in the former real world, you know? Jon Moffitt

00:52:58   Dithering is probably at 15 minutes, and especially having a hard, not just being

00:53:03   relatively short, but also having a defined limit is much more like old school media, right? Where

00:53:08   you did, you know, the TV famously is programmed in half-hour chunks. But I was, it's funny,

00:53:15   you brought this up because I was kind of getting to this where, before the internet,

00:53:20   the nature of all previous mediums defined the content, right? There's only a very limited

00:53:32   number of airway frequencies for radio stations and TV channels. And so, of course, it had to be

00:53:39   regulated by the government to say you need a license to broadcast at 6.10 on the AM dial,

00:53:46   because you can't have multiple signals interfering with each other. And like when I grew up, there

00:53:51   were 13 channels on the TV, and one of them was UHF, which was just static, right? So, we really

00:53:57   only had like 12, and you'd turn a dial and it'd come over the air. And then it seemed miraculous

00:54:04   when cable became a thing. And I don't know, I think when my family first got cable, we had like

00:54:10   30-some channels, I don't know, 30, 40 channels. And it seemed like an infinite library of content

00:54:17   for about a week, right? But the nature of a channel of TV is that the sort of half-hour

00:54:24   programming matrix, it kind of had to be that way. You couldn't just have five-minute shows or

00:54:31   10-minute shows, and you couldn't have two-and-a-half-hour shows, or at least not

00:54:37   regularly, about esoteric topics like I like to talk about. And same thing with print, right?

00:54:43   If you got the back page column in Newsweek, the column had to, A, it couldn't be too short and it

00:54:50   couldn't be too long, right? And there was a little bit of flexibility. I mean, that's,

00:54:55   hence my story about becoming the op-ed editor at the student newspaper. To make a column two

00:55:02   lines shorter or one line longer, you know, there's margins and stuff you can play for and pull quotes.

00:55:08   There's ways to tweak it slightly. But for the most part, a newspaper column has to be about,

00:55:14   in a printed newspaper, has to be about 750 words. It could be more like 700, maybe more like 800,

00:55:22   but it certainly can't be 1100, and it can't only be 300. But what if you have a 300-word thought?

00:55:30   I have lots of 300-word thoughts. I also sometimes have 4,000-word reviews of an iPhone or something.

00:55:39   Those things don't work in print, right? You can't just have a tiny little article, and you can't

00:55:45   just run 4,000 words in print whenever you want. And to me, that's where I just feel so lucky to

00:55:52   have come of age with the internet where I could build a career on. And it certainly defines the

00:55:59   length of this podcast. It's, you know, at a certain level, it just becomes physically

00:56:05   exhausting to keep going. But on the other hand, we could just talk until I feel like,

00:56:10   "Hey, that was a good show, and we're done." And it could be an hour, it could be two hours,

00:56:14   it could be whatever. It doesn't matter, right? And then the other thing is that because it's

00:56:20   non-linear and people listen to it on their own pace, unlike the old days of radio where you were

00:56:27   either tuned in and listening live or you missed it. My theory, and I think it's totally panned

00:56:34   out, I mean, every time I probably get emails from people hearing me finish this sentence,

00:56:39   and they'll say, "Yeah, that's how I do it," is I just, from the very early days of podcasting,

00:56:43   I just thought if we go long and people have a 35-minute commute and that's where they

00:56:50   listen to podcasts, if they like the show, they'll listen to 35 minutes of it, and then they'll pause,

00:56:55   and then when they go home at the end of the day, they'll listen to another 35 minutes. And if they

00:57:00   still like it, they'll listen to the rest of it the next day in the morning.

00:57:02   Tom Bilyeu (01h00m 5s): Yeah, no, I think you've done the,

00:57:06   but you've also filled a market with dithering at 15 minutes. And when you first announced dithering,

00:57:13   yeah, I probably was like one of the first people to subscribe. You and Ben, two of my favorite tech

00:57:18   writers. But it was that idea that you would cover one, maybe two topics, but normally one,

00:57:26   and that it was just enough for me when I start my morning day, I'm out walking my dog,

00:57:32   I come in and I make coffee, and it was the perfect length, and it gets my brain going.

00:57:38   And the idea that you're there each week, it's fun as a consumer, but as someone who's running

00:57:45   a media business, it's like the Holy Grail because you're in someone's head multiple times during the

00:57:51   week. You're not only writing regularly, and we're refreshing the browser, but it's that podcast.

00:57:56   And I have to say, you probably noticed, but I completely copied you a year and a half ago,

00:58:01   when we launched Trial Balloon, which is the podcast for members on Political Wire, again,

00:58:07   a paid podcast. And I even went so far as shamelessly copying the fact that you

00:58:14   change your podcast art out every month. I thought that was just a genius thing,

00:58:19   and so I do the same thing now with Trial Balloon.

00:58:21   Tom Bilyeu (01h00m 5s): I have noticed, I find it, and you wouldn't be here as my guest on the

00:58:26   show if I felt otherwise, I honestly take it only as flattery because I don't see,

00:58:31   in the same way that there are numerous Apple ecosystem blogs that are vaguely of the format

00:58:40   of Daring Fireball, which I don't really think you can point to anything before Daring Fireball and

00:58:45   say Daring Fireball is like that one. But I don't begrudge that at all. I only find that, again,

00:58:53   flattering. I don't know. I think as soon as I saw that you were changing, I remember it was that

00:58:57   first month of dithering, and all of a sudden the next month comes and the podcast arch change,

00:59:02   I was like, that's just genius. That's just genius. I get so tired of looking at that same logo,

00:59:08   these podcasts. And then I noticed that you had various themes going and depending upon the time

00:59:14   of season and all the rest, and I just thought that made a ton of sense. And so when Chris

00:59:19   Reback and I, my co-host on Trial Balloon started, we wanted to do the same type of thing, which was

00:59:26   politics has a season. The summers are times for conventions. The falls are times for knocking on

00:59:32   doors and campaigning. There's so much imagery around those seasons that we wanted to do that.

00:59:37   And then the idea of just changing out the podcast, it's one thing that I wonder how many listeners

00:59:44   pay attention to it, but you've always been one to pay attention to the design and the detail.

00:59:49   And I just think it's really a nice twist. And I wonder why more podcasts don't do it. I love it.

00:59:55   Pete: Yeah, I don't know either. I think as we're meta nerding out here, I mean,

01:00:01   that's the whole point of having you on the show. I seldom talk about why and what I do,

01:00:07   but I'm not necessarily unhappy to. I just, I don't know. It feels self-indulgent, I guess,

01:00:17   but there's times for it. I know Ben and I started dithering in 2020. And it's just like anything

01:00:23   that happened in 2020 is very easy to peg as to happening in 2020 because it was the weirdest,

01:00:30   hopefully the weirdest year any of us are ever going to live through. And as I recall, we had

01:00:38   been talking about doing what became dithering before the pandemic started. And I do think it

01:00:47   was more Ben's idea than mine. We were close friends. We'd become close friends as he grew

01:00:54   with Stratechery. I don't recall how, but it feels more like his idea than mine. It still does.

01:01:01   But I remember thinking a subscriber only would be good. And we should talk about this too,

01:01:08   right? That one way that Daring Fireball at this point really, really stands out in the

01:01:13   ecosystem of independent media is that I don't have any membership income for now. Even though

01:01:22   I tried that in 2006 and instead of canceling it, just sort of let it fade away. But I could even

01:01:31   four years ago see the rise of stuff like Substack and how new independent, some so-and-so has left

01:01:41   their job at the Washington Post and they're starting their own publication. What are they

01:01:45   going to do? They're going to Substack, right? I mean, that's what almost everybody did. And it's

01:01:49   no ads and all the revenue comes from membership. And I don't practice what I preach, but I've

01:01:59   preached having as multi-legged a stool of revenue numbers as possible. Don't just rely on the weekly

01:02:06   sponsors at Daring Fireball. Don't just rely on the podcast sponsors, build out multiple streams

01:02:15   of revenue. But some kind of membership thing I felt was the only way I could think of to

01:02:21   continue growing my income and just felt safer in a media world that was clearly moving more towards

01:02:28   memberships. I have a completely irrational reluctance to put my writing behind a paywall,

01:02:38   even though I know it works. I mean, and Ben's model in particular I think is genius and I think

01:02:46   it has been copied widely. I mean, honestly, I think all of Substack is in some ways a copy of

01:02:51   Stratechery. Because he's my friend, I feel happier saying that than complaining about anybody who's

01:03:00   stolen ideas from me. But part of the genius is consistently once a week he has a public article,

01:03:08   a public column that anybody can read, and he tries to make that as broadly—if he has a best

01:03:17   column of the week idea, he I think tends to steer towards the free one for everybody. But then the

01:03:24   other four days a week there's a members-only update. So, four out of the five articles he

01:03:29   writes every week are only from members. And it's worked out very well for him. And you can, you

01:03:33   know, it's just common sense, even if you don't think about the media. It kind of makes sense that

01:03:38   if you're going to charge people money, making some of your content exclusive only for them

01:03:45   is going to be more lucrative than just asking for donations, which is sort of what I did in 2006,

01:03:52   just asking for the support without really putting much of anything behind a paywall.

01:03:58   But that's me being—I'm so precious about my writing that it just would—it bothers me to think

01:04:06   about my writing being behind a paywall. But I don't feel that way about podcasting at all.

01:04:11   I don't know why. It's, like I said, I don't even—it's put me on the psychoanalyst couch.

01:04:16   I don't know. Maybe it's because I guess fundamentally, no matter what happens

01:04:21   popularity-wise or income-wise, I will never not think of myself as anything but a writer

01:04:28   who podcasts, not a writer/podcaster and certainly not a podcaster who writes.

01:04:34   It's the writing that to me is the real work. And I'm just reluctant, even though that means I,

01:04:41   in some ways as a business person, I should be like, well, that's what I should put behind

01:04:45   a paywall and get people to pay for. But it bothers me not to have to decrease the audience

01:04:50   size. And I take dithering very seriously, and I really enjoy doing it. And I'm so glad it's

01:04:55   successful, and I'm so glad four-plus years later, I still feel as enthusiastic on the nights we

01:05:02   record as I did at the beginning. So that's a good sign, and I love it. But I don't feel guilty at

01:05:08   all that it's subscriber-only. It doesn't bother me. I don't know. So part of that worked.

01:05:13   But the other thing I remember that the—I think the name dithering came from me, and I know that

01:05:20   the album art rotating idea was mine. And it totally harks back to my thinking in the 90s

01:05:28   of starting a site that was more like a weekly publication, right? Because to me, one of the fun

01:05:35   things about doing a magazine is doing the cover and thinking, what's the cover this week, right?

01:05:41   That's always seemed like that was part of the best fun. I never worked at a magazine, but I

01:05:49   could—that would be my favorite part of the job if I did. And when I was—even with a newspaper where

01:05:55   the front page is nowhere near as dynamic as a magazine, a magazine has a cover image,

01:06:02   and a newspaper is the text of the articles there. But doing the front page of the weekly Drexel

01:06:09   newspaper was one of my very favorite jobs at the student newspaper. I just love doing it.

01:06:14   Which article is bigger? How big is the headline? What photo? If we're going to put a photo on the

01:06:20   front page, what's the photo going to be? I loved it. And with Daring Fireball changing so little

01:06:27   visually over the years, there just was a huge pent-up, unscratched itch in myself, my ego,

01:06:38   for doing something like we do with the dithering cover art.

01:06:42   Pete: Yeah, no, I think what you said is it's fun. You've made it fun. And Dithering's 15 minutes,

01:06:49   Trial Balloon, my podcast, is only about 20 minutes. There's not room for really chapter

01:06:55   art or other things like that. And changing out the cover art is really just one way to make it

01:07:02   fun and make it a little bit different. And that's what I—anyway, thank you for not being angry that

01:07:07   I stole that idea from you. [Laughter]

01:07:08   Joe: No, honestly, like you said, I still wonder now that we've started

01:07:14   Dithering and it's some level of renown, how come the idea hasn't been stolen more widely,

01:07:21   right? Like, at this point, I have noticed the similarity in format with Trial Balloon,

01:07:27   but I can't think of any other podcasts that I listen to that do anything vaguely similar. And I

01:07:32   wish they did. I like it. I would love to look forward to the September, what's going to be the

01:07:38   September album art for the other podcasts I listen to. One thing I will also say that I did get right,

01:07:48   and it seems like this—we could have adjusted on the fly without saying anything, but I knew

01:07:54   up front that monthly was the right schedule to update it. That if we did it weekly, it'd be too

01:08:01   much work. But less than monthly, if it was seasonal, like just four times a year, it

01:08:08   wouldn't feel updated enough. Monthly, even though it is a twice a week podcast, in any first year or

01:08:13   two, it was three times a week, monthly just felt right. I don't know why. It just was like a total

01:08:19   gut feeling, but I knew it. And now, four years later, I still feel 100% certain that a monthly

01:08:28   new cover image is exactly right. I can't explain that.

01:08:32   Well, I think you can add that to Markdown as one of your big contributions to the computing world,

01:08:38   is changing out the cover art, because I think it's a great thing. I hope more people copy it. But

01:08:42   as for what you were talking about before, though, the putting your work behind the paywall,

01:08:48   that's where you and I differ. I don't have any issues with that. And in fact, what I know is that

01:08:54   members of political wire, people who subscribe, they are a special, special sort in the fact that

01:09:00   they're true junkies. They want to know what's going on at any time. And as I said before,

01:09:06   so many people wonder, what is Tegan Goddard? What are his views? Where's he coming from? And this is

01:09:13   where I get the chance to tell them exactly what I think about a specific issue, whether it's how

01:09:18   someone performed in a debate, how a speech went, what some sort of campaign strategy should be,

01:09:24   and so when I put that behind the paywall, first of all, it became political wire became a much

01:09:30   more sustainable business. And so it allows political wire to exist. But then it also just

01:09:37   meshed. And this is something that Ben talks about all the time, is by creating a bundle of products

01:09:43   that all work well together. So the fact that trial balloon is a benefit that you get as a

01:09:50   member, the fact that you can read what my analysis of the various issues, I have some

01:09:56   website features, like a trending news page that people are pretty addicted to,

01:10:00   some other bonus newsletters that I've licensed so that they can be part of this bundle,

01:10:06   all of those things together is what you get. And I think that's the way I view it. It isn't so much

01:10:12   that it's just my writing behind the paywall, but there's more behind the paywall for the people who

01:10:17   are really just committed readers. And most importantly, none of this would be possible

01:10:22   if we weren't able to turn these into businesses to support our families and all. And so it becomes

01:10:29   a very, it's a very, as a business model, it's just a very clean business model. It's people

01:10:36   paying you for exactly what you want. And you have a very elegant advertising model on Daring

01:10:42   Fireball. You always have political wire because of the political content is a little bit harder

01:10:47   to do what you do. So I have to rely for the free site on advertising that can be, let's just say,

01:10:53   sometimes imperfect. And that's probably my least favorite thing about it. But I love the fact that

01:10:58   when you become a member of political wire, the ads all go away. The page is even cleaner,

01:11:03   it loads even faster and you can get right to it. So.

01:11:07   Pete: I lucked into that part, the elegant advertising model on Daring Fireball. I mean,

01:11:15   some of it I can take some credit for and some of it I can just chalk up to my own

01:11:21   obstinance and refusal. I used to often say to some people, like, it's a good thing that I'm

01:11:26   the only one negotiating with would-be advertising networks, not advertisers for my existing format.

01:11:33   But in the earlier years of doing it full time, I would get a lot frequently offers from

01:11:41   ad networks for blogs to take over or to add their ads to what I was doing.

01:11:47   And I used to tell, I mean, it's, she doesn't usually listen to the show, but I mean,

01:11:54   I know she knows that I've joked about it, but it's good that I was the one doing the negotiating

01:11:58   and not my wife because there were some offers that I turned down that were for a lot more money

01:12:04   than I was making selling my own ads. But I just did not, I wouldn't sleep by taking them

01:12:11   and what they looked like, the fact that they were animated. But there was a long while in the early

01:12:17   years where I left a lot, I mean, just left money on the table to stick to what I thought

01:12:24   looked better and worked better and was more, I mean, the best thing I can say about my ads is,

01:12:29   I think if and when I put a membership system back on Daring Fireball, I would really like for it

01:12:39   not to include, or certainly by default, not to include not having the ads because I actually

01:12:45   think the ads improve Daring Fireball. Maybe I'm just crazy for thinking that, but I honestly think

01:12:52   that it looks better with the pop of color that only comes from the ad and the fact that it's over

01:12:58   there. But I'm so super fortunate that I just by the nature of what I write about and the fact that

01:13:06   I started writing it in 2002 and built up an audience five years before the iPhone and then

01:13:13   the iPhone came and writing about Apple became a lot less of a niche and a lot more of a genre

01:13:21   that I kind of backed into targeted advertising without actually doing any targeting.

01:13:29   The Daring Fireball audience is a targeted group. In some ways, I think more targeted

01:13:36   even than Instagram can pull off, famously, probably the most lucrative ads in the world.

01:13:44   But you don't have to do any tracking or cookies or anything to target the Daring Fireball audience.

01:13:50   You just have to kind of, if you vaguely know what I write about, then and you have a guess in your

01:13:56   head what the audience is like. Everything I know about my audience is your guess is exactly right.

01:14:02   And so I've lucked into the effective CPM rate of targeted ads without doing any targeting at all

01:14:10   and could get away, can knock on wood, still continue to get away with one sponsor per week

01:14:18   on one ad on every page. But I totally understand why that doesn't work for almost

01:14:22   any other subject area, including if not especially politics.

01:14:27   Tim Cynova Yeah, no, people are obviously interested in politics no matter what their

01:14:31   professions, no matter what their interests, and people stay in touch. And so it is a little bit

01:14:36   different there. That's why I kind of embrace the membership as a business model. Because I do think

01:14:43   that my most loyal readers, they do get the best experience. Not only do they get this bundle of

01:14:50   extras and other things, but they, that the experience itself is the best possible experience

01:14:56   you can get. So when you're, what you talk about with Daring Fireball and the way that it looks,

01:15:01   that's what I think political wire is for its members. And so it works. And at the end of the

01:15:08   day, I consider myself just so fortunate to be able to do this for a living. I mean, I have just

01:15:14   the greatest job in the world next to yours, of course. But we do the same thing.

01:15:18   Pete: Maybe second greatest. We could spend the rest of the show arguing,

01:15:21   who has a better job? But what a fight to have.

01:15:24   Tim Cynova Yeah, no, it's unbelievable. And I'm sure Ben Thompson would agree as well. What an

01:15:31   amazing world that you can put up a site and that you can do something that's valuable for readers

01:15:37   and make a living from it. It's really, it's a great, it's a great time to, it's really been

01:15:43   great fun to watch the internet evolve over this time.

01:15:45   Pete: I, you know, I think it's come across in my questions to you, my own

01:15:49   rants during this episode, but I've always been obsessed with the format of media and

01:15:56   from childhood onward. I just am fascinated by it. And little things like, I mean, is it,

01:16:05   how innovative is it that the talk show has never had a theme song at the beginning? And it just

01:16:11   starts with a cold opening. But I remember arguing with Dan Benjamin about it, you know, that

01:16:15   he thought it needed to have, we could, you know, I think his argument was basically,

01:16:21   we can have a short theme song, but you got to have a theme song. Otherwise, it's weird.

01:16:25   I was like, but I, there's not a single podcast I listen to that I want to hear the theme song. I

01:16:31   skip it. So, why don't we just, why don't we just do the skipping for the listener and just start at

01:16:39   a great point? What's a great, to this day, I don't know, I don't even pick the entrance. The

01:16:44   editor, my good friend Caleb Sexton, who edits this show and has for years, picks where the cold

01:16:51   start will be. I don't know, but he does a great job of it because he knows and likes the show.

01:16:55   But the whole point is, you know, ideally it's a funny thing or a funny quip or sometimes it'll

01:17:01   make people laugh or whatever. But the main point is just, just give them something interesting

01:17:07   right from the first second. And so Dithering, we don't have a theme song. We have the little

01:17:11   ticking stopwatch, but it only takes a couple of seconds. But the part of the format when Ben and

01:17:16   I were talking about Dithering is, well, how long should it be? I think we kicked around,

01:17:21   should it be three times a week, 10 minutes? Should it be two times a week, 20 minutes?

01:17:27   We knew it would be short. And I think we quickly settled on 15 as, let's see how 15 goes. And if we

01:17:35   want to go to 20 or 10, we can adjust that later. But 15 has obviously worked very well. But one

01:17:42   thing that was obvious and Ben, because of what he does at Stratechery and where it's membership

01:17:48   only with no ads, he didn't, we never really even talked about having ads because I don't,

01:17:53   I think that would have been, he would have said that's off the table because he likes,

01:17:58   and I appreciate, I kind of sometimes wish, I don't feel like me having advertisers puts me in

01:18:04   a conflict of interest often, but it's always in the back of my head that it's theoretically

01:18:09   possible. That somebody who's sponsored the site could be the subject of something I want to write

01:18:14   about. And now I've got to do disclaimers and blah, blah, blah. And so I appreciate his,

01:18:20   Ben's desire to, he just doesn't make money from advertising. But the other thing is,

01:18:25   even if he was open to it, we had 15 minutes. How do you put ads in there? We couldn't do the long

01:18:31   rambling freestyle ones I do here. We could pre-record 30-second ones to make sure they're

01:18:37   exactly 30 seconds and put them in. But I don't know, dithering wouldn't be dithering with an ad

01:18:43   break, right? And if you stick them at the end, then people aren't going to listen to them. And

01:18:47   if you put them at the beginning, at the very beginning, then you lose the whole thrill of the

01:18:51   cold open, right? So why not go membership only? It seemed very, but that sort of playfulness with,

01:18:59   well, what's the exact format to be? I just love doing, but it sounds funny because I do

01:19:05   new things like that very seldom. But-

01:19:08   Yeah, no, I think for what it's worth, I think dithering works the way it is. I love the fact

01:19:14   that you get right into it after the ticking clock. And I'm always curious to know who's

01:19:19   going to open the show, you or Ben, which is be interesting to see behind the scenes,

01:19:23   how that works out. But-

01:19:24   I would love it if somebody, and if somebody wants a little hobby project,

01:19:29   write to me, I'd love to see it. I would love to see somebody go through the whole feed and

01:19:35   figure out what percentage of shows. I think my gut says it's about 50/50 or maybe

01:19:43   more like 55% Ben, 45 me as to who opens. But it feels to me, my gut says 50/50. But I wouldn't be

01:19:53   surprised if somebody went through all the episodes and said, "Dude, you were way wrong.

01:19:57   Ben opens 80% of the shows and you open 20%." I'd be like, "Wow." But hopefully, but the fact that

01:20:04   you think that's part of the fun each time a new episode arrives is exactly part of my intention

01:20:10   with the design.

01:20:12   Well, and it's also trying to find the compatibility between the two hosts of the show,

01:20:17   how that works. Like for Trial Balloon, Chris Rebeck and I, we've known each other

01:20:21   since graduate school. We wrote a book together. We started Political Insider together. And now

01:20:29   we're doing Trial Balloon together. But we had tried for years to come up with an idea and a

01:20:34   format for a show. And in our way that it works is he opens every show and he asks me something

01:20:42   and I'm always caught off guard because he's got a clever way. He knows me and he always kind of

01:20:47   catches me off guard, but that's kind of the way that works. Anyway, it really, and shows don't

01:20:53   work unless the two people kind of mesh well together and you fall into that.

01:20:58   Yeah. And the other thing is just getting all meta and actually staring at my navel. I mean,

01:21:07   I don't do tons of episodes of the talk show. I mean, it's ideally three times a month sometimes,

01:21:13   especially in the summer, it's only two times a month. But even at that relatively slow pace,

01:21:20   I'm my own booking agent and I kind of don't enjoy it. I just don't enjoy the actual booking

01:21:27   part itself. And I do, the one part of doing the show, the old original version of the talk show

01:21:33   that I missed was never had to worry about it because it was always me and Dan. That's it.

01:21:38   And it was what it was. And that's the whole idea of who's going to be on the show

01:21:43   wasn't just easy. It didn't exist. Right. And having that back with dithering satisfies

01:21:50   a thirst that I've had. And in fact, in hindsight, and like I said, four years in, I enjoy it as much

01:21:57   as I did when we started. I knew that I missed that, but I think I underestimated how much I

01:22:03   missed it. The best way I can say it, I always say my ideal reader at Daring Fireball is that

01:22:10   other version of me who didn't start writing Daring Fireball, but it's somebody who is just

01:22:17   exactly like me, shares my interests, shares the same taste in writing styles, shares everything.

01:22:23   That's who I'm writing for is another version of me. And I don't know how else to make things that

01:22:30   I'm happy to do the making of other than to make what I would want to consume myself. And I don't

01:22:36   listen to anywhere near as many podcasts as most people who make a big part of their living on,

01:22:42   because I don't drive anywhere. I live in the city and I just walk places and I only get to listen to

01:22:46   the podcast while I'm out walking around. But I know that I would enjoy listening to dithering.

01:22:51   I would. And so to me, that's the test. It's not how many zillions of listeners we have or how much

01:22:59   money we make from it or whatever. It's do I feel like we're putting out a show that I myself

01:23:04   would definitely listen to every time a new episode came out? And for me with dithering,

01:23:11   the answer is definitely yes. Yeah. I mean, that's exactly why I started Political Wire,

01:23:17   because I wanted it to exist. I would read it. That's what I wanted. It's exactly what I was

01:23:22   looking for. I had an imperfect version of it on the front page of the Wall Street Journal,

01:23:28   but that wasn't it. And so sometimes you just create something and get a little lucky.

01:23:32   We are lucky in the fact, the similarity that we have is that politics did not get boring as I

01:23:39   worried about 20 years ago. And you're lucky the fact that Apple pulled out of the nose dive and

01:23:45   became one of the most successful companies in the world. It's funny though, because there used

01:23:50   to be, it was so common in the Apple media sphere to pick a name that referenced Apple. I mean,

01:23:56   and I would say the most incongruous of the ongoing sites is Federico Vitticci's Mac Stories,

01:24:02   which is one of my favorite sites. And I love having Federico on the show,

01:24:07   but it's so funny to me in hindsight, because what Federico is best known as is as an iPad

01:24:16   aficionado and somebody who has made the deepest dive into going full time with an iPad as his main

01:24:24   computer while his site that he founded known is called Mac Stories. I mean, he does, it's not like

01:24:30   they don't write about the Mac there either, but it was a very conscious decision on my part not to

01:24:36   give Daring Fireball a name that in any way alluded to Apple. Not because I was super

01:24:43   pessimistic about Apple in 2002, but I just, it wasn't so much that I thought they would go away,

01:24:49   but that I thought they may not be the most interesting thing in technology

01:24:53   for five years from now or three years from now. And something like if there was never an iPhone,

01:24:58   but Palm had come out with the WebOS, the Palm Pre phones, that would have been something that

01:25:06   I would have written about as much in a world where the iPhone didn't exist and the Palm Pre

01:25:10   came, it's sort of a weird hypothetical because Palm Pre only came out that way because they had

01:25:17   the iPhone to copy, but let's just say they came out with it on their own. I would have written

01:25:22   tons about it and bought one and used it and talked to written as much about it as I write

01:25:27   about Apple stuff. And I wanted a name that would have let me do that if Palm became the most

01:25:33   interesting company in technology. After all that time talking about how we don't do ads on

01:25:37   dithering, I need to take a break here, do an ad on the talk show for our good friends. Guess who?

01:25:44   Oh, you're never going to guess who the second sponsor is. Oh, you're right, Squarespace.

01:25:50   Squarespace, the longest running sponsor on this show. Just had a conversation with them this week.

01:25:56   They're still happy as a clam with the results they get. What is going on? The basic gist is

01:26:04   Squarespace is a phenomenal platform for building your presence on the web. If you're listening to

01:26:11   me and Tegan today and thinking, "Boy, these two guys who own their own web presence really seem

01:26:16   to enjoy it," maybe I should do that. Maybe it's in the back of your head that you should start a

01:26:21   website, something like a blog or a podcast or anything like that, or just, I don't know, just

01:26:27   you want a website to do X, Y, or Z. Squarespace is an absolutely fabulous way to start. Give it a

01:26:34   try. You get a 30-day free trial at, you go to squarespace.com/talkshow to send them from this

01:26:43   show everything you could possibly want. If it's selling stuff, they have all the e-commerce stuff

01:26:48   you want, Apple Pay support, credit card support, of course, built in. Even if you're selling actual

01:26:53   physical goods, those new buy now, pay later things like Afterpay, they have integration

01:26:58   with those. If you want to gate content behind paywall, as we've been talking about on this show,

01:27:04   Squarespace has that functionality built in. You can totally do that. If you're just making a

01:27:09   website that's free for everybody, then there's no payments involved at all, then you don't,

01:27:13   you can just ignore that part of Squarespace. You could just do that. They have, in terms of

01:27:18   customization, it's, "Oh, I don't know, is Squarespace one of these things where you sign

01:27:21   up for Squarespace and everybody's site looks like a Squarespace website?" No, it's so opposite that

01:27:27   I guarantee you throughout your day, you are seeing one, multiple Squarespace websites,

01:27:33   and you have no idea because every Squarespace website can look so different, so unique,

01:27:38   so customizable. They have a new feature. It makes it even, takes that idea even further.

01:27:43   They call it Blueprint AI. You start a completely personalized website with their guided design

01:27:48   system, Squarespace Blueprint. You choose from professionally curated layouts and styling options

01:27:53   to start, but then go through their AI guided system, answering questions, and you build a

01:28:00   unique presence from the ground up, tailored to your brand or business and optimized for every

01:28:06   device. It is really great, really easy. They've always made customization easy and flexible,

01:28:11   but it's, they've leaned into that as the years have gone on even more. Email campaigns,

01:28:17   that's built into the Squarespace platform. Anything you could want like that, it's all there.

01:28:22   Go to squarespace.com/talkshow for a free trial. Again, 30-day free trial, no credit card up front.

01:28:28   And when you're ready to launch, go to squarespace.com/talkshow. You will save 10%

01:28:33   by using that URL off your first purchase. And the reason they keep sponsoring is because people who

01:28:38   listen to this show keep going to squarespace.com/talkshow. So if you've been waiting, stop.

01:28:44   Go check them out. On that, Jon, I've been, as you know, I've had a website for 25 years. I know how

01:28:50   to do websites. I can't tell you the number of people who have told me, who have asked me,

01:28:55   can you help me with your, with my website? I want a website for this. I send them right to

01:28:59   Squarespace every single time. Send them to squarespace.com/talkshow.

01:29:05   So I talk show. I will. Absolutely.

01:29:07   I do the same. It really is a great place to start. So coming down the home stretch,

01:29:15   you referenced this earlier. You write about politics. I mean, it's right there. It is in

01:29:21   the name. And it's the same way I avoided putting anything Apple-related in the name of Daring

01:29:26   Fireball. You did not avoid putting anything political in the name of political wire, but

01:29:32   it, you mentioned that your point of view isn't the main focus of the site, right? It's, it is the

01:29:43   news junkie part. And I, you, I don't know. Do you feel like it's more the media landscape for

01:29:55   writing about politics and doing something like what you do at political wire that it's, it's

01:30:00   even more partisan than ever, or do you think the nature of the internet is such that it's always

01:30:09   been partisan? Oh, no, it's definitely more partisan than it used to be. I mean, if you look

01:30:15   at what was once called the blogosphere, there were all sorts of links that we had between sites

01:30:22   on the left, right, in the middle. There were a lot of people reading both kinds of sites. It is

01:30:27   not that way anymore. People pretty much choose the point of view that they're interested in

01:30:32   looking for. And my point of view, I like to say is neither left nor right. What it is, is it's,

01:30:38   if you're interested in politics for all the good reasons, which are, are you interested in how power

01:30:45   is gained, how power is used. If you're interested in that type of, that aspect of politics, and

01:30:52   you're okay with stories and anecdotes from the other side that you might not vote for, the other

01:30:58   party that you might not vote for, I think you're going to get that at political wire. So it's less

01:31:03   of a rah rah Democrats or rah rah Republicans type site. What I'm interested in is how people

01:31:11   gain power and use it and hopefully use it in the right ways to actually correct some of the

01:31:17   problems that we have in the country. That's what my focus has always been. And if my readers are

01:31:23   left or right or whatever, it's really just a byproduct of that. If you have one candidate,

01:31:29   as we have right now, who doesn't seem to be all that interested in using the government for good

01:31:35   purposes, then obviously, the other party's readers are going to gravitate towards political wire for

01:31:42   that reason. So because that's really what my bias is. So I do have a bias. I'll get criticism over

01:31:47   the years as you're so biased. And I said, well, I actually never said that I'm unbiased. The name

01:31:52   of the site is Tegan Goddard's political wire. It is exactly what I think about politics. It's

01:31:57   exactly what I think is important about politics right now. And if you don't like it, that's fine.

01:32:03   But that's what I'm trying to share with you. And fortunately, many millions of people each year

01:32:08   think it is. But that's all I'm trying to do. But there's no doubt that the environment is far more

01:32:15   partisan. And also, as you, I think, alluded to earlier, the journalism itself, I think, is

01:32:20   lacking, let's say. And so I actually think that that helps a site like political wire exist,

01:32:27   because, you know, what I tend to focus on sometimes is not the lead of a story in the New

01:32:32   York Times. Sometimes it's the 10th paragraph in that story that I think is the most interesting.

01:32:38   And that's what I kind of pull out. And so so many people who don't get around to reading the

01:32:42   full story might not know that, but they come to political wire and they see that.

01:32:47   Pete Liddell Going back as far as I can remember,

01:32:50   even when most people read in the New York Times actually did read it on paper and get their hands

01:32:56   dirty with the ink. It's always been like a meme about the New York Times that they'll bury the

01:33:04   most interesting thing in the story in the last paragraph. Like it's almost a running joke. But

01:33:09   I at this point, I feel like it's gone from, oh, they had this thing that they wanted to put in

01:33:15   the article. But they were it wasn't going to fly putting it up top, but they worked it in at the

01:33:20   end that they get away with it. But now it's often the case that infuriates people, particularly on

01:33:27   the left. And if the meme has gone from how the New York Times buried the most interesting thing

01:33:32   in the story to how many times have you seen this? I'm unsubscribing. How many? If everybody who's

01:33:39   ever threatened to unsubscribe from the New York Times actually unsubscribed, it would be like

01:33:45   they would have had to have 6 billion subscribers in the first place. It doesn't even make any

01:33:50   sense. And I get it. I'm sure there are thousands of people listening to this podcast who are like,

01:33:55   "Hey, wait, I did unsubscribe from the New York Times." I get it. I know that people actually

01:34:00   have and done unsubscribe from the New York Times over frustration with their coverage. But

01:34:04   at this point, you do. You have to be a close reader because it's like, "Ah, this is the

01:34:10   first seven paragraphs of the same old shit." But, oh, this is interesting. Why isn't this at the

01:34:15   top of the article? And it's like, it's just weird almost, right? Well, I remember back in the 2004

01:34:22   campaign and John Kerry is running as the Democratic nominee for president and reading

01:34:28   the New York Times about comments that Kerry had made. And I think it was like the 10th or 11th

01:34:33   paragraph where Kerry was quoted as saying about the Iraq War, "I voted for it before I voted

01:34:40   against it." And I was like, "Oh my God, he did not say that, did he?" And it became the quote of

01:34:46   the day on political wire. And, you know, I like to think that, you know, in so many ways, that's

01:34:52   why we know that quote, because otherwise it was just buried in the bottom of a New York Times story.

01:34:57   Fascinating, because I would honestly say if you had said, what do you, name one thing you remember

01:35:02   from John Kerry's campaign in 2000. Before you even bring it up, that quote might have been

01:35:08   something I remembered. There is a total tangent that I also remember only because it recently came

01:35:16   up, literally came up like days ago, which is Swiss cheese on a cheesesteak gate. And now I

01:35:24   know you saw this with J.D. Vance, where J.D. Vance was here in Philadelphia and went to Pat's Steaks

01:35:30   and asked why they don't offer Swiss cheese as an option. Hilarious. John,

01:35:38   do you remember this? Or did you, I don't, maybe I was reminded of it even just reading

01:35:41   political wire. When John Kerry was running in 2004, as far as I know, every major political

01:35:46   candidate in my lifetime at some point has gone to Pat's or to Pat's and Gino's in South Philly

01:35:52   to get a cheesesteak. John Kerry ordered his with Swiss cheese, and I think he actually got it

01:35:57   somehow. I don't know if they sent like a kid out to go get some Swiss cheese.

01:36:00   Is that right?

01:36:01   Yeah, go, I swear to God. I wouldn't be surprised if you wrote about it at the time,

01:36:06   but it was sort of made news on the right side of this fear playing into the John Kerry is

01:36:14   an fat elite. You know, remember how the windsurfing pictures of him off the coast

01:36:20   of Martha's Vineyard where, who vacations windsurfing off the coast of Martha's Vineyard?

01:36:25   This guy's not a man of the people. This guy, it's almost as if he married a billionaire

01:36:31   heiress of a ketchup fortune.

01:36:33   You know, Martha Coakley when she was running for, I guess, US Senate at the time in Massachusetts,

01:36:38   and she wouldn't campaign in front of Fenway Park of all places. It's like those local stories

01:36:45   are what make politics really fun.

01:36:48   Right. Whereas Hillary knew what she was doing, lifelong Cubs fan, but then she moved to New York

01:36:54   so she can run for the Senate, and she got herself a Yankees hat.

01:36:59   See, John, this is where as a devout Red Sox fan and you as a devout Yankee fan,

01:37:04   I always thought that our first conversation would be sitting at a Red Sox Yankee game, but

01:37:09   anyway, we'll have to do that another time.

01:37:12   Oh, it'll have to happen. Maybe this will be a good year with the year Aaron Judge is having,

01:37:16   because I feel much more confident that my team would prevail. Although the Red Sox,

01:37:20   they are pesky. Good enough to be pesky this year, I would say.

01:37:23   They're a pesky team this year. They're not a great team, but we have won four championships

01:37:28   in 20 years. So it's been a decent run.

01:37:31   Steven: Oh, man. The Yankees, they had old-timers day last weekend, which I think is a great

01:37:37   tradition that more teams should do. They play, I forget how many innings they play. I've never

01:37:42   gone. And one of these years, I'm definitely going to go, but they let old retired players play,

01:37:48   I guess, three innings of baseball, and they mic a couple of them up. It seems like a lot of fun,

01:37:52   but it's a way to bring old players back to the stadium. And this year was the 15th anniversary

01:37:58   of the 2009 World Series. And it's, I don't know, something happens between 10 years and 15 years,

01:38:07   where it's 10 years after a sports thing, the athletes still, you kind of squint and could

01:38:14   still see them in uniform. And 15 years, you're like, "Oh my God, Jorge Posada looks old."

01:38:20   Well, Jon, you can see on my video feed right over my shoulder is a picture of Fenway Park

01:38:29   taken almost 20 years ago. That was actually taken, that photo, at the moment that Dave

01:38:35   Roberts stole second base. In my view as a Red Sox fan, that was the moment that the curse was

01:38:42   finally broken when the Red Sox were going to overcome the Yankees and the ALCS. So that was

01:38:49   one of the great moments almost 20 years ago. 3-0 lead from the Yankees, from the good guys.

01:38:54   Somehow the Red Sox prevailed, but yeah. Well, if somehow those pesky Red Sox can make a wildcard

01:39:01   slot and make a run for it and meet the Yankees in the playoffs, let's meet in New York City and

01:39:07   catch a game. Well, it was so much fun. I'm going to just give you the credit. It was your idea

01:39:13   to do this show and just lean into the summer dearth of tech news. Is there political news

01:39:21   this summer? Have you been busy? Just a little bit. August is usually very slow for technology

01:39:30   for obvious reasons. And it was as you thought it would be to me, it was a lot of fun talking about

01:39:37   this stuff, Tegan. It won't be the last time, but like you said, maybe next time we'll just do one

01:39:42   of these shows in person, hot dog in one hand, beer in the other, or at a ballpark. The thing about,

01:39:48   you know, I am also just a huge Apple fan as well. So much so that when one of my sons was young,

01:39:54   we were walking in an Apple store and he screams out loud, "Daddy, you have everything here."

01:40:00   I was so mortified and I was embarrassed, but I am a huge Apple fan, which is why I read Daring

01:40:08   Fireball all the time. So I know the feeling. I don't think my son's ever done that, but I don't

01:40:15   think my son has ever been excited to go to an Apple store because there was nothing there that

01:40:21   he hadn't seen. So it's kind of similar. Anyway, we've mentioned it multiple times, but people,

01:40:26   of course, can follow Tegan's site at politicalwire.com. I really think most of you have

01:40:34   heard of it at some point. I've certainly linked to it over the years and will again, I'm sure,

01:40:38   between now and November. Thank you, Tegan.

01:40:41   Thank you so much, John. Thanks for having me on the show.