Jason Concepcion on the Right-Wing Media Slump, David Ellison’s Pitch for Owning CNN, and Portland vs. the Blazers’ New Owner

Hey, I just Venmo Deferent.

Nice.

Now I can instantly spend it whether I'm checking out online with Venmo,

or using the Venmo Devacore.

Same more.

More exactly, because the more you do with Venmo, the more you get.

Like earning up to 5% cash back with Venmo Stash on a bundle of brains.

So, order more pizza.

The math demands it.

Get the Venmo Devacore.

Venmo Stash bundle terms and exclusions apply.

See terms of Venmo.me slash-dash terms.

Venmo check out not available with all merchants.

Venmo master cart is issued by the Vencore Venk NA.

Things People Love.

Hello media consumers.

Welcome to Pressbox.

Got me, Joel Anderson, produces Isaiah Blakely,

and John Notbone's Jones on the Wings and Tooths.

Yeah, you all right?

I know that has not caught on yet.

Maybe someday it will.

Our fearless leader, Brian Curtis, is out today.

Fear not.

We've got this great in-house guest joining us for this episode.

And because of who he is,

we're going to talk about today's stories through the lens of conspiracy.

Today, we're going to talk about the declining returns of the right-wing media

conspiracy, Montgaring, David Ellison's New York Times op-ed on the Paramount Warner merger.

Portland's battle over the future of the Blazers.

And what the hell is Sophie Cunningham's doing right now?

And what the WNBA should be doing about that if anything.

Without further ado, let's welcome Jason Konsep,

he owns the Pressbox.

He's a screenwriter and pop culture and sports commentator.

But most importantly for our purposes,

one of the co-hosts of the conspiracy-minded,

wait a second podcast.

Jason, thank you for your very valuable time.

Thank you for having me.

It's delightful to be here.

And just to note, I have a person doing some work on my house and my dog might

bark a little bit, but I'm going to try to keep her calm throughout this.

I think we can count her as a listener by the way.

So I will check all the lessons we can get.

So yeah, I'm good with it.

It's fine.

I've been on your podcast twice.

Yes.

You know, look, so now we can do this thing.

You know, say a little trade every night again.

Yes.

Yes.

Tyler's next.

So, um, look, I just want to start

with which seems to be the death rattle of the right wing media machine.

And it's been this trend that's been noted many times.

I've seen a bunch of media outlets write about this in recent months.

But the times published the most comprehensive piece about it last week.

And it starts with an anecdote about my former Buzzfeed colleague,

Buzzfeed colleague, Benny Johnson.

And how his YouTube channel, yeah, me and Benny Johnson worked at Buzzfeed together.

That's it.

It took all kinds to make that.

Do you get any of that Russian money that Benny got?

I did.

I did not.

You know, Benny got run up out of there.

Not long after I was there.

Yeah, yeah.

Probably for the best.

Yeah.

Um, but yeah, now I'm hopefully that that Russian money is still going for him.

Because apparently that YouTube channel,

his YouTube channel's down millions of views.

X accounting, doing the numbers it used to.

He's not the only one though.

The times analyze years of audience data for it.

Doesn't matter.

Concrete content creators like Mickey Kelly,

Tucker Carlson.

And Nick Fuente, some of many others.

And to sum it up, here's a little line from the piece that says,

only a few saw their audiences grow since Mr. Trump's inauguration,

while many more have seen their viewerships decline.

And so while the views are also down even for mainstream sites.

So I don't want to, you know,

everybody is kind of struggling right now.

The declines have been biggest for the right wing outlets.

And so Jason, I'm just curious like,

what's your theory for what's going on here?

Like what is happening that those numbers are going down

and precipitously so since Trump has got back in office the second time?

Yeah, I think that it's,

I think you could kind of generally,

kind of say that the reason is malaise,

you know, that kind of exhaustion with,

with the president in general, he has said,

and I think this is right, that maggot is me.

You know, there's a lot of,

there's a lot of intellectual tying one's self into knots

to attempt to create a coherent ideology

from the various moves of MAGA of this White House.

But really it's just the whims of the president,

the things he decides to do.

Right.

And I think because things are going so poorly

and I think primarily with regards to the war in Iran,

driving up gas prices, looking like there's no end in sight,

it's a clear defeat.

You know, for anyone who wants to look around the latest news

that I saw yesterday afternoon was that the shape of a deal is that

Iran will charge tools on a certain kind of route through the street

of Hormuz and that will be,

that's a red line for them, that's a clear loss for the United States,

America and the president.

And so I think there's just a kind of general exhaustion with the bad news.

People are tuning out, would rather watch a summer house on Bravo or anything else.

And I think that's primarily what it is.

Now, I mean, if you look at his favorability with Republicans,

it's kind of unchanged.

It hasn't really gone anywhere.

It's the independence.

The people who had kind of jumped on the low information voter,

the younger voter, the people who also voted for Obama or Biden

or had kind of jumped back and forth.

It's those people who have mainly pulled away from him.

And I think that is what's being reflected in this.

Right. Because there's a sort of person,

you talk about that low information.

A person that's like, well, the sides are going towards Trump.

Right.

And, you know, there are a lot of people that will listen to us.

Right. If we, if we side with Trump, this go around.

But the thing is, is when, once he's in office,

and I, this is the thing I kind of can't understand

because they should have known this from the first time,

because he's incoherent.

Like, there's nothing like if you were defending him on one thing,

then it's just like, well, if you believe the government should be small

and now we know that that's some bullshit, right.

Like, the United States own, like, is bought into like,

they own shares in like about 30 companies now.

So, yeah, many, many important companies, including shares is probably not

the right way to frame it all the time.

But in videos, I forget two of our important rare earth companies.

And on and on.

Yes.

Yeah. Right.

Where the number that used to be was zero.

Right.

Yes.

And it's like, that's, I mean, that is something that like,

we would criticize and other countries,

we say, well, that's not the free market working.

But so if you were apt to want to defend him on any number of fronts,

you just can't do it because there's just no coherent.

There's no coherent ideology at play here.

And so I think the thing is that some people are like, well,

I can just stick with the president and hope that I can ride it out

and people will still support me on that.

Or you can turn tech like Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuente,

so whatever and go another way.

But then you're going to lose a lot of people that don't want to hear that.

This shit either, right?

Yeah.

And it's just like there's like this fracturing that's going on.

And it's like, well, there's nobody that really sort of can capture

that group that was all behind him in 2024 anymore.

Yeah, a good example of what you're talking about is Dan Bongino,

who was the deputy director of the FBI,

who in the lead up to the election was one of the loudest voices

banging the drum on Epstein releases on clarity about what happened there.

Is this some sort of deep state cover up to protect the elite,

and mostly the Democratic elite.

And then that all blew up when it turned out actually

the president has no interest in releasing any further information on that

or investigating in any kind of serious way.

And is indeed implicated in significant ways.

And you know, Bongino had to flee the

on signs of Washington at that point.

There's been a lot of reporting on this most recently in

Heyverman and Jonathan Swanson's regime change.

I'll give about his unhappiness with the way that was handled.

And he's returned now to his podcast perch.

And it's absolutely no surprise that a lot of his audience

who had bought into this idea that Trump and he were going to go to Washington

and release all this stuff and find out the truth

have turned him out.

Have it turned off on him.

You know, like that's not a surprise.

And I think that is one example of the war in Iran is another one.

You know, this was supposed to be an America first movement.

This was supposed to be a movement about avoiding foreign entanglements and foreign wars.

And it turns out that's very much not the case,

which has, as you mentioned, led to the exit of

Carlson, Fuentes, and others to varying degrees of success.

I mean, I think Tucker's going to run.

That's the other thing.

You really think so, okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

I could see that.

And you know, the thing about Tucker

and even Nick Fuentes is that, you know, I know people

are particularly on the left don't like to give people credit for being intelligent.

If they believe in some of the things that Tucker and Nick Fuentes believe in.

But they are actually smart dudes.

They just believe in what I believe to be some odious things, right?

But they can look at the history of Trump.

And I think that they were really smart in the way that they were like,

I can sort of ride this thing.

But as soon as the bandwagon gets a little bumpy,

we can get off because the thing that anybody who has followed Trump

for their entire life, like they entire life, like if you go back over the whole course,

anybody that has a tired, affiliated themselves with Trump usually ends up

worse off for it at the end of it.

Like can you think of anybody who is ever like maybe Steve and Miller?

Like maybe Steve Miller right now.

Yeah.

He's living as your core, core Lewandowski, I guess, like,

but sure.

But that's, you know, maybe Steve and Blanche.

Yeah.

A few people.

You know, yeah.

I think that there are, listen, it all depends on what your ambition is.

Right.

I think that anybody who seeks an office as high as the president

or has ambitions that would garner a spotlight,

as bright as the spotlight that shines on the president,

maybe in other arenas, is something that will draw Trump's eyeer.

Yeah.

And we've, you know, we've seen that in various ways with him being like, you know,

to turning on various figures because it seems like their ambitions are not subordinate to his.

And I think the people who have been successful in his orbit,

Marco Rubio, who is going to get, I mean, there's another one.

He's going to get everything that he's been dreaming of,

including control over Cuba.

It seems.

Yes.

That's, seems what we're, we're angling towards.

People who are able to subordinate their personal spotlight,

the, the kind of luminance of their own ambition to his,

and up succeeding.

And I think a lot of what the appeal is for these very smart,

and the people who kind of surround Trump,

is,

their ability through Trump to get the thing that they have been working towards

for all of their professional life, done for Stephen Miller,

it's the whitening of the country.

Right.

For Marco Rubio, it's Cuba and control over Latin America,

you know, for, I don't know,

cash, cash, cash, cash,

betel, it's like,

you get to go to hockey games.

I'm going to play my girlfriend, everything.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right.

Yeah.

So if you can do that,

if you can work towards a thing that you desire,

but also not outside the president,

then you'll succeed in this very, very strange,

personalist power structure.

So I want to, for a moment,

tell you what it's, this is not necessarily a conspiracy,

but I do find it weird that in a year of midterms,

there's all this fretting about the erosion

of the right wing media space.

And it kind of is reminiscent to me of like,

when Democrats like,

hey, man, the fundraiser's not going very well right now.

You know, they want to make things are as bad as they can

to drum up, you know, more interest.

Like that, because I just felt like this has been a through line

a story that's been popular and for like the last couple of months.

And I'm just like,

why do people,

why do people care about this?

Like who's trying to put this information out?

And why should we care?

And I just wondered. I was like,

ah, and oh, in the fact within that story,

the New York Times story, they interviewed about a dozen people,

Candace Owen, some other folks, a part of it.

And they all responded, right?

And normally they wouldn't, they don't have any,

there's no benefit to them usually talking to the mainstream media,

but for this point,

they were happy to talk about how their numbers were down.

It just seems suspicious to me.

I think there's something to it.

Listen, I also think that there has been,

I mean, this is a conspiracy theory, I think.

But it was notable to me how,

how a lot of the dip in right wing media seemed to coincide

with the defeat of Victor Orbán and Hungary.

And then the appeal that Victor Orbán was funneling

tons of Hungarian taxpayer money into right wing

causes across the globe, particularly in the US

and in the media space.

So, you know, Ben Shapiro was one,

is like, had layoffs two weeks after Victor Orbán loved in Hungary.

So I do think that there is something to what you say in this kind of,

hey, is there any other sugar daddy out there

or a suite of sugar daddy's we can help us out?

I think that that is, I think you're on to something.

Yeah, right. And also,

and you tell me if I'm on to something about this,

because I worry that this doesn't truly capture something

that's going on with right wing media,

because I wonder if we spend a little bit too much time

thinking about how they're doing on media we know about.

Right?

Like you didn't say anything about Gab, truth source,

truth social.

All sorts of voters,

they kick all of the sort of shit they use to organize now.

Like those feel even YouTube and TikTok feel like sort of antiquated,

like metrics.

And I just wonder, and because of the way they've been organized,

I mean, again, the right wing has been ahead of us

on so much shit, like as it turns out, right?

Like they, they knew to go after school boards,

they knew to take over course.

So they're organizing in ways that we,

that are never really perceptible to the mainstream.

And so I just wonder if, you know,

like maybe this isn't the right metric to be thinking about,

we're thinking about how right wing media is doing.

I think that there is something to that, you know, there is a,

there is a way in the digital era that

kind of grassroots political movements,

kind of are born and matriculate from these weird cracks,

you know, 4chan message boards and, you know, strange subreddits.

I think you're honest something, but I would zoom out and I would,

I would zoom out and even, and look at it from an even higher kind of 30,000 foot view

and just kind of think of it as a media thing.

So the ratings have gone down in digital media?

Okay, what, you know, so what?

That happens to everybody.

And I don't, I'm, you know, we've both been in digital media now for a while.

When is it not dying?

When are you not, when are you not as a person who makes a living

through these digital channels?

When are you not keeping one eye on the fire exit trying to figure out?

Like, okay, if this, if this doesn't work, what's my off-ramp?

And, you know, I, you know, we're probably two, three off-ramps into our career right now.

So, for, you know, in a larger sense, I kind of feel like this is the natural ebb and flow

of digital media.

That's right.

Yes, their numbers are down.

Does that mean that, quote unquote, right wing media,

mega media is cracking up?

I think not necessarily.

This just, to me, seems like the natural ebb and flow of the marketplace.

I mean, you say that to somebody who used to work at BuzzFeed and ESPN and local newspapers,

you know, so it's like, yeah, like there's, they're always losing audience if they, you know,

at a certain point.

So, order more pizza.

The math demands it.

Get the Venmo debit card.

Venmo stashed bundle terms and exclusions applied.

See terms of Venmo.me slash dash terms.

Venmo check out not available at all merchants.

Venmo master card is issued by the bank or bank NA.

So, also in the New York Times on Tuesday, David Ellison,

who made a people know the chief executive of a paramount sky dance.

And son of Larry, one of the 10 richest people in the world,

wrote about why we shouldn't be concerned about him potentially taking overseas.

And then this curious attempt of persuasion,

he pointed to his stewardship of CBS news.

As a reason why we should trust him.

And here's an excerpt.

He says, great news organizations like CNN and CBS News are here to tell it straight down the middle.

That requires newsrooms that reflect the whole world, not one side of it.

And it requires independence.

Our journalists will continue to answer to the facts and to all the people they serve.

Not to any party or cause.

Anyone who listens to the press box knows that Ellison's hand picked Hinch woman,

Berry Weiss,

is basically taking a hacksaw to CBS News in 60 minutes.

And there's real doubt about the future of the network and that show heading into the fall.

So Jason, what do you think Ellison was doing here?

Do you think he's trying to pull the wool over his eyes

just so he can decimate another mainstream media

outlet under orders from Trump?

Or do you think there's something else going on here?

Or maybe he's just sincere.

Maybe he's really sincere.

Well, I think it is what it appears to be, which is, maybe gaslight is too strong.

I think it's his only move.

CBS is his weakest card.

I think you could argue.

It is the single best piece of evidence that he's going to do.

It is the single best piece of evidence to your point

that the exact fear that people have is legitimate that he interviews in newsrooms.

And so I think it essay built to reassure people that CNN

is this asset that he is, that he's going to cherish and approach

and kind of unbiased hands-off way.

It's kind of like the only thing he can do.

If he ignored the CBS part of it, it would be an admission that

actually I intend to do the thing that we all agree that he intends to do.

So I think that your mileage may vary

and whether you found this effective, I did not find it effective.

But I think it was his only move.

I think he had to do this.

Right.

That's fair.

What the thing is, he kind of gives the game away right there.

Because you can say, all I'm going to be hands-off.

Right.

I'm not going to be a guy that intervenes.

But then you also say in the next breath,

we need news organizations that reflect the whole world not one side of it.

So you said, I'm not going to do anything.

On the other hand, it's like, I do have some views about the news.

And I think there's other side needs like a better airing.

Right.

So it's like, which is it?

You know what I mean?

If you really feel that way, it'd be hard to imagine that you're going to be like,

well, you know what?

I think one side is being untreated unfairly in this news environment.

But I'm not going to do anything about it.

You know?

That doesn't make any sense to me.

No, I completely agree.

There is a contradiction at the heart of it.

But again, I do think it was kind of like the only...

A light gas lighting is the only thing he could really do with and frame it as,

you know, this kind of return to the Murrow and Turner legacy of

straight down the middle kind of news.

It had slanted too much to the other side, right?

So therefore we have to...

I do have to put my thumb on the scale a little bit

to get it even.

That said, I think that his central move, the kind of like this argument that the fight,

it's not about market share.

Everybody's worried about the news.

Yeah.

Is a kind of dodge.

It's like not a rebuttal.

It reframes what I think is a very concrete monopolist,

antitrust counterargument.

You know, there's 12 attorneys generals

that are naming all the reasons why this accumulation of media power is very troubling.

And I don't think they're just doing it because they've got some political hobby horse.

That's like, you know, that's a significant challenge.

And so I think the way he's framing it is this kind of like proxy for like cultural anxiety.

Is a tactical move to kind of concede the scary point.

And avoid the scary point.

The fact that he doesn't want to talk about market share

tells me that he understands that the market share part of it is actually the scary thing.

One guy, one entity is going to control all these levers of media.

Forget that it's, you know, it's CNN, it's CBS, but it's also, you know,

huge legacy movie studios and other media channels.

And so that dodge to me is the thing that he doesn't want to talk about.

And it's the weakest part of his entire narrative.

And that is again, the accumulation of tremendous media power under one banner.

Right. And he skips past that.

And actually, it's interesting.

I'm glad you're here for a number of reasons, but you've worked in Hollywood, right?

You've just got to do it.

And he talks about himself and his company is a force for good, like trying to create

more great art.

But it's somebody who is there who's underlayer the lane.

Like, what's the lay of the land for people who actually want to make cool shit right now?

Because I feel like he was, like he's making said, well, if we, if we merge together,

people will have more opportunities to do more stuff.

We'll greenlight more movies.

What are the odds that this actually makes that better?

Well, listen, there has been a great summer for movies.

I don't think that has anything to do with David Ellison.

He's talking about his suite of upcoming movies that he greenlit in the op-ed.

Again, that has, that doesn't really change facts on the ground currently.

I think that there's a lot of evidence that media conglomeration, monopolization,

creates less channels for the people who are below the line, the writers, the septic

creators, the producers, the people who just kind of work steadily in the industry.

And there's a lot of other headwinds that have nothing to do with Ellison

and that, you know, having to do with the high cost of production, the introduction of AI into

the space, the, the balance of tax credits, here in Hollywood and the general kind of flight of

production to other places. Those are kind of materialist things that have nothing to do with Ellison.

So I think there's a significant reason to believe quite fairly that Ellison's just wrong.

It's like, this is not good for the overall health of the industry, despite the fact that I think,

despite the fact that I think that this is this kind of accumulation of power and media has been

forecast by many people for a while. So I'm going to drop off this other working theory of things

that I've been workshopping and I kind of debuted it on Ringartelgate the other day, but I'm

going to run this by you and see if it makes sense, okay? And David Ellison is part of a group of

extremely wealthy people who have looked at the country, looked at the state of things, and they

don't think we're going to make it. And they're ready to, they're ready to give up on it, right?

And I feel like that what Elon Musk is like, we're going to go to space or, you know, Peter Teele

moving out of the South America, whatever, but the thing is that people are taking these legacy

brands, so with its CBS, Washington Post, America, North Carolina football, and they're just,

they're taking these legacy brands and they're just ransacking it on the way out the door. They're

just like, we're just going to get a lot of money and I'm going to make sure I'm not people

that take care of on the way out the door. And that kind of, that feels like what David Ellison

is doing to me of CBS is like, he can say all that shit, but like, we're not done. We can look

at the ratings, bro. Like we know like nothing you've done over there has worked. And so they're

trained, I feel like they're trading on the reputation of these places that have done great

things again in the door and then just go ahead and, you know, take the copper all out and get

away with it. Does that, does that ring true to you? Do you think that the rich folks have had a

meeting, the Illuminati have had a meeting and they decide to do that or a motorly off base?

Yeah, I think you're right. And I think that there is, listen, the world is going under

tremendous changes in every kind of way that you can imagine, right? And I think that, you know,

we're seeing the massive effects of climate change. There's been huge population movements of

populations across borders. The, the economic system is looking incredibly shaky and looks like

it's going under tremendous changes. On and on and on. And so I think that overall, there is a

response to, there's like a natural human response to insecurity, which is to like stock up

food and water, right? Build, build, build higher thicker walls and army yourself. And I think

that's just going on in different spheres all across the economy, all across societies, like all

across the globe. People with means, the very powerful people are kind of looting to the extent

that they can and building protections around themselves. So at the other end of whatever these

changes produce, they will be okay. Right. You know, I think about it as it's kind of like the

effect of like a water hole and the savannahs of Africa, you know, like if you drain the water,

what happens? You know, when there's plenty of water, everybody's like they're they're all drinking,

there's plenty of space for them to drink. As the water starts drinking now, there's people

fighting over the water. Now the lions are coming in and they're and they're controlling it. The

hyenas on the other side. And that's kind of like what's happening. You know, writ large across the

globe. And so I think you're right. I think there's a lot of, I think there's a lot of truth to what

you say. And I think it's happening honestly everywhere. You know, like seven companies right now

that prop up the entire American economy. This is happening everywhere. Right. Right. Yeah, we didn't

even talk about AI or whatever. Like how like grim their view of humanity is, but that's neither here

nor there because Jason, I want to, I got to, I'm going to run out of time with you. I already know,

but I want to get to this because you're a basketball guy. Okay. You've, you've won a sports

Emmy for your MBA coverage, which means I can't let you out of there without asking about what

you think is happening in Portland. In fact, your wait a second co host Tyler wrote a piece about this

for the ringer earlier titled How to Cut cost ruined things and antagonize people. And so to catch

everyone up about a year ago, Tom Dunton, the CEO and governor of the Carolina Hurricanes in NHL

agreed to buy the blazers at about 4.25 billion and the NBA's board of governor has approved that

ever since then, he seems to have done everything to piss off everybody who cares about the franchise.

He's cut staff. A lot of the teams broadcasting crew gone cheap in a number of ways. Like they didn't

even play, pay for free, playoff t-shirts for fans like every other NBA franchise does what

that happens. But the big thing now is he's in a standoff with the city over public funding for

the home arena. He wants about 50, 573 million in exchange for 20 year lease that keeps the blazers

in Portland, Jason. Plenty of people suspect that's bullshit that he actually doesn't want to happen.

What do you think? Let's first acknowledge that when a bluff is successful, it is from the outside

impossible to discern as different from sincere intent. So whether or not he actually wants to move,

it certainly looks like it. Researching this though, I think it would be, first of all,

it would be impossible for him to move before 2030, not get into why. And I think it would be

very difficult, but not impossible for him to move after that. And there would be very concrete

signs that he is serious about moving. So under the NBA Constitution, relocation requires

one a simple majority of board governor. So you got to have 16 yes votes out of 30 owners,

which is pretty low bar. But the 2024 bridge lease that the blazer signed bars, the team from

even seeking to relocate before October 2030 without the city of Portland's written consent

to do so. So I think that it would be really hard for them to even explore doing that. Now,

what would be, what are some historical warning signs that a team is looking to move? Some of these

are here already. So like soldering and negotiations, those are here. We saw the Seattle. We've seen

that for Oakland in MLB. We've seen it for other teams. And executive publicly questioning the market.

Okay, that's there. Aggressive cost cutting. Okay, that's there. Short term lease. This is only

goes to 2030. Yes, that's there. So all these things are there. But I think the single most

decisive sign that preceded these past moves is like an owner scouting and cutting deals with a

specific destination. See that hasn't happened. And again, could not happen without the city of

Portland being aware of it. Now, you mentioned his work with the Carolina Hurricanes. This is kind of

his playbook. He extracted like 300 million of public money from the Carolina to build the arena.

And then signed a 20 year lease. So it might be that he is just like maximizing his leverage currently.

Were that true? Right. Maximizing his life. Like, how do you engender goodwill?

By doing like, Thiago Splitter, like good coach, you know, first year they made the playoffs.

And then you low ball them and get them the hell out of there. And then you have, I mean,

the current coach is working for Gritson Tattered Clothes, man. You know, I would like to work for

those Gritson Tattered Clothes, but relatively speaking. Yeah, I mean, oh, you know what I'm saying,

but it's just like, so if you're not moving, like if you, and you know that it's hard to move,

then what's going on? Well, I think, I think that he wants as much money as he can get from the

city of Portland to fix his arena. So he doesn't have to kick any money in. And then secondarily,

I do, I personally do think that he would like to move. Now, this would be a more of a long-term

thing. And I think the number one warning sign to look for would be if

some person or group affiliated with a different city, independently of Dundin and his organization,

just happens to mention, oh, it'd be great to have an NBA team. You know, I don't know if it

would whatever happened. And you know, I know that they've been talking about expansion and who knows.

But yeah, it would be, you know, maybe they'd move one, who knows, but I think it would be really

nice to have it. I think, you know, St. Louis or Kansas City or whatever would really love to have

a team. You know, there's a lot of issues to work out, you know, for infrastructure, et cetera,

but like that would be really cool to have one. If that happens, if some group makes a statement

like that, then I would actually be, I would be more worried. But right now, right now,

my sense is he's wants money and that even if he wanted to leave, it would be really hard.

But all of this is bad. The way he's treating team is bad, the way he's treating the fans are

bad, the way he's denigrating the city is, is super shitty and he sucks. Yeah, well, that's the thing.

So that's the thing because we're both, I mean, I'm probably not the best about fan you are,

but I've watched basketball my whole life. I've always had like, like, it's not, there's some

franchises you hate, but there's also some franchises you have like a lot of respect for. And the trailblazers

about the trailblazers have mostly been good my entire life. They've always pretty much had good

fan support. And it's like, this city, this franchise really doesn't deserve that, man. They've

done nothing. And it's just so frustrating because like, this is, this reminds you of all the things

that people are starting to hate about professional sports, right? Like the intrusions of these

billionaires who are treating these like, you know, like their companies, rather than like public trust,

right? And so I just, I feel like, and you probably, I'm sure you probably feel the same way. I don't

know if you've even been to a game of Portland, but it feels like they don't deserve this. You have,

yeah, they don't, yeah, they don't, they don't, but you know, we're also in a, we're also in a,

kind of era in which sports franchises, not just NBA franchises, but sports franchises in general

are massively, massively expensive to the point that the pool of buyers is vanishingly small.

That's right. And selecting among that pool, like the good guys' air quotes, I think is a really

hard job. Now I would argue that Adam Silver, I think, and whatever processes they use to vet

this particular guy and his group were not good enough, not strong enough, not just not up to

stuff. This was bad. That said, you can't discount the fact that it's just really hard to find like a

person or organization willing to spend billions of dollars on a team who is also like, has the

city's best interest at heart, the team's best interest at heart. And this is before the NBA even

gets into the, you know, sovereign international money kind of area that international soccer has

gotten into where you have, you know, whole countries owning teams. That's where we're going with

this. If these valuations keep going into the $67, 8, 9, 10, $11, $12 billion, you know, that what

of the Lakers sold for $10 billion? Yeah, $10 billion. Yeah, you know, if, if imagine the NIC sell one day.

Man, that's right. So who's got that kind of money just laying around or who can borrow that level

of money? It's like, you know, not a lot of people. So are you letting, are you letting Adam off the

hook here? Because that was actually going to be the question I had. You tell me that because like,

like, for this is Adam's fault. This is Adam's fault. Okay. All right. This is Adam. This is, you got

to do better than this. Come on. Yeah. This is not the way that you want to be talking about the league

and one of the, I mean, it's not a marquee franchise in the league, but they are, they are

indelibly tied with that city. They had like five years of straight sellouts in recent memory

have been historically very, very solid throughout the last 30 years of NBA history and

have won a championship. So I just think that I think that this is, this is the NBA's fault for not

properly vetting El Chico as our boss Bill Simmons. I was going to say, well, I mean, also, there's no way,

but the thing is, is it an issue of vetting or is it just that Adam had to ride with it? Because

there's no way Dundin goes in there and doesn't reveal what his plans are for this franchise, right?

Like he does know he makes his presentation. I would have buy in to this league. And it's like,

oh, yeah, by the way, I didn't mention all this other shit about how I want to force him to get a

new stadium. Like I, I imagine the NBA's on board with that. Yeah. I think he must have downplayed it

because it, and this is just me reading the tea leaves, it does seem like Silver has been taken

aback somewhat. You know, he's talked about this at Summer League and at other press conferences,

you know, at Summer League, he, he, he seemed dissatisfied despite his very deadpan demeanor,

talking about how the league is trying to work with both sides, but acknowledging that the

negotiations with the city have gone off track. So I think he was, I think he's been taken aback

by this a little bit to be honest with you. Okay. Okay. We'll shoot him some bill this time. That's

okay. One person not prepared to shoot Bell to as we move on here is Sophie Cunningham. I'm

loathe to give her the attention she wants, but I'm curious to know what you think about what's

going on with her and how the WNBA and its fans are responding to it. Again, Cunningham,

whoever just nine points a game for the Indiana fever, has made headlines for a recent run of

political commentary, and it started with this ESPN profile, profile headline, love her or hate

her, Sophie Cunningham won't be ignored, and address this conjecture online that Cunningham is a

mega Republican, except for the pieces. You say she's a mega Barbie is some corners of the

internet have taken to calling her projection, she says, because of which she looks like and where

she's from. She'll weigh in on how to protect women sports, she says, because she's in that world

and feels qualified to speak to that world. I get a lot of negative feedback about me hating

trends, and I'm like, I never once said that she says, I think I'm here to extend love,

but I also think that with love is truth being honest, and I want to protect young girls in a locker

room or young girls in sport who shouldn't have to go against biological men. She's doubled down on

those comments and recent interviews and this inspired rallies in her defense outside of fever games,

even took a picture with the anti-trans activists and former college swim champ Riley Games.

Swim champ is strong, isn't it? Yeah, I mean, I guess she got fit, she tied for fifth, is that right?

Did she want her conference champ? Maybe she want a conference champion.

I'll give her that, you know, but we need to look at Chuck Closterman. What did he know?

Just because he went on our boss's podcast a couple of weeks ago, it said she was going to be

a vice presidential candidate in 20 years or so. What did he know? Because that didn't this feel like

choreographed in some sort of way? Yeah, I mean, it's very clear that Sophie's positioning for a

post-career media career. I mean, that's already happening. She co-hosts a podcast with

Wes Wilson of Summer House, the recently ejected cast member of Summer House, where you don't have

time to get into that right now. But, yes, she used kind of the

made-in-a-lab type of right-wing anti-trans personality. And I think she will probably have a

very successful career. Vice president seems strong. But you never know. But you never, you truly never

know these days in which kind of social media, the ability to garner attention, the ability to go viral,

and this kind of like reality star framing is a political plus. So who knows? But this is a very

tough spot for the W to be in. What to dig down into the cynicism here? I mean, the WMBA,

which is about as politically active and progressive, is any professional sports league is ever been.

I mean, they're responsible for Rafael Warnock being a senator in Georgia. Like, I don't think it's

it. I don't think it's overstating it to say that. They didn't really have like a foil within their

ranks. Like, nobody that was public, that publicly spoke out. So I'm just wondering if like,

somebody, you know, RNC anywhere else said, hey, there's a chance here. I mean, again, we're right

with right in the midterms. And I just, you know, I'm saying like, if somebody looked at her and

said, you know what? Maybe we should do, maybe we should try this. And the WMBA, it just kind of

seems like, well, they've never had to deal with this before. I think that there is something to

what you say, simply because the demonization of the trans community is such a like, evil, but also

brilliant wedge strategy in that the community is very, very small. So visibility, kind of

in the best of times. It's always going to be something of an issue that you're picking on a

community that there is no, like, there are so many kind of structural reasons that people would

not want to come forward and kind of be the face of the pushback against this because of,

you know, credible rates of violence against trans people,

outsized rates of trans community self harm. Like, there's a million reasons. All the hate that

you could, you could imagine that community in gendering. And also, you know, I'm not the best

person to talk about this, but there are like legitimate fractures within the LGBTQ community

with regards to the way in which the trans issue has like been, I guess mainstreamed as

I didn't want to put it. Like, I think this is mainly a generational thing, but, you know,

like, I've talked to older gay folks, gay people from another generation who feel like, well,

trans issue just kind of popped up and now it's it's imperiling all this other work that we've

done. Meanwhile, you know, I've talked to many trans people who feel like they're not accepted by the

gay community. So there is like this, it is a very specifically targeted fracture point that intersects

with a lot of schisms within society and kind of weak points within society. And, you know, the

worst part about it is it's making life even more horrendous for the trans community who just,

I think, just want to live their lives and not be turned into this mainstream scapegoat. And

scapegoat and the, you know, the other thing that I think when I, when I read about this story and

just like listen to podcasts and, you know, watch, watch coverage of this is that man, I am glad that

magic bird happened. Oh, man, that's before social media. That is really yet. That is an inside.

Yeah, man. Oh my god. I'm glad it happened then. Yeah, I'm sure I'm sure it was just as vitriolic

and toxic as the kind of cultural war stuff that we see now. Oh, yeah, sure. But it had, but it was

siloed and it didn't have the ability to turn into this kind of like grass fire. And because what

we're seeing now. In terms of the culture war that is center around Sophie with regards to the W's

just like it sucks. Like you can't even talk about the sport and the game and how, you know, how

the various merits of the players, it's about this and it's just overshadowing the entire

league. Right. And, you know, I do find it interesting. You, that's very well said. And I also think

about how you said that there's not very many people that are advocating for that community. Right.

And I just so when I first started at the ringer and I lived in the bay and San Jose State had a

trans player, a Blair Fleming, right. And I went to one of their matches. I think it was their

the final home match of the season. And what happened with San Jose State that year is that

several teams, you know, forfeited. They can't, they didn't want to play them. So like Boise State

and like Wyoming didn't play them. And then like one of her teammates and roommates like I

I want to accused her. I mean, there's I think there's filed a lawsuit against her, you know,

deviling her rights and all this other sort of stuff. And I saw I remember I was going to this,

I went to this game. I just wanted to see like what it was like on the ground there. And the

Jason, there's this rickety gem on the campus of San Jose State. There's maybe a thousand people

in there. And there's a thousand because it's the, you know, final game of the season. And I'm like

what are people objecting to here, bro? Like we're not nobody, nobody is talking. This is not a

juwanoman situation. Like we're talking about somebody who just wants to play WAC volleyball.

Like Western Athletic Conference volleyball. And and to make that think the thing that I find

really offensive about Sophie Cunningham is like I that that Blair Fleming woman like really suffered.

Like it was just real. You could just tell that the year taking a real toll on her. And all she

wanted to do was play. And I was like what would it somebody I would love for somebody explaining

me what was in it for her? When it's all over she had to go into her regular life like she's not

going to go forward in volleyball. She has to be a citizen now with this attached to her name.

Where all the people that rallied against her get to get scooped up into that Republican or the

right wing pipeline of anti-trans activism. And I just I think that like the one thing I think

about the WNBA is that you're right. They don't want to talk about this. But I feel like

they're sort of missing an opportunity. And that's not everybody because some people are

spoken out about this, right? And they're supported them. But I feel like by not more forcefully

coming out against Sophie Cunningham, they're sort of like giving fuel to it because like people say

oh it's a complicated topic. You know a lot of people don't support trans stuff and so I don't

want to you know I felt like people are afraid to side with the publicly because they feel like

there's no public there's there's not going to be any backup. And the WNBA is just sort of giving

into that. I agree with that. I think that's right. And I think it's part of a larger issue which is

that you know with gay rights there was decades of work and visibility and stories and movies and

various things that communicated the humanity and the justice of

that struggle. And this is for the regular person kind of a new topic. And even for the people who

are allies, there hasn't yet been a kind of coalescing around a like a muscular message about

why this is fucked up. Like I could go through all the reasons why it's fucked up but like no I don't

know that anybody's come up with the sound bite. You know what I mean? And so that's one issue is

even the people who are who want to push back against this stuff struggle to do it in a way that's

concise and cuts across the kind of noise. And then the second part about it is like you we really

do have to inform the public like whatever the W wants to do it will stand or fall on

the kind of general public's understanding and relationship to this topic. And right now

it is that I think for the the anti-transforces for the you know kind of right wing media sphere.

Sophie Cunningham and Heracleites it is really about that nightmare specter of a man walking into

like a you know a high school girl's locker room you know a teenage boy pretending to be a girl

walking into a high school girl's locker room. That thing that has not happened right and has never

happened. That the spectra of that is what they are selling. And the fact that so many people are still

so kind of unacquainted with the topic don't know like a lot of everybody knows gay people more

than one has them and their family knows you know that we've reached a point in society where

there's enough out gay people that you know them you work with them right they're in your family

they're in your friend group. Not so with with the trans issue and so I think that it's it is about like

raising the visibility and that's not something that the W can necessarily do. And for as weak as

their position is currently their public position I weirdly empathize with it because I don't know

I think there's a lot of structural reasons why they're just in a bad spot like I don't think

Kathy Engelberg is a good commissioner period but also she's a lame duck commissioner so

and cutting him is like the worst maybe possible target for discipline because like she has spoken

negatively about commissioner Engelberg by name so now she could frame any

actions against her as not well now you're just singling me out for telling the truth.

And so I think it's a really really horrendous position that is being exploited you know on the

backs of the trans community which is really horrible. I you'd want the players to speak out and say

something stronger but I don't know that there's a good way out of this right now and I don't know

that there is a good way out of this that the W can necessarily pioneer.

I know I will say and I'll just shoot the W and B.A. some bill right now they're already sort of

reeling and figuring out how to deal with the Caitlin Clark phenomenon. I mean that's a whole

another part of it. Right and they have a whole bunch of supporters who believe she's being bullied

by a bunch of angry black lesbians who are jealous of her success in fame right and I believe

we say I don't even think it's fair to Caitlin Clark right like I don't like is somebody I could

see something just wonder who like she just plays as what's the who and she's at the center of

this thing and nothing she says is really sufficient for either side right um but yeah so I agree

with you you know it's the leaders the leaders in this weird place where they have an opportunity to

grow they have been growing tremendously over the last several years but with growth comes new eyeballs

people who haven't been steeped in the culture of the W which is one of activism

and who are coming from like a more general sports mindset that is very much in this kind of like

first take us us versus them like what's the take what's the you know who hates who that kind of

mode I do wish Caitlin would come out and say something stronger but she has made statements and

you know I think the one thing that I would want to say is this none of these people who are rallying

30 or so that rallying like outside the Seattle game or the folks that are you know supporting

the Sophie in this kind of anti-trans crusade they are not they're not like W fans in waiting they're

not like women sports fans in waiting they're political actors that's right who are exploiting an

opportunity they're not going to be at the New York Liberty game like cheering the cheering the players

on when this is all over right they are purely here to exploit division yep and that should be

rejected I love that and you nailed the landing uh because we have to end it here yeah I took

about an hour of your time Jason so I appreciate I had my love doing it I'd love to be back

and you know there you go look man I don't run this show that's Brian but if you have anything to do

with it you know I'm saying you're gonna be back so thank you to Jason please check him out

it wait a second great podcast hopefully when I'm back at LA or even if I'm not in LA I want to be

back on again you're gonna come back on you'll be back on okay I'm looking forward to it thanks for

joining us on the press box and look I'm Joel Anderson production magic by Isaiah Blakely and

John not bones Jones next week Brian B that's yep look man not bones not bones and B let's say

what about that and B listen if that catches on in B yeah yeah you know what like there was a guy

went to college with his name was Jamie's willing I probably would not believe that I'm saying his

name right here his name is Jamie's willing and I called him jigger okay and people didn't understand

because Jay Z you know I'm saying and I called him jigger nobody me while I was calling him jigger

but anyway so in it so maybe this in B thing might might catch on but we're Brian we'll see

with Brian will be the ultimate judge but anyway but he'll be back in this seat on on I guess

Tuesday and until then y'all be easy thanks for checking in please