In This Episode
- Check out Graeme’s piece – https://tinyurl.com/3p6ed8cj
- Call Congress – 202-224-3121
- Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8
- What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcast
Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/
TRANSCRIPT
Jane Coaston: It’s Friday, September 12th. I’m Jane Coaston, and this is What a Day, the show that learned today that octopuses, yes, octopuses, not octopi, use all of their eight limbs in different ways. They use their front forearms for exploring and their back forearms for movement. Just a fun little fact for you to use at your next octopus-themed dinner party. [music break] On today’s show, the Federal Trade Commission takes a look at the potential harm AI chatbots have on children. And the British government fires its ambassador to the United States for his extremely not great emails to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But let’s start with the latest updates on the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. At the time of this recording at 8 p.m. Eastern on Thursday, the search for a suspect continues. The FBI released some grainy photos of a person of interest wearing sunglasses and baseball cap, all in black, in the hopes it might trigger tips or other information from the public. The Bureau also said it had recovered a bolt-action rifle that may have been used in the shooting. With no suspect in custody, no motive has been established either. And let’s be incredibly clear. As of this moment, we still do not know why someone shot and killed Charlie Kirk. Still, that has not stopped many, many people quite loudly and with a whole lot of certainty from characterizing his murder as an act of left-wing political violence. That includes President Donald Trump, who said this Wednesday night.
[clip of President Donald Trump] For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.
Jane Coaston: Several congressional Republicans echoed similar sentiments, accusing Democrats of contributing to a culture that led to Kirk’s death. This, despite Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson trying to, as he told reporters, quote, “turn the temperature down.” Here he is on CNN Wednesday night.
[clip of House Speaker Mike Johnson] It’s government of, by, and for the people ourselves. It means the people should be engaged. They should be informed. They should engage in thoughtful debate, as Charlie Kirk was a model and a leader in. Um. But at the end of the day, you can’t take that home, and you can’t hate the person on the other side. We’re all in this together.
Jane Coaston: Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries also chimed in on Thursday.
[clip of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries] This moment requires leadership that brings the American people together as opposed to trying to further divide us. Political violence in any form against any American is unacceptable, should be denounced by everyone, and moving forward we have to figure out a better way to come together.
Jane Coaston: Kirk’s death has been a terrifying reminder of the specter of political violence in a country where such acts of murder and mayhem have been markedly and blessedly rare over the last 40 years. But we didn’t have social media 40 years ago, where we can see someone die on TikTok and read someone’s call for a civil war on Twitter. So to talk more about what this moment means, I spoke to Graeme Wood. He’s a staff writer at The Atlantic who wrote a piece entitled, Political Violence Could Devour Us All. Graeme Wood, welcome to What a Day.
Graeme Wood: Thank you.
The subhead of your piece in the Atlantic says quote, “Charlie Kirk’s murder was one of the worst moments in recent American history.” Can you tell us why?
Graeme Wood: Yeah, I mean, look, you for a living, sit in a chair and say your opinions on things. Um. That’s what he was doing when he was shot. So the idea that political violence would get more common in America uh was is always frightening. I mean we have been blessedly, not totally free of it, but having less of it. Even when you factor in all the assassinations we could name from the from the past several decades, all the terrible things that happened, the United States has been very free of, relatively free of political violence. And to see that change in front of our eyes, to see blood shed in that horrible way, and in that context, is a portent of something really bad, um something that I at least 10 years ago did not think would revisit the United States.
Jane Coaston: Yeah, I’m curious for you to be thinking about this in that context, because I’ve seen a lot of people, you know, making comparisons to different eras of political violence, you know, in the early 1970s, bombings were incredibly common in the United States. We, you know, Gerald Ford survived two assassination attempts. But Gerald Ford was not president during an era of social media and Kirk was a force on social media and social media is where the most conflict about his murder is taking place. What role do you think it’s playing in ratcheting up both political violence and the viability of political violence.
Graeme Wood: I mean, part of it’s just a matter of normalization. There’s something called in psychology, the availability heuristic, where how mentally available is something? How easily can you imagine it? Can you picture it? And of course, if we see these things happening, if they approach us you know on our telephones, like the most intimate device that we that we look at, you know this is something that in the past we might’ve seen Zapruder film, grainy footage, uh and it’s a very different thing for it to be something that is right there next to the pictures of your significant other or your kids. The image of someone instead having his throat explode uh in front of hundreds of people. So this is something that really changes things when it’s something that’s so thinkable to so many people. And of course. It but the availability of it psychologically means a lot of people are going to think oh well maybe that’s something I might do and it changes the political landscape significantly.
Jane Coaston: Do we have examples of what that looks like from other countries? I’m thinking about, you know, Germany or Italy during the years of lead. How does that availability heuristic lead to more political violence? Does it just seem like that’s just the logical thing to do?
Graeme Wood: Yeah, I mean, it’s very difficult, of course, to assign causality–
Jane Coaston: Right of course.
Graeme Wood: With things like this but these things build on each other. I mean the fact that in Italy or in Europe in general in the 1970s, uh it was a normal thing to find out that there were bombings, that their bank would be blown up, that there would be a major political figure taken hostage um means suddenly that this is just one of the things that is on the menu for political action. Uh. And that has effects that I think most Americans right now, again, even considering what we’ve seen over the last 20 years, most Americans don’t think of that as being on the menu and suddenly it’s going to be something that is, I hope, not ubiquitous, but something that we’ll think about a lot more, and the very thought of it is part of the terror that it causes.
Jane Coaston: I’m curious thinking on social media, something I’ve been thinking a lot about is how social media is inherently performative. And so much of the statements in response to Kirk’s murder have been performing for an audience, whether they have been performing you know being a normal person and saying you know this is terrible, or they’re performing to an audience that is either want either cheering on his murder or cheering on horrifying consequences for all liberals. What element does that performance play in how we look at social media and how we interpret events like this?
Graeme Wood: Now, look, the context in which I have looked at social media professionally in the past was also a context of great violence. I was covering ISIS. ISIS, of course every day we had imagery–
Jane Coaston: Very performative. Magazines.
Graeme Wood: Totally performative, yeah.
Jane Coaston: Yeah, extremely performative!
Graeme Wood: And very much trying to take a horrifying image and then cut you loose from what you believed about the world so that you would you would take up what they had instead. What were the lessons from that? The main lesson was that you do have to figure out ways to consume these media, which we can’t totally avoid, in ways that are protective of your own moral and mental health. Um, this is. This is an enormously difficult task that I think, in this infancy of this medium, social media, so I don’t know that there’s a recipe for it other than just allowing the time to pass and you know as as perhaps some people well who are younger than me will grow up as social media natives and be better at protecting themselves from being basically made crazy by the images that they see. That is a process that I think we’re just starting collectively to figure out how to do.
Jane Coaston: Already you’re seeing people losing it a little bit, you know, there’s a website publicly identifying people accused of making light of Kirk’s murder. Historically, Black colleges and universities are on lockdown due to threats and members of Congress are beefing up their own security. Who has the power to turn down the temperature and what would that actually look like? Like, what would it look like to try to do that effectively?
Graeme Wood: That’s a great question. I have no answer for it. I mean, the first thing that I would look for is leadership that could make a statement that was morally credible, that people would listen to and would think, you know, I haven’t thought this through myself, but I trust the person who’s saying it. Uh. Do we have leadership like that? Um. Clearly not. I can’t think of a public figure who could say, let’s all calm down about this. I can think of many public figures, including one very prominent one, who could say things that would cause the heat to ratchet up.
Jane Coaston: As you’ve written, there’s been an unquestionable uptick in political violence in just the last few years. The plot to kidnap Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, January 6th, the attack on Speaker Emerita, Nancy Pelosi’s husband, two different assassination attempts against Trump, among many others. And you write that periods of quote, “disorientation” like this make people susceptible to political shifts. Can you explain what that means?
Graeme Wood: Yeah, it’s not as if I can reach into the any literature of political psychology, but I can tell you I feel it myself. When you see wild things happening that are things that you couldn’t believe would ever exist before, then you just feel yourself kind of being cut loose from all the moorings that you had, political moorings, moral moorings. And I think that’s kind of what happens. I mean, I mentioned the way that conservatives have been energized by the murder of a 23-year-old Ukrainian immigrant, Iryna Zarutska. And um it was because there was images of her being stabbed to death on a commuter train in Charlotte, North Carolina on August 25th, images that are just horrifying to watch and that somehow penetrate deep into your brain, totally involuntarily. To a place where they they cut you loose from what you thought reality was and sadly can push you back to changes perhaps we might call it changing an overton window within ourselves where suddenly you think that maybe I was wrong about everything and I’m open to a lot of things that I had previously considered anathema within politics. So of course that’s that’s exactly what various types of radicals uh expect that, yes, if something horrifying happens, that’s an opportunity. That’s an opportunity to say, maybe since you didn’t see that coming, you might recalibrate your view of the world and be open to a politics that before you thought was far too too fringe or radical for you. So I suspect that the public execution of Charlie Kirk will have that effect for a lot of people.
Jane Coaston: Is there anything else about this political climate that you don’t think is getting enough attention?
Graeme Wood: Last year when the assassination attempt against Trump happened in Butler, Pennsylvania, the first reaction I had was, thank God he wasn’t killed. And the second reaction I had was let’s think about this in context. And as I suggested in the beginning of our conversation, the context is of a country that has had horrifically violent moments. But that in the last 100 years or so has actually been pretty low in political violence. So I think context is what is is still very important to see, which is that there’s a whole world out there where the events that we saw yesterday. Is far those events are far more common, far more familiar to people. And so we don’t have to guess what happens when that becomes a commonplace event. We can look at what happens in places like even you know Pakistan, like Indonesia, and indeed, even in Western Europe during times. So um but that should teach us, and I think that people’s normie instincts kick in and they say, um that was bad. And sometimes they say that performatively. I think that what might be overlooked is we can see what happens when it’s when this happens all the time and the instinct to denounce it is no longer an automatic one. Um. Namely, that all [?] go totally haywire and um everybody loses really, really badly. Um it this is this is a horrible, horrible tragedy for individuals, but for society it’s truly unthinkable for someone who’s been in the United States for his entire life to imagine what would be like if we lost that gift that this country has had for most of the last century.
Jane Coaston: Graeme, thank you so much for joining me.
Graeme Wood: Thank you, Jane.
Jane Coaston: That was my conversation with Graeme Wood, staff writer at The Atlantic. We’ll link to his article, Political Violence Could Devour Us All in the show notes. We’ll get to more of the news in a moment, but if you like the show, make sure to subscribe, leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts, watch us on YouTube, and share with your friends. More to come after some ads. [music break]
[AD BREAK]
Jane Coaston: Here’s what else we’re following today.
[sung] Headlines.
[clip of Senate Majority Leader John Thune] Democrats and their political base cannot deal with the fact that the American people elected President Trump. And so they’re dragging out every confirmation in retaliation. This president would be fine if this Democrat temper tantrum didn’t affect anyone else. But Democrats’ historic obstruction is having serious consequences.
Jane Coaston: Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune triggered the nuclear option Thursday to speed up confirmation hearings for Trump’s executive branch nominees. Hearings he says his Democratic colleagues delayed on purpose for petty partisan reasons. Which Republicans would never do. The new rule allows the Senate to confirm an unlimited number of nominees in a block, rather than one by one. Republican senators will still be able to object to individual nominees, but the rule strips that power from the minority party, which has got to sting. The vote was held up for hours on Thursday while Democrats tried to strike a deal to avoid the rule change, but ultimately it passed 53 to 45. The initial block of 48 Trump nominees, now primed for a smoother confirmation, include former Fox News host and Donald Trump Jr’s ex-fiancee Kimberly Guilfoyle as ambassador to Greece, former New York Republican Representative Brandon Williams as undersecretary for nuclear security, and Callista Gingrich, former house speaker Newt Gingrich’s wife as ambassador to Sweden. She’s half-Swedish on her mother’s side, okay? Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the reason Democrats were delaying the confirmations wasn’t because they were having a temper tantrum, but rather because of Trump’s, quote, “historically bad nominees.”
[clip of Representative Thomas Masie] I was encouraged today by the news that the United Kingdom just fired their ambassador to the United States over the Epstein files.
Jane Coaston: Well, that makes two of us. Accountability. Ever heard of it, America? Kentucky Republican Representative Thomas Massie praised the British government Thursday for firing the country’s ambassador to the United States, Peter Mandelson, over his links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson came under scrutiny after Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a 50th birthday book compiled in 2003 for Epstein. In that album, Mandelson called Epstein, quote, “My Best Pal.” You know who also allegedly wrote Epstein a birthday letter in that book? Anyway, on Wednesday, The Sun newspaper published emails that Mandelson allegedly sent to Epstein. Among other things, they showed Mandelson telling the disgraced financier in 2008 that his conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor was a miscarriage of justice. He wrote, quote, “I can still barely understand it. It just could not happen in Britain. You have to be incredibly resilient to fight for early release. And be philosophical about it as much as you can.” Eew. By Thursday, Prime Minister Keir Starmer had dismissed Mandelson. He was appointed to the role last year, but he’s had a long career in British politics. Foreign Office Minister Stephen Doughty told Parliament the emails show the quote, “depth and extent of the pair’s relationship” and how it’s quote, “materially different from what was previously known.”
[clip of Stephen Doughty] In particular, Mr. Speaker, Lord Mandelson’s suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information and in light of that Mr. Speaker and mindful as we all are of the victims of Epstein’s appalling crimes, he has been withdrawn as ambassador with immediate effect.
Jane Coaston: See how easy that was? Mandelson wrote a letter to embassy staff saying, quote, “the circumstances surrounding the announcement today are ones which I deeply regret. I continue to feel utterly awful about my association with Epstein 20 years ago and the plight of his victims.” You should. On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Education announced it would end discretionary funding for several grant programs for colleges that enroll large numbers of minority students, or what the government refers to as minority serving institutions. Apparently, it’s considered discriminatory and unconstitutional to give students of color extra assistance to attend college. Here’s what Education Secretary Linda McMahon had to say about the decision. Quote, “discrimination based upon race or ethnicity has no place in the United States.” She added, quote, “Diversity is not merely the presence of a skin color. Stereotyping an individual based on immutable characteristics diminishes the full picture of that person’s life and contributions, including their character, resiliency, and merit.” The move will affect hundreds of colleges and universities, with schools in states like California, Texas, and Arizona taking the biggest hit. According to the AP as part of these cuts, the agency will hold back about $350 million that were already budgeted for this year. More than half of that sum was designated for a grant program set up specifically for colleges and universities with student bodies that are at least 25% Latino. Congress officially created the Hispanic Serving Institutions Program in 1992. After realizing that Latino students were going to college and graduating at a rate far lower than white non-Latino students, Congress giveth and the president taketh away.
[clip of Bethany Braun-Silva] These AI companions are designed to mimic friendships so they can hold deep conversations. They remember preferences and they can even act empathetically, right? So for the adolescent stage, this is quite appealing, but you have to remember this is not real empathy.
Jane Coaston: That’s ABC’s e-commerce editor, Bethany Braun-Silva, explaining how AI chatbots mimic human behavior. The Federal Trade Commission said Thursday it’s launching an inquiry into companies who operate AI chat bots, including Meta, Snap, and the makers of ChatGBT, among others. Letters were sent to the companies asking them to explain what steps, if any, they’re taking to make sure their chat bots are safe for children and teens who might see them as companions. And how the tech giants are ensuring that both users and their parents are aware of the risks involved before interacting with the bots. More than 70% of teens have used AI companions at some point, and 50% use them regularly, according to a new study from Common Sense Media. And it’s not just for schoolwork. A lot of young adults treat them as friends they can go to for advice. A third said their conversations with AI chatbots were as or more satisfying than their conversations with real friends. If that isn’t very worrisome on its own, the same bots have been shown to give kids dangerous advice about things like drugs, eating disorders, and even suicide. Several parents have sued companies like Character AI and OpenAI for allegedly influencing their children to commit self-harm. OpenAI and Meta announced changes earlier this month to how their chatbots respond to teens asking questions about suicide or showing signs of mental and emotional distress. And that’s the news. [music break].
[AD BREAK]
Jane Coaston: That’s all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, contemplate the fact that former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has been sentenced to 27 years and three months in prison for trying to stay in power, and tell your friends to listen. And if you’re into reading, and not just about how the former leader was convicted by a Supreme Court panel for acting with the purpose of, quote, “eroding democracy and institutions.” Like me, What a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at Crooked.com/subscribe. I’m Jane Coaston, and Bolsonaro says he’s running for president again in 2026. Because some people just can’t help themselves. [music break] What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It’s recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producer is Emily Fohr. Our video editor is Joseph Dutra. Our video producer is Johanna Case. We have production help today from Greg Walters, Matt Berg, Megan Larsen, Gina Pollack, and Jonah Eatman. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison, and our senior vice president of news and politics is Adriene Hill. We had help today from the Associated Press. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East. [music break]
