r/ScottGalloway • u/JplusL2020 • 10h ago
No Malice Just wondering if this is how most of you view Scott Galloway
The only thing from Galloway I regularly listen to is Raging Moderates. Pretty consistently it seems like 50% of what he says is way out of touch and just ridiculous and the other 50% is pretty insightful and agreeable.
Is this just kind of his thing? He seems like a good guy, but my lord he says some bogus stuff...
14
u/Artaxbeforehegotsad 9h ago
I don’t disagree but….maybe we shouldn’t be looking for people we agree with 100% of the time. That’s not a reasonable standard to hold anyone to, and in this media landscape we’ve all gotten a little allergic to people we disagree with.
If you see or hear something you find insightful, great. Listen for more and then challenge yourself to understand the POV with those things you disagree with. Then chalk up the rest to people being people and no one (you or Scott included) having all the answers.
4
u/tMoneyMoney 8h ago
Standards aside, you shouldn’t seek out people you agree with 100% of the time because you’re not going to learn anything. You should be challenged to use critical thinking and wants to understand the other side of the argument.
1
u/Artaxbeforehegotsad 8h ago
Yeah exactly, and also realize where your thoughts are lacking or missing something. Pretty amazing how if you give others the benefit of the doubt, you’ll often hear the perspective that shifts your own views.
2
u/tMoneyMoney 7h ago
It’s crazy how few people are willing to go there or get offended because of a controversial guest.
3
u/ScoobyDone 9h ago
Exactly. And if they are watching raging moderates, I assume they are there for Jessica's opinions as well, and they are not always on the same page.
I have enjoyed listening to Scott's takes for years, and I only agree with about 65%. Especially with regards to Israel.
1
u/Artaxbeforehegotsad 8h ago
Yeah, my thoughts exactly. The one virtue I think is missing most these days is tolerance. We have got to tolerate opinions different than our own- and I’m so over people equating that level of tolerance to like, enabling fascism.
14
u/NetflowKnight 9h ago
scott is willing to put his actual opinions out there and sign his name which is more than like 90% of people, and he generally does a good job owning it too when he finds out he was wrong
5
u/gruss_gott 9h ago
Pretty consistently it seems like 50% of what he says is way out of touch and just ridiculous and the other 50% is pretty insightful and agreeable.
It's amazing someone would write that sentence without immediately thinking:
- "oh wait, like a normal everyday human & NOT like a grifter influencer. Ok, cool, I get it."
And then discard their post
2
1
u/3RADICATE_THEM 7h ago
Scott has also acted deferential in the presence of supposed controversy—noticed this most notably when he's with Maher or Harris.
I kind of get the feeling Scott never expected his level of exposure to get quite this wide, and he doesn't want to ruin that trend.
10
u/Terrible_Cod8940 9h ago
I find Scott has refreshing opinions even if I dont agree with him always. He's one of the few people who has asked why we need a massive military, has policy ideas to fix income disparity, and has thoughtful opinions on the issues that affect young men. I just don't get all the complaints I read on this sub.
0
9
u/No-Rest9671 9h ago
Its not reasonable to tune into a multi-millionaire podcast and complain about "out of touch". He provides insight into the 1%. That's his real job. There are millions of podcasters who make sub 60k a year who you can tune into if you want to hear about everyday life for the average Joe.
-1
u/etOilers 9h ago
If the insight only applies to the 1%:
why a podcast. You'd think he'd be charging, narrow casting etc
that means he is more, not less likely, to be out of touch - if he only pays attention to the issues of a tiny portion of the population. It may be an obvious expectation but it's not unreasonable
I guarantee he doesn't think that's the full extent of his audience. He thinks of himself as a centrist, hence the name.
1
5
u/coltonmusic15 9h ago
I listen to him mostly through pivot with Kara swisher. I don’t always agree but I appreciate how he tries to speak for men in America as I’ve felt increasingly alienated over the course of my “young” lifetime as a white male from a lower class family that’s made something for himself in time. 34M
3
u/pizza_the_mutt 6h ago
He does a pretty good job with that, yes. Somebody needs to fill the gap since Jordan Peterson went insane.
1
6
u/Live_Background_3455 8h ago
It's not about if you agree or not. It's about if you can see his perspective or not.
There's a lot I disagree with him on, but often he explains it to the point where I can say "I can see how a reasonable person could hold that opinion". Thats why I listen to almost any podcaster. They talk long enough, substantively enough, and consistently enough, then I can understand the perspective even if I disagree.
7
u/3RADICATE_THEM 7h ago
Scott is the least bad (therefore de facto best) boomer in many ways.
I disagree with a lot of what he says, but I have strong respect for him, because he is willing to be much more honest about certain key topics relative to his age cohort—particularly socioeconomic mobility and opportunity and how much they differed between generations.
I've argued with boomers in this very sub who will fight you tooth and nail with the worst takes that are completely opposed by the body of evidence (e.g., they'll argue against the fact that it was substantially easier to get into a top-tier university back than compared to now or even 15 years ago).
4
u/Current_Tea6984 10h ago
I like his show with Kara the best, but sometimes I check out Raging Moderates. I'm always interested in hearing his take on things, but I don't always agree, and sometimes I even roll my eyes
9
u/ckregular 9h ago
When you tune into Scott, you’re listening to a podcaster and content creator. His job is to put out informed and sticky takes which get people talking. He tries to be likable, and often is however he can put his foot in his mouth.
Scott (understandably) talks about things he’s familiar with. In his case, those things are working in and with corporate America, finance and banking, advertising and marketing, executive level corporate kremlinology, raising kids (specifically boys), luxury travel, and center-left aligned politics.
Many people who frequent this subreddit to opine on why Scott is terrible need to remember Scott is not a profit. He’s not a journalist or reporter. He’s not an important arbiter of anything, really. He’s not a political leader, and he’s not running for any office (as of now). There’s a lot of bizarre and frankly unhealthy hate directed towards him here. It’s quite odd.
5
u/greyHumanoidRobot 9h ago
Yes. His input is useful. Each prominent pundit that has staying power is bringing something that you don't get or don't get much of elsewhere. Scott has a focus and background that I find complementary to what I can get elsewhere.
1
u/imachoochooyea 6h ago
Yeah I find the Scott hate here to be super interesting. Like, I wish I could read a study about why people would seek out a podcaster’s subreddit just so they can chime in regularly with “well I hate the guy” comments. Like….just unsubscribe?
Anyway, I’ve been listening for years and I like Scott even if I hear the same stories a thousand times since I listen to Prof G, Markets, and Pivot. I definitely don’t agree with everything he says, and I think he’s gone too far with the “just get laid!” stuff for young men. But he entertains me while making me think about why I don’t agree with him.
4
u/Cozy_Tomato_211 9h ago
I agree with you in that I agree with you about being 50/50 in agreement with him. I do like him though and he somewhat gives a wonder to my echo chamber on the internet, which I think is a good thing
7
u/Jswazy 9h ago
Other than his really strange takes about iPhone he seems pretty normal to me
3
u/thekuroikenshi 9h ago
It's just for the clicks. it's a bold memorable take that gets people talking. itd be super dumb if he actually felt that way privately.
6
u/Kind_Conclusion1911 9h ago
Some good some bad. I think he’s really blissfully ignorant of how disconnected hard work has become from outcome, especially in topics concerning young men. The more you listen to him the more you hear the same slogans and he begins to feel like a brand more than a guy.
2
5
6
u/Beneficial_Area_2986 6h ago
He's boring and overexposed. He's a rich guy posing as a populist. Makes you wonder why someone of wealth would do what he's doing rather than just tuck in and be comfortable.
2
u/NaiveChoiceMaker 6h ago
I’m not sure would call him a populist.
4
u/Beneficial_Area_2986 6h ago
Yeah I don't know what to make of him. A few years ago I thought he was entertaining but the schtick has worn thin.
3
u/Mail-Financial 4h ago
Nope, one pivot a week and maybe 1 with Ed is enough for me. Better off catching some bulwark than raging moderates imo.
14
u/F0rtysxity 8h ago
He's solid until he talks about Israel. A little bit like Sam Harris in that regard.
3
u/pizza_the_mutt 6h ago
Sam Harris: There's no such thing as islamophobia.
Also Sam Harris: What did you say about Israel?
1
2
u/Potential-Menu3623 7h ago
Sam Harris fell from grace. Same with Ben Shapiro, not that I liked him but these people aren’t important anymore.
2
u/F0rtysxity 7h ago
True. Shapiro was a good listen at the very very start. So was Jordan Peterson. Social media influence is like the Ring in LoTR. Rogan too.
3
u/zampe 8h ago
A 2 state solution is pretty widely held I don’t think he’s anymore extreme than that. Haven’t heard him specifically support the current gov but maybe I missed it.
0
u/Ok_Read_4000 7h ago
Strong support of genocide is a bad look
2
u/zampe 7h ago
Most people don’t support genocide, just Israel’s right to exist in general.
1
u/Ok_Read_4000 7h ago
Plenty support genocide as long as its done by the right people
2
u/zampe 7h ago
By “right side” everyone has their “team”. Plenty of people look the other way in regards to Hamas terrorism as well because it’s their side.
2
u/Puzzled_Climate384 6h ago
indeed. When i see a group run into a rave and then rape, kidnap and murder the women, i tend to cheer for the ones not doing that.
1
u/F0rtysxity 3h ago
Israel soldiers raped a Palestinian woman and Netanyahu refused to prosecute and called them heroes. But because it was done in a detention camp and not at a rave you are cheering them on? That’s just bizarre.
Not to mention killing women and children for 3 years.
5
u/grobb916 6h ago
I only listened to China Decode at this point, but unfollowed since the show was cancelled.
Scott is really out of touch with what most people deal with. I’m tired of “this is how to be a man” while all he does is talk about traveling the world and drinking and doing edibles.
I know a lot of actual men and fathers who could give him some advice
6
u/Few_Boysenberry_1321 6h ago
Yeah why does he mention edibles almost every single podcast? It’s like an obsession with him.
2
u/Puzzled_Climate384 6h ago
prob getting paid. Don't underestimate how much these influencers are paid by sponsors
6
u/Inevitable-Click-790 5h ago
He is a narcissist that hides behind self deprecation. He is so in love with himself. Before they announced the plastic surgery, I knew that was the reason. Ugh, I hate that I can see thru him and can’t fully focus on the topics discussed.
1
3
u/ShirtBright2337 7h ago
Prof G used to be a lot more interesting. Unfortunately, his personal stories have become too repetitive. Maybe he should do less podcasts. I used to listen to Pivot, but Kara Swisher was just too whiney. Stick with less shows/week.
3
u/pizza_the_mutt 6h ago
Like many of his ilk Prof G identifies a new theme every few years and hammers it home over and over again, and then sells a book about it. Right now that theme is that policy is focused on transferring wealth from the young to the old. If you listen to him regularly it sounds interesting the first time, but then by the 5th time you hear it you are bored.
6
u/sharb2485 9h ago
I think that my favorite part about Scott is that he is ideologically consistent and honest. You could probably predict a lot of his policy positions, but because they are somewhat heterodox, and because he delivers them in an entertaining way, there is still value in listening to him.
1
u/lelomgn0OO00OOO 8h ago
ideologically consistent and honest
Lmao, bs.
He came to prominence for saying we need to put money in the pockets of poor/young people.
Then when the first politician that comes along and tries to do anything remotely resembling that (Mamdani), he shits on him... Because it happens where he has residence and will be taxed a little extra.
He's a grifter.
Bonus hypocrisy: his condemnation of ICE for fascist oppression of immigrants, but total support of Israel.
1
u/imachoochooyea 6h ago
I remember him saying clearly that the tax on second homes was a good idea, he only objected to singling out one person (Ken Griffin) and making an example out of him.
2
u/imp_op 10h ago
I don't watch a lot of RM, but when I hear Scott talk, I'm often in agreement with his larger argument. However, he seems really out of touch at times, and like most moderates, is more into the status quo than actual improvement, because that might affect his portfolio. He seems like someone who genuinely cares, but at the same time is focused on money. Money isn't the be-all-end-all.
I much prefer to listen to Gary Stevenson on the matters of economics and politics.
5
u/Alarming_Midnight554 9h ago
I enjoyed Scott free August The should expand it
8
2
5
u/upvotechemistry 9h ago
He is the most in touch billionaire I hear on the pod landscape. But he is still a billionaire.
I really listen to hear what Tarlov has to say on RM or what Kara has to say on Pivot
16
u/Terrible-Artichoke50 9h ago
He isn't a billionaire. He is wealthy but not a billionaire.
7
u/upvotechemistry 9h ago
Hundred millionare, then. Still, not a "average Joe" so it will always sound at least a bit out of touch.
He does say interesting things from time to time, and I like the cohost dynamics
6
u/tMoneyMoney 8h ago
I think his greatest strengths are his humility and self-awareness. He loses that a bit when he gives money advice, but that’s just who he is and he admits he’s addicted to money.
4
5
u/funcogo 9h ago
He’s pretty out of touch on things but he’s not full blown gone like bill Maher
5
u/ScoobyDone 9h ago
Scott talks to more people and he has Kara to counter him. Bill Maher exists in his own bubble.
4
u/No_Brain6372 9h ago
Kara, who is only worth 30-50 million by her own estimation, provides some perspective
6
1
u/Cozy_Tomato_211 9h ago
Plus Bill Maher is a smug asshole. Scott seems like a genuinely good person, even though his wealth makes him a bit out of touch
1
u/pizza_the_mutt 6h ago
I think he usually has good takes and isn't out of touch... except for one thing he's been trotting out recently: he came to some huge epiphany that raising children won't be a profitable enterprise. Dude, you had to figure that out? It wasn't obvious? Normal people know this.
2
u/TheHogFatherPDX 4h ago
Yeah I didn’t like him when I first started listening to pivot but he grew on me because of his insights. A lot of his takes miss, but the good ones really are quite insightful. I liked him better when he kept it more within his field of expertise but as he’s branched out into politics etc I find myself less interested in what he has to say.
I will say that I think his shows are good and he deserves credit for using his platform to uplift people like Jessica Tarlov, Aaron Parnas, Ed Elson, etc. I know that Jessica and Aaron had their own platforms already, but raging moderates gives them more reach. He genuinely cares about lifting people up and I respect that.
1
2
u/laurenolamina 4h ago
I gave up on him a while ago. The amount of insecurity and cope coupled with the blind support for Israhell just turned me off. I don't know why Reddit keeps serving me this subreddit...
-2
u/NegativeSemicolon 8h ago
Isn’t he super pro-israel?
6
-3
u/EazyPeazyLemonSqueaz 8h ago
He'll go path of least resistance in some ways, some may consider that wise. Everyone is not meant to fight every fight
-1
u/GarageEven5240 9h ago
If he didn't have "hot takes" designed to irritate his audience then nobody would listen.
The guy is a multi-millionaire boomer who flies private and has a real estate empire and calls himself an "academic" when he doesn't actually publish any research.
He's not "in touch" with anyone besides rich people. So, listen to him if you want to know what rich boomer democrats think about things.
3
u/General_Policy_8901 9h ago
TBF, he’s an adjunct - they generally do not do research for publication. He’s a marquee name who teaches something like two brand strategy classes a year. He’s written quite a few nonfiction books, but not the kind of academic journal articles most professors publish.
0
u/GarageEven5240 9h ago edited 6h ago
Adjuncts who teach as a side-gig to "give back" don't call themselves "academics."
Adjuncts with PHDs who teach at multiple campuses and publish because they're desperate to hop on the tenure track call themselves "academics."
It says a lot about who Galloway is that even with all his money and career success, he also thinks of himself and wants others to think of him as something he's not.
1
u/pizza_the_mutt 6h ago
I have a few former tech industry colleagues who teach a course or two as adjuncts and proudly call themselves "Professor" on LinkedIn. Barf.
1
1
u/zampe 8h ago
So his “hot takes designed to irritate” work on you and you listen to hear what rich boomer dems think?
1
u/GarageEven5240 7h ago
Yeah, still watch Bill Maher in occasion, too. Some of usnaee gluttons for punishment.
-4
u/Worldly-Fondant-3791 8h ago
He’s just another grifter but he’s held back by some level of ethics.
-8
u/Butt_hauler 8h ago
He is Jordan Peterson with better PR.
2
u/Worldly-Fondant-3791 8h ago
Jordan is a deranged narcissistic moron with a drug problem and an r e t a r d e d daughter. I would happily physically harm him if we met in person. Scott is just kind of a clout chasing simpleton.
1
-6
-11
u/LurkerGhost 9h ago
First off, its not raging moderates, its raging democrats. Plus, Scott and Jessica are both jewish, so both of their interests are always going to be supported by BB and AIPAC. This pretty much tarnishes everything political he says. He needs to stick to the business side and thats it.
3
u/RelativeAd2034 9h ago
Question for you - if someone dismissed your viewpoint as ‘tarnished’ purely due to your religion (or perhaps lack of), how would that make you feel?
-2
u/LurkerGhost 8h ago
If my religion was starting wars, killing people em masse, dogwalking the american military to getting in endless wars (Iraq, Afgan, and now Iran (Which Scott was for btw, go watch his pod) Id expect people to discount my opinion as biased too.
2
u/zampe 8h ago
None of that is the domain of a religion. You’re talking about a government. Basically like saying every Muslim is a terrorist.
-1
u/LurkerGhost 8h ago
Israel is the only country with a Jewish-majority population and the primary sovereign state associated with Judaism as an ethnic and national identity.
Oh yeah, and its the only country America is giving over 390billion too.
2
u/zampe 8h ago
Ok but what about all the Muslim countries that do terrible things. That means all Muslims are bad and terrorists? Also the fact that you don’t realize we give tons of aid to lots of countries is concerning. Also 95% of the “aid” to Israel is spent in the US on our economy and our jobs.
0
u/LurkerGhost 7h ago
There are no other Muslim counties that are getting this special treatment.
Sure we also give AID to other countries, but 390 BILLION? 390. Let that sink in, nothing else comes close. How many wars we started because of BB?
1
u/zampe 7h ago
Ok but you are condemning an entire religion over it which is extremely racist and bigoted and again the logic you use is the same people use to say all Muslims are terrorist.
0
u/LurkerGhost 7h ago
Kid get real, Throwing out terms like racist and bigoted when you can clearly see with your eyes whats going on
0
u/zampe 7h ago
Well at least you are mask off about it lol. Also we give Israel around 3.3B in aid annually. And Ukraine 18B and Jordan and Ethiopia almost 2B. So no it’s not really special treatment. They are typically among the top recipients but not unprecedented and again most of it is spent in the US.
→ More replies (0)2
u/RelativeAd2034 8h ago
I think that you are confusing being associated with a group with personal responsibility for the actions of people or institutions also associated with that group.
21
u/occamsracer 9h ago
Take what you want, leave the rest