Conversation

Replying to
It’s the symmetry that does it where host is a foreground personality rather than a “questioner from nowhere” like a journalist. Audio amplifies the effect, but it can happen in personality-centric text media too, like newsletter or blogs.
1
22
This is also why, though I’ve done a couple of interviews as host just to try it, it’s not my thing. I can’t fade into the background enough for it to be entirely about guest, but if I put myself in the foreground, a cordial conversation turns into “proof of political alliance”
1
23
The relationship between the two realizations is that interviewing or being interviewed by a *person* as opposed to by a representative of an org creates a costly public relationship. If you need to move them into “safer as enemy” box later, it will cost you more.
1
23
Note... it doesn’t mean if I say no to a podcast invite I think the person is a potential hostile. About 99% of the time it will be fine. It just means I don’t know yet, and there’s really not enough upside to figure it out since there’s such a glut of interview content now.
1
12
To be clear, I enjoyed most the podcasts guestings I’ve done (knowledge project, longform, econtalk were especially fun to go on) and don’t regret even the ones I was a bit bored to go on (hosting well so guests are not hired is a real skill that seems to take time to acquire).
1
14
I don’t mind text/email interviews as much. Less demanding, safer, and easier to turn into a fun bunnytrail I want to think about for myself anyway.
2
9
Depends on the person. It could be interpersonal danger via bad behavior within a nominally friendly relationship, fallout/collateral damage from stupid shit they pull near you, messes they drag you into without asking, reputational danger by association (“Epstein induction”?)...
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
What constitutes "danger"?
2
10
Many of these risks also exist in more dilute form in the burgeoning salon scene (Zoom, clubhouse). An interesting precursor was the Edge conversations. A lot of that content was pretty good, but it’s now all kinda gone toxic from Epstein induction fallout.
1
15
Replying to
My suspicion is, if you don’t like drama in your media participation, it’s best to go mostly solo for the next few years, and vet all collaborative efforts carefully with a default “no” posture. Like it or not, each instance is a political capital investment.
1
23
Treat any significant PR opp with the same lens you would a job offer. It may seem more casual and transient but it’s not really.
1
12
I suspect a lot of waldenponding is misdirected social risk aversion. It’s not being online too much that’s toxic and brain-rotting. It’s being too uncritically social about it. You can be Very Online and stress-free if you resist the temptation to be too sociable.
3
25
Not surprisingly the biggest waldenponders are usually the ones who really hustle to sell something with a limited window. Like a trendy or time-sensitive product/message. The pressure to sell tempts you into social risks your gut recognizes and punishes you for. Result: burnout.
1
6
One of my free strategic options is that I’m never in a hurry to sell anything I’m doing so I’m never under artificial pressure to be more visible than I want to be. Hidden benefit of self-publishing and indie consulting on relatively time-insensitive stuff.
2
15
Replying to
Once upon a time organizations like the Free Masons (with careful induction) existed to handle this risk. Perhaps we will see a return of such (along with the attendant pathology of the commoners misinterpreting them, as already seen w/ IDW)?