Musk Tanks, ESPN Unbundles, Stern Canceled, Cruz Backlash, RFK Flip

On today's communiverse, ESPN breaks free from cable with a $30 streaming service and a surprise NFL partnership. Elon Musk becomes the most disliked public figure in America. Yes, even less popular than certain politicians. Howard Stern may be done as Sirius XM backs away from his hundred million dollar contracts. Ted Cruz sparks backlash after mocking Governor Hochul for honoring a fallen Muslim officer. And RFK Jr. Cancels vaccine contracts while pushing anti science rhetoric but could end up cracking down on dangerous supplement loopholes. This is Communiverse News Dakota through the lens of communication. Thanks so much for joining me today. Lots of fun to come. Okay, let's launch right into the top story of the day. Story 1 ESPN and NFL cut the cord. That's right, they are cutting the cord. They are not going to do everything the way they've always done it. Let's take a look at the specifics here. The biggest shakeup in sports media in a generation. ESPN is finally going fully direct to consumer. Starting August 21st, you can stream ESPN including everything from live games to SportsCenter for $30 a month, no cable required. And here's the kicker. The NFL now owns 10% of ESPN. That's the big news that just came in. In return, ESPN gets the NFL Network Red Zone channel and more football programming. So a lot of exciting news here for people who are are big sports fans. There's no doubt about it. What does this really mean in the world of media and business? I think it's a pretty substantial story because it shows the power of creators. It shows how the old networks are not calling the shots. Now, ESPN has been fabulously, fabulously profitable for their parent companies, abc, then Disney. So they've been extraordinarily a powerful cash cow for a long, long time. But it's not the good old days of when 100 million people in America had ESPN. It keeps shrinking every year as people come cut the cords. And that is simply not good for cable network. So they're scrambling around for anything that can truly give them leverage and get them an audience. The fans are going to where live shows are and that is NFL. NFL is the most popular type of programming to watch in America. I don't frankly get it. You know, I'll watch maybe the, the super bowl once a year, but I'm not a big football fan. But you know what? I'm weird. You may or may not like American style football. I know we have a lot of viewers in other countries who when I say football, to them it means soccer. This is the American style football. And that's what's different about it. So again, the specifics. The NFL is actually taking ownership. 10% of the ESPN and a 2 to 3 billion dollar swap they're doing media stock swap. A couple of other facts of interest. Disney's profit jumped 16% last quarter and streaming growth was a part of it, not just the traditional cable News. This strengthens ESPN's position against other tech giants because they're going to have the programming people want and that is crucial, absolutely crucial to success. So what does this mean for you and me? What I think it really means is it's yet another sign that traditional broadcasters, in this case cable TV companies, are losing power. They're having to sell their parts on to stay viable. And it's yet another shift of power, all in the direction of creators. Now, you might not think of professional football or professional sports as content creators. That's essentially what they are. It's, they're not making most of their revenue from people paying money for a ticket to go see a live show. It's coming through media, it's coming through advertisements and it's coming through people paying directly to watch it online. That's what it's all about. So ESPN is finally going in a direction that I think is going to help them more long term and that it's going to guarantee they have content people want. As long as you have content people really want. Watch, you're going to have some power. So this reduces their risk. It gives more power to the NFL. Here's the thing I don't quite understand. I mean, the NFL is such a juggernaut that they really could say, hey espn, we don't even need you. The actual technology of putting your pipes, connecting with a camera to pipes on the Internet and going into people's homes and putting a shopping cart on it or a pay gate, it's not that difficult. So I am going to make a prediction that some sports league, some major sports league in the next three years says no to all cable networks, to all media companies. They simply decide, we are going to be our own media. We're going to control everything, whether it's NFL, whether it's Major League Baseball, whether it's the NBA. At this point, there's too many entrenched interest with advertisers and, and other ancillary revenue models for them to do that. But I don't think we're that far off from the big content creators. And certainly that's what professional sports teams are for them simply saying okay, we're going to do it all ourselves. Rather than give huge cuts to these other companies that don't seem to add a lot of value, we're going to do it ourselves. I mean, right now, ESPN has a huge ad sales force that presumably the NFL doesn't have, but that is something that could be built in house. So that is my prediction. The real lesson for you and for me, focus on actually creating the end product people want. Create a product, create a service. If you're making any kind of media, create it yourself and try to control the relationship with your customer, whether it's a subscriber, whether it's a member, whether it's someone supporting you through Patreon. Create your own unique thing of value and sell it directly to customers. Because if that happens, you can't be disintermediated. That's what's happening to television networks. I mean, that's certainly what's happening to the Late show on cbs. Because people like Stephen Colbert, frankly, don't need cbs. And people who like late night comedy don't need cbs. They could simply go online and watch their favorite comedians doing things on demand when they want to watch it, whether it is on TikTok, whether it's on YouTube, whether it is watching Conan O' Brien on HBO. You don't have to show up at a set time to watch a show anymore. I mean, it seems archaic to watch a lot of people. The one difference is this thing with sports. You do want to watch a live sports game. There is nothing more exciting to a lot of people than an actual live game. And that's why it's exciting. That's why it's always, if it's a sport people care about, always going to attract people. I believe it was Spike Lee, the famed director, who once said that even the worst New York Knicks game has more excitement in it than a lot of Broadway shows. I'm paraphrasing him, but he likes the fact that it's a surprise. Nobody knows the ending. There can be twists and turns. So sport is something that is really essential to a lot of human beings for their way of expressing their downtime and their joy and their fun and spending time with friends and family. So the NFL's got something at least until, you know, lawsuits from giving so many people dementia and brain problems puts them out of business. But I don't think that's happening anytime soon. So that's what's going on in the world of sports and big media. We'll be covering some other big Media News Today specifically related to Howard Stern. All that and more coming up after these commercial messages. Imagine having a communication coach who never sleeps. Meet your new secret weapon, the TJ Walker AI clone. Go to TJ Walker AI and start getting custom coaching 24 7. No scheduling, no hourly fees. I train presidents, prime ministers and Fortune 500 CEOs but but the same exact communication I've delivered to world leaders is now available to you online anytime@mediatrainingworldwide.com whether you're speaking on camera, pitching a client or handling a crisis, you need these tools. These aren't fluffy motivational videos. They're practical, battle tested techniques to help you speak clearly, confidently and persuasively. Go to mediatrainingworldwide.com and take your communication to the next level. Got feedback or a question for me? I actually read them and if you send one I'll send you a free mini course as a thank you. Just head to tjwalker.com feedback ever wish you could just ask me your question live now? You can. Every week I go live with Story two Elon Musk Hits Rock Bottom in public Opinion Elon Musk is now the most disliked public figure in the U.S. according to Gallup, 61% of Americans view him unfavorably, more than any other name on the list, including Netanyahu and even Trump. Musk favorability has nosedived since January, when he had a net score of -4. 4. It's now -28. His alliance with Trump soured quickly, alienating both liberals and conservatives. And after Musk publicly criticized Trump and referenced Epstein, MAGA supporters turned on him too. Tesla's earnings are also down, and new studies suggest Musk's personal brand may be hurting public perception of electric vehicles more broadly. His fall from grace could have long term ripple effects across the tech and auto industries. So what are we to make of Mr. Musk? Yes, he's still brilliant. Okay, yes, he is an innovator. But I think he's a perfect example of the classic cliche, you know, someone who believes his own press. After so many stories about how he's the most brilliant person in the world and the richest person in the world, and how people say, oh, Tony Stark is modeled after you, you're such a part of pop culture, and how millions of people say amen to anything he posts on Twitter x, he starts to believe he is a genius at everything. And here's the problem. Anyone who's a true genius at something is average, below average in almost everything else in the world. That's simply how expertise is, is distributed in the human gene pool. So am I suggesting that he's washed up and he's going to be a failure? No. But this is a huge, huge hit. The one thing about Elon Musk is that you could argue is one of his greatest strengths is he's a huge risk taker. That's a positive thing. He at a time when a lot of people would have said, hey, I made to tens, hundreds of millions of dollars, let me play it safe, let me just put those in T bills and go on an island. No, not that island, just on an island somewhere. Relax, sip margarita. He didn't do that. He's bet his entire net worth numerous times on Tesla, on SpaceX, and he's come this close to everything imploding and ending up in complete professional and personal bankruptcy. He's been willing to roll the dice to try to solve some of the largest problems in the world. So I give him credit for that. But what he did, going to Washington D.C. trashing bureaucracies, government trashing careers of people, smearing and sliming honest, hard working public servants, destroying the capabilities of arguably the most effective government in the history of the world, and I don't think you'll easily come back from that. Now Elon Musk isn't running for president. So at some level he doesn't have to worry specifically about is my poll rating up above 70%. He doesn't have to worry about that. But when you become so unpopular, you do make it a lot easier for government entities to stop giving you contracts for government policy officials to change things to make sure you don't have subsidies for anything you want. I mean, let's not forget that the guy who railed against government waste is probably the number one all time beneficiary of welfare. If you define welfare as money from the government going to an individual's pocket, well that's Elon Musk. He's gotten untold billions of dollars for his space programs, for his cars, for energy, all sorts of things he's involved with. So it always struck a lot of people as very hypocritical for him to talk about how awful this big bureaucracy was when nobody has benefited more from the United States bureaucracy, the government, than Elon Musk. And now he's found that he doesn't really have a base because for so long liberals and progressives and people who actually believe there is such a thing as global warming loved him because they loved what he was doing with electric cars. They thought, wow, this is doing so much to rid the world of fossil fuel dependency. We love this guy. He was not really seen that favorably by a lot of conservatives, Republicans, MAGA crowd, they tend to think, you know, real men drive gas guzzlers. But then that all changed when, late in the game, he endorsed Donald Trump last year, gave him a quarter of a billion dollars, cheered him on, promoted him on his social media platforms, and all of a sudden the MAGA crowd loves him. He's brought to Washington to reduce waste. And that by all accounts, was an unmitigated disaster. He, he did cut some spending for the neediest people in the world, hundreds of thousand, according to independent estimates. Hundreds of thousands of people around the world either have died or will die because of the cuts to USA aid that he was able to bring about. And he, he really fostered this notion that any government spending to help someone in need is somehow suspect and wrong and misplaced. And that hurt a lot of people. And they now hold Musk personally accountable. So he diminished himself in the eyes of all the progressives, liberals, centrists in the country. But then he had the huge falling out with President Trump and is a lot of people forget this. Musk is the guy who started this whole Epstein scandal thing going again and again and again. That had kind of died down in recent years. And then right after Musk left the orbit of Trump left the White House, he's like, hey, Donald Trump is in the Epstein trials. That's what started this whole frenzy that's been going on for more than a month. So now the Republican and certainly Trump can't stand him. The MAGA crowd is a bit upset that, hey, you're only supposed to talk about Democrats that stern that, that Epstein, like, you're not supposed to talk about the Donald. So they're upset with him as well. So Elon Musk is left kind of without a base of support in American pop culture. And unfortunately for him, so much of his support for his businesses and his stock price is based on this story. He projects that, that he's the most fantastic guy ever and the most creative guy ever and solves every problem and always sees the future. A lot of people are saying this guy doesn't really know the future very well. So what's the lesson to you and to me? It's not that I want you to stay in your lane and never try something new, or if you've been an executive your whole life, to not do something in public service. That's not my message to you, but don't just assume you're a genius on everything. Don't look at something as wildly complex as the federal government with millions of employees that interact with every single part of the US economy, the worldwide economy, the political economy, the political establishment, geopolitical relations, and think, yeah, I'm so smart. I've never done anything with any of those people. But I know more than everyone else who's devoted their life to this. That is hubris, that is arrogance. And people like it when you bring down someone who is too filled with hubris. That's certainly what we're seeing with Elon Musk now. So what is my prediction with Elon Musk? There's a part of me, and sorry to sound equivocating, but I really don't. There's a part of me that says this guy has so much energy, he's so creative, he's such a dynamic storyteller. He's got the ability to, to rally investors to anything he wants. We're going to be seeing him for the next 50 years and long after someone like Donald Trump's name is maybe forgotten, we're going to see Elon Musk really on top of the political culture, economic culture of the world. There's a part of me that feels that, but there's a part of me that feels he's so drunk on his own power, his hubris. And according to well documented sources and stories in the Wall Street Journal, in the New York Times, the guy appears to be a drug addict. So there's very much a part of me that feels like this guy's going to end up where Prince and Michael Jackson ended up. When you're so powerful, you're surrounded by yes men, everyone's telling you what a genius you are. The, the tendency is to do too much, whether it's snorting or ingesting or needles or something. And there's a part of me that feels very strongly he might not see his 60th birthday. I'm not wishing anyone ill will, I'm really not. But you look at the indications there and how he conducts himself and just showing up at the White House with a black eye, dressed in all black. That is something drug addicts do. And it's things I, people I have known. Not close personal friend, but I've known who were heroin addicts. Not saying he's a heroin addict. There's been no, no evidence of that or reporting on that. But certainly ketamine, other drugs. A lot of concerns there. Issue three, after nearly 20 years of Sirius exam Howard Stern show may be canceled. Stern's $100 million contract ends in late 2025, and insiders say Sirius isn't likely to meet his financial demands. Sirius may still cut a deal to license Stern's archive, but he's expected to leave the air. Sources say it's not about ratings. Stern remains a media force, but rather a cost cutting move similar to other recent talent shakeups like Stephen Colbert's cancellation. Politics may also be a factor. Stern's vocal criticism of Donald Trump reportedly isn't setting well with certain executives. As media budgets tighten, legacy icons like Stern may find themselves pushed out. Okay, so let's talk a little more about Howard Stern. He certainly has had an extraordinary, extraordinary career. I mean, he's now 71 and, and has had a long, long, long career. He, if he's not a billionaire yet, he's got to be pretty close to one. He's made so much money and truth be told, he kind of made serious because he was so popular at time when he started them, 20 years ago, not that long ago. But in terms of media ecosystems and what's happened, I mean, that might have been a hundred years ago. It seems so remote. Before podcasting was around, before most people really listened to, before YouTube was around. So it was before people could get content online very easily. So he was a big, big deal. I used to listen to him and his show was never really my cup of tea. But I, I give him credit. He is a survivor. He's morphed, he's evolved, he stayed up with the times. And he jokingly calls himself the king of all media. He really was at a time he was in books, he had movies, he had TV shows, he had radio. But his core strength was always, whether you want to call it radio speaking and audio format. That's what Sirius XM is. And everyone in the media is seeing some declines, or all big traditional companies are. So according to Insider reports, SiriusXM kind of knows they're not firing him, but they kind of know, okay, he's gotten 100 million contracts before. He's going to want 100 million in college contract now. They're not going to give it to him. They're not going to say, we hate you. Go away, you're fired, and walk him out the door and have him carry a box with his possessions. That's not what's going to happen. But they are going to give him a contract that is a significant cut reduced from where he is. And Howard Stern has always tossed out the idea Whether you believe him or not, that, hey, maybe I'll retire. He's been saying that for quite some time. And it may be that if he has to suffer a huge pay cut, that may be what makes him decide to do it. Gina says hello. Good morning, Gina. Good morning to our Good evening wherever you are. Thanks for joining us today. What's the real message here for you and for me? Part of it is to have a role model like Howard Stern. I don't mean the. The Howard Stern of 30 years ago, 40 years ago, rude, crude, lesbian kissing, wet T shirt contest, putting foam on women and licking it off, things he used to do. I don't mean that as your role model, but I mean someone who is in the game, working, creating. I mean, his work ethic was amazing, especially in the early years. I mean, he was on the air like five hours a day, plus doing TV shows, plus being a guest everywhere and hosting. I still remember him from the mt I think it was the MTV Music Awards of the Grammys one year where he comes in flying through the air with his entire buttocks exposed. It was quite memorable. He's not afraid to experiment. He's not afraid to try new things. But maybe he does decide to hang it up. Here's my prediction. I think he just takes things internally and says, I'm going to be my own boss. I'm going to have a podcasting network. I mean, that's essentially what he did before there was podcast. He created a series of networks for Sirius, Sirius xm, and they use that to charge people whatever it was back in the day. I think it's 9 or 8 $12 a month now. And he was responsible for bringing in so many subscribers. There's nothing preventing him from doing that right now. Because here's the thing I have found. We talked about this earlier in the week with Charlie Rose. People who are media celebrities who interview the most interesting people in the world who get the adoration and support and love of fans if they're already rich. It's no longer about the money. They do it because it's fun to do and they love to do it. And Howard Stern's in a position where he could simply build, if he doesn't already have it, have a giant studio in his home and literally work only when he wants to. He could say, I'm going to have my own podcasting network. I'm going to have all my favorite comedians and have their shows on my network. I'll have my own ad staff and I'll interview people Whenever I want to, I'll do whatever I want. And if I want to work five days a week, I, I will. If I want to not show up for two weeks, I will. If I want to pop into a show for 30 minutes, do some wise cracking elite, I'll do that. That is what I predict Howard Stern will do. And then he doesn't have to tell anybody how much money he makes. I can't imagine he's at a point in his life where any more money is really going to have any impact on his lifestyle, his happiness, or for that matter, his kids or his grandkids. He's made that much money. Now it's really about what does he want to do to give him an excuse to get up in the morning, what does he want to do to feel alive, to feel connected with the world? So I do not predict that. He just says, okay, that's it, I'm going to take up sailing. I don't see Howard Stern doing that could be wrong. But I do think that now is probably the time for him to make the break from Siriusx. It made a lot of sense when they're paying, when they're taking all the risk out of his business entities, when they were just paying him huge, gigantic 100 million dollar contracts. At one point it was like a 500 million dollar contract. When they're paying that much money, it would have been crazy not to work with him. But if they're going to reduce radically his upfront fees, then I don't know why he doesn't just become independent. So the other real lesson here, I think is if you look at Howard Cernan, 71, I'm not saying his work ethic is what gives him a great head of hair and he has confessed to having plastic surgery. But when you look at him, he certainly seems a lot more vital and a lot more plugged in an energetic than most 71 year olds I know. And I have to think it's in part because he has this purpose in life. He gets to perform in front of people, he gets adoration, yes, he gets tremendous wealth, but he gets this intense human interaction with top celebrities, political leaders all over the world who want to talk to him that is inherently invigorating. And, and that's why I do think, in part, he's a role model for you and for me. And certainly there was a time when very few people could do what he did. Radio stations were really the only way for people who want to talk for a living could make money. And you had to get through gatekeepers. You had to deal with program directors. And if you want to see some of his interactions with the management, I would urge you to see the movie based on his life, Fabulous Money, where he's butting heads with the fantastic Paul Giamatti, who was an executive at a New York City radio City, I think was the NBC station where. Where Howard Stern worked in his early years. Fascinating battle. So very few people could run that gauntlet of appealing to program managers, station managers, and appealing to the audience and being created. He did that. Nowadays, anyone can create a podcast. You may be saying, well, tj, your case in point, okay, anyone can do it, but not anyone can generate a huge audience. There's no doubt in my mind Howard Stern can still create and attract a huge audience. If you can attract a huge audience and create content, then have to be five hours a day, might be two hours a week. But if you could do that, you can make money, you can have influence, you can have fun. And I don't know anyone of any age and of any net worth who doesn't want that. So that's really what I, I think about Howard Stern and what's going on. Issue four, Ted Cruz, the senator from Texas. In the news, Ted Cruz criticizes Governor Hochul over headscarf. Senator Ted Cruz mocked Governor Kathy Hochul for wearing a headscarf at the funeral of slain New York Police Department officer. Did Aero Islam, a Muslim. Responding to a photo of Hokul inside a Bronx mosque, Cruz posted what Hochul fired back, saying, respectfully, a grieving family's faith is what leaders and anyone with basic decency would do. The funeral followed Islamic tradition with all women, including New York Police Department Commissioner Jessica Tisch, wearing head coverings. The Council on American Islamic Relations called Cruz's comments despicable, especially given his past appearances. Wearing a Jewish skull cap, Cruz doubled down sarcastically saying, Hochul should wear a hijab every day. The moment became a flashpoint over religious respect, political cynicism, and how leaders respond to grief in diverse communities. Okay, so what's really going on here? Ted Cruz, who is pretty savvy when it comes to media, other than when he gets caught out of the country vacationing, when there's crises happening in Tex. But he's a pretty shrewd guy by all accounts. He thought, hey, I know here's a way for me to pander to the MAGA base of people who hate Muslims. And I can look cute and clever and I can, I can own the liberals and I can do A burn on Governor Kathy Hochul. So he did. He did accomplish that. I have no doubt that it helped him within his own political base. But here's the bigger issue and the reason I bring it up as a communications issue, because what you wear does say a lot about what you're communicating. If I were going to do an interview at a high tech company today, for example, I wouldn't wear a jacket like this. I certainly wouldn't wear a tie. It would be sending the message of, hey, tj, you don't understand our culture. You don't respect us. People in high tech dress casually. If I were going to work at a prominent white shoe law firm in New York City or going for a job interview, I would in fact wear perhaps this suit and a tie. I would be very traditional looking because that's the uniform. Not with everyone at big law firms, but certainly with junior members showing up for job interviews. It's sending a message, I'm here to play the game and I'm wearing the uniform. So every single industry has a particular code. It might not be written down of what people wear. People do socially, too. If you go to a backyard barbecue and you're wearing a tuxedo, people are going to look at you like, are you crazy? Who's this clown? Who does he think he is? Is he the waiter? What's going on here? So how you dress is important. It does send a message. And there's always a fine line when it comes to religion, because if you are going somewhere where someone else's religion has something that's completely against your values, are you being inauthentic to yourself and your own values are by doing what they ask for, or are you simply being respectful? Now, as Governor Hochul pointed out, Ted Cruz has presumably on many occasions, if he goes to one of his biggest donors, bar mitzvahs, for his kid, I guarantee you he's putting on yarmulke when he goes into the synagogue. So for him to suggest putting something on your head that is consistent with with a particular religion is somehow weird, strange, despicable is the implication. It is really despicable on his part. What he's saying is, okay, since I have a lot of friends and donors who are Jewish, it's okay for me to wear yarmulke. But since I don't have many donors and friends who are Muslim, I'm going to make fun of you for covering your head, which is the custom in the Muslim tradition. So where do you draw the line? I'll admit to You. I've grappled with this myself because as someone who is not a fan of organized religion and do not believe in the fundamental precepts of organized religion, I always feel a little awkward doing things that imply, for example, a belief in a God looking down upon you. So I think there's a legitimate area of debate for someone wanting to go to a religious service and saying, hey, I'm here to be respectful. I'm here to be quiet. I'm not here to proselytize for my own thing, but I want to not put your religious symbols on my body in the same way that if an atheist had a funeral in a public park, if they want everyone to wear, you know, a Darwin fish symbol, showing respect for atheism, I don't have a problem with people who are religious saying, you know what? I'm not going to put the fish on. I'm here. I'm respectful, but I don't need to put your religious artifacts on any part of my body. I could certainly understand and respect that. But let's deal with reality. We live in a world where politicians, especially, are not going out of their way to offend people who could be their voters and could be their base of support. I realize that seems odd now to a lot of people because we see so many politicians spending so much time seemingly going out of their way to criticize and to offend. But once upon a time, there was a time when politicians didn't go out of their way to offend anyone. So you get invited to, let's just say, a popular religion in the worldwide sense. You get invited to a particular religious ceremony and a funeral is that. And it's. Let's just say it's from one of the top 10 most popular religions in the world. Islam is one in the United States. Judaism is one. You don't go out of your way to be offensive. And that's all the governor was doing. And for Ted Cruz to try to do cheap shots on that, well, it's typical of Ted Cruz, and it seems to work with his political constituency. My advice to you is you got to really think about it. There's no one easy answer. You have to be authentic to yourself. But you also have to ask yourself, how many battles am I going to fight? And do be aware that people are judging you all the time on everything you wear. I'm wearing a business suit and not a tie because I don't want to seem overly formal, but I want to seem more like a business person and not just a Hip kid and a T shirt trying to be cool. So that's when it's also kind of portraying my. My own history as a corporate media consultant, someone who's worked with Fortune 500 companies and major governments all over the world, so it's closer to how people are used to seeing me. Issue five we got to move on RFK Jr slashes vaccine science eyes supplement crackdown. Robert F. Kennedy Jr has canceled nearly $500 million in federal funding for MRNA vaccine research. He also announced future vaccines must exclude MRNA, a move scientists call dangerous and anti scientific. In stark contrast to Kennedy's claims, MRNA technology helped develop COVID 19 vaccines in record time. Designed within days, tested in two months, and rolled out in under a year, the shots are credited with saving roughly 20 million lives worldwide in 2021 alone. At the same time, Kennedy is taking aim at the grass loophole, an FDA rule that lets companies self certify new food and supplement ingredients without safety testing. That loophole has allowed thousands of unregulated chemicals and supplements into the marketplace. Kennedy's crackdown could be the first serious threat to the supplement industry in decades. It's a strange juxtaposition slashing cutting edge vaccine science while possibly bringing long overdue accountability to an industry he once championed. So there's, I think, sort of a mixed message, a good and a bad here. Kennedy overall, I have to tell you, I'm not impressed with his leadership at all. And he's increasingly distressing most serious members of the scientific medical community. I think going after vaccines could really leave this country underprepared for the next. The next pandemic if and when it happens. So it does trouble me greatly. Now he's someone who traditionally has been seen as someone favorable to the supplement industry. Even during his confirmation hearings, he was mixing little blue magic potions and powders. So he seems like someone who's been very open to a lot of the junk science promoted by supplement providers. But his actions yesterday do make it seem as though he's. He's not going to let them continue to get into this loophole where it basically, you can say you can take dog poop off the sidewalk, freeze it, and sell it to people and say, hey, the government doesn't want you to have this. But technically there's no evidence there's any chemical in here that will cause problems and sell it to people, and it could in fact kill you. I mean, that's really the problem with how unregulated our industry is for supplements in the United States. So if he does crack down on that. One of the things the MAGA movement and Casey Means and others in nat milieu share is a fear, some of it justifiably in increasing chemicals in everything we eat, everything we consume. There's some legitimacy to that. And if they are going to crack down on supplements, who just pour all sorts of chemicals that could create liver damage, kidney damage to people, then power to them. But the idea of going after vaccines that have saved millions of lives, I think is just an absolute insane, insane thing. Speaking of messaging, it's really sending a message to the world we don't care about science. It's specifically sending a message to a lot of parents out there, hey, don't get your kids vaccine vaccinated. And we are in fact seeing rising rates of non vaccinated children populating schools in America and seeing it come back for things like measles. Yay, measles. If you're measles, you gotta be thinking about maybe starting a political action committee and running TV ads promoting Trump and Kennedy because measles is the best thing that ever happened to measles. Political action committee and running TV ads promoting Trump and Kennedy and other diseases because measles is the best thing that ever happened to measles are also kind of licking their chops saying, hey, now's a chance for us. And other diseases are also kind of licking their chops saying, hey, now's a chance for us to come back. Maybe to come back. Maybe. Smallpox can really hit the ground running again. It's extraordinarily frustrating when you, when you look at the history of human beings on planet Earth, people typically died at around age Smallpox can really hit the ground running again. 30 is recent. It's extraordinarily frustrating. It was 150 years ago. Most people just sort of expired died, whether they're eaten by saber tooth tigers or just got a cut. When you, when you look at the history of human and infection killed them. People just died at age 30, 33, 35 human beings on planet as recently as 150 years ago. And then 200 people. Typically things happen, antibiotics and vaccines. So we went from about the age of 30, 35 to 75. That's 100% died at a battle around age 30. As recent as 150 years ago that increase. And yet people want to act like, oh, the government's bad for making you do vaccine. No, it's not. Most people just sort of expired died whether they're eaten by cyber. If the government can double people's Love or tooth tigers or just got to cut eyes. That's a good thing. We want government to and infection kill them. People just died at age 30 protect US government is not necessarily enemy 3335 now the government can be the enemy many times in the last six months as recently as 150 years ago. And then two things happen. We've seen that the government certainly can be an enemy antibiotics in places like Hungary and vaccines. So we went from about the age of 3035 to 7 North Korea 35. That's 100% increase. And yet people want to act like oh Cuba. There's a lot of bad countries in the world where the government government's bad for making actively harms people. The United States was something you do vaccine. No it's not supposed to be different United if the government United States until not that long ago was a place where most people regardless of the political party they were in can double people's lives. That's a good thing. Trusted the government to do. We want government to protect us Government do things like improve their health. Things like testing water is not necessarily the enemy. Now the government can be the enemy. Many slaughter things like trying to remove air times in the last six months air pollution and there was such I've seen that the success people forget how 1970 I remember government certainly can be an enemy in places like Hungary. Being in Chicago in 1970 and I thought wow. Sure seems odd. There's no such North Korea. This thing is sunshine here. Well today there is sunshine. The Great Lakes have been cleaned up Cuba there's a lot of bad rivers lakes around the world and certainly in the United States have been cleaned up because countries in the world where the government actively harms people. The United States was of government regulation supposed to be different. You know is it possible to over regulate? Yes, look at North Korea. Yes, look at Cuba. United States until not that long ago was a place where most people regardless of the political part party they were in. The question has never trusted the government to differ is regulation good or bad. The question is always what is the right amount of regulation to create things like improve their health the best environment for people for citizens things like testing for the economy to water. Things like trying to remove air pollution. And there was such thrive and where the private sector can't huge success. People forget how 1970 I remember solve all the problems such as basic science research such as research on vaccines. The government needs to step in. And that's what the United States government was doing with bipartisan support. But now thanks to RFK, half a billion dollars in MRNA being in Chicago in 1970 and I thought vaccine research canceled. And I think it's an extraordinarily negative message for Americans to receive and those around the world. I'm TJ Walker. Thanks for joining me. This is Communiverse. We're going to be launching officially. This is sort of the stealth mode and we're going to be launching officially September 2, 2025. Wow. Sure seems odd. There's no such thing as sunshine here. Well, today there is sunshine. The Great Lakes have been cleaned up. Many rivers, lakes around the world and certainly in the United States have been cleaned up because of government regulation. We are coming up with a new name. Sadly, the name just isn't working out because of other trademark restrictions. But more on that later. This Is it possible to overweak? And next week. Thanks so much. Please post your comments. Tell me where you disagree. Tell me where you agree. Tell me what other regulate. Yes, look at northern subjects you would like me to cover. The premise of this show is Korea. Yes, look at Cuba. The question is never I look at the top business, technology and culture stories of the day. Analyze it through a communication skill. Is regulation good or bad? The question is always lands all with the goal of making you what is the right amount of regulation to create more successful. Thanks so much. See you tomorrow.