Your Custom Text Here
We built a brand new website—which hosts all of our latest episodes!
Polilogue is a weekly dialogue on the substance and style of the Sunday morning political shows. It’s a podcast where we try to capture the magic of the perfect Sunday brunch: a conversation of ideas, reflection, and constructive criticism.
This week on the Sunday talk shows, there was dichotomy of conversations with domestic and foreign implications. On the domestic side, after weeks of buildup, we saw hundreds of thousands students, parents, educators, and other activists march the streets of Washington DC. They were motivated and passionate and united on one cause: to address American gun violence. There were also almost 900 marches around the world. It was extremely moving to see— and frustrating to see the effort undervalued on some of the talk shows.
On the foreign side, HR McMaster is being removed from his post as National Security Advisor and is being replaced by John Bolton. Bolton was an UN Ambassador from 2005 to 2006. He is staunch war hawk— he was supporter for the Iraq War and is supportive of regime change in both North Korea and Iran. And given that both of those nation states are in delicate diplomatic negotiations… his appointment has lots of people feeling uneasy.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
Fifteen months into his presidency, Donald J. Trump has made it clear that he prefers perpetual chaos—when it is his own doing. After months of speculation, he fired Rex Tillerson via tweet and appointed two Iraq War hawks to lead the State Department and the CIA. Some in Congress, including Republican Senator Rand Paul, are determined to halt the confirmations, even if it means filibustering. Trump also fired the Deputy Director of the FBI two days before Andrew McCabe would have been eligible for his full retirement.
The President, however, seems less inclined to appreciate the political chaos that lingers from his 2016 presidential campaign. In the last few days, both Trump and his personal lawyer demanded for the Mueller investigation to end. And lastly, The Guardian and the New York Times released explosive reports about Cambridge Analytica. Cambridge Analytica was the digital arm of the Trump campaign and was reported to have used hacked Facebook data from more than 50 million users to define Trump’s winning digital strategy. Cambridge Analytica was funded by one of Trump’s biggest supporters: the Mercers, and led by campaign strategist: Stephen Bannon.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
A few resources that helped us understand North Korea.
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
More often than not, ABC’s This Week, takes the #1 slot in Polilogue’s show rankings. That's still true, but this time for a different reason. On the latest episode of This Week, Jonathan Karl hosted. Karl is a the Chief White House Correspondent for ABC. He doesn’t normally fill in, because if George Stephanopoulos can’t host, usually Martha Raddatz can. But this time, Karl hosted— and he was great! Karl brought the richness of his career and a new tone to his each interview.
For the first segment, we look at Jonathan Karl’s unique qualities. We also discuss Trump’s decision to meet with the North Korea dictator, Kim Jong-Un, and what is at stake for this controversial meeting.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
A few resources that helped us understand this week's important stories.
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
Last week President Trump announced that he was going to impose tariffs of 25 percent and 10 percent for steel and aluminum, respectively. While these tariffs are designed to address China’s steel dumping, the tariffs are broad and affect every nation that trades with the United States: thus raising the likelihood for an ill-advised trade war.
Two economic advisors of the White House who have previously never been on the Sunday talk shows came on to defend the President’s new and unvetted decision: Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and Director White House Office of Trade & Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro. We also hear from two former Trump advisors on their impressions of the never-ending White House chaos.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
A few of our research links:
In this extended episode of Polilogue, we dive deep into Jake Tapper’s interview with Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel. According to Twitter and other immediate media hot takes, Tapper was on fire. He demanded that Sheriff Israel explain to him and the audience how the Parkland shooter slipped through the cracks. Much of the praise online noted Tapper’s tough and hostile interview approach. But we found that Tapper’s interview was also extremely unfair and prosecutorial. We explore this disappointment and break down the missteps of Jake Tapper as a journalist and Sheriff Joe Israel as a law enforcement leader.
We also explore the gun control conversation from multiple angles— including NRA lobbyist Dana Loesch and the student activists. We find the dialogue around gun reform may lead to action as young people lead the conversation.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
This week, Polilogue looks at how the political landscape is being redrawn by the brave and articulate student survivors of the latest mass shooting—this time at a high school in Parkland, Florida. The students were on all four of the Sunday morning political shows—speaking out and demanding a reset to a conversation that has become stale and predictable. We also spend a few minutes looking at how political leaders from both sides of the aisle are reacting to the latest indictment released from the Mueller investigation. What does this mean for the country, our election system, and for Donald Trump?
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
After a few weeks of policy discussions, the Sunday talk shows were back to a familiar topic of conversation from President Trump’s first six months in office: personnel issues. This time, the situation was more egregious as it became public that the White House Staff Secretary, Rob Porter had domestic abuse allegations against him from both of his ex-wives. This was a known issue among the FBI and key leadership in the White House— so why was he allowed to stay in a such a sensitive and powerful role? Why did the White House first respond to the allegations by supporting Porter? And why did it take a public photo of his ex-wife with a black eye for the White House to finally push Porter out? These are all important questions that took up the majority of the Sunday talk shows— and that comprise the bulk of this week’s episode of Polilogue.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
Last week, President Trump approved the release of a Republican memo from the House Intelligence Committee. This news story may be one of the complicated stories we have seen and discussed during Polilogue’s run. The memo was both simultaneously overpromised as a President Trump’s path to vindication and undersold as recording breaking partisan manipulation. There is no clear winner or loser— and yet— the memo matters.
In this episode of Polilogue, we examine the role of President Trump and Congressional Republicans in developing and releasing this memo. But more importantly, we note the attack on the credibility of America’s political institutions like Congress and the FBI. We ask ourselves, what does it mean to watch the slow disintegration of national norms?
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
We wrap up the final episode of our special State of the Union series by breaking down tonight’s speech by President Donald Trump. Whereas Bush’s first State of the Union speech was unifying, strong, and comforting, Trump relied on fear and threats to reach his audience. Whereas Obama yearned for explanations and exasperations to try to bridge the partisan divide, Trump leaned, nodded, and winked to his base. To say it simply: President Trump’s speech did not attempt to bring together America or the two parties. The speech reflected Trump’s governance— one of little detail, strong emotions, and insulting to large swaths of American communities.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
Republicans may have control over the White House, House, and Senate, but they are by no means are united. This was evident in two issues on this week’s Sunday talk shows. First, not everyone was concerned or even phased with reports last week that President Trump ordered the firing of the special investigator Bob Mueller last summer. And second, not everyone is under the impression that the White House immigration framework could feasibly serve as guideposts for Congressional leaders.
In this episode of Polilogue, we explore the political spectrum of expectations and responses from far right Republicans, moderate Republicans who want to work with Trump, and centrist Democrats that are more interested in governance than they are in the upcoming elections. We also continue the conversation from last week that rich dialogue is possible when there is diversity of identity, thought, and experience.
We’ll be back tomorrow with an episode of President Trump’s first state of the union speech.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
We continue our series on the first State of the Union addresses with a look at Obama's first official SOTU in January 2010. It was just over a year after the financial crisis and Obama already faced a divided Congress. The unity we saw in Bush's speech from 2002 was now nearly a decade behind us—and Obama made it clear that he missed it.
In this episode of Polilogue, we compare Obama's approach to Bush's. Clearly, these were different times that called for a different kind of speech. But was it effective? We debate these and other issues—and ultimately arrive at very different conclusions. We also look ahead towards Donald Trump's first State of the Union.
Don't forget to tune into Trump's speech on Tuesday. We will be recording a special episode Tuesday night—the last in this State of the Union series. So stay tuned!
And remember—our regular episode of Polilogue covering the Sunday morning political shows will be released on its usual schedule—on Tuesday morning.
***
To see Obama's first State of the Union, watch here.
To listen to our special episode of Polilogue on Bush's first State of the Union, click here.
To learn how and when to catch Trump's speech live on Tuesday, click here.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The government shut down for less than 72 hours, but the Washington blame game was thriving on the Sunday talk shows. Half of Washington called the shutdown the Schumer shutdown, and other half called it the Trump shutdown. We take a step back and explain why the blame game is important to analyze and how it could still jeopardize DACA negotiations in the weeks to come.
We also bid adieu to a Sunday morning staple as John Dickerson hosted his last Face the Nation episode. Dickerson is moving over to the CBS This Morning to replace Charlie Rose. His contribution to the Sunday talk shoes cannot be overstated. Dickerson demanded civility and rigor week after week— and Polilogue grew wiser following his show for the last six months. Whoever replaces Dickerson will have big shoes to fill, but we’re hopeful that the Face the Nation spirit will remain steadfast even with the new host.
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
Fierce little ladies at Women's Marches
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The first of a 3 part series.
This special Polilogue series explores the State of the Union speeches of three presidents. To start, we look at George W. Bush's speech in 2002-- a mere four months after the 9/11 attacks.
You can watch the speech in its entirety here.
You can read more about the book Brendan mentions in today's episode here.
Stay tuned for coverage of President Obama's speech in 2010 next week, and another episode of President Trump's first State of the Union address on Feb. 1.
The Sunday talk shows focused on two major stories that could have, and probably should have, been avoided. First, President Trump’s derogatory comments about Haiti and African countries derailed the immigration negotiations and led senators to accuse each other of lying and deception. And, of course, the White House is backpedaling the president’s insulting comments.
The second avoidable story was the nuclear message that was mistakenly sent to all Hawaiians that a nuclear missile was coming towards them. It stressed that the message was not a drill; the message was not true — and it took about 40 minutes for the state to rectify. This left families and Hawaiians petrified, reeling, and running for safety for more than half an hour. The anecdotes we hear on the Sunday talk shows about Hawaii’s horror are haunting and frustrating.
This week on Polilogue we look at both of the stories and ask ourselves, who approached each story with the weight and conversation they deserve? And who will push the dialogue forward?
Before we go— a quick request— we’d love if you would give Polilogue some love in Buzzfeed’s Underappreciated Podcast inquiry. You can do so as a comment or email in this Buzzfeed story.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
Michael Wolff’s book Fire and Fury Inside the White House has DC and the political media sphere in turmoil. The book recounts the chaotic first year of the Trump administration—full of vicious infighting and an unstable president. But Wolff’s book does not meet rigorous journalistic standards.
How does the White House resist something they see as inherently false? And how seriously do journalists use Wolff's book as an accurate White House portrayal? How do readers?
These were all questions that the Sunday talk shows grappled with. The most explosive interview was with White House strategist Stephen Miller on State of the Union. Never in Polilogue’s run or in any of the 2016 campaign, have we seen a more hostile and aggressive interview. Stephen Miller clearly came on the shows to fight—and Jake Tapper tolerated none of it.
This week, we also discuss another important story from Sunday: Oprah Winfrey’s speech at the Golden Globes. It connected the current #MeToo moment with past discrimination and looked towards the future of gender equality. But without saying a name or evening mentioning the year 2020, Oprah Winfrey has triggered chatter (and screams!) for her to run in 2020. She accomplished this all with a single 9 minute speech. We talk about why her speech matters—and why whatever Oprah does next will likely influence American society.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The last political media hurrah of 2017— was not all fireworks. The Sunday talk shows on New Year’s eve each put in varying amounts of energy to produce a quality episode. Three out of the four shows had substitute hosts to continue the reflective conversations from the previous week. And many shows failed to mention the few timely news stories of the week.
This week on Polilogue we focus on the shows’ range on three distinct ways: the political climate going into the midterm elections (and the opportunity of constituents and media consumers to demand more); Congress’s legislative to do list; and the media coverage of the Russia investigation— or lack thereof. We also expand our rankings to identify the best show of the year!
A packed show full of insight, frustration, and hope— we can’t wait to see what’s next for Polilogue in 2018. Happy New Year!
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
Happy Holidays! In this episode, we look at how the Sunday morning political shows wrapped up the year in politics. Most of the shows decided to have extended panel discussions—but a few chose to interview guests. From Sen. Bernie Sanders to Sen. Jeff Flake to a panel on the role of journalism, we dive deep and ask: who handled the wrap up with the greatest insight and the most grace.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
Some people watch the news and see only the news content. But so much of what you hear and what you learn is defined by the show and journalist delivering you the content.
This week on Polilogue, we switch our attention from the topics, guests, and panelists to other crucial voices on the Sunday talk shows: the journalists themselves. While the Sunday political shows are very similar in their format and often the content, hosts determine which topics get discussed, the tone of each interaction, and the depth of every interview.
Sometimes, hosts permit guests to weasel their way out of important questions. At other times, weak questions invite disappointing answers. Some hosts excel by demanding answers and deploying smart follow up questions to achieve the impossible. Hosts cannot predict what guests will say or what news will break out 12 hours before, but they can determine their show’s journalistic goals and create a program that attempts to reach them.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org
The Sunday political shows discussed this week:
They say journalism is the first draft of history. Well this week, we look back at that first draft and try to understand our current president.
In 1999, then-host Tim Russert interviewed Donald Trip on Meet the Press about his possible candidacy for the 2000 presidential election on a third party ticket. It’s an interesting look back into the personality, values, and political stances of Trump before he was Trump. Some things are sadly familiar like his blatant sexualized view of women. But other issues stand out— like his thoughts about gay marriage and abortion.
It’s a new interview with a familiar man on a familiar show. But an entirely different take on the Sunday talk shows— and of Polilogue itself.
You can see the interview in its entirety here.
Email us at polilogue.podcast@gmail.com or you can send us your feedback on Twitter: @sotonaomi_ and @bsteidle.
Want to stalk us some more? Check out some of our other work:
Brendan’s website: www.armisticedesigns.com
Naomi's website: www.startwithaquestion.org