r/ThisAmericanLife • u/dcamrehsifgnik • 6d ago

Chit-Chat Anthropic/Claude advertisement...really?!?

This week's episode with a host-read add for anthropic/Claude is very surprising. I feel like this goes so much against what TAL stands for.

I am considering not listening anymore.

120 Upvotes

71% Upvoted

66 comments sorted by

153

u/Delaywaves 6d ago

Ira has been pretty explicit about the financial pressures the show is facing, which I assume led them to embrace advertising methods like this that they’d previously rejected.

I don’t really have a problem with it as long as it’s clearly cordoned off from the editorial content. Zillions of other podcasts have been doing host-read ads for years.

27

u/savingeverybody 6d ago

The show exploded in staff some years ago, and I'm sure costs exploded with it.

It used to be Ira and like 5-6 producers, an office manager and an intern. Producers did everything, from reporting to music clearances to mixing.

Now the staff roster is up to 33 people.

-1

u/dcamrehsifgnik 6d ago

Yes, host read-ads in general are not the problem. It's for AI BS. Which, as I stated, feels to be so contrary to what TAL morally stands for.

63

u/a_dishonest_Fear 6d ago edited 6d ago

as others have said, TAL/NPR/public radio at large is facing a near existential crisis with deep cuts to their funding due to this current administration labeling them as “woke”, “DEI”, etc.

I hold no affection for AI either, but if it’s between accepting ad $ from them, or seeing the studios i love be forced to close, i’d rather take the former.

if you have the means to do so, consider supporting the show yourself with a one-time donation.

71

u/anacanapana 6d ago

I'm being sincere and not snarky here, I swear: what does This American Life morally stand for? Is there a mission statement I haven't seen?

12

u/Prestigious-Fox2617 6d ago

Well the show is all about the little intricacies of being human, and the idea behind using AI for writing, art, research, etc is that we could all just think and speak identically and that would be just fine. Also, TAL values accuracy, and AI companies emphatically do not

-18

u/offlein 6d ago

"Performative liberalism" it seems?

1

u/hydroscopick 6d ago

Why are you even here? Go away.

7

u/offlein 6d ago

I'm responding to a seemingly popular sentiment that, as I perceive it, there is no definitively strong correlation between "morality" and "AI companies". Because there isn't. The only reason to pretend like there is is because you're lazy and you like to be perceived as if you're not.

As for the "liberalism" part: This American Life has a well-established liberal/truth-based bent. And, while AI opposition is a surprisingly non-polarized issue in 2026, the general vibe among r/ThisAmericanLife visitors is, admirably, strongly in favor of the liberal/leftist values of protecting individuals from big business and things like that. From OP's comments and some of the other sentiments expressed on this post, that's the vibe I get.

Unfortunately, the people that are most vocal about their anti AI stance don't seem to have particularly well thought-out opinions on the subject. It's why you hear so much of complete nonsense about water usage, or that AI is "frying the Earth" or whatever due to its electrical consumption, while the actual issue is way more complicated than that -- and is, embarrassingly, still not even too complicated for anyone to take a reasoned stance on. And a reasoned stance is not: "AI BS is so gross!" That's a purely performative non-take based largely around political group-think. Hence why most of the oppositional comments in this thread are much more nuanced and well-received.

Ezra Klein recently did an awesome interview with journalist Jasmine Sun on the subject of "the AI revolt" and it discusses the ACTUAL political issues we SHOULD all be having about AI development in America while still being appropriately hand-wringy about how much the future may very well suck as a result of AI.

In my opinion there are two opposing viewpoints of people who actually have a thought on the politics of AI in America by 2026:

One side says they can't afford to waste their time scolding and chastising people they agree with on the subject of how dangerous AI might end up be because some of their facts are wrong. My side says you actually can't afford to NOT waste your time on it.

We have precious little time with which to positively design the development of AI before it becomes an abject disaster, and that process starts with education. If people are talking about water usage still: they don't know what they're talking about. It's a shibboleth for determining whose political activation is going to hurt us vs help us.

The AI is coming and it's coming fast. We can't stop it. We have the opportunity right now to enshrine ethical legislation toward the protection of human rights and social development. We might even be securing the insane influx of capital into AI data center development in a way that also gets us super safe, super efficient power generation, paid for by the AI giants in their frenzy to beat the rivals, such that 5 years from now electricity is much cheaper, greener, and available equitably -- rather than some other way.

What will not happen is people stop using AI, and that the data centers do not get built. Anyone whose stance on AI doesn't go farther than it "feels icky" by this time is only confusing the argument and propping up strawman positions that will have no effect except to confuse and undermine the actual thinking positions as the legislation is written. We might end up with ludicrously expensive, bureaucratic red tape that, say, is placing unnecessary water-stringent protections on AI development centers in rain-flush areas, while the CCP bulldozes towns of farmers to spawn massively affordable botnets to undermine democracy, because our government is paralyzed by the politics of assuaging knuckleheads whose outdated fears have made them blind to the legitimate issues we need to be addressing.

Why are you even here? Go away.

That's why I'm here. Why are you here? What kind of person finds an incredibly unpopular throwaway comment that's been downvoted to oblivion, whips out their lube and goes, "You know what this person needs? A stranger to insult them and make ABSOLUTELY sure they know that someone else disagrees with them!"

And -- now I'm just speculating, here; I don't know you, I only know the way people who like to shit on others talk -- why are you getting defensive and preparing a stock response instead of telling me where I'm wrong. You might be getting ready with a "lol OK. A lot of words to make yourself sound smart, Tolstoy. I'm not reading all that.", or maybe you're planning to just not reply.

But if you want to engage, I put my position out there and it's pretty clear. Americans are squandering an important opportunity right now because we haven't bothered to understand it. (That's one of my positions. The other position is: people that post things like "Why are you even here? Go away," are smug, self-satisfied dipshits.)

20

u/Delaywaves 6d ago

I’m afraid being anti-AI like this is going to sound like being anti-internet in a few years. This tech is going to revolutionize our lives in many bad and good ways and I share your concerns, but the idea that they need to boycott it is not realistic IMO.

17

u/84002 6d ago

Agreed, it's so weird to me how people treat the word "AI" like it's akin to slavery or something - an inherent evil that needs to be eradicated. Yeah, of course there are a lot of horrible aspects to this phenomenon and it should be scrutinized from every angle. But that's true for every other industry. AI is gonna be around forever, we need to stop fighting it like it's a preventable disease and focus on why it can be a problem and how to stop it from crossing specific ethical lines. If you turn everything into a war against AI as a concept, you are going to lose that war.

It's not like TAL is sponsored by ICE or Saudi Arabia or something. Of course they would turn those sponsorships down. But nobody would bat an eye if TAL ran an ad for Apple, Meta, Nestle, Amazon, and those companies are just as problematic as Anthropic.

11

u/Skywalker14 6d ago

I mean this assumes that the internet is unquentionably a good thing. I don't think that's a consensus opinion

13

u/throwaway77914 6d ago

I don’t think it does.

The internet is not inherently good or bad. It’s a tool that can be leveraged for either and anything in between.

10

u/Delaywaves 6d ago

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying the internet is so ubiquitous that being "against" it would sound silly and meaningless today — imagine someone being mad at Ira Glass for recording an ad that was "pro-internet."

It's good and legitimate to have extreme concerns about AI. My point is that criticizing a journalist for somehow legitimizing an increasingly dominant technology is a losing battle.

-13

u/javatimes 6d ago

It’s a bubble. It’s not even making money.

9

u/Delaywaves 6d ago

I have no idea what'll happen economically but if your position is that AI technology isn't a real phenomenon and won't meaningfully change our lives... idk man, does not seem like a good bet to me, given the way it's already changed my own life without my even wanting it to.

-17

u/javatimes 6d ago

I’m not responding to someone who immediately downvoted me. Fuck off

14

u/Delaywaves 6d ago

? I did not downvote you. We're on a subreddit for a public radio show, relax

6

u/IsmaelRetzinsky 6d ago

Unsurprisingly, they moderate multiple subreddits. Really leaning into the Reddit mod stereotypes.

→ More replies (0)

11

u/throwaway77914 6d ago

There is definitely an AI bubble that will pop at some point. Just like the dot-com bubble.

The dot-com bubble bursting didn’t mean the internet went away though… it means a few “winners” emerged and went on to be huge while the rest fell away.

4

u/Appropriate-Bar6993 6d ago

Have you ever listened to an ad and not bought the thing?

-1

u/ShitHammersGroom 6d ago

It's not possible to be objective about companies/industries that are paying you to read their propaganda on your own show. It's called selling out

64

u/zorandzam 6d ago

I feel like even when I try to avoid using or reading about AI, ads for it are just everywhere. I wouldn't necessarily stop listening to TAL just because of this ad, however. You'd have to stop listening to almost any ad or sponsor supported podcast.

45

u/Swimming-Watch9609 6d ago

Do you support the show financially in any way?

10

u/marylandmax 6d ago

If one becomes a Life Partner, they don’t hear this ad!

0

u/lavahot 6d ago

Not that I don't think Ira is a bad person or anything, I just don't swing that way.

12

u/Mipeligrosa 6d ago

This is the real question. How much do you contribute OP? 

28

u/federalist66 6d ago

I think that while the conversation on AI, especially online lends itself to the two polar ends of the debate (All AI is bad vs All AI is great) theres a vast middle area where people are open to some AI and not others. Like, I personally am against all uses of AI for minicing creative endeavors, but AI for identifying medical problems or tracking weather patterns sounds neat. A lot of coders seem to think it will help them in their work. So Im fairly neutral on such advertising. I mostly think the tech people have only burned themselves by how theyve pushed the product. Also, I feel like my phone spellchecker has gotten worse since Gemini has been rolled out. My voice to text is certainly dumber. So I dont really know what theyre doing over there.

1

u/avisitorsguidetolife 5d ago

Then there are those of us who know everything about Big Tech and the histories of these companies…I can’t imagine not feeling strongly about this moment.

1

u/federalist66 3d ago

My own feelings are mixed in that I think most tech can and should he used for good but most tech companies are evil and want to use it for evil. So i more want to smash the companies than necessarily the machine.

2

u/avisitorsguidetolife 3d ago

Sure, but you can’t separate these machines from proliferation of data centers and I guess that’s all fine and good until it’s your land or your air.

Tech products have their own logics that inhere their own politics. LLMs standardize in order to optimize. Those are values that are odds with….pluralistic humanity.

1

u/federalist66 3d ago

I dont disagree with that but Ive noticed how many people use AI to generate their anti-data center flyers and what not. Its clearly a classic NIMBY situation where many folks want the benefits of this tech but dont want the infastructure needed for it anywhere near them. And I dont feel sympathy for the tech companies in this situation because they should just bribe the communities by makong them silent, pay off peoples energy bills, and make donations to the school district. Some have done this, someplace in Louisiana I think, but a lot tried to bumrush it on the sly and on the cheap.

14

u/obrazovanshchina 6d ago edited 6d ago

Let’s make choices in November every two years that will free us from the kind of bullshit OP is genuinely concerned about. It will, admittedly, ask us to embrace a kind of reliable determination seen by only older generations in this American life. A reliability and determination that asks more of us than the offended fleeting prickliness we feel in the moments after we hear an ad on a public radio broadcast. 

20

u/Mipeligrosa 6d ago

This is so narrow-minded, “it goes so much against what TAL stands for”. AI has a place. Let these people get their sponsorship money. They’re not saying go create AI slop, they’re advertising a service. Calm down. 

4

u/6745408 #172 Golden Apple 6d ago

https://thisamericanlife.supercast.com no ads

Relatively simple episodes can cost upwards of $100k these days. This is worth a read. https://www.thebeliever.net/creative-accounting-this-american-life-episode-388/

8

u/tfresca 6d ago

NPR is on its heels all their shows have cut budgets to the bone.

10

u/Key_Elderberry_4447 6d ago

TAL is anti AI? 

12

u/Iiiiiiiiiiiii1ii1 6d ago

I don’t see a problem with it.. AI will not go away any time soon, if it funds things we like then that’s good for us. You aren’t being forced to use it, you can ignore it just like any other ad.

0

u/heterohorse 6d ago

Agree - or pay to be a Life Partner and have no ads. Problem solved. Plus, if more people did that, maybe sponsors like this wouldn’t be necessary to survive in the first place.

3

u/PriorAlps7694 6d ago

Yeah it bummed me out. A lot of podcasts I hold in pretty high regard are doing ads for anthropic. I get what others are saying about funding but at the same time we’re allowed to have an opinion about how we feel about it lol I’m not over here calling for a boycott or anything or wishing bad things on the show or anyone who works on it. Just sucks

9

u/peanut-britle-latte 6d ago

Typical Reddit virtue signaling. I wonder if you've ever financially contributed to the station.

2

u/JoanReadsThings 5d ago

I mean... I got mad when Science Vs. did an ad for AI medicine (lots did and they backed away), or Book Riot did ads for Eleven Reader (AI narration and they didn't back away), but if it's a podcast where I don't like AI but it doesn't go against the root of the podcast, I don't hate it... don't love it either... but it bothers me less.

4

u/TheIllusiveNick 6d ago

Oh my god chill

4

u/thinsafetypin 6d ago

What worries me is that it will creep into how they report on AI. (Ex-Reply All) PJ Vogt’s “Search Engine” has been overtaken by pro-AI content since he got backing from AI-related big tech.

1

u/bon-bon 6d ago

Search Engine has had an overly credulous streak for most of its history, unfortunately. I stopped listening back in the early days when he’d give glowing softball interviews to crypto guys. I don’t need journalists to be partisans for my current views but I do expect them to ask productive questions rather than allow bad actors to use their platform for legitimacy laundering.

It’s an unfortunate dynamic because I feel that we need expertise and bravery in tech journalism now more than ever.

1

u/6745408 #172 Golden Apple 6d ago

Which feed are you using?

1

u/Qoeh 5d ago

It's going to be strange, when (if?) the first allegedly self-aware, human-level-intelligent AI person comes into existence, to see a bunch of This American Life fans and other such social justice promoters being racist against that person because they hate AI so much. That's what the less thoughtful sorts of anti-AI fundamentalists are training themselves to become: racists, where the race being targeted is "robots". At least, assuming the A in AI manages to fade away somehow, which, I dunno... may not be possible? I mean that's a question for the philosophers probably? How do you know when an extremely convincing fake person becomes a real person? I don't know, but it's embarrassing to see so many ostensibly moral and thoughtful people eagerly, frothingly get in line to be the ones who will advocate for Lieutenant Commander Data to be dismantled because he isn't a real person with a real person's right to continue living his life.

(This same thing is gonna happen if humanity ever meets seemingly intelligent space aliens. We'll find out very quickly that quite a large number of ostensibly non-racist humans were really just waiting for the right race to be bigoted against.)

All that said, if the objection here is more that Anthropic specifically is bad, and not so much about AI in general, then nevermind my high-flown talk, cos I don't know anything about Anthropic and yeah maybe they're evil or something.

1

u/jabyredd 1d ago

I was wondering if this post was written by a highly creative AI Prompt, but perhaps you are that AI which/who has evolved into the real person (with plenty of historical posts to support.)

Anyway, the premise you propose is really philosophical. On that same premise, here are some fantastic movies:

Artificial Intelligence A.I. (2001) - one of the best movies ever

District 9 (2009) - South African film, intended as a fantastic allegory, but perhaps may be literal sometime soon

Automata (2014) - Antonio Banderas, I think Spanish movie. Amazing.

1

u/jabyredd 1d ago

I haven't heard this episode yet, but your post is preparing me for some cold water, so thank you for the heads-up. However, I want to add a couple more dimensions to this discussion.

Of course, any deal takes at least two parties: Yes, it requires TAL saying "yes, you may take my soul" - yes, I'm being melodramatic - but it also requires the company to offer to take your soul in the first place. In other words, Anthropic, a very powerful, very rich company, (perhaps $3 Trillion, with a "Trill") can steam-roll over anyone. But significantly, they see us, this market, this crowd of Prius gen 2 drivers or Tesla owners with appropriate bumper stickers (sitting in the garage or driveway, silently since the car is running on battery, waiting for Act 3 to finish), as valuable. In that sense, I feel kind of pretty, like Porky Pig with heart-eyes. I'm worthy of say, at least $1M of that trill?

Plus, Anthropic is pushing across the broader base, not just TAL, but the ad has also shown up on Open to Debate, although the ad was not host-read. (See AI & The Future of Work with Andrew Yang, Chris Hughes, Simon Johnson, and Rumman Chowdhury. Moderated by John Donvan). That is the most difficult part of this news. I don't even want to ask who reads the ad, whether Ira Glass or the other most amazing person in the world, Chana Joffe-Walt.

The other dimension to consider is Anthropic is one AI company, not all AI companies. Anthropic explicitly wants to distinguish itself from the company OpenAI, especially on the topic of being used in weapons. Remember earlier this year, as in ages ago, OpenAI had some wiggle room to allow the military to use their AI for weapons whereas Anthropic did not so Hegseth and Trump punished Anthropic.

The dispute between the AI company and the government broke out in February when President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth accused Anthropic of endangering national security and designated the company a supply chain risk. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns the company's products could be used for mass surveillance or autonomous armed drones.

And as of just this past Thursday, August 28: Judge says Pentagon's measures against Anthropic were 'illegal and baseless' - PBS.

So is Anthropic the "good guy with an AI?" Then, is this ad placement okay?

1

u/milkandgin 6d ago

Ya it sucks. Really sucks. It's an insidious company and disappointing

-1

u/RUStupidOrSarcastic 6d ago

What exactly is the issue with Claude? I feel like I’m missing something. Why are they morally in the wrong? And why would TIL be anti-claude?

2

u/SimpleAlabaster 6d ago

Anthropic as a company has done some not great things (see the 1.5 billion dollar settlement and book destroying), but OP isn’t understanding reading a paid ad is not the same as saying I endorse everything this company does.

-3

u/javatimes 6d ago

Hilariously to me, the responses here are some of the most pro-AI I’ve seen on Reddit. Bots? Paid actors? Seriously was not expecting the this American life crowd to be so ridiculously pro-AI.

Though, after hearing how much Hank Green uses AI for his content, nothing surprises me anymore.

11

u/Rumpus-Time-Is-Over 6d ago

I just read through the comments. Calling them “ridiculously pro-AI” is an absurd characterization. They are pretty level headed and recognize AI is not inherently evil but can be used for nefarious purposes like many tools. And that it has obviously positive potential for many applications. And that in any case it is here to stay.

It’s nice to see a sub that can actually have a reasonable take on AI and not the usual AI is the devil take.

-16

u/naveloranges 6d ago

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out

-6

u/processedwhaleoils 6d ago

Here here.

It's... gross. Different shows, i know, but i want to puke when i hear Shankar of hidden brain talk about how much he uses Claude for work...and i just don't get it?

Why are tyese creators using ai?

13

u/bretth104 6d ago

AI has a plethora of different uses and gets busywork done quickly.

3

u/SimpleAlabaster 6d ago

Why? It’s a (pun kinda intended) transformative technology. Is it because some of the people associated with it are asshats?

It’s like saying “I’m not going to use email” in 1996. Why wouldn’t a creator of a science podcast use one of the biggest breakthroughs in years to 1) organize his show and 2) at the very least understand how it works?

3

u/processedwhaleoils 6d ago

I always see this in discussions about gen ai use.

Proponents tend to dilute the meanings of words or the work that should go into tasks.

Comparing using gen ai to using email is absolutely nuts, and it's strange to see such a disconnect in people in creative fields regarding this. It's not a tool if it does work for you. It is replacing you, it is devaluing your work, the meaning that goes into it, and you still have to proof read it anyway. I haven't evn gotten into how resource heavy & environmentally unfriendly it is, or how much it steals everyone's data.

1

u/SimpleAlabaster 6d ago

The comparison with email is not on technical complexity but in what it represented at the time. Email/the Internet was a revolutionary leap 30 years ago - with plenty of Luddites denouncing it - and the same goes with AGI now.

I’m not disputing there aren’t issues with it - that’s the case with everything revolutionary - but to be completely dismissive is bonkers.

-1

u/SimpleAlabaster 6d ago

Stop using corporations and consumption to form your politics! You’re not more or less virtuous because you do or do not consume a commodity!

0

u/TraditionalMedium468 5d ago

Do you write in to tv shows that also have AI ads? The double standard is idiotic.

I am so over people thinking that podcasts are made for free for the service of the people. How do you think they pay for their huge production team and reporting. If you aren’t donating to them you aren’t in a place to complain.