Guru Right to Reply: Chris Williamson *UNEDITED*
Added 2021-11-29 14:50:15 +0000 UTCSome of you may remember the ex-Love Island contest who featured as the interviewer on the Gad Saad episode. We were quite harsh in our assessments with some reasonable criticisms and some unfair comments.
Chris reached out and a few weeks ago I had a discussion with him about the experience of being featured on the show and broader topics of audience capture, responsible criticism, and our role in the online discourse-o-sphere.
Chris proved more thoughtful than we credited him. He was a good sport, raised interesting points, and was kind enough to come on and have an extended discussion with us.
This was an interesting experience for us and I think it was a very worthwhile discussion. But would be interested to hear feedback and sorry for the unavoidable self-indulgence of the topic.
However, I also want to caveat that this discussion took place at 4am for me, 5am for Matt and with both of us functioning on a few hours of sleep, so we might not be at a sharpest! And I swear I'm not usually THAT white!
In any case, here for your viewing pleasure ahead of editing... audio version coming soon.
-Chris
Comments
I enjoyed listening to this . I had never heard of Chris Williamson until the Gaad Sad episode and did find Matt's comments unnecessary. I heard him since discussing similar things about creating content with David Fuller on Rebel Wisdom. And I admire him for coming on here and talking with you - in a pretty open, exploratory way. I do believe that he wants to do as good a job as he can and he seems genuinely interested in learning to do that better. But, in both interviews with you and David, I have been left wondering why he thinks he is qualified to do it at all, and what he is contributing - especially in this time when every conversation can have a massive audience and real world implications. I sense that he has a genuine desire to learn himself and to grow - and he also has a strong desire to matter and to be of influence in some way, and to make money doing this................ I can hear how people like David from a journalist background, and Matt and Chris from an academic background have some tools to question and to challenge the people they are interviewing and bring a different perspective than the narrative than the interviewee wants to bring - and even with those skills, it is difficult and challenging in this format. I don't see what Chris W can bring to this sphere in a meaningful way. I was left thinking, that he may be better to listen to podcasts for now, and learn that way and get some training in how to interview and challenge people if he wants to develop this new career. It seems too important a role to learn on the job.
Christine Jenkins
2021-12-05 08:20:26 +0000 UTCVengeance is a dish best served cold? It doesn't matter when you do it, Sam will never forgive you, stop following you on twitter, call you "woke". Some of those left-wing gurus like Christine Blosdale are horrible. However, perhaps poking fun or giving good analysis to their podcasts might not hurt as when you do it to members of the IDW "tribe". Intellectual is part of IDW so questioning their intellect would be a blow to their identity, & hurt. I'm not so sure that's as true of leftwing "gurus", at least those of the more self-help spiritual type. Just speculating.
Kat
2021-12-02 15:33:56 +0000 UTCWe will do a proper episode on Sam in due course. But don't want it to be seen as getting revenge.
Christopher Kavanagh
2021-12-02 03:51:26 +0000 UTCAt least it was a conversation. Gotta respect Chris W. for that With Sam Harris's "right to reply", he talked all the time and hardly let Chris K. get in a word edgewise, so annoying especially in cases where (as Sam is wont to put it) Chris K (&Matt) have direct knowledge & he has little such as capture by the "woke" of academia. I wonder why he's so defensive about being a member of a tribe anyway?f I think you were much to nice to Sam Harris. But perhaps you've guessed, I'm in the anti-Sam Harris crowd. He's clearly islamophobic despite his disclaimers, never noticing that, for example, that France has a fairly large Muslim population already, the consequence of its past colonial invasion of north Africa, and far from welcoming them it has more or less kept them in ghettos, underemployed and impoverished. Muslims are invading France? What about those who are there because France invaded Muslim countries? He also has this annoying phrase, "it is an inconvenient fact", often used to preface something that isn't a fact at all. Anyway, I guess you'll put him through the gurometer some time. That would be good.
Kat
2021-12-02 02:36:11 +0000 UTCYes, though as Matt says he did immediately say it was a below the belt shot. With Mikhaila the only reason she rose to prominence is her father but she represents a type of diet-guru that actually is worth covering. I think we pulled a lot of punches with her too but y'know people's definition of 'meanness' is subjective!
Christopher Kavanagh
2021-12-01 01:07:25 +0000 UTCChris W. seems like a pretty intelligent guy & manages to toss a few techno-buzzwords into the mix. Not half so good at dissecting online speech as Matt and Chris K. The comment about him being a former model was uncalled for, being a model doesn't mean you lack intelligence, that's just the stereotype. I thought you were a lot meaner to Mikhaela Peterson but I'd have to listen to it again to see why I thought so. Maybe it's the sense that you picked her just because she's the child of someone who really deserves a good "dissection," rather than her on merits or lack of them. I guess it says something about me that I enjoy a lot of the meanness. Anyway keep up the good work.
Kat
2021-11-30 21:29:23 +0000 UTCIf he really wants the social credit for turning down garbage interviews that he knows will get him a lot of subs and traffic, he could make ‘intellectual honesty’ a stronger part of his brand by providing periodic updates on the interviews he’s pursuing and the ones he’s turned down on moral grounds.
Kevin Nyberg
2021-11-29 22:35:27 +0000 UTCGood episode. I was a little surprised that Chris W, as introspective as he seems to be, seemed to speak so naively about the temptation of ethically suspect business practices. The business person who is willing to dump toxins in the river will always have a short term advantage over the one who pays the cost to safely handle their waste. So it is with a podcaster who prioritizes metrics at all costs, and really for all people when we’re faced with the opportunity to externalize a cost for personal gains, e.g. tragedy of the commons. Still, he is a fairly young guy and I think most of us naturally make progress on the “me vs. we” problem as we age, especially those of us that get married or have kids. It bodes well that he’s clearly shown some evidence of maturing as a result of your critique, which he talks about in this episode. And I think he does have good podcast ‘presence’. I’m going to give his podcast a chance and we’ll see what happens.
Kevin Nyberg
2021-11-29 22:28:17 +0000 UTCI don’t want to make it about Matt and Chris but I just want to point out they have actual experts on the show to discuss these topics on detail. If you are a journalist you should have a knowledge of at least what the scholarly debate is around the subjects you are interview. You shouldn’t publicly talk about the Sun. An example is Jordan Peterson on Marxism. He is heavily influential but has only read the Communist Manifesto. He might be fine for psychology but he shouldn’t be spouting off about Communism giving people the idea that they now know what they are talking about.
Giovanni
2021-11-29 20:16:33 +0000 UTCMatt and Chris don’t have Ph.D’s in mathematics but seem perfectly willing and able to call Eric Weinstein or James Lindsay out on their BS. I think they correctly point out that you don’t need to be an absolute expert in every topic under the sun to interview people in a responsible manner and understand when claims need pushback.
Andy
2021-11-29 19:46:10 +0000 UTCI still think your original criticism were correct. He talks about to think how you influence people but doesn’t realize that when he admits he is not educated enough to engage the ideas that means he shouldn’t haven’t a podcast with 250k subscribers talking about the ideas.
Giovanni
2021-11-29 19:12:29 +0000 UTCI didn't really think I'd listen to this all the way through. I did, and happily so. I found the meta-issues in the podcasting industry totally fascinating and the parallels to the broader discourse very enlightening. Thanks, guys. Chris W. needs to laugh audibly, though! He cracks up quite a bit through this episode and on audio nobody is going to hear it. Other than that, I thought he represented himself quite reasonably.
Jesse Hodges
2021-11-29 18:12:05 +0000 UTCMatt and Chris, you are very much to be respected and thanked for hosting these kinds of discussions. Kol ha kavod.
Sian Gibby
2021-11-29 14:53:19 +0000 UTC
