E104: “Shoveling cultural snow,” or: Season’s greetings from AI Slop Summer
On today's show, Alex and Calvin continue their series on “AI” and public discourse, focusing this time on the increasing proliferation of AI applications in government writing, policy, and social media. We characterize the second Trump administration as the "first totally post-AI presidency," which has adopted the "dumbest, most unreflective, most uncritical approach" to AI's use in communication, research, and analysis. Throughout the show, we emphasize how AI technologies are themselves rhetorical artifacts at the same time as they so often produce “bad” rhetoric, reflecting the intentions, values, and presuppositions of their creators, as well as the inherent biases of their training data and text generation models. This often results in an entry-level, overly dense writing style - often referred to as "slop" - which is almost written not to be read, but rather to fill space.We explore several concerning examples of AI's uncritical adoption by the secondTrump administration and their acolytes in the tech world. Early executive orders exhibited AI-generated formatting errors and formulaic, generic language, demonstrating a context-blind style that could lead to legal problems and erode public trust. Furthermore, the "MAHA Report" from the Office of Health and Human Services was found to fabricate studies and misrepresent findings, reflecting how large language models are "sycophantic," and can reinforce existing (often false) beliefs. Our discussion also covers Palantir's "Foundry" product, which aims to combine diverse government datasets, raising significant privacy and political concerns, especially given the political leanings of Palantir’s founders. Finally, we examine xAI’s Grok chatbot (run by Elon Musk), which illustrates how tech elites can exert incredible political power through direct interventions in AI tools’ system prompts - which in recent months has led Grok to parrot conspiracy theories and make explicit antisemitic remarks on the public feeds of X/Twitter.Ultimately, our analyses emphasizes - once again - that these so-called “AI” technologies are not neutral; they are, in the words of Matteo Pasquinelli, "crystallization[s] of a productive social process" that "reinforce the power structure that underlies [them]," perpetuating existing inequalities. Understanding these mechanisms and engaging in what Pasquinelli terms "de-connectionism" - undoing the social and economic fabric constituting these systems - is essential for critiquing the structural factors and power dynamics that AI reproduces in public discourse.Have any questions or concerns about this episode? Reach out to our new custom-tuned chatbot, @Bakh_reverb on X/Twitter!Examples Analyzed in this Episode:Trump Admin Accused of Using AI to Draft Executive Ordershttps://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-admin-accused-using-ai-191117579.htmlEryk Salvaggio - “Musk, AI, and the Weaponization of ‘Administrative Error’” https://www.techpolicy.press/musk-ai-and-the-weaponization-of-administrative-error/ Emily Kennard & Margaret Manto (NOTUS) - “The MAHA Report Cites Studies That Don’t Exist” - https://archive.ph/WVIrT Sheera Frenkel & Aaron Krolik (NYT) - “Trump Taps Palantir to Compile Data on Americans” https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/30/technology/trump-palantir-data-americans.htmlDavid Klepper - “Gabbard says AI is speeding up intel work, including the release of the JFK assassination files” https://apnews.com/article/gabbard-trump-ai-amazon-intelligence-beca4c4e25581e52de5343244e995e78Miles Klee - “Elon Musk’s Grok Chatbot Goes Full Nazi, Calls Itself ‘MechaHitler’” - https://archive.ph/SdoJn Works & Concepts Cited in this Episode:Bakhtin, M. M. (2010). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. University of Texas Press.Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code (1st ed.). Polity.Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021, March). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?🦜. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 610-623).Our previous episode with Dr. Bender about her workBurke, K. (1984). Permanence and change: An anatomy of purpose. Univ of California Press.Burke, K. (1965). Terministic screens. In Proceedings of the American Catholic philosophical association (Vol. 39, pp. 87-102).DeLuca, L. S., Reinhart, A., Weinberg, G., Laudenbach, M., Miller, S., & Brown, D. W. (2025). Developing Students’ Statistical Expertise Through Writing in the Age of AI. Journal of Statistics and Data Science Education, 1-13.Haggerty, K. D., & Ericson, R. V. (2017). The surveillant assemblage. Surveillance, crime and social control, 61-78.Hill, K. (2025, 13 June). “They Asked an A.I. Chatbot Questions. The Answers Sent Them Spiraling.” The New York Times.Markey, B., Brown, D. W., Laudenbach, M., & Kohler, A. (2024). Dense and disconnected: Analyzing the sedimented style of ChatGPT-generated text at scale. Written Communication, 41(4), 571-600.Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly journal of speech, 70(2), 151-167.Murakami, H. (1994). Dance dance dance : a novel (1st ed.). Kodansha International.Pasquinelli, M. (2023). The eye of the master: A social history of artificial intelligence. Verso Books.Reinhart, A., Markey, B., Laudenbach, M., Pantusen, K., Yurko, R., Weinberg, G., & Brown, D. W. (2025). Do LLMs write like humans? Variation in grammatical and rhetorical styles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(8), e2422455122.An accessible transcript for this episode can be found here (via Descript)
E103: No (More) War with Iran!
In this episode – recorded prior to Trump’s announcement of a ceasefire between Iran and Israel – Calvin and Alex unpack the alarming reality of US strikes on Iran, recently announced by President Trump on June 21, and the ensuing escalation of tensions between the US, Israel, and Iran. We situate these recent events within decades of neoconservative influence and prior escalations, including the 2020 assassination of Qasem Soleimani by US Forces (which we covered back in Episode 31), as well as Israel’s “pre-emptive” strikes against Iran in 2024 and earlier in June 2025.We historicize the current conflict by highlighting the success of the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA) in preventing escalation, contrasting it with Trump's abandonment and the Democrats' failure to defend it, and debunk media narratives about Iran's nuclear ambitions, confirming Iran's compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). We then dissect the propagandistic pro-war rhetoric that has been employed most recently, such as Trump's bizarre Truth Social posts announcing the "very successful attack," and exposing the dangerous slippages between US and Israeli foreign policy, evidenced by Senator Ted Cruz's admissions on a recent episode of Tucker Carlson’s show.Finally, drawing on rhetorical scholars such as Jeffrey Tulis and Gordon Mitchell, we explore the libidinal urges driving contemporary presidential rhetoric and US war policy, and how intelligence is manipulated through "Team B intelligence coups," raising concerns about reliance on foreign intelligence like the Mossad. We conclude with a resolute call (echoing our earlier episode) for "No war with Iran," urging public dissent against these increasingly reckless and dangerous decisions.Works and concepts cited in this episode:Curtis, A. (2002). The Century of the Self. London, UK: BBC Four.Daly, C. (2017). How Woodrow Wilson’s Propaganda Machine Changed American Journalism. Smithsonian Magazine. Esfandiari, S. (2020, 6 Jan.). Iran can't hit back over Soleimani's killing because America has only fictional heroes like SpongeBob SquarePants, a prominent cleric said. Business Insider.Flanagan, J. C. (2004). Woodrow Wilson's" Rhetorical Restructuring": The Transformation of the American Self and the Construction of the German Enemy. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 7(2), 115-148.Haar, R. (2010). Explaining George W. Bush's adoption of the Neoconservative agenda after 9/11. Politics & Policy, 38(5), 965-990.IAEA Director General. (2024, 19 Nov.). Verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015). [IAEA report raising concerns about Iran’s stockpile of “60% enriched” uranium]Mitchell, G. R. (2006). Team B intelligence coups. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 92(2), 144-173.Oddo, J. (2014). Intertextuality and the 24-hour news cycle: A day in the rhetorical life of Colin Powell's UN address. Michigan State University Press.Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Trans. John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. University of Notre Dame Press.Porter, G. (2014, 16 Oct.). When the Ayatollah said no to nukes. Foreign Policy.Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon.Tulis, J. K. (1987, 2017). The Rhetorical Presidency. Princeton University Press.
E102: Escape from the University of the Cancelled
In this episode, Alex and Calvin return to a favorite hobby horse: the University of Austin (UATX). First discussed back in episode 62, this ultra-conservative "university concept" is still not accredited and has no undergraduate degrees planned until at least 2028-2031. In that previous episode, we described UATX variously as right-wing academia’s answer to the Fyre Festival and a pitch deck/PowerPoint scam masquerading as an education; this time, we call it a fast-casual university concept (Chipotle for higher ed). We catch up with the myriad ways that UATX continues to struggle under the weight of its own internal contradictions, while occasionally benefitting from being confused for UT Austin (home of some of our favorite previous guests, like Scott Graham and Karma Chávez).After taking stock of US free speech generally in the age of seemingly intractable US-led conflicts in the Middle East and the criminalization of student peace activism, we examine a Quillette article from Ellie Avishai asking if UATX is betraying its founding principles. As Avishai explains, her UATX research center was terminated in response to her posting a rather benign (and ideologically nuanced) LinkedIn post about DEI. We discuss how UATX's claims of championing academic freedom and viewpoint diversity necessarily conflict with its increasingly extreme anti-woke conservative agenda. Given that it is bankrolled by dark money funders and figures connected to corporate interests and political power like Harlan Crow and Joe Lonsdale, the institution appears more dedicated to fortifying right-wing ideas and providing a filter bubble than fostering genuine free inquiry. This makes it particularly ironic that its corporate doublespeak response to Avishai's termination was to use language like "wind up Mill" and "restructure." In these ways, UATX seems to combine the worst of mainstream academia (neoliberal austerity measures justified through corporate doublespeak) with new heights of conservative radicalism. Drawing on Noah Rawlings' piece in The New Inquiry, we peek into the "Forbidden Courses" summer program held at Harlan Crow's Old Parkland office complex in Dallas, where figures like Peter Boghossian and Katie Roiphe hold court. What does it mean for a university to exist primarily as a "safe space" isolating students from opposition, or worse, a "money and influence laundering operation for some of the most abhorrent ideas" (as Alex calls it)? We conclude that despite the real structural flaws in mainstream academia, the pursuit of knowledge and evidence-based argumentation is still vital in higher ed, but it’s something that UATX seems fundamentally opposed to.Articles Analyzed in this Episode“Is the University Of Austin Betraying Its Founding Principles?” by Ellie Avishai (in Quillette)“An American Education: Notes from UATX” - Noah Rawlings (in The New Inquiry)Previous Episodes ReferencedE62: re:joinder - The University of the CancelledWorks and Concepts CitedVan Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & society, 4(2), 249-283.
E101: Discourse & Manipulation pt. 4 - The Economic Assumptions of "Liberation Day"
On today’s show, Alex and Calvin – briefly rebranded as Kenneth Jerke and Mikhail Shocktin, co-hosts of "Shock Docs" – explore the state of rhetorical manipulation in the context of the second Trump presidency. We discuss the general ineptitude of the conservative movement occupying the White House and the unsettling lack of a powerful counter-rhetoric in the Democratic opposition, before turning to analyze Trump's tariff policy. We discuss how the tariff conversation is a particularly baffling current example in which raw power seems to be operating without legitimation through traditional rhetorical norms.Applying a Critical Discourse Studies lens to understand this moment, we revisit concepts like dialogicality from Mikhail Bakhtin, explaining how discourse can be evaluated based on whether it opens up difference (ie. to what extent it is dialogical) or suppresses difference. We introduce assumptions analysis from Norman Fairclough, which examines what a writer/speaker takes for granted as truth (existential, propositional, and values assumptions) and assumptions can reduce dialogical space for manipulative purposes. As a case study, we analyze an article by left-punching journalist Batya Ungar Sargon titled "Liberation Day puts Main Street ahead of Wall Street" (published in Commonplace). We analyze the ways that Ungar Sargon’s manipulative assumptions reframe Trump's tariffs as beneficial for the American worker by ignoring corporate interests and tax policy, misrepresenting political history, and erasing important debates over national security and border policy issues. We conclude with a reminder that it’s always better to be a Mikhail Shocktin than a Kenneth Jerke. Texts Analyzed in this EpisodeBatya Ungar Sargon - “Liberation Day puts main street ahead of Wall Street” (published in Commonplace)Works Referenced in this EpisodeFairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse (Vol. 270). London: Routledge.Relevant Past EpisodesDiscourse and Manipulation, Pt. 3Discourse and Manipulation, Pt. 2Discourse and Manipulation, Pt. 1re:blurb - Conceptual Metaphorre:blurb - Dialogicalityre:blurb - IdeographsAn accessible transcript of this episode can be found here (via Descript)Episode Image Description: Top text: "re:verb"; Left-center image includes a picture of Critical Discourse scholar Norman Fairclough with a laser beam shooting out of his left eye towards right center image; Right-center image is offset, includes a screenshot of an article titled "Liberation Day Puts Main Street Ahead of Wall Street"; Bottom text: "Discourse & Manipulation pt. 4 - The Economic Assumptions of "Liberation Day""
E100: Making the Human: Race, Allegory, and Asian Americans (w/ Dr. Corinne M. Sugino)
Today’s episode features our rich conversation with Dr. Corinne Mitsuye Sugino, Assistant Professor in the Department of English and Center for Ethnic Studies at The Ohio State University, about her compelling new book, Making the Human: Race, Allegory, and Asian Americans. On the show, Alex and Calvin are joined by guest co-host Dr. Sarah Hae-In Idzik to talk with Corinne about her multifaceted analyses of the role of Asian American racialization in the construction of the concept of the human. We delve into Corinne’s concept of "racial allegory," which illuminates how media and institutional narratives mobilize categories of difference, including Asian Americans, to stabilize the idea of "Western man".Our discussion touches upon the significance of the title Making the Human, unpacking how Asian American racialization and gendering contribute to the social formulation of the human. We explore key concepts such as the understanding of "Western man" drawn from Black Studies scholarship, while also examining the crucial relationship that Corinne charts between anti-Asian racism and anti-Blackness within communication and rhetoric studies. Corinne also explains how she applies the notion of racial allegory to a case study on Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, revealing how anti-racist discourse can be used to uphold racial hierarchies, and the strategic role of the victimized Asian student trope in this context. Furthermore, we analyze Corinne’s intercontextual reading of the film Crazy Rich Asians alongside Daniel Patrick Moynihan's “The Negro Family” report, exploring allegories of family and mothering and the underlying racial narratives at play. Our discussion also considers the significance of animacy and the inhuman in relation to the boundaries of the human, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the racialization of Asian Americans as potential disease carriers. Finally, we reflect upon Corinne’s nuanced perspective on the term "Asian American" itself, considering its complexities and its potential as a resource for undoing categories and fostering coalition.Corinne Mitsuye Sugino’s Making the Human: Race, Allegory, and Asian Americans is available now from Rutgers University Press.Works and Concepts Referenced in this Episode:Chen, M. Y. (2012). Animacies: Biopolitics, racial mattering, and queer affect. Duke University Press.Jackson, Z. I. (2020). Becoming human: Matter and meaning in an antiblack world. New York University Press.Johnson, J. (2016). “A man’s mouth is his castle”: The midcentury fluoridation controversy and the visceral public. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 102(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2015.1135506Maraj, L. M. (2020). Anti-racist campus rhetorics. Utah State Press.Molina, N. (2014). How race is made in America: Immigration, citizenship, and the historical power of racial scripts. Univ of California Press.Moynihan, D. P. (1965). The Negro family, a case for national action. United States Department of Labor, Office of Policy Planning and Research.Spillers, H. J. (1987). Mama's baby, papa's maybe: An American grammar book. diacritics, 17(2), 65-81.Wynter, S. (1994). “ ‘No humans involved’: An open letter to my colleagues.” Forum N.H.I.: Knowledge for the 21st Century, 1(1), 1–17.Wynter, S. (2003). “Unsettling the coloniality of being/power/truth/freedom: Towards the human, after man, its overrepresentation—An argument.” CR: The New Centennial Review, 3(3), 257–337.Wynter, S., & McKittrick, K. (2015). “Unparalleled catastrophe for our species? Or, to give humanness a different future: Conversations.” In K. McKittrick (Ed.), Sylvia Wynter: On being human as praxis (pp. 9–89). Duke University Press.da Silva, D. F. (2007). Toward a global idea of race. University of Minnesota Press.An accessible transcript for this episode can be found here (via Descript)