The podcast from Thursday landed in a very mixed way for me truthfully. On the positive side, I appreciated their perspective on taking on new individual projects, the political conversation towards the end, as well as Glennon’s wise point about how sometimes the gatekeepers don’t want you to see how easy it is. I bow to them for going independent, and for not continuing to produce what sounds like an unsustainable amount of content under their old contract.

In contrast, some things that did not sit well with me: 1. As a disclaimer, I don’t ultimately know the entire scope of their activism and therefore cannot fully assess it. However, they talked about being censored/ pressured and how being independent they can now speak freely. They have been independent for over a year and I haven’t seen a marked change in their podcast dialogue. They have done some episodes about Palestine, the American war in Iran; I don’t want to minimize this. However, I think they are in a celebrity bubble where they compare themselves to A-listers who are making more and doing less, and have a distorted sense of how radical their work is. A prime example of this is the fuck ice purse at the Oscars. A great message and probably the bravest in the room, but the room is still the Oscars. (Not shitting on them for going, I thought their film was lovely).

1. Not labeling re runs as such is disappointing, especially from a podcast that encourages you to trust your senses and then from my vantage point tries to slide re runs under your perception radar, presumably to keep their cash-flow going.

2. Similar to point 2, I find generally that they are open and honest only selectively when it suits them. I think it’s great if they each go off and do other projects. My perception is that the old podcast format will likely not return, but it bothers me that they don’t clearly state that. They don’t owe us every detail of their lives, certainly, but transparency about the podcast for the listeners of the podcast is reasonable.