The information on this podcast might very well be fascinating but I cannot process pieces of phrases connected by the word ârightâ that then stream into future and past tense at the equivalent of a 1.5 speed setting. Itâs so irritatingly millennial that I eventually turn it off.
I look forward to the show every Tue & Fri, because I know the conversation will delve deeper than the absurd scandals/headlines that dominate our news cycle. The guests are honest about the fact that their political sensibilities arenât those of the National Review, but even as someone with a more centrist view, I find the analysis credible and often bitingly funny.
It's true that the hosts' over-dependence on certain words is hard not to notice when you first start listening, but this really is one of the best political podcasts around.
I like Ezra Kleinâs podcast, this is not on that level at all
I'm such a political junkie that I want more weeds. This is why I especially like Chris Hayes' podcast because he can't get that deep into anything on his cable show. Maybe this is an age thing, but 2 out of the 3 people I hear on The Weeds use 'like' in every sentence - sometimes 2 or 3 times. So, I find myself so distracted counting and being annoyed by the over-use of this word that the content gets lost.
Iâve liked this show for a long time but the content has gone down hill. Mostly, Iâm really tired of Matt cutting off his women co-workers in order to repeat their ideas (in a less nuanced ways). Also, I have less interest in the white papers that theyâre choosing to discuss. It might be because I feel like the crew is less prepared to talk about it, and they provide some pretty simplistic responses to them.
This is a great podcast to learn the details & backstories behind the important news stories of the day. I like that links are provided for follow up reading/listening/viewing. I took off a star, however, because Matt uses âlikeâ more than a suburban eighth grader. If this makes me a cranky old lady, so be it.
Great podcast! Everyone complaining about Mattâs voice is a cranky old person.
Please for the love of God stop saying âlikeâ every other word. Also, stop ending every sentence with an upward vocal intonation indicating a question when it isnât. You sound like a mid 90âs teenage girl from some WASP-y suburb in Southern California.
Okay, so I want to start by saying this is a great podcast. Most of the shows they have the ability to really go into the weeds of the subject. When they do I feel informed and better off. Other times, like when they discussed the low birth rate in the US, I felt like I understood the problem better than they did. It took them almost 40 minutes before they discussed the healthcare costs of having a baby. They didnât get to the medical costs of children period, or dental care. And they never discussed how income levels havenât been rising as fast as inflation. This isnât the only topic I think they failed. I also have many issues with Sarah. She has a hard time on really delving into a lot of issues. This Vox team does best when they are only discussing âboringâ policy. I find those policy issues are their strong point. Especially, for people that already know a little more than the basics of the âboringâ policy. I just wish Sarah could expand her thinking because she can circle around and around one point of a subject to the point where I just start skipping what she says. When I do I find I havenât missed much.
This is the first podcast review I have ever written, and I have a lot to say. First, I love this podcast, and especially the thoughtful and well-spoken women. But I have one problem that I can no longer keep quiet about. I feel bad saying something this negative, so I come to you both with a complaint and a few proposed solutions. First, the complaint: Matt Iglesias has the single worst podcast voice I have ever heard in all my life. It makes me want to crash my car over the side of the 110 so I can escape his shrill, high pitched, canât get a sentence out without saying âlikeâ voice. Plus, heâs generally less interesting yet more talkative than his brilliant female cohosts, which just makes all this seem much worse because I have to listen to his horrible screech when I could be hearing interesting discourse delivered by people with normal human voices. Now that Iâve expressed my anger at this, I have to offer solutions so that this isnât just a vicious nothing. (Also, Iâm sorry Matt. But Iâm sure youâve heard it before, and you must have thick skin if youâre in this line of work. Please take this as constructive criticism. I want to like you, really). Possible solutions to fix the problem of Mattâs horrific voice:1. Autotune him to keep his pitch constant2. Offer him voice and speech lessons 3. Only allow him to speak for 20% of any given podcast4. Provide an auto-silencing function for whenever he speaks 5. Have him wear a voice altering device to make him sound like Batman or Darth Vader, either of which would be more bearable than hearing his shrill âI THINK THAT like what Iâm about to say is a real important point?â Again, thank you all, especially Dara and Sarah, for this great podcast. Please help me enjoy it more by helping your colleague Matt be more tolerable to listen to. Sincerely, Concerned Listener
Always a great listen for anyone interested in policy.
Their treatment on the intellectual dark web was horrendous particularly on Jordan Peterson. If they actually took a few minutes to listen to Jordan Peterson theyâd realize he isnât the hateful guy they portray him to be. The hosts like to go on long tangents full of flowery words that no one uses day to day to sound like theyâre so intellectually superior, but the truth is theyâre just as linked to confirmation bias as anyone else is.
Don't get me wrong. Content is first rate. Never the less I can only endure a limited amount of time listening to the vocally bizare speech of Matt. Why is this man screeching leading syllables as if he is sitting on a tack. Please Matt get some voice coaching. Is your weirdness the result of being cutoff endlessly so you have to squeal in such an ugly manner. Emily Bazalon was able to pull herself together and so can you. The art of public speaking certainly should have some respect for your audience to the extent you are willing to get off this ragged edge. Until then only occasioanlly will I summon the patience to listen to The Weeds without fast forwarding through Matt contributions.
This is an actual quote from their podcast. â[Conservatives who get their speeches cancelled by violent riots] is not censorship, it just means they have to try to find other avenues to get their message acrossâ The phrase âyou should be ashamedâ gets thrown around a lot but really, no matter what your political ideology, that is an extremely shameful thing to say.
this podcast has always been a little left leaning and , well, thats ok. I consider myself left leaning, though I'm not really trying to just hear echos of what I believe in already - but the policy details were worth it - but lately this thing has gone SO FAR into the SJW direction, theres barely any unbaised policy coverage left in here. Matt now just throws in marxist presumptions about business and the economy as a matter of course and it really feels like it's gone off the rails since Ezra went on break. Very sad. Had to unsubscribe after a good few episodes of just.... nonsense. Cant tell if this is a policy podcast or just TUMBLR now
Ezra Kleinâs parenthetical speaking style is maddening. And do all of his sentences have to sound like theyâre spoken by a teenaged Valley Girl? Sheesh.
...but I'm starting to only be able to hear that Matt makes every statement as a question? Yes, he does? It's not a question? But every, single, sentence he raises his voice? So it hangs like a question? It's the timid equivalent of all caps? It's making me crazy.
I really love this show. Itâs fast become my favorite pod. Please get rid of the âlikes.â Once you notice, you canât get away from them and the make it difficult to concentrate on the facts and great insights. Like, itâs so annoying.
The best of Vox is when they take the time to explain a very specific issue, why it's important, and what arguments are going on/should be going on about it. The worst of Vox is when they get away from that level of rigor, which seems to happen often when they make a podcast that's 50%+ making fun of a group of politicians. Today Explained and the Impact get closer to the best of Vox than the Weeds does.
I find the content interesting but one of the podcasters says the word "like" so much I found it almost comical. I started imaging if I had to take a shot for every "like" he uttered I'd be wasted.
Love Ezra, Matt and Sarah. They feel like my smartest friends all together for drinks but smarter and with no drinking. Look forward to this and the Slate Political Gabfest every week!
Love the in-depth discussion, but I find Matthew Yglesiasâ constant interruptions (often of the women on the pod) and endless, mansplaining monologues exhausting.
I think the subjects are interesting but I would urge the host to please not frame every statement as a question and with a lot of likes and you knows and rights ??Itâs hard to listen these topics inflected in the ditzy millennial accent.
Love the weeds. Matt is the best. Data Lind is killing it on hosting. #BetterThanEzra
Talking over each other while raising you voice to be heard. This seems to be a new thing. Itâs killing my ears and Iâm constantly having to increase and then decrease the volume. I absolutely love you all and really enjoy you pod cast. I enjoy hearing your opinions and how you discuss current issues.
I mean, I want to give it four, like, stars because it actually is, like, sort of a smart and informative show, right? Like, with kind of, like, great hosts...right? They just, I mean, have some, like, bad habits. I mean, like, despite my sort of, like, constant, reflexive, sphincter clenching, I do, right, like, actually recommend kind of, like, subscribing, right?
Discussion is interesting, but the over use of âlikeâ in almost every sentence is distracting and like irritating.
Though I miss Matt's and Ezra's back-and-forths now that Ezra is on book leave, the new back-and-forths over Max Weber's relevance to the Trump Era between Matt and Dara Lind are if anything even better. This is still my favorite podcast to listen to on long drives and while running.And don't listen to people who complain about Matt's verbal tics.
Dara Lind is an intelligent, talented voice though more of a distraction than accentuation to The Weeds. Maybe a format like Ezraâs show would work or possibly a duo, but she does not seem to thrive in a three person format. I miss that excited feeling I used to get when a new episode was posted. Now I listen to maybe half of the shows with less interest.
I love this podcast because it gives context to what's going on in the news by explaining the nitty gritty (but relevant) details. A recent podcast about Sinclair Broadcastings media consolidation involved going back to when TV stations were first being established and explaining how TV affiliate licensing works. Extremely educational and informative podcast.
Great policy details, very insightful and generally entertaining but the presentation and consensus is largely one sided. I think the show would do better appealing to everyone if they could have even moderately more objectivity.
The journalist feels compelled to say "right?" at the end of almost every sentence. So irritating and not very intelligent. Does he not trust what he has to say?
In an age of sound bites, it's nice to spend an hour listening to smart people dig into and dissect policy details.
I've been a long-time listener, but just wanted to applaud the team on the second-to-latest episode, particularly the first portion on research related to racial mobility. I thought the topic was analyzed and presented in a very articulate and thoughtful way, and it only served to make me love this podcast even more!!
For a group of privileged white folks, they have some decent debates on todayâs issues.
What can I say, I'm a Weedsy sort of person. If you had told me that a McNeil Lehrer type podcast, only even more focused on wonky details, could be this engaging, I'd have said no, not possible. But that's what they've done here. I love all 3 of the original hosts but ultinately I think this podcast reflects Yglesias' sensibility above all. I think that's why he appears on both of the weekly editions. Thumbs up!!
Matt Yglesias is great. Thanks!
The in-depth policy talk, of course, is bar none. On top of that, I love the latter half of the podcast with some of the more interesting and obscure white papers that Iâve come across. Keep up the good work.
It is very informative, but the thing that sets this podcast apart is when Matt Yglesias TRIES to give right wing talking points the benefit of the doubt. You can hear his voice get slower and higher pitched, and he often finishes without bursting into laughter. I hope the rest of the crew appreciates him as much as I do.
This is a great podcast but once a week is enough. I love it, then two of the hosts were spun off into their own podcasts and this one went twice weekly (plus whatever promo episodes of other podcasts they throw into your feed). In depth discussion and great detail, and I love Matt but I had to give it up so I could listen to other podcasts. They all make this same mistake: just because it is good doesnât mean we want it more often; we just want it to STAY good. There is only so much time in a day and when you quadruple the content I have to give up three other podcasts to stay with it. Not worth it, even as good as this show is.:(
It isnât adding value. I want to hear educated dialogue; the soundtrack is unnecessary, confusing and distracting. This is why I stopped listening to Today Explained almost immediately.
This podcast has the promise of elevated thinking and clear headed analysis. Unfortunately it fails on both accounts. Itâs a very insular podcast where they put forth the best arguments that Democrats have while occasionally offering the worst arguments from Republicans (if they even bother to offer their side at all). One of the hosts, Matthew Yglesias, is so constantly vulgar and insulting towards those he disagrees with, one almost starts wonder how he can muster so much anger day after day. They definitely need a more moderate addition to their group that can offer reasoned insight and analyses. This would help the listener, but most of all it would help the other hosts.
while i like the information, i cannot listen to the dudes voice. every time he goes into falsetto i lose interest and get so distracted that i find something else to listen to. i am now unsubscribed. ð¥
I really look forward to these podcast to explain the subject and talk through the complex issues. Thanks!
One of the best podcasts to dive into the details of policymaking in Washington! I appreciate how Ezra, Matt, Sarah and the Vox team provide a deeper understanding of policy issues and current events, rather than focus on palace intrigue stories and speculation that dominates political coverage.
Such smart and well read individuals are on this podcast! This was exactly what I was looking for in order to get my political analysis fix. This podcast is a definite recommend
Diving deep into important topics is highly rewarding. In these chaotic times, The Weeds helps me understand what's at stake in the policy issues that our politicians are (usually) screwing up.