Poppy MacDonald: USAFacts’ Mission to Empower Informed Citizens

0:00:10 Hello, I’m Guy Kawasaki.
0:00:13 This is the Remarkable People podcast.
0:00:18 And as you’ve heard many, many times before, we’re on a mission to make you remarkable.
0:00:23 So we bring in remarkable people so they can show you what it takes to be remarkable.
0:00:29 Today’s guest is the Remarkable Poppy McDonald and Poppy.
0:00:35 Oh my God, she’s the president of USA FACTS and she’ll explain what that does.
0:00:41 She’s also the former president and chief operating officer of political, which is one
0:00:43 of my favorite sources.
0:00:46 And she used to work for Atlantic media.
0:00:50 So she has the background in media and data and all that kind of great stuff.
0:00:56 So we’re going to be talking about data and truth and democracy and all that today.
0:01:03 So Poppy, welcome to the show.
0:01:07 I’m going to give you a nice, easy question for the first one.
0:01:08 OK.
0:01:09 Sounds good.
0:01:14 Do you think that misinformation determined the outcome of this election?
0:01:17 How’s that for an easy question?
0:01:18 Wow.
0:01:19 All right.
0:01:20 You’re hitting hard right from the get go.
0:01:22 I appreciate it.
0:01:30 I think misinformation is a challenge, as is just the amount of information that’s available
0:01:32 to the American public, right?
0:01:37 Sifting through that information, which many times can be contrary, right?
0:01:44 So if you turn on FACTS and MSNBC or you’re hearing from the incumbent or, I guess, in
0:01:49 the presidential race, there wasn’t an incumbent, although there was a current vice president
0:01:51 running against a former president.
0:01:53 So in some ways, maybe they were both kind of incumbents.
0:01:56 But when you hear from two different politicians, you’re getting completely different stories
0:01:59 about what’s going on in this country.
0:02:07 And I think that is a challenge that is driving mistrust, lack of trust in historic lack of
0:02:12 trust in every major institution in the United States, including the government.
0:02:16 And for USAVAC, our goal is to be a trusted source.
0:02:19 And we do that by making the facts accessible.
0:02:25 And our hope is that people can come to a resource to usafax.org and say, just by the
0:02:33 numbers, what is going on in this country without any spin, without any predictions or forecasts
0:02:37 or things that are designed to scare you or make you click many, many times?
0:02:41 Our goal is to ground people on the facts.
0:02:46 Well, for those of you who are listening and watching, I just want to point out a very
0:02:53 subtle thing, which is I asked her one question about misinformation and the election.
0:02:59 And she turned it into a pitch for her organization, which I really respect when people take a
0:03:05 question that I ask and then they answer it in a way that serves their purpose.
0:03:06 That is an art.
0:03:11 I learned that at Apple, so my hat’s off to you, Papi.
0:03:14 Yeah, I love it.
0:03:20 So now you explain what USAVAC does now.
0:03:27 What happens in a situation where what happens if the government doesn’t collect facts anymore?
0:03:29 There’s a lot of things that could happen.
0:03:34 So the two questions is first, what happens when the government doesn’t collect facts
0:03:35 anymore?
0:03:36 What do you do?
0:03:38 That’s an important question.
0:03:44 And part of what USAVAC does is take the government data that is accessible, technically, like
0:03:50 publicly available data, and very hard to get access to.
0:03:56 And the second part of what we do is call out when data is not there, a data that should
0:04:01 be there or data that would be very important to answer a question.
0:04:04 In some cases, that’s just we’re running behind, right?
0:04:06 Businesses run behind.
0:04:10 People run behind, and so we call it out, hey, we contact the agency and say, where
0:04:11 is that data?
0:04:13 You’re supposed to update it every year.
0:04:14 When should we expect it?
0:04:15 When is it coming?
0:04:19 So part is we’re poking at the government of it.
0:04:22 So I’ll just say it’s happened before.
0:04:25 There’s also a case where, hey, it’s not required to report that data.
0:04:32 So an example of that was we looked at rape kit testing, and there was funding that was
0:04:37 provided by the federal government to help with the backlog of rape kit tests.
0:04:42 And we wanted to see, hey, are those tests getting processed more rapidly?
0:04:44 Are people getting their answers?
0:04:48 And what we found was states weren’t reporting the data, so we started calling the states,
0:04:53 and what we found out was they weren’t required to report that data, but most of them were
0:04:54 willing to get it.
0:04:58 But we got 30 of 50 states were willing to give us that data.
0:05:01 And so we made Congress aware, hey, this is a challenge.
0:05:04 This data isn’t reporting and being reported, and we think it’s really important.
0:05:09 And bipartisan legislation was introduced to make that data available and accessible
0:05:10 to the public.
0:05:13 So that’s part of what USAFACS does.
0:05:19 I’d say the majority of our time is spent making the data that is technically available
0:05:20 accessible.
0:05:23 And part of what we do is call out when data isn’t there that should be.
0:05:26 So we’ll keep doing that guy.
0:05:31 And what’s going to happen if the government doesn’t like the data that you’re bringing
0:05:32 to light?
0:05:36 I hate to get all dystopian on you, but I’m just thinking of all the things that could
0:05:37 go wrong.
0:05:39 I think that’s a great question.
0:05:45 I would say we have worked across the Trump administration and the Biden administration,
0:05:46 and we make the data available.
0:05:51 And I don’t know that there’s ever been a time where 100% of the data coming out of
0:05:53 the government is rosy.
0:05:54 It’s a mixed picture.
0:05:59 And our goal is not to shame anyone or to praise anyone.
0:06:05 It’s simply to put the data, make it accessible, and then let Americans decide for themselves.
0:06:07 Are we headed in the right or wrong direction?
0:06:14 Can you go back in time when you guys worked with the Trump administration during COVID?
0:06:15 And how was it received?
0:06:17 What happened there?
0:06:18 Yes.
0:06:19 Thanks for asking about that.
0:06:26 So I will say in late February, early March, when there was the early outbreaks in Washington
0:06:33 State and in New York, we started hearing and seeing people expressing concern.
0:06:40 I can’t get access to reliable data about where is this outbreak occurring?
0:06:43 How dangerous is it based on where I live in these states?
0:06:45 And at the time, we had a very small team.
0:06:48 We had 13 people on staff.
0:06:52 One of my colleagues said, “Hey, I think I could get this data and make it accessible
0:06:57 and just do the hard heavy lift of calling and getting the data.”
0:07:02 And so we started collecting it, publishing it on our site, and fast forward as it spread
0:07:06 across the country, we certainly leveraged technology to make it easier.
0:07:10 But in some cases, we were still having to make phone calls or go to a Sheriff’s Facebook
0:07:12 page to get that data.
0:07:17 The Trump White House ended up making us the official source for the federal government
0:07:18 for COVID data.
0:07:21 So we were linked directly from the CDC.
0:07:26 If you saw Dr. Deborah Bricks give a briefing, you would see the USA Facts logo on the chart
0:07:27 that was shared.
0:07:32 So we felt incredibly proud to be able to do that service for our country.
0:07:37 And I think it shines a light of a challenge that USA Facts often highlights.
0:07:44 When there isn’t a reliable way of taking local data and reporting it to the state and
0:07:49 reporting it up to the federal government, it is really difficult to make decisions.
0:07:52 People need data to make good decisions in this country.
0:07:57 And we think it’s a travesty that government data isn’t more accessible.
0:08:02 And that doesn’t just look like an outbreak that happens across 3,000-some counties.
0:08:07 That looks like 90,000 government entities in the United States of America where there
0:08:13 is no standard for what data is collected, when it’s reported or how it’s reported.
0:08:18 And so part of the thing that we will advocate for is that government data should be more
0:08:20 accessible to the American public.
0:08:23 Okay, I’ve got to ask you these questions.
0:08:27 And I guarantee you, I’m not the only person that’s going to ask you these questions.
0:08:34 So now RFK Jr. is in charge of the FDA and the CDC.
0:08:38 And he’s saying that vaccines aren’t safe and you can drink raw milk and you can do
0:08:39 all these things.
0:08:46 And in that kind of world, what kind of data do you think the FDA and CDC is going to give
0:08:47 you?
0:08:48 That’s a great question.
0:08:53 We have had really great luck working with government agencies, and I don’t expect that
0:08:54 to change.
0:09:00 We worked well across the Trump and the Biden administration, and it is career civil servants
0:09:06 who’ve been there across years or decades collecting this data and making it available
0:09:07 to the public.
0:09:13 Now, the SPIN, an individual politician or a group advocating for something, may put
0:09:15 on those numbers.
0:09:20 That’s not something we can control, but what we can do is present the data, put it in context,
0:09:24 know how it’s changed over time, and allow people to make their own decisions.
0:09:32 Well, but you used the phrase “civil servant” in Project 2025 is all about reducing civil
0:09:34 service.
0:09:40 So now what happens when those civil service people are turned into loyalists?
0:09:41 I appreciate that question.
0:09:50 I will say that already reporting data is not necessarily the mandate or the mission
0:09:52 of federal agencies, right?
0:09:56 So if you look at something like the Department of Housing and Urban Development, their mission
0:10:01 is make housing affordable, provide access to affordable housing.
0:10:07 And so already it would say these agencies, part of the reason why USAFAX has to do the
0:10:13 extra work of taking that data that’s sitting on a PDF or taking that data that’s on a CD
0:10:20 and making it machine readable and understandable and analyzing it and putting it into context
0:10:24 is because our civil servants are already stretched pretty thin.
0:10:26 And what will the impact have?
0:10:31 I think it will be interesting to see how that plays out.
0:10:38 And I will say Trump having run businesses, I hope data is very important to how he’s
0:10:42 run his businesses, and it will be important to how the Trump administration thinks about
0:10:43 running the country.
0:10:49 I will say previously in the Trump administration with our 10K report, they were very interested.
0:10:55 We do this 10K, which is something that the federal government requires public companies
0:11:00 to file and to share that shows transparently what is all the data on their business.
0:11:04 And we do that on behalf of the U.S. government and it was something that we kept getting
0:11:07 additional requests from the Trump administration for.
0:11:22 We hope data will be an important part of their path forward.
0:11:29 I hate to tell you, but I haven’t even gone into my darkest mode yet, like right now I’m
0:11:30 just gray.
0:11:32 I’m going to go a little even darker here.
0:11:40 So, based on what we’re seeing going on, I could almost make the case that facts and
0:11:46 data don’t even matter because people are just looking for confirmation.
0:11:50 The confirmation bias is at the highest level, right?
0:11:54 It doesn’t matter what data and information there is, they believe what they believe and
0:11:56 they’re going to continue to believe that.
0:11:57 What do we do?
0:12:00 I appreciate that concern, right?
0:12:05 And my business is USA Facts, so I sure hope facts matter to people.
0:12:11 My signal of that is when people are aware, there is a resource they can go to for facts
0:12:13 that they do come to it.
0:12:20 So on election day, we had 450,000 people come to USA Facts to read articles about the
0:12:26 Electoral College and how many people vote and what’s going on with swing states.
0:12:30 And we have over a million people coming to our site every month.
0:12:34 We have 330,000 people who subscribe to our weekly newsletter.
0:12:36 I do think people want the facts.
0:12:40 They may not always be aware of, where can I go for those facts?
0:12:43 What is my trusted resource?
0:12:50 And I will say that we ran an experiment this election season and we recorded a series
0:12:56 of six 15-minute videos explaining the major policy issues by the numbers.
0:13:02 And I think asking busy Americans to pause and take 15 minutes to watch a video to learn
0:13:09 about immigration or healthcare or the federal debt and the budget is a lot to ask.
0:13:14 And we had over 40 million people come and watch those videos.
0:13:18 And so it does give us hope that people do want the facts, that they are interested in
0:13:20 learning that information.
0:13:25 We’re not in it to change minds, we’re in it to make the data accessible and then let
0:13:30 Americans have a hearty debate about where to go from here.
0:13:33 This is a little bit of a speed round in the middle, all right.
0:13:39 Can you just give us the gist as if we had watched those videos like on a few topics,
0:13:40 all right?
0:13:44 So give us the gist of, first of all, immigration.
0:13:46 What’s the gist of immigration?
0:13:51 The gist of immigration is looking at, first of all, what is happening?
0:13:54 How many people are legally coming to the country?
0:13:56 What’s going on with border apprehensions?
0:13:58 So border apprehensions are up.
0:14:04 I will say there was a dip that happened during COVID, where I think that that was related
0:14:07 to what was happening with the pandemic.
0:14:08 It’s come back up.
0:14:11 So there were 2.5 million border apprehensions.
0:14:15 The other thing I think is really interesting is the pending court cases.
0:14:17 There is a big backlog of people.
0:14:23 Similarly, about 2.5 million people who are waiting to have their case heard.
0:14:26 And we’re only hearing about 10% of those cases.
0:14:32 So only a couple hundred thousand are making it through the court system per year.
0:14:37 And only about 13% of those cases are granted the opportunity to remain in the country.
0:14:43 And what we’re trying to share people is what is the state of the facts on immigration and
0:14:45 allow people to make decisions for themselves.
0:14:53 Are you saying that apprehensions are up so we are under control or apprehensions are
0:14:56 up so we’re facing a flood?
0:14:58 I don’t think we know that by the data.
0:15:03 In some cases, we saw guards at the border go up and we saw apprehensions go up.
0:15:09 So you could interpret that to say, wow, we’re doing a much better job stopping people as
0:15:10 they’re trying to come across the border.
0:15:13 And so fewer people are coming into the country.
0:15:19 If you looked at the estimate that is provided of how many illegal immigrants are in this
0:15:22 country, it stayed fairly flat.
0:15:23 But it’s an estimate.
0:15:29 And so some people could also say, is that a good estimate, right?
0:15:33 Because if we’re getting more apprehensions, does that mean potentially more people are
0:15:37 trying to come across and more people are able to come into the country?
0:15:44 So I think that is one where we don’t have definitive government data to say how many
0:15:50 people are not being apprehended at the border and making their way into the country.
0:15:55 So depending where you are on the political divide, you can use that to support your case.
0:15:57 Both sides can support their case, right?
0:16:01 I would say depending where you are on the political spectrum, you could look at that
0:16:07 number and say, we need better data or we need more answers for sure.
0:16:11 We don’t have a good understanding of what’s actually happening.
0:16:12 Okay.
0:16:14 What’s the gist of the economy?
0:16:16 Are we doing better or worse?
0:16:22 GDP, which measures growth of the economy overall on a broad level for the country.
0:16:25 We’re doing better for individuals.
0:16:28 So then you would say, then why are people so frustrated?
0:16:30 The other thing we look at is for individuals.
0:16:34 We look at the median wage adjusted for inflation.
0:16:38 It is held relatively flat for the last 20 years.
0:16:41 And the costs of some goods are getting more expensive.
0:16:47 So you’ve probably heard a lot about food prices or the cost of fuel, right?
0:16:48 Cost of housing.
0:16:55 So for people who are at that median wage, the frustration of feeling like, I know the
0:16:56 economy is booming.
0:16:59 I know unemployment is low.
0:17:05 And yet I don’t feel like I can buy the same things that I used to be able to buy on my
0:17:06 income.
0:17:07 Okay.
0:17:11 The last one I’m going to ask you about is crime.
0:17:14 So is it safer or not safer to be living these days?
0:17:18 Is crime on the rise or crime falling?
0:17:19 And guess what?
0:17:23 I can already tell you that the answer is going to be depends where you are in the political
0:17:24 divide.
0:17:27 I don’t think it depends on where you are at the political divide so much potentially,
0:17:31 but it really depends when you look at the data, crime is falling.
0:17:35 But I think it comes to what I said about it depends on where you live.
0:17:39 And so I would say, and in most cases, it’s still falling.
0:17:44 But if you had the crime happen on your street, you’re really upset about it regardless of
0:17:46 what the national trend is.
0:17:52 And so one of the things we really did this year at USA Facts is give people the opportunity,
0:17:53 right?
0:17:56 They find USA Facts because we’re presenting the national number.
0:18:00 They’re probably Googling what’s happening with crime or what’s happening with housing
0:18:01 prices.
0:18:06 But when you come there and you see what’s happening for your country, that is less relevant
0:18:08 than what’s happening where you live.
0:18:13 One of the additions that we’ve added to our site is allowing people then to look at it
0:18:20 by their state, by their county, and to really localize the data so that it is more relevant
0:18:23 to the experience that person is having.
0:18:32 So I read a very interesting thing that your organization has a data boot camp for congressional
0:18:34 aids.
0:18:35 Tell me about that.
0:18:37 I want to hear about that.
0:18:39 Why does it take nine?
0:18:41 What is it, nine days or nine weeks?
0:18:42 Nine weeks.
0:18:47 Why does it take nine weeks to teach congressional aids how to deal with data?
0:18:49 Great question.
0:18:52 We have introduced a data skills for Congress class.
0:18:55 We’ve run it for two years now.
0:19:01 We’ve had just under 100 staff, Capitol Hill staff, go through the program.
0:19:07 And the reason we do it is because you have people who are helping write legislation, who
0:19:12 are helping make decisions about what is the best direction of our country.
0:19:16 And as I mentioned, it’s really hard to get access to data from the government.
0:19:19 And so we want to empower those people with the skills.
0:19:20 And it does take nine weeks.
0:19:21 Why does it take nine weeks?
0:19:25 First of all, it’s teaching, where do you go to find the data?
0:19:31 Once you find the data, how would you go about analyzing it in a way that is thoughtful
0:19:36 and accurate and how might you want to adjust it for inflation or how much you want to look
0:19:40 at it based on population, so a per capita adjustment.
0:19:45 So teaching them how to think about analyzing that data in a way that they’re going to
0:19:47 be true to what the data is saying.
0:19:51 And then how would you visualize that data so that if you’re trying to share that with
0:19:57 your constituents or you want to use something on the Senate floor to show what’s happening,
0:20:00 how would you visualize it in a way that is understandable?
0:20:04 And understanding, we also want to teach them a little bit more about the challenges with
0:20:09 government data, how there are some gaps in what’s available and how we don’t really have
0:20:12 a policy to standardize data.
0:20:15 So we, to teach all of that, it does take nine weeks.
0:20:19 It’s a big commitment, but we’ve been really thrilled with the reception we’ve received
0:20:24 and we’re actually going to double the availability of those courses next year, so it will be
0:20:26 offered two times.
0:20:28 And we do it in partnership with UC Berkeley.
0:20:36 So coming out of that program, once you graduate, the staff receive a certification from UC
0:20:39 Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy.
0:20:48 Wait, so these congressional aides, they actually in person come to school for nine weeks.
0:20:49 They live in Berkeley.
0:20:51 They don’t go to Berkeley.
0:20:57 I don’t know that we’ve had really great support from senators and representatives and their
0:21:01 chiefs of staff who are thrilled to have their team participate.
0:21:03 I don’t know they’d be thrilled to have them go away for nine weeks.
0:21:09 So we do the education mostly virtually, some in person, and we do the in person courses
0:21:11 work in Washington DC.
0:21:15 So we bring the course to them.
0:21:16 Oh, that’s great.
0:21:22 Now, in this distribution of data and stuff, and we’ve talked about slicing and context
0:21:27 and all this, how do you see LLMs playing in this game?
0:21:34 We are excited about the opportunity that AI has to empower my small but mighty team
0:21:40 to be able to tackle these 90,000 government sources of data.
0:21:45 And we also think it’s really important to have a human in the loop at all times to verify
0:21:52 the accuracy, because we’ve done some experiments with, oh, just put an LLM on top of a government
0:21:57 data set, and we were getting garbage out of that most of the time.
0:22:02 And so there is a lot of work that goes into structuring the data so that it is machine
0:22:05 readable and understandable.
0:22:09 And we’ve also leveraged AI to fact check AI.
0:22:10 Okay, great.
0:22:13 You have written the response.
0:22:19 Now go back and verify that the data provided can be mapped back to the original source.
0:22:24 And then we still have a human in the loop to ensure that facts are being delivered.
0:22:27 And I think it’s only going to get better.
0:22:31 We’re working with the U.S. Department of Commerce right now, because they were puzzled,
0:22:36 “What do you mean you spent all this time trying to make our API data machine readable
0:22:37 and understandable?”
0:22:40 We should just be doing that for you, and we’re like, “That would be amazing.
0:22:42 That would save us so much time.”
0:22:46 And we are working with the government right now to think about how to improve the way
0:22:50 they’re providing their data, not only so it’s easier for USA facts to use it, but anyone
0:22:55 who wants to leverage AI to understand and leverage that data can do so.
0:23:01 I got to tell you, I’m so curious because you’re so adept at figuring out data in the
0:23:02 context and all that.
0:23:10 What are your, Poppy McDonnell, what are your go-to sources for news?
0:23:14 So obviously, I have a little bit of a bias because I worked at Politico.
0:23:17 I worked at Atlantic Media, so I love Politico.
0:23:18 I love the Atlantic.
0:23:24 I also think it’s important to get a broad swath of coverage, right?
0:23:30 Because I think you can become bias if you’re only reading one source, no matter how strong
0:23:31 that source is.
0:23:37 So I will flip around a little bit, and I encourage my team to do it, turn on Fox for
0:23:42 a little bit, listen to Megan Kelly for a little bit, go over and listen to MSNBC for
0:23:43 a little bit.
0:23:50 I love NPR, so listen to NPR quite a bit, and I will say, I think it’s really important
0:23:56 to have a wide variety of your diet, especially for USA facts, as we’re thinking about what
0:24:00 are on people’s minds, and we’re trying to serve all Americans, no matter what media
0:24:04 they’re consuming, and ensuring that they have reliable facts.
0:24:10 So you suggest that when people really want to know what’s happening with crime or immigration
0:24:16 or any of these things, come to USA Facts, and we will have addressed that for you at
0:24:19 the state level of granularity.
0:24:27 We will get as granular as we can, so it is a big lift, but our goal is to provide data
0:24:33 that is not only as up-to-date as the government has, so the latest available government data.
0:24:38 Also our second goal is to get it as local as possible for people, and I will say it
0:24:39 is big lift.
0:24:44 As I mentioned, there are these 90,000 government entities, and there are no standards for what
0:24:49 data is collected, when it’s reported, how it’s reported, and so that can look like going
0:24:55 place by place, county by county, to collect the data, and so we’re working as hard and
0:25:00 furious as we can, and we prioritize based on what are the biggest questions people are
0:25:05 asking or wondering about, and let’s go get that data and make it accessible.
0:25:07 Can you describe it that way?
0:25:13 It sounds so inefficient, like there’s no standard and all that for government data,
0:25:17 but I got to tell you, there’s a part of me that says I like it that way, because if it
0:25:23 was all standardized and all controlled by one place, if that one place gets corrupted,
0:25:31 it’s over, but now, in a sense, it’s kind of unorganized, anarchy, it may be more powerful
0:25:32 in the long run.
0:25:33 You may not want to hear that.
0:25:36 That’s a positive spin.
0:25:41 It makes it a lot of work for people like USA facts, trying to help people understand
0:25:45 not only what’s happening where they live, but putting in context of what does it look
0:25:49 like in other places across the country or in other similar cities.
0:25:54 It’s a lot of work for us, and we know that people are collecting the data they think is
0:25:58 important to their constituents, and so they’re doing their best.
0:26:05 I would say that this is analogous to, I think it’s a source of strength and reassurance
0:26:12 that Wikipedia is organized disorganization, and if it was only one source, if it was only
0:26:19 encyclopedia Britannica is the answer has everything, it would be a more dangerous world.
0:26:27 So I have to ask you, what exactly does it mean to be nonpartisan?
0:26:28 Great question.
0:26:34 So to be nonpartisan means that we use only government data, so we go straight to the
0:26:36 source.
0:26:42 We don’t take aside, so we don’t say, and now because we’re show the data, this means
0:26:46 this is the right decision, or this is the thing that should be done.
0:26:51 So we only present the facts, and then we let people make their own decisions.
0:26:53 We don’t do any forecasting or predictions.
0:26:56 We think that’s where judgment comes into place.
0:27:02 That’s part of our mantra, and when we go to Washington D.C., it’s really important
0:27:03 to us.
0:27:05 We’re meeting with a bipartisan group of members.
0:27:11 We work across administrations, and so it means that we’re here to provide the data,
0:27:13 and we do that on behalf of all Americans.
0:27:20 And what if you do this completely properly, completely nonpartisan, but the data just
0:27:28 shows one side in a negative way, and you’re accused of being partisan because it doesn’t
0:27:32 show their preferred side in a positive way.
0:27:37 I mean, what’s the limit of nonpartisanship then?
0:27:40 At some point, the data doesn’t lie.
0:27:42 Not everybody’s going to love all the data.
0:27:43 You’re right.
0:27:53 Not one set of all-glowing data that completely supports one person’s views, right?
0:27:55 And our country is very complex.
0:27:57 We find this with the State of the Union.
0:28:03 The President is invited by Congress to deliver a State of the Union address annually, and
0:28:08 we went back and analyzed State of the Unions for the last hundred years, and it’s like,
0:28:14 no matter who is in power, the State of the Union is strong, never been stronger, and
0:28:20 we’re like, huh, I think it’s a little more complicated than that.
0:28:25 And so one of the things we did was say, hey, when people go to hear the President give
0:28:28 the State of the Union where they’re going to hear everything strong and wonderful, and
0:28:31 then they’re going to hear the rebuttal where they’re going to hear everything’s just terrible
0:28:35 and falling apart, they deserve something right down the middle, right?
0:28:39 They deserve something that’s just the facts about what is happening in this country, and
0:28:44 certainly some things are going well, and some things are trending not in a great direction.
0:28:47 And so we have a product called the State of the Union.
0:28:50 State of the Union in numbers is what we call it.
0:28:55 It’s available on our website, and we update that every year and publish it a few weeks
0:29:00 in advance of the State of the Union so that people can be able to go and look at the data
0:29:15 and keep that in mind depending on what they’re hearing from the person in office.
0:29:20 We’ve been talking about media a lot, and I want to go into your past, that political.
0:29:27 What is your assessment of the state of trust in media today?
0:29:32 If you were on threads or something, everybody hates the New York Times.
0:29:34 Everybody hates the Washington Post.
0:29:37 Everybody hates everything depending on the day.
0:29:43 Are we at a low point in the trust of media, or is it just my filter is threads and I’m
0:29:46 only hearing the worst stuff?
0:29:51 By polling numbers, USAFAQ doesn’t publish polling numbers, but we do look at polling
0:29:56 data to understand what is happening with trust in every major institution.
0:30:04 I believe by the Gallup poll, trust in media has fallen below trust in Congress, the lowest
0:30:05 it has been.
0:30:12 It’s really concerning to see what is happening in terms of the American public and their
0:30:16 belief that media is a reliable source.
0:30:21 What I would say is it’s disappointing and sad because I’ve worked in media.
0:30:23 I know how hard journalists work.
0:30:28 I could come into the newsroom at 7am or midnight, and people were buzzing and working as hard
0:30:33 as they could to make information accessible to the public, which I really believe is an
0:30:40 important mission, and that information being accessible isn’t as valuable unless people
0:30:43 trust that it’s accurate and reliable.
0:30:48 One of the things I will say that got me excited about coming to work at USAFAQ is a belief
0:30:53 that it could not only benefit the public, but it could really benefit media.
0:31:00 If they could source back to data and be able to say by the numbers, this is what we’re
0:31:01 seeing.
0:31:06 I think because media works at such a frenetic pace, oftentimes their sourcing is more qualitative.
0:31:12 It’s what this person said, and the crazier thing the person said, the more clicks it’s
0:31:16 probably going to get, and that is confusing to people.
0:31:22 It’s not reliable, and I also have empathy that somebody on a frenetic pace trying to
0:31:28 go into a PDF document and parse out the data, they don’t have time for that, and they probably
0:31:29 don’t have the skills for that.
0:31:34 I do hope that USAFAQs will also be a source for the media where they’ll go and say, “Hey,
0:31:37 we’re covering this issue, but what is the data?”
0:31:39 I’m seeing a positive trend.
0:31:43 I’m seeing more and more citations in media.
0:31:50 I’m hopeful that data can empower the media to start rebuilding trust as well.
0:31:51 You are still hopeful.
0:31:56 You don’t believe that it’s fundamentally flawed and podcasts and things like that are
0:32:00 going to take over the world of mass media.
0:32:01 I’m still hopeful.
0:32:08 I think there is a lot of quality people who are trying really hard to make information
0:32:10 accessible to the public.
0:32:17 I think grounding in the data, I’d love to hear the day when I switched to Fox and MSNBC,
0:32:20 and yes, they’re having a completely different spin, but they were grounding on the same
0:32:22 set of facts.
0:32:24 That would rebuild trust for me.
0:32:25 Okay.
0:32:27 I’m getting the same foundational information.
0:32:31 There’s just a different spin on what’s the right way forward.
0:32:32 Okay.
0:32:37 I’m going to put you on the spot again, which is, let’s pretend you are a billionaire,
0:32:44 or maybe you are a billionaire, but let’s pretend you are, but let’s say you own the
0:32:47 Washington Post.
0:32:51 Would you have let the Washington Post endorse a candidate?
0:32:57 If you wouldn’t have and you wanted to change the policy of the Washington Post endorsing
0:33:04 a candidate, when would you have let the world know that we are not going to make an endorsement?
0:33:05 That is a great question.
0:33:14 I came from the Atlantic and Politico where we didn’t have an editorial board that published
0:33:15 opinion.
0:33:22 We didn’t do opinion editorials, nor did we as a newsroom publish an opinion on an election.
0:33:29 We felt in being objective, in being nonpartisan, that was not the role of our newsroom.
0:33:31 That’s where I came from.
0:33:37 The Washington Post, the New York Times, and others have a different way of showing up.
0:33:39 Did Bezos make the right decision?
0:33:45 I think that was a controversial time to make the announcement, as you mentioned, right
0:33:47 before an election.
0:33:54 I don’t know the backstory there or why the decision was made, far be it from me to second
0:33:58 guess decisions that were made on behalf of the Washington Post, but it’s not the tradition
0:34:02 of newsrooms that I’ve been a part of.
0:34:10 Do you think it is a better way to goal that these mass media things do not endorse?
0:34:12 Is it just better conceptually?
0:34:18 I don’t think Jeff Bezos not allowing the Post to endorse a candidate really affected
0:34:20 the election, right?
0:34:29 But just backing away from 2024, is it a better practice for these publications not to endorse?
0:34:30 That is a great question.
0:34:35 I would say as a voter, one of the things that I do when I’m thinking about filling
0:34:41 out my ballot is I go right to, in this case now that I live in the Seattle area, I go
0:34:46 to the Seattle Times and read their coverage on the issue or on the candidate, and I see
0:34:47 who did they endorse.
0:34:51 It doesn’t mean that’s exactly the way I’m going to fill out my ballot, but I find it
0:34:57 a very helpful input that, hey, some thoughtful people took the time to sit down with candidates
0:35:03 or to sit down with people on both sides of a ballot initiative and to really understand
0:35:04 it.
0:35:08 I don’t have the time to go into that kind of depth, and so I really appreciate that
0:35:09 as an input.
0:35:17 At the same time, I think the media is in a tough place right now as they’ve trust has
0:35:26 eroded and potentially showing bias by taking a stake or by endorsing a candidate.
0:35:29 Is that going to hurt their credibility more?
0:35:36 Potentially, I think maybe potentially a compromise is opinion editorial where you get somebody
0:35:42 to speak out on both sides of the issue and you publish that so that your reader can see
0:35:43 both sides.
0:35:46 They aren’t somebody who works within the newsroom.
0:35:50 They’re somebody who works outside of the organization who has been deemed to be a thoughtful
0:35:54 advocate and can present their two sides thoroughly.
0:35:58 That may be a nice compromise, so people can still be informed, but it’s not the newsroom
0:36:00 making a decision.
0:36:03 I think that is a brilliant answer, actually.
0:36:07 I would have respected Jeff Bezos more if we said, “All right, so we’re not making
0:36:14 an endorsement, but we have, I don’t know, Barack Obama making a case, and we have Tucker
0:36:19 Carlson, I don’t know whoever, Joe Rogan making a case, and we’re publishing both.”
0:36:22 That would have been, I think, a much better solution for him.
0:36:28 Well, I think I’ve tried to pin you down as much as I possibly can for the last 52 minutes
0:36:30 and 34 seconds.
0:36:33 I appreciate you bearing with me.
0:36:38 I obviously had a lot of questions, and I truly appreciate what your organization does.
0:36:45 Why don’t you finish up with just one more quick explanation of what your organization
0:36:49 does and why people should use it and how they should use it, because I think it could
0:36:53 be a part of the equation of saving democracy.
0:36:54 Thank you, Guy.
0:36:59 USA Facts were dedicated to empowering Americans with the facts, and so we do that by going
0:37:06 to over a hundred government agencies and making that data accessible and understandable,
0:37:11 and so we’re looking at what are the questions Americans are asking, what’s important about
0:37:14 what’s going on in our country right now, and presenting just the data so that people
0:37:20 can make an informed decision about, “Is our country headed in the right or wrong direction?”
0:37:26 You can find that information by going to usafacts.org, or by following us on Facebook, on Instagram,
0:37:30 or TikTok, and really look forward to hopefully being a resource.
0:37:36 We also have a newsletter that goes out every week that you can subscribe to at usafacts.org.
0:37:41 Oh, my God, Poppy, you are so smooth.
0:37:49 All of you listeners and viewers, yes, we talked about data and facts and stuff today,
0:37:55 but today was also a lesson in how to be a guest on a podcast, which is you take whatever
0:38:00 question and you turn it to your advantage, and you say, “That is a great question, why
0:38:06 you’re thinking about the answer,” and all this kind of, “I love this, Poppy.
0:38:09 You’re my new hero and podcast guest here.”
0:38:14 Thanks for having me on, Guy, I really appreciate the conversation.
0:38:18 So listen, I just want to thank everybody for listening, and Poppy and Caitlyn, and
0:38:23 thank you for making this happen, and Madison Nismar is our ace producer and co-author,
0:38:28 and Tessa Nismar is our researcher, and we have Jeff C. and Shannon Hernandez, who’s
0:38:34 making this come out really beautifully, so that’s remarkable people, and I want to thank
0:38:44 you for listening or watching, and until next week, mahalo and aloha.
0:38:46 This is Remarkable People.