Buttigieg Calls Out ‘Societal Problem’ of Getting Your News From ‘Some Dude on the Internet’ While on a Manosphere Podcast

Former Transportation Secretary and Democratic Party presidential candidate, Pete Buttigieg, joined Andrew Schulz’s Flagrant podcast this week for a wide-ranging 2 and a half-hour long discussion, which eventually turned to the state of the media.

Schulz hosted President Donald Trump during the election for a friendly sit-down and he and his podcasts have been lumped with the so-called “manosphere” of new media shows that many observers argue helped propel Trump to victory in 2024. Buttigieg took to his Substack after the episode aired on Wednesday and explained his decision to go on the show:

I know that a podcast with an almost all-male viewership, which prides itself on rejecting political correctness and is skeptical of all things “woke,” represents an audience that might not be inclined to give my party the benefit of the doubt.

That’s the point.

Buttigieg also took on the influence of new media and alternative information sources while on the show and argued there is a huge difference between “professional journalists” and “some dude on the internet,” whether or not all news consumers can make the distinction.

“So, but the real thing is we don’t trust the people who are supposed to be interpreting the data. And that is like a societal problem, it’s not just politicians, right?” Buttigieg said, pivoting to his media analysis:

It’s an erosion of trust in every institution where somebody is supposed to help us make sense of this. And I come out of the local, right, where we’re a little more connected to reality because if the roads are in shitty condition and I’m the mayor and I can produce something saying that the roads are great.

People can call me out and say, ‘No, they’re not. I drive on these roads all the time.’ And they’re going to see you at the supermarket. And they will find me and they will tell me what they think of the condition of our roads. Right. You get up to the national level, and you’re so removed from them that you start to get into these like alternate reality zones.

And then you add to that the fragmentation of where people get their information, because there isn’t, you know, Walter, the famous example is Walter Cronkite, right? Like everybody in the 60s, like turns on Walter Cronkite and it’s not so much that he told people what to think. It’s that he laid out a certain set of facts, certain set of things that happened. Everybody, they could argue over what it means, but they would generally agree on what just happened. And we don’t even have that.

“Yeah, we’re in the echo chambers and the algorithms are just making those echo chambers more extreme,” Schulz agreed.

“So the algorithms are even worse. I mean, the other problem I would say is like, we no longer have access to the editorial function, by which I mean like a professional news organization,” Buttigieg argued, adding:

I like, I used to get so mad at it ever from the south entry of me into the New York Times. There were times when I was so pissed over a story or framing or whatever. But I will say, if I actually found that they got something actually factually wrong and showed it, they would correct it.

Like, there is that ethos. Ah, no, there is no. And professional journalistic organizations have to do that. But if we’re in a world where somebody weighs, like what some dude on the internet says, the same as an organization where there are people who have to hold to journalistic standards, if that’s the same, that dude on the internet doesn’t have to issue a correction. He doesn’t even have to reveal like who he is, right?

I think there’s a lot of people looking at their feeds and those two things seem equal.

“The algorithm is going to reward the more salacious version of that information,” Schulz added.

“Yes, it rewards the lizard brain,” Buttigieg agreed, adding:

Because your lizard brain is taught– the thing we don’t realize is every time we click on something, look at something, let alone like something or share something, or I’m still talking on Twitter in terms like an old man, but whatever the kids are doing these days. You are actually making a statement about your editorial preferences. You’re not intentionally doing it.

Watch the clip above or the full interview here.