Sacks observes that Greenwald and Taibbi have been excluded from what is now considered liberalism despite prior credentials.
“both these guys have, I'd say, you know, well established bona fides, you know, used to be considered left wing sort of liberal bona fides, but now today somehow they've been read out of what you would call liberalism today.”
Sacks frames the central question as how journalists with liberal credentials got read out of modern liberalism.
“And so that comment that Jason made sort of, I think there's so much to unpack there on how that happened.”
Sacks reveals NYT fact-check alleged he heard chip export arguments at a dinner with Jensen Huang that never happened.
“During the dinner, Sachs heard a convincing counterargument that selling American chips to rivals, including China, will get those nations hooked on US tech.”
Sacks argues The New York Times has lost its power to intimidate people into silence over the past decade.
“You know, ten years ago, if The New York Times ran a hippie on somebody, even if other people didn't like it, they wouldn't wanna say anything because they'd be afraid that they would be the next target. And that mystique and that fear has completely broken down.”
Sacks says Netflix pays showrunners well but offers no equity, unlike traditional studios that offer entrepreneurial upside.
“And he says the big difference is Netflix will pay you pretty well, but you don't get any equity in your show.”
Sacks expresses surprise Warner's board chose Netflix over Paramount's higher bid that had better regulatory prospects.
“I'm a little surprised actually that the Warner's board went with Netflix when they had Paramount as an option, assuming this Paramount offer was on the table because it seems like a better deal and it's probably a little bit more likely to get through the regulators.”