Latest / frontpage.pt / frontpage.pt: sun may 24

Transcript

frontpage.pt: sun may 24 · frontpage.pt

• 0:00
  Host 1: So imagine for a second that you're paying into a national social security system
• 0:04
  Host 1: for, well, your entire adult life.
• 0:06
  Host 2: Right. Like every paycheck, just clocking in.
• 0:09
  Host 1: Exactly. Every paycheck you pay your taxes,
• 0:11
  Host 1: you you follow all the rules,
• 0:13
  Host 1: you uphold your end of the social contract,
• 0:15
  Host 1: and then, out of nowhere, you get a cancer diagnosis.
• 0:18
  Host 2: Oh, wow. Yeah.
• 0:19
  Host 1: So you apply for the medical leave that you've literally been funding for decades,
• 0:23
  Host 1: only to be told by some computer system that because of the the specific collar
• 0:27
  Host 1: you wear around your neck, you don't qualify for a single dime.
• 0:31
  Host 2: It's just it's incredibly jarring.
• 0:33
  Host 1: It really is.
• 0:34
  Host 1: And welcome to today's deep dive, everyone.
• 0:36
  Host 1: Today, we are unpacking a stack of Portuguese newspaper front pages
• 0:40
  Host 1: dated for tomorrow, May 24th, 2026.
• 0:43
  Host 2: Getting a little preview of the news.
• 0:45
  Host 1: Exactly.
• 0:46
  Host 1: We're looking at Público and the historic Jornal de Notícias, which, by the way,
• 0:51
  Host 1: has been rolling off the presses since 1888.
• 0:53
  Host 1: And when you lay tomorrow's headlines side by side,
• 0:56
  Host 1: what really emerges isn't just, you know, a list of current events.
• 0:59
  Host 2: No, not at all.
• 1:00
  Host 1: Right? It's this really striking portrait of the machine versus the human being.
• 1:04
  Host 2: Yeah. And, I mean, the daily news usually just presents itself as these isolated
• 1:08
  Host 2: data points. Right? Like, a storm over here, some political scandal over there.
• 1:12
  Host 1: Right. Totally disconnected.
• 1:14
  Host 2: Exactly. But when you synthesize these specific pages, the mechanism connecting
• 1:18
  Host 2: them becomes just incredibly clear. I mean, every major story tomorrow
• 1:21
  Host 2: revolves around this profound tension between grand, rigid institutional systems,
• 1:25
  Host 2: like the state, the church, the justice system, and the individual people who are just kind
• 1:29
  Host 2: of violently squeezed through their bureaucratic cracks.
• 1:31
  Host 1: Squeezed through the cracks. Yeah, that's a great way to put it.
• 1:33
  Host 1: Let's actually start with the heaviest systemic shadow on these pages.
• 1:36
  Host 1: So Público is marking the 100th anniversary of the May 28th coup.
• 1:40
  Host 2: Right, a massive historical milestone.
• 1:42
  Host 1: Yeah, this was the 1926 military march
• 1:45
  Host 2: Yeah.
• 1:46
  Host 1: that, basically, crushed the first Portuguese republic
• 1:49
  Host 1: and installed António de Oliveira Salazar's dictatorship.
• 1:51
  Host 2: Which lasted for decades.
• 1:53
  Host 1: Right, for nearly half a century, the state in Portugal was literally an active oppressor.
• 1:57
  Host 1: Now, 100 years later, obviously Portugal is a democracy.
• 2:00
  Host 1: The state is structurally designed to be a provider, you know, protector.
• 2:02
  Host 2: In theory. In theory, exactly.
• 2:05
  Host 1: Yet, right next to this historical retrospective,
• 2:08
  Host 1: the paper details this massive modern failure of state management.
• 2:11
  Host 1: The government is selling off eight properties in Lisbon, and, get this,
• 2:15
  Host 1: they are offloading them below market price.
• 2:17
  Host 2: Which is wild when you think about the context of Lisbon right now.
• 2:20
  Host 1: Exactly.
• 2:21
  Host 2: I mean, these are properties that were left vacant because the government recently consolidated
• 2:25
  Host 2: a bunch of different administrative offices into a single hub.
• 2:28
  Host 1: Right, they streamlined.
• 2:29
  Host 2: They streamlined. Right. So by fixing their own bureaucracy, they freed up all this
• 2:32
  Host 2: prime real estate. And Público points out that these eight buildings could have been retrofitted
• 2:35
  Host 2: to create 450 public housing units.
• 2:38
  Host 1: 450.
• 2:39
  Host 2: Right in the middle of Lisbon's suffocating housing crisis.
• 2:42
  Host 2: But instead, the state is just liquidating them.
• 2:45
  Host 1: I mean, look, I understand that converting like 19th-century
• 2:48
  Host 1: or mid-century office buildings into code-compliant residential apartments
• 2:51
  Host 1: is complex.
• 2:52
  Host 2: Yeah.
• 2:53
  Host 1: You know, you're dealing with zoning laws,
• 2:55
  Host 2: seismic retrofitting, plumbing overhauls,
• 2:57
  Host 1: Yeah, all of that.
• 2:58
  Host 1: But how does a democratic government justify selling public assets
• 3:02
  Host 1: at a discount when 450 families are actively being priced out of their own capital?
• 3:06
  Host 2: Well, it really comes down to the fundamental difference between how a corporation operates
• 3:10
  Host 2: and how a social institution is supposed to operate, you know?
• 3:13
  Host 1: Right.
• 3:14
  Host 2: For a state bureaucracy, retrofitting those buildings means decades of property management,
• 3:18
  Host 2: maintenance liabilities, complex urban planning.
• 3:21
  Host 1: A huge headache for them.
• 3:22
  Host 2: Exactly. But selling them below market price to private developers, that's just a one-time cash
• 3:25
  Host 2: injection. It instantly optimizes the government's short-term balance sheet.
• 3:29
  Host 1: Ah, so the system prioritizes immediate financial liquidity over the long-term,
• 3:33
  Host 1: kind of messy reality of actually housing its citizens.
• 3:35
  Host 2: You hit the nail on the head.
• 3:37
  Host 1: And, you know, that prioritization looks even more disjointed when you read the Jornal de Notícias.
• 3:41
  Host 1: Because, right below the housing crisis story, Maria da Graça Carvalho,
• 3:44
  Host 1: the Minister of the Environment, announces a €10,000,000 support fund to subsidize
• 3:48
  Host 1: the purchase of electric cars.
• 3:50
  Host 2: Right, the EV subsidies.
• 3:51
  Host 1: Yeah.
• 3:52
  Host 1: I mean, it is like a homeowner deciding to install state-of-the-art solar panels
• 3:55
  Host 1: on their roof while the foundation of the house is actively sinking into the mud.
• 3:59
  Host 2: That is a perfect analogy. I mean, in behavioral economics and political science,
• 4:02
  Host 2: we actually call this visibility bias.
• 4:04
  Host 1: Visibility bias. Okay, break that down for me.
• 4:05
  Host 2: So institutions heavily overinvest in highly visible status-signaling initiatives,
• 4:09
  Host 2: while underfunding foundational invisible infrastructure.
• 4:12
  Host 1: Oh, that makes so much sense.
• 4:13
  Host 2: Right. Like an electric vehicle subsidy is clean, it's modern, and it looks fantastic
• 4:16
  Host 2: on an international climate report. You can photograph a new EV charging station.
• 4:19
  Host 1: But you cannot easily photograph the prevention of a family's eviction.
• 4:22
  Host 2: Exactly. It's invisible work.
• 4:24
  Host 1: But I want to push back on this just a little bit, because is it really just a cynical PR stunt
• 4:28
  Host 1: by the government? Like, is it just visibility bias, or is it also just a fundamental lack
• 4:31
  Host 1: of bureaucratic bandwidth?
• 4:32
  Host 2: What do you mean?
• 4:33
  Host 1: Well, setting up a €10,000,000 fund, essentially, just requires like writing a check
• 4:36
  Host 1: and setting up an online portal for rebates, right?
• 4:38
  Host 2: Mmh.
• 4:38
  Host 1: Repurposing eight massive buildings into 450 apartments
• 4:41
  Host 1: requires literally thousands of hours of architectural and legal labor.
• 4:44
  Host 1: Aren't they just taking the path of least administrative resistance?
• 4:47
  Host 2: Yeah. I mean, you are identifying the exact flaw in the machine there. Grand systems
• 4:50
  Host 2: always default to the path of least friction.
• 4:53
  Host 1: Path of least friction. Right.
• 4:54
  Host 2: And administering a digital rebate for a car requires almost zero human friction.
• 4:57
  Host 2: Managing 450 public housing units requires dealing with actual complex human beings
• 5:00
  Host 2: on a daily basis. So the institution just defaults to what is mathematically easiest to execute,
• 5:04
  Host 2: leaving the individual who's desperate for an apartment entirely on their own.
• 5:06
  Host 1: Wow.
• 5:07
  Host 1: And that brings us directly to the contrast between physical infrastructure and social infrastructure.
• 5:11
  Host 1: The Jornal de Notícias reports that a brand-new bridge over the Lima River in Viana
• 5:14
  Host 1: will be finished this summer.
• 5:16
  Host 2: Physical bridges are easy for the state.
• 5:18
  Host 1: Exactly. The state is highly efficient at pouring concrete.
• 5:20
  Host 1: But the invisible social bridges, the safety nets designed to catch actual citizens,
• 5:24
  Host 1: those are collapsing,
• 5:26
  Host 1: which brings us back to the priest we mentioned at the start.
• 5:28
  Host 2: Right, the story of the Catholic cleric with cancer.
• 5:31
  Host 1: Yeah.
• 5:31
  Host 1: He discovers that while he has legally paid his dues into the social security system,
• 5:35
  Host 1: the regime explicitly prevents him from accessing medical leave benefits.
• 5:37
  Host 1: The system is legally obligating his contribution while completely blocking his withdrawal.
• 5:41
  Host 2: It's awful.
• 5:42
  Host 1: So explain the mechanism behind this, because on a human level it makes literally zero sense.
• 5:45
  Host 1: If a citizen pays their taxes, why does the institution suddenly absolve itself
• 5:48
  Host 1: of responsibility just based on a religious vocation?
• 5:50
  Host 1: Does the system literally have a line of code that says like, if collar, deny payment?
• 5:53
  Host 2: Honestly, essentially, yes.
• 5:54
  Host 1: Are you serious?
• 5:55
  Host 2: I mean, massive bureaucracies rely on really rigid taxonomies to function.
• 5:59
  Host 2: Centuries ago, the church and the state had entirely different economic spheres.
• 6:02
  Host 1: Right.
• 6:03
  Host 2: So as the modern state absorbed the social welfare role, these legacy classifications just
• 6:06
  Host 2: remained. Clergy pay into a specific subregime of the tax code.
• 6:09
  Host 2: If the modern algorithm driving social security doesn't have a preprogrammed checkbox for clergy's
• 6:13
  Host 2: short-term disability, the system just defaults to rejection.
• 6:16
  Host 1: So it's not even targeted.
• 6:17
  Host 2: No, it isn't malice at all. It's the sheer violence of administration.
• 6:20
  Host 2: This social security mainframe doesn't see a human being suffering from cancer. It just sees
• 6:23
  Host 2: a categorical error.
• 6:25
  Host 1: A categorical error. Man.
• 6:28
  Host 1: And we see that exact same paralysis when the state is forced to respond to sudden crises,
• 6:31
  Host 1: too, like the Notícias magazine section covers the massive wreckage left behind
• 6:34
  Host 1: by Storm Kristen.
• 6:35
  Host 2: Just devastating damage. Yeah.
• 6:37
  Host 1: And just a quick disclaimer for you listeners, we're going to mention some political critiques here,
• 6:40
  Host 1: but we're just reading what's in the papers, we aren't taking any sides.
• 6:43
  Host 2: Mmh.
• 6:43
  Host 1: But we have political figures like António José Seguro standing at a podium, basically launching
• 6:47
  Host 1: warnings at the government, devastating their delayed emergency response.
• 6:50
  Host 2: Right, the typical political back and forth.
• 6:52
  Host 1: Exactly.
• 6:53
  Host 1: But while the political class debates the timeline of disaster relief,
• 6:56
  Host 1: the paper profiles an ordinary guy named Sérgio Silva in Leiria.
• 6:59
  Host 2: Yeah. And while the centralized, invisible infrastructure of the state is paralyzed by its own
• 7:03
  Host 2: red tape, Sérgio is literally on a roof with a hammer, working tirelessly to physically repair
• 7:07
  Host 2: his community.
• 7:08
  Host 1: So when the macro system delays, the micro individual is forced to become their own
• 7:11
  Host 1: first responder.
• 7:12
  Host 2: Completely. The priest fighting for his sick pay and the citizens fixing roofs in Leiria
• 7:16
  Host 2: are experiencing the exact same phenomenon, just from different angles.
• 7:19
  Host 2: When institutions fail to adapt to reality, whether it's an outdated tax code or a delayed
• 7:22
  Host 2: FEMA-style response, the burden of survival is immediately transferred right back to the individual.
• 7:26
  Host 1: And the front pages show us what happens when that burden of survival lasts for decades,
• 7:30
  Host 1: which gets really dark.
• 7:31
  Host 1: There is a harrowing true crime report about Carlos Gouveia, who's known as Animal.
• 7:35
  Host 1: He has spent 30 years behind bars.
• 7:37
  Host 2: 30 years. That is two-thirds of his entire life inside a cage.
• 7:41
  Host 1: Yeah.
• 7:42
  Host 1: And the article details an existence defined entirely by extremes.
• 7:45
  Host 1: I mean, from being subjected to tasers to enduring hunger strikes.
• 7:48
  Host 2: And a 30-year sentence characterized by tasers and starvation really forces us to look
• 7:51
  Host 2: at the mechanics of the penal system, you know?
• 7:54
  Host 1: Right. Is it a correctional facility, or is it just a warehouse?
• 7:56
  Host 2: Exactly. When the state locks someone in an environment defined by continuous violence for three
• 7:59
  Host 2: decades, the institution hasn't solved a social pathology. It has merely contained it behind
• 8:03
  Host 2: a concrete wall, essentially ensuring the individual is perpetually broken.
• 8:05
  Host 1: Just locked away and forgotten.
• 8:07
  Host 1: And we see an equally grim breakdown of primary systems in another report.
• 8:11
  Host 1: A French couple has been placed in preventive prison in Tires and Lisbon
• 8:14
  Host 1: for child abandonment.
• 8:15
  Host 2: Such a tragic story. It really is.
• 8:17
  Host 1: The stepfather reportedly assaulted one of the brothers before leaving the children entirely.
• 8:21
  Host 1: And in court, only the man defended himself.
• 8:23
  Host 1: The rest of the family's silence is just it's deafening.
• 8:26
  Host 2: Yeah. And here you have the total collapse of the most fundamental social system we have, which
• 8:30
  Host 2: is the family unit.
• 8:31
  Host 1: Right.
• 8:31
  Host 2: When the family fails to protect a child, the state is forced to step in. But the state only
• 8:35
  Host 2: has blunt instruments at its disposal, in this case, preventive prison. The legal system can
• 8:38
  Host 2: isolate the abusers, but it cannot undo the compounding trauma that was inflicted on those kids.
• 8:41
  Host 1: And this is where reading these front pages side by side creates a truly jarring experience.
• 8:45
  Host 1: Because, right next to these reports of actual devastating trauma,
• 8:49
  Host 1: a man locked in a cage for 30 years, children assaulted and abandoned, Jornal de Notícias
• 8:52
  Host 1: runs a headline about the current state of reality TV.
• 8:54
  Host 2: The contrast is just bizarre.
• 8:56
  Host 1: Bizarre doesn't even cover it.
• 8:58
  Host 1: Television producers are now featuring actual sexual abuse, physical amputations, and severe aggressions,
• 9:02
  Host 1: all purely to drive audience ratings.
• 9:04
  Host 2: It is the literal industrialization of trauma for entertainment.
• 9:07
  Host 1: I have to ask you about the psychology of this. I mean, think of the media you consumed this week.
• 9:11
  Host 1: Are we so insulated from real-life tragedy that our baseline
• 9:14
  Host 1: for stimulation has just shifted? Like, do we demand to see actual amputations
• 9:17
  Host 1: on television just because we need more extreme inputs to feel anything at all?
• 9:20
  Host 2: Well, I would actually argue it's the exact opposite. Really? Yeah.
• 9:23
  Host 2: It isn't that we are insulated, it's that we are entirely overwhelmed. I mean, think about it.
• 9:26
  Host 2: We live in a society surrounded by complex, systemic failures, housing crises,
• 9:30
  Host 2: cancer patients denied care, broken prison systems. Real suffering is incredibly complex.
• 9:33
  Host 1: That's true.
• 9:33
  Host 2: It demands civic action, it induces guilt, and it reminds us of our own vulnerability.
• 9:37
  Host 2: So we actively look away from the homeless family on the street because acknowledging them requires
• 9:40
  Host 2: moral labor.
• 9:41
  Host 1: Moral labor.
• 9:42
  Host 1: So you're saying manufactured suffering acts as a sort of pressure valve.
• 9:45
  Host 2: Yes, exactly. A reality TV show featuring an amputation or an assault
• 9:49
  Host 2: is neatly packaged within a 45-minute episode. The viewer experiences the adrenaline spike,
• 9:52
  Host 2: the neurological thrill of observing trauma, but with zero moral tax.
• 9:55
  Host 1: Wow.
• 9:56
  Host 2: You don't have to fix the reality TV star's life, you just turn off the screen.
• 9:59
  Host 2: We binge extreme manufactured trauma precisely because we feel completely powerless
• 1:00:02
  Host 2: to fix the real, systemic trauma happening in our own neighborhoods.
• 1:00:04
  Host 1: That makes total sense, but it is terrifying. Let's actually shift our focus to the people
• 1:00:07
  Host 1: who wield power over these systems, because the front pages suggest that the firewall between power
• 1:00:10
  Host 1: and accountability might actually be thickening.
• 1:00:12
  Host 2: Mmh.
• 1:00:12
  Host 1: Over in neighboring Spain, there is an unprecedented political earthquake happening right now.
• 1:00:16
  Host 2: Massive news. Yeah.
• 1:00:17
  Host 1: Police cases have now entangled five prime ministers, and for the first time in history,
• 1:00:21
  Host 1: one of them is being formally accused.
• 1:00:22
  Host 2: Right, and to understand the magnitude of this, you really have to look at the mechanics of judicial independence.
• 1:00:26
  Host 2: Historically, in a lot of democracies, the highest echelons of the justice system
• 1:00:29
  Host 2: are appointed by the very political class they are meant to police.
• 1:00:32
  Host 1: Oh, right. So the executive branch and the judicial branch just kind of operate
• 1:00:35
  Host 1: in a state of mutual preservation.
• 1:00:37
  Host 2: Exactly. It's the ultimate don't bite the hand that feeds you scenario. Precise.
• 1:00:40
  Host 2: So for a prime minister to be formally accused, it means the judicial institution has matured
• 1:00:44
  Host 2: to a point where it actually believes it can survive attacking the executive branch.
• 1:00:47
  Host 2: It is a rare tectonic shift where one massive institutional system is finally using its weight
• 1:00:51
  Host 2: to hold another system accountable, rather than just leaving the cost of corruption
• 1:00:54
  Host 2: to be borne by the taxpayer.
• 1:00:56
  Host 1: That's fascinating.
• 1:00:57
  Host 1: And speaking of how systems grouping to define people, there is a really interesting ideological critique
• 1:01:00
  Host 1: highlighted in the cultural commentary section today.
• 1:01:02
  Host 1: Writer Ana Bárbara Pedrosa is quoted saying, quote,
• 1:01:06
  Host 1: "The left puts all the oppressed in the same bag."
• 1:01:09
  Host 1: And again, just reminding you all, we're strictly reading the cultural commentary here,
• 1:01:11
  Host 1: not taking political sides.
• 1:01:12
  Host 1: But regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, her column explores a central flaw
• 1:01:16
  Host 1: in political architecture, which is the erasure of the individual.
• 1:01:18
  Host 2: Right, and it ties perfectly into our discussion of the priest and the social security system earlier.
• 1:01:21
  Host 2: Bureaucracies, whether they are left wing, right wing, or corporate, they really struggle with nuance.
• 1:01:25
  Host 2: They require broad categories to function.
• 1:01:26
  Host 2: Pedrosa is basically pointing out that when an ideology lumps incredibly diverse groups of people
• 1:01:30
  Host 2: into one monolithic category labeled "the oppressed," it strips them of their specific individual struggles.
• 1:01:33
  Host 1: Right, like a worker priced out of Lisbon does not have the exact same needs
• 1:01:36
  Host 1: as a family recovering from a natural disaster.
• 1:01:38
  Host 2: Exactly. When institutions put everyone in the same bag, they usually end up helping no one.
• 1:01:41
  Host 1: So true. And we see how institutions complicate individual lives even in death.
• 1:01:45
  Host 1: The business pages are covering this massive, high-stakes family drama
• 1:01:48
  Host 1: surrounding the disputed will of the boss of the Tamariz restaurant chain.
• 1:01:51
  Host 2: Yeah. A will is supposed to be an individual's final, undeniable dictate.
• 1:01:54
  Host 1: Right.
• 1:01:55
  Host 2: But the moment money is involved, it just gets dragged straight into the machinery of family courts
• 1:01:58
  Host 2: and legal interpretations.
• 1:01:59
  Host 1: The courtroom essentially bureaucratizes a family's grief.
• 1:02:02
  Host 2: That's exactly it. The individual's final wishes just become a legal battlefield where attorneys
• 1:02:06
  Host 2: litigate the definition of a single word in a contract.
• 1:02:08
  Host 1: It's exhausting. But to pull us out of the bureaucratic trenches for a minute,
• 1:02:11
  Host 1: tomorrow's papers do offer some moments where individual brilliance actually manages
• 1:02:14
  Host 1: to cut through the noise.
• 1:02:15
  Host 2: A little palette cleanser.
• 1:02:16
  Host 1: Yes, much needed.
• 1:02:18
  Host 1: Over at the Cannes Film Festival, director Cristian Mungiu has won his second Palme d'Or
• 1:02:22
  Host 1: with his film, Fjord.
• 1:02:23
  Host 1: I mean, art remains one of the very few spaces where an individual vision isn't immediately
• 1:02:27
  Host 1: crushed by a committee.
• 1:02:28
  Host 2: So true.
• 1:02:29
  Host 1: And then there is the ultimate palette cleanser on the sports page, the Taça de Portugal,
• 1:02:32
  Host 1: the Portuguese cup finals. Sporting versus Torreense.
• 1:02:34
  Host 2: Yeah.
• 1:02:35
  Host 1: And the papers note they are stepping onto the pitch with incredibly unequal weapons.
• 1:02:38
  Host 1: It's not just an underdog story. It's a clash of entirely asymmetric systems.
• 1:02:42
  Host 2: Absolutely. I mean, Sporting is this institutional juggernaut with massive capital, deep rosters,
• 1:02:45
  Host 2: endless infrastructure, and Torreense is, well, this statistical anomaly that somehow survived the bracket.
• 1:02:48
  Host 1: Right, the underdogs. And that match is, honestly, the perfect physical manifestation
• 1:02:51
  Host 1: of tomorrow's entire news cycle.
• 1:02:53
  Host 2: It really is. Let's pull all these threads together for you. We've just taken you through the headlines
• 1:02:57
  Host 2: of May 24th, 2026. We started in the shadow of a century-old dictatorship,
• 1:03:01
  Host 2: looking at a modern state that, you know, optimizes its real estate balance sheet
• 1:03:04
  Host 2: by selling off potential public housing while literally pouring millions into highly visible electric vehicle subsidies.
• 1:03:08
  Host 2: Yeah. We looked at the rigid tax codes that deny a priest with cancer his sick pay
• 1:03:11
  Host 2: and the localized action of citizens fixing their own roofs when centralized disaster relief fails.
• 1:03:15
  Host 2: We examined the dark extremes of a 30-year prison sentence, the collapse of a family unit,
• 1:03:18
  Host 2: and our own psychological demand for manufactured reality TV trauma to distract us from real systemic failure.
• 1:03:22
  Host 2: And finally, we saw this Spanish justice system asserting its independence, all leading up to a football match
• 1:03:25
  Host 2: where the underdog faces the giant.
• 1:03:27
  Host 1: It's a profound snapshot of a society wrestling with its own architecture.
• 1:03:31
  Host 1: But it leaves us with a critical, lingering thought.
• 1:03:34
  Host 1: We opened this deep dive by looking back 100 years at the 1926 military coup,
• 1:03:37
  Host 1: judging that history with the clarity of hindsight. Right?
• 1:03:40
  Host 1: So imagine historians looking back at us 100 years from tomorrow,
• 1:03:44
  Host 1: what will they see as our defining failure?
• 1:03:45
  Host 1: Will they judge us for the rigid, bureaucratic systems we built that actively ignored the vulnerable,
• 1:03:49
  Host 1: or will they judge us most harshly for the fact that we were too busy binge-watching amputations on our screens
• 1:03:52
  Host 1: to even notice the infrastructure collapsing around us?
• 1:03:54
  Host 2: Oh, man. That is a phenomenal question to carry with you this week. Really think about the systems
• 1:03:58
  Host 2: you interact with today and, uh, maybe the media you choose to consume tonight.
• 1:04:01
  Host 2: Thank you so much for joining us on this deep dive. Keep reading between the lines, and we will catch you next time.