nd that you paid a thousand dollars for, whatever the price was. That's like the worst thing that could ever happen to a company. Well we made a handheld object you just can't hold it in your hand. That's the only problem. Otherwise it's really spiffy. Doesn't make phone calls and it's a phone but otherwise really good. That's a big problem, right?

Here's how Steve Jobs handled it which became the stuff of legends. It was actually written about in his autobiography and sort of a big deal. Steve Jobs got on a call with all the journalists. He said, and I'm paraphrasing but this is the basic idea, he said also all smartphones have problems. We want to make our customers happy. And then he said here's what we're going to do. And the next day because he had reframed it as all smartphones have problems, the press instead of killing Apple for having a phone that had a problem they started doing stories about all smartphones had problems. It completely worked.

Now I don't know if Apple helped seed those stories but the net effect of it was it really worked. And here is the form that Steve Jobs used. Number one, reframe. He reframed iPhone as a problem to all smartphones have problems. Good technique. Number two, he showed empathy. We want to make our customers happy. A very direct statement about his customers. It wasn't about the company. It wasn't about Steve Jobs. He reframed it and he said we want you to be happy. Then he said we're going to do this to make you happy. And then he said his solution. Very simple. Perfect handling.

All right, so let me show you the frame again because we're going to show you this frame a second time. You reframe it, you show empathy, and then you give the solution. Reframe, empathy, solution.

Now I don't believe, I think the story is that Steve Jobs did not come up with that himself. I believe he got it from, and I forget the name of it, it was a PR executive who was an expert at that. Somebody will tell me in the comments if you've read the biography of Jobs. Anyway, so Steve Jobs had some help from an expert but Steve Jobs was an expert too on this. Somebody will say the name of it. Is it McKenna? McKesson? McKenna? I don't know. It doesn't matter but it was a professional who was good at it.

Now let's talk about Joe Rogan's thing. Joe Rogan basically said, and today actually, not, write that down, I don't think that's possible. So here's how he started. His first reframe was he talked about his show being a conversation that grew big unexpectedly. I'm paraphrasing now but he says I'm just talking to people about stuff that's interesting to me and that it grew into this big thing. And so that's the context. The context is I'm not the news, right? That's pretty important because the context is that you know allegedly misinformation. So the first frame is this is just a conversation of something interesting, not the news. Now he didn't say I'm not the news but that's the context.

So he reframes it and he said basically there's no agenda. It's just interesting stuff. And he also talked about how the experts he's had on, some of them would have been banned, and he claims four things that in the end ended up being right. So that he gives you further context that says how many times he has specific examples of people who said things that the mainstream would have said no that's dangerous and then they turned out to be right. So that's good context.

All right, so like Jobs, Joe Rogan reframes the situation. Then he shows empathy. He basically agrees with his critics. And then he tells you what he's going to do about it. Reframe, empathy, solution. Perfect.

Now the solution would be, he said that he probably does need to get an expert who disagrees with some of the provocative people, get them on close to when the provocative person was. And he said that he does his own scheduling and that he needs to do that more. I don't want to say better but he just wants to pair the differing opinions so they're a little closer together, which is a form of what I'd been suggesting as well. Now I thought it's even better if they're there at the same time but maybe that's hard to manage. But the next best thing is to show the expert and then the counter expert be as close as possible. So he's at least acknowledged the nature of the complaints and then he offered some solutions. And then he also said he'd prepare better for some of the types of experts.

Now here's David Smith. "Scott loves sucking up to Big Pharma sheep. Rogan is accepting a misinformation tag on his show." All right, the people who only see things as like weak or sheep, you're like binary idiots. So get rid of this binary idiot. Goodbye. All right, you've got to handle a little bit of nuance to enjoy this live stream.

All right, so I would say here's my speculation. One of the things that Joe Rogan gets right is what I'll call the Norm Macdonald theory of comics, comedians. That is, Norm Macdonald explained once, I saw it on a video recently, that you don't want to act smarter than your audience. You want to act dumber than your audience but maybe, I think I'm adding this part, but maybe surprise them that your stuff hangs together better than they think. Joe Rogan does an insanely good job of what a good comic does. And remember he's got this whole talent stack working, you know, stand-up comic and then plus all the other skills, acting, blah blah. So I don't know how much is knowing what systems work and borrowing them. I don't know how much is natural. Can't read minds. But when you see one of the things that makes Joe Rogan so popular is he doesn't ever let himself look like he's smarter than you. That is sort of genius because it is a hard thing to do. If you think maybe you've got some of your success because you were smart, you'd have to think that in his private moments he might have some positive thoughts about his own intelligence. It got him where he is right now.

Here's my take. I'll make this conditional. My guess is that when the thing blew up with Spotify and Joe Rogan, that he's now playing at a corporate level, I hate to say it but because Spotify is involved there's sort of a corporate element to this, it would surprise me if Spotify did not offer to give him some professional crisis management PR advice via somebody like Steve Jobs got the advice. So my guess is that in both cases Steve Jobs and Joe Rogan got advice from the best advice givers you could possibly get advice from. But that's not good enough, right? Because if most people got the greatest advice in the world they wouldn't recognize it. They wouldn't recognize it as good advice. You have to be pretty smart to even recognize it. And then secondly they couldn't implement it because it takes a lot of communication skill and most important reserve, like to hold back all of your normal instincts to give the perfect three-part response that both of them did.

So here's the thing. If Joe Rogan got advice from an expert he did a really good job of following the advice, like really good. But if Joe Rogan came up with this spontaneously, which has the look of it, it has the look of something where he'd been thinking about it for a while, picked up his phone and then gave you ten minutes of perfection, that could have happened. I don't know. And I would love to know because if he did that spontaneously after thinking about it a lot of course, but if that was one take spontaneous and he hit the three elements that cleanly, that is one of the smartest things you've ever seen in your life. That would be just insanely smart. And the amount of skill that would go into that, it would be hard to imagine. So I would just love to know. I don't know if he'll ever talk about it but I'd be real curious if he got expert advice or if that was just spontaneous. That would be really interesting.

From Reuters, this came from Reuters, and it reported that Ivermectin was effective against Omicron in a phase three trial. Wow. Wow. That's big news. Everybody's saying bad things about Ivermectin but here's Reuters today saying that Ivermectin in a Japanese study that is effective. It is effective against Omicron in a phase three trial. Holy cow. Wow.

That fake news lasted I believe less than one minute. It's not true. It took me one minute to say well that's a pretty vague claim because you look at it and there's no link to a study. It just looked obviously untrue because I could see the machinery now. I didn't really have to break it down or anything. I just looked at it. I just looked at the story and I said well that's somewhat transparently not true.

Now I'm not talking about Ivermectin. This has nothing to do with Ivermec