0:00

ABC Listen podcasts,

0:02

radio, news, music and

0:04

more. Put

0:11

it in, drop out and

0:13

then drop thousands of dollars on

0:15

it. Yes, this week on Download

0:18

This Show, after much hype, Apple's

0:20

newest product, the Apple Vision Pro,

0:22

a sort of augmented reality, a

0:24

sort of virtual reality headset, has

0:26

been made available to reviewers, but

0:28

does it stack up to its

0:30

stratospheric expectations? Also on the

0:32

show, the federal government has set out

0:34

a new set of safeguards to tackle

0:36

the rise of artificial intelligence and, after

0:38

more than a decade, Facebook veteran Sheryl

0:40

Sandberg steps down from the company. What

0:42

is her legacy? Let's find out. This

0:45

is your guide to the week in media

0:47

technology and culture. My name is Mark Fennell

0:50

and welcome to Download This Show. MUSIC

1:01

Yes, indeed, it is a brand spanking new year.

1:04

I don't know why spanking's in there. It

1:06

probably shouldn't be. But it is anyway. Brand

1:08

spanking new year of Download This Show. It's

1:10

lovely to have you here. Join

1:12

me in studio from the Australian Financial

1:14

Review Technology Reporter, Jessica Sire. Welcome back.

1:17

Hi, happy new year. Thank you. Also to you

1:20

and our favourite social media expert who's a

1:22

bit sus on social media, Meg Coffey. Welcome

1:24

back to Download This Show. Hello,

1:26

hello. So,

1:28

I feel like it has

1:30

been talked about for so much,

1:32

but now finally people are getting their

1:34

hands... I should say only

1:37

reviewers at this point are getting their

1:39

hands on Apple's next big leap, the

1:42

goggles of

1:44

Into the Future. We're getting our

1:46

first reviews of the Apple Vision Pro. And

1:49

with a handful of different kind of opinions that have

1:51

come through, just remind us at the beginning, what

1:53

was it about Apple Vision Pro that kind of

1:56

caught people's attention? What is it about it that

1:58

is considered by at least some to... The revolutionary

2:00

maybe? I mean I can't say the thing that

2:02

caught my attention a surprise to I bet that's

2:04

not funny, Us Ninety Three. Hundred dollars

2:06

or something like that are full

2:09

disclosure. I haven't used it, Yes,

2:11

but from what I understand, this

2:13

is probably the most advanced. What

2:16

are they calling and spatial computers and up calling

2:18

them they are. Google is a. Yard Dog

2:20

my know right side are so

2:22

a colleague. Of mine, John Davidson

2:24

went over and tried the mount

2:27

at the Apple Fest last year

2:29

and aid sort of described them

2:31

as these like quite heavy big

2:33

ski masks mixed reality. Goggles:

2:35

And mixed reality I suppose is the

2:38

idea of. Like you can see everything in

2:40

it's in front of you but the computer

2:42

can inserts and. Digital images as well and

2:44

see. Sort of get this augmented mixed

2:46

reality set up says a little bit

2:48

augmented reality and a little bit about

2:50

reality can toggle between the two. Yes,

2:53

And I think people just frost on

2:55

it because it was very clear. It

2:57

was quite an amazing viewing experience. that

2:59

withstanding you had kilograms. On. Your site says

3:01

that Heavy, heavy, spices both? I'm not sure but

3:03

I know that John didn't talk about how heavy

3:06

it was. So heavy in our has enough. So

3:08

now he's had some people do reviews of it.

3:10

Meg, what are the things that have come out

3:12

of those reviews that stood out? He was being

3:14

ah that's actually kind of school do door. He

3:16

will do the other side of the quite in

3:19

the second with the start with the good Mag.

3:21

I see. People. Were

3:23

just saying is that they're just impressed

3:25

with it at at some of the

3:27

the ease of the fact that he's.

3:30

And like type with your eyes.

3:32

A you stare at something and and

3:34

as keyboard happened or like you since

3:36

flick your eyes and and apps. Change

3:38

or using. you know, top of it is

3:41

the East L. Is. That's it's blowing my

3:43

mind about it Is that where

3:45

to place in computing were just

3:47

assist of an eye. Or a

3:49

look will completely he at in something

3:51

that seems to the other no say

3:54

in what I'm taking away. He wanted

3:56

to like the The Keep. positive

3:58

that the one thing seems to

4:00

be coming out of all the articles

4:02

is just how cool it is and

4:04

how simple, I mean there are some

4:06

issues to it, but just how, yeah, just the flick of

4:08

a finger or the top of a finger or the look, you

4:10

know, a glance to the left can do things.

4:13

For you, Jess, the things that have come out of

4:15

the reviews that seem like positives, what stands out? I

4:18

mean, I like the idea of having, of

4:20

trying out using my eyes as a cursor.

4:24

I think the dovist application

4:26

for this is sports. Oh,

4:29

yeah. There's like this whole

4:31

pay-per-view idea of like,

4:34

I can put this headset on and I can be right

4:36

down like on the cricket pitch

4:38

or I can be inside a game on

4:40

things like that. I know that that was sort

4:42

of like the vision that was promised all those

4:44

years ago when like Google Cardboard came out and

4:47

the New York Times are doing these amazing stories

4:49

where they were filming refugees, say, running for a

4:51

boat or something and you were inside

4:53

a news story. Sports

4:56

seems like way closer to

4:58

experiencing that. And so,

5:01

I mean, from a commercial point of view,

5:03

sports seems like the most obvious use

5:05

case for it for people that

5:07

are willing to pay-per-view. But yeah,

5:09

the implications for like storytelling and

5:11

interactive media, that's kind of how

5:13

I see this being used. I

5:16

will say that the thing that stood

5:18

out to me most was the ability

5:20

to replicate what is essentially a cinema

5:22

experience. It struck me

5:24

that with the demonstrations of this

5:26

particular device allow you to have

5:29

the scale, you know, you put on a

5:31

virtual reality headset and it can replicate not

5:33

just a cinema, but like a cinema in

5:35

space and a cinema on the side of

5:37

a volcano. Have they actually

5:40

got plans to do some of the stuff you're

5:42

talking about with sport? Has any of

5:44

that been discussed? Yeah, I think those

5:46

that went over to the Apple

5:48

conference, they did experience a baseball

5:50

game and I think that was,

5:53

from what I understood, a real like turning point for a

5:55

lot of people are like, oh, this is how you could

5:57

use it. We can see a market for this. I

6:00

can imagine that being a very useful revenue

6:02

line for Apple because making these Vision

6:04

Pros, I was looking at the supply

6:07

chain of this, and it has got

6:09

to be one of the most complicated

6:11

product launches in years. Why

6:14

does it stand out to you as being so complicated? Well,

6:16

I think all the components in the

6:18

headset are customized. They all need to

6:20

be made to spec at all of

6:22

these different factories. Apple does most of

6:24

its manufacturing still in China. All of

6:26

these different components need to be manufactured.

6:29

Then apparently, because of this customization idea,

6:31

let you go in and get fitted,

6:33

everything is assembled and boxed

6:35

in the store. You need to change

6:37

all of your Apple stores to now

6:40

accommodate fittings for your Vision Pro and

6:42

then space for all of these components.

6:44

Because they are customized components, you really need

6:47

to have quality assurance. You can't just get

6:49

anyone whipping up these circuit boards. Then you

6:51

also need things like head straps and light

6:53

seals and there's prescription lenses and just actually

6:56

getting all of those bits together

6:58

in a store and

7:00

then training somebody to put it together

7:03

for an individual customer who is totally

7:05

paying a premium price. That

7:07

is a big circus. This

7:10

version though is not for the general

7:12

public, let's be honest. Yeah, good

7:14

point. Really good point. Yeah, this version

7:16

that's launched, yes, it's a really high price

7:18

point, but it is for early adopters

7:21

and it is for tech nerds. It

7:23

is not for the general public to go out there

7:26

and get. But I think that we have a long

7:28

way to go before we are getting these in store

7:30

and on where

7:33

it's mass consumption of this product. But also

7:35

I think by simple virtue

7:37

of it being an Apple product, it ends up

7:39

reaching a wider market than I think other... It

7:43

isn't the only virtual reality or augmented

7:45

reality headset on the market. They're obviously

7:47

Oculus and there was a PlayStation headset

7:49

and there's a few of them around. The

7:53

mere fact that it's Apple means that

7:55

their capacity to reach people is

7:58

on a scale unlike any of those I've ever seen. other

8:00

companies. The famous thing with Apple is Apple

8:02

doesn't necessarily, quote-unquote, invent new things. What they

8:04

often tend to do over their history as

8:07

a company is bring together disparate pits of

8:09

nascent technology and package them up in a

8:11

way that makes them really popular, slash

8:14

cool, slash enormously profitable. Is

8:17

this that tipping point for AR

8:19

and VR? Because Apple are now

8:21

doing it, does it then become

8:23

something that becomes popular in

8:25

the same way that the touch screens were

8:27

around and then the iPhone happened and changed

8:29

the way it was focused? Does the mere

8:32

existence of Apple change the trajectory

8:34

of this technology, Meg? Yes,

8:37

I think so. I think exactly what you just said.

8:39

Apple brings it into the mainstream. It brings it to

8:41

the consumer in a way that maybe

8:43

the other brands didn't. Apple is

8:45

in the majority of

8:48

homes, and therefore when you see this

8:50

product, it just makes it a little

8:52

bit more reachable. Yes, this Vision Pro

8:54

product level one version one is not

8:56

for the average consumer, but the fact

8:58

that Apple is doing it is definitely

9:01

bringing it to the attention of a lot more people. What do

9:03

you think Jess? I totally agree. I can

9:05

imagine lots of rich families going, well, what

9:07

do we get our kids for Christmas? Let's give it a

9:10

whirly bird. Seven

9:14

grand, not a present. There are people

9:16

with budgets for that. Yes,

9:18

sure, totally. You can imagine that

9:21

being the bridge. Let's

9:23

talk about some of the negative things that have come

9:26

out of the reviews. Jess, you mentioned weight. For you,

9:28

Meg, are there things that you've seen in the reviews

9:30

that you go, that might be

9:32

a deal breaker for some people? Well,

9:34

it's not a deal breaker, but the

9:36

marketing person in me, the cynic in

9:38

me goes, so let's talk about the

9:40

battery pack. Sure. Right? Because

9:42

in all of the marketing and all

9:45

of the advertising, Apple is going to great

9:47

lengths to hide the fact that there is

9:49

an external battery pack. It's

9:51

got a two-hour life, no? Yes,

9:53

it can be plugged in. You can't watch Oppenheimer in

9:55

the audience. Can you? You can watch

9:57

half of Oppenheimer. plug

10:00

the battery pack in, but then

10:02

you are stuck to the wall. And

10:04

if the whole point of these goggles is to be

10:06

able to move around and be active, then you are

10:08

limited to the time. And

10:11

the fact that it is external, because the thing

10:13

is, is they're trying to make the goggles light.

10:15

And if they're already heavy, well, you put a

10:17

battery pack in them. A, where do you put

10:19

it? Is it this weird external thing that's on

10:22

the back? I don't know. Where does it go? But

10:24

then it adds weight. So I

10:27

don't like that they're not being as

10:29

forthcoming about the battery pack and that

10:31

sort of power issue. Are

10:33

there any plans of when we'll actually arrive in Australia?

10:37

Yeah, I mean, I think the idea

10:39

of the launch date for the public

10:41

is February. And all of

10:43

the manufacturing facilities in China have been told everything's going

10:45

to be ready by February. Obviously

10:48

this isn't the only set of

10:50

augmented or reality glasses out there.

10:53

How does it compare to what's already on the

10:55

market, Meg? There's other competitors?

10:58

Good point. I

11:01

mean, like I knew of like Google Glass and

11:03

stuff. I don't know, Ray Ban Metis, that's, I'm

11:05

all about those glasses at the moment. I

11:09

think the competitors, I mean, when

11:11

they announced that they were releasing

11:13

these goggles, Metis

11:15

stock took a whack. And

11:17

I think some of the other large consumer technology

11:20

companies also took a whack for

11:22

that. Probably the reason that we said

11:24

before, if Apple brings it to the market, they are as consumer-y,

11:28

as retail public, as you can possibly

11:30

get with a complex product like this.

11:33

I mean, like Android and everything, it's

11:36

possible that other goggles will be more

11:38

customizable. You'll be able to mess around

11:40

with them a bit more. The software

11:42

could be, yeah, you could sort

11:44

of interact with that in a different way, whereas Apple

11:46

tends to like put up its walls and like, this

11:48

is the product. Don't mess around with it.

11:51

So the show is what you're listening to a brand

11:54

new year. It is your guide to the week in

11:56

media technology and culture. Our guest this week, Jessica Sire

11:58

from the AFR. Social Media

12:00

expert, Meg Coffey. The federal government

12:02

has introduced its plan to respond

12:04

to the rapid rise of artificial

12:07

intelligence technologies. So what

12:09

are they planning? What's going to work? What's

12:11

not going to work? What's it missing? Meg,

12:13

what is currently on the table? I

12:16

feel like we're in the minority report. Like...

12:20

As in you can see the future? No, I don't know.

12:24

We're on the cusp of the

12:26

minority report happening. We

12:28

have all of this stuff where we can

12:31

like see the future and we have AI

12:33

that can predict crime and predict future and

12:35

look at all of these things. And we

12:38

have all of these warning signs that are

12:40

saying, don't listen to the AI because it

12:42

will predict it all wrong, but we're not

12:44

paying attention. And that is

12:47

the gist of what I got from the government. No, so

12:49

the government... Wow, you had a real moment there. No,

12:52

look, so the government... You need

12:54

a hug? I do

12:56

need a hug. I need a really big hug. Now

12:59

the government is taking it serious and

13:01

we do need to take AI serious

13:03

and all of it. As exciting as

13:05

the AI stuff is, but I do

13:07

think that we need to have some

13:09

serious conversations about how we apply the

13:11

technology to law

13:13

because it is really easy to be

13:15

misled. And I think that we

13:18

don't have enough digital or media

13:20

literacy and people just don't understand the

13:22

things that they are seeing out there

13:24

on the internet. And so the government

13:26

is crafting the response to say, look,

13:28

if you are creating things, if you

13:30

are doing things, certain AI productions need

13:32

to have a watermark on them. There

13:36

are limitations around what we can use AI

13:38

for. The horse has already bolted,

13:40

but they are trying to put some

13:42

regulations in and trying to control what

13:45

we use AI for. Out of what's been tabled,

13:47

Jess, what stood out to you as being the

13:49

most interesting aspects of it? Well,

13:51

I think what they've done is they've basically said,

13:54

we're going to release some voluntary guidelines. So if

13:56

you're messing around with AI, whether it's in

13:58

the back end of your company, company or

14:00

at home or your smart home or things

14:02

like that, we're just going to put some

14:04

guidelines around how you interact with

14:07

it. The thing that stood out to

14:09

me is that they're voluntary. The thing

14:11

that also stood out to me is that the

14:13

government's sort of splitting, and like governments all around

14:15

the world are, they're splitting the difference into high-risk

14:18

use cases. And so that's like if you

14:20

interact, if your artificial intelligence bots or

14:22

any of your programming interacts with a

14:25

critical infrastructure, like transport, if it interacts

14:27

with the education system, aviation,

14:30

utilities, things like that, they

14:32

are high-risk enterprise-level problems. And

14:36

so there will be higher penalties if you're

14:38

sort of letting AI run rampant. And

14:41

then they also categorise things as low-risk, and

14:43

that's like video games or spam filters and

14:45

chat bots and things like that. And I think that

14:48

process of mapping out where the

14:50

risks are is critical and has been done in

14:53

the US and it's been done in parts of

14:55

Asia, and it's also being done

14:57

in the EU at the moment. The

14:59

other thing that stood out to me was, and this

15:02

makes sense, is that the government's going

15:04

to look at the regulations that we've

15:06

got around different things in the

15:08

economy already. So they're looking

15:10

at privacy laws. There are changes coming

15:13

for copyright laws. They're looking at

15:15

online competitions and anti-misinformation and

15:17

cybersecurity. So there are legislative changes

15:20

that are already in the pipeline,

15:22

and basically the government said,

15:24

look, we're going to apply an AI lens

15:26

across all of those changes. And see if we

15:28

need to augment those so we

15:30

don't actually have to push

15:33

entire new bits of law. Why

15:36

is it voluntary? Is

15:38

that just the thing you do when you begin

15:40

these conversations and eventually you force to

15:42

make something binding? Is that the logic of it? Yes,

15:46

I think mostly it's voluntary because you don't

15:48

want to squish the market that's trying to figure out

15:50

whether or not we can get productivity gains out of

15:52

this. Whether or not... I mean,

15:55

I'm a business journalist, so I'm looking at it from that lens.

15:57

I think... But you don't hate money is

15:59

what I'm hearing. You

16:01

say that my I get that people

16:03

are trying to make it through businesses

16:05

and if you're using artificial intelligence to

16:08

augment your business, you're having really strict

16:10

penalties and rules on how you can

16:12

interact with that technology. Discourses that innovations.

16:14

I totally appreciate that you need to

16:17

have parameters and letting the market run

16:19

Rams had is a terrible idea. End

16:21

of the idea of Libertarian capitalism is.

16:23

In fact, very scary when you interact

16:26

with artificial intelligence. But if you are. Looking.

16:28

Across How people a living their.

16:31

Lives and they want to experiment with

16:33

this. If you immediately put in laws

16:35

that are if you do this you

16:37

will be fined. gave him you miss

16:39

out on opportunity and then someone is.

16:41

Things that I thought was really interesting

16:43

and it's heard back to access the

16:46

saying about the different levels of were

16:48

A I interacts in your business like

16:50

the risk levels and was. Just

16:53

sort of around that you know that the

16:55

profiling and what we're doing around whether it's

16:57

customer profiling or facial profiling or or does

16:59

any of it and I think I think

17:01

it's really interesting And again to the Imo

17:03

marketers I come from this this background of

17:05

like I want as much data around my

17:07

customer is possible but then I come from

17:09

the background of a human animal. Rights

17:13

as they. Prepare Everything. That

17:16

are says you. Have

17:19

to separate sides of my brain on this

17:21

was this of and I'm frightened by it

17:23

but i'm fat head and so i think

17:25

it's enough I think bit. Of. What

17:27

I really what would make me the

17:30

happiest around as if I'm really eyes

17:32

is to see if there was some

17:34

digital digital literacy requirements that came out

17:36

of it. Or. Media literacy requirements. That

17:38

came out of it because I. Think

17:41

that that's where we're really letting downs. Not

17:43

just children, but our ourselves,

17:45

our entire in our entire

17:47

population were just not up

17:50

to speed on. What?

17:52

Is real on what is not and how. to watch the

17:54

news anymore go about building legislation

17:56

and guidelines for something that is

17:58

moving and growing inside so fast

18:00

because governments everywhere have always slightly struggled

18:03

with this, which is the forever feeling

18:05

like government is playing catch up. And

18:08

then occasionally when governments do legislate around technology,

18:10

sometimes they just get it

18:12

quite wrong. In

18:14

the years that we've seen governments do this and in

18:17

the way we've seen governments around the world do this,

18:19

because I know the EU has some AI legislation. Is

18:22

there particular ways in which you can legislate

18:24

around technology that's moving really fast? Do you

18:27

go really top line? Is that the idea

18:29

Jess? Yeah, I think that's generally how they

18:31

approach this kind of things. You

18:34

define top line

18:36

streams that policy

18:39

would influence. And one

18:42

of the things that contacts of colleagues of mine inside

18:44

the government have been talking about a lot

18:46

are a lot of the social influences and

18:48

the kind of stuff that Meg was talking

18:50

about as well. Like some of the really

18:53

high risk use cases are around like social

18:55

scoring and biometric identification in public spaces and

18:57

things like that and ensuring that there are

18:59

guardrails so that there isn't

19:01

like the want and use of AI

19:04

across our physical

19:06

real world. I think the government's very

19:08

cognizant of stuff like that. And I think they

19:10

are the most important

19:13

parts that the legislation or changes, any

19:15

sort of regulation is trying to capture.

19:18

We just don't want to live in

19:20

a world where you have surveillance everywhere

19:22

you go for the purposes of companies

19:24

making money, for example, or at least

19:27

or the congregation of data and power

19:29

in the hands of a few. That's

19:31

definitely what I think this particular government

19:33

is paying close attention to. Meg, there's

19:35

no stopping AI as a category, but

19:37

do you think the kind of the

19:39

discussion that's being had around AI

19:41

puts us in better stead because people are more

19:44

mindful of it at the moment? Yes,

19:46

definitely. Whenever any topic is

19:48

being discussed, it's always better because it's being

19:50

discussed, right? It doesn't happen good

19:53

or bad because it's being discussed. Governments

19:55

will always lag in legislation, right? They just will

19:57

never be able to keep up with. with

20:00

business and innovation. They just, they

20:02

simply can't. But I

20:04

think that the fact that

20:06

they're having the conversations that they're trying, I

20:09

support it, I think that they're on the right track. Download

20:12

the show is what you're listening to. It

20:14

is your guide to the week in media,

20:16

technology and culture. Mark Fennell is my name.

20:18

And the former chief operating officer of META,

20:20

the company that owns Facebook, Sheryl Sandberg is

20:23

leaving the company's board of directors. And she

20:25

is one of the most high profile women

20:27

in the world of technology. And

20:29

I feel like it was not a bad moment to kind of

20:31

look at what her legacy is, both on Facebook and men. As

20:34

I said, legacy, Jess made a face. What

20:37

do you do? I don't know what it is. You

20:39

don't know what it is. I made a face too

20:41

though. Okay, well Sheryl Sandberg, I guess was

20:43

credited with sort of taking Facebook

20:45

and making it a really commercial enterprise that

20:47

made a stunning amount of money. Is that

20:50

necessarily a fair characterization of her role from

20:52

what we can see Jess? I

20:54

think so. I think she's a remarkable commercial

20:57

executive. I think she was also the bridge

21:00

between Washington and Facebook for a

21:02

long time, which was a very gnarly

21:04

job, particularly given the Cambridge Analytica scandal

21:06

and the idea that this company

21:08

had just been randomly ignoring

21:11

the rights of its users and their

21:13

personal data and things like that. I

21:15

think Sandberg sort of shouldered

21:18

a lot of that heat from

21:20

Washington and not the standing

21:22

that Mark Zuckerberg was the guy that fronted up.

21:24

I think her Washington relationships were really deep. I

21:28

think also she was very, she

21:30

was like a lieutenant of Mr. Zuckerberg. She

21:33

sort of embodied or expounded

21:35

his vision all the time. And I

21:37

think that kind of loyalty, I

21:39

think she was very handsomely compensated for that. And I

21:42

think she stayed at the company for so

21:44

long because she really bought into whatever it

21:46

was that Mark Zuckerberg was dreaming up. Yeah,

21:48

she joined when it was a very

21:51

small startup and then she had

21:53

come from Google. And I think

21:55

the credit she gets mostly is the ability to kind

21:58

of manage it as a business. about what

22:00

it is now where it has Instagram, WhatsApp,

22:02

Messenger. Meg, when you look at the

22:05

legacy of Sheryl Sandberg at Facebook slash

22:07

Messenger, what do you see? She

22:10

was the grown up, you know, as a bunch of

22:12

kids. And she was the grown up

22:14

that came in and legitimized it in

22:17

a very broad generalization. That's good.

22:19

Keep going. But,

22:23

you know, I mean, that's kind of how I look

22:25

at it is as, you know, she was the

22:27

one exactly what I said. She had the Washington

22:29

relations. She had a lot of the connections coming

22:31

out of Google. She knew how to, you know,

22:33

the ad platform. She was the one that was

22:36

not necessarily solely responsible for Google's

22:39

ad platform, but had a big

22:41

play in Google's ad platform. So she was

22:43

able to go into Facebook and turn that

22:45

on and turn it into

22:47

somewhat of the beast that it is today and really

22:50

make Facebook into the company

22:53

that it was rather than just a bunch of college

22:55

kids wanting to know who was hot or not. I'm

22:58

guessing Sheryl Sandberg doesn't need to do anything else

23:00

with her life, with the amount of

23:03

money that she's made. But what do you anticipate

23:05

for somebody like Sheryl Sandberg does, Jess? I

23:07

reckon she'll go to Washington. She'll be a lobbyist

23:11

or she'll be, I

23:13

mean, she'll do angel investing with all of

23:15

her money. But I think I wouldn't be surprised

23:17

if she ended up

23:20

in politics in some way. Okay.

23:22

What about for Facebook and Meta itself,

23:25

Meg? It's sort of entering a

23:27

new era. Obviously Zuckerberg is still

23:29

very involved, but it's sort

23:32

of weathered a lot of storms over the last couple

23:34

of years with a series of scandals. And also,

23:36

Facebook itself is clearly in decline and they

23:38

have a suite of other new products. What

23:40

do you see next for the company of

23:42

MetaMeg? Look,

23:45

it is definitely a great time for her to leave.

23:47

You know, she's done her job and it is a

23:51

good exit because they are moving into

23:53

the next phase, right? They have

23:55

grown up. She's done her duty.

23:58

They don't need that grown up anymore. The

24:01

next phase, look at this, they're throwing

24:03

everything at the wall. Threads, they're going

24:05

real hard at threads, but they're still

24:07

heavily invested in Instagram. They're still invested

24:10

in the big blue book, Facebook, because

24:12

that is the core product. But

24:14

they're trying all kinds of things. You know, Meta's

24:16

not going anywhere, so you'd be foolish to write

24:19

them off. What is

24:21

Meta's next step? Just keep innovating. They've got

24:23

to stay ahead. They've got to keep the

24:25

user numbers up. What do you

24:27

think, Jess? I mean, it's just

24:29

in a seriously competitive industry

24:31

now, but it has this enormous

24:33

user base. And they have all

24:36

these products, and I think Meta's

24:39

probably still a buy in some

24:41

portfolios. I think

24:43

social media is changing, though. I think

24:45

that the appetite for the customer for

24:48

social media products is changing. And I

24:50

can remember, was it Cal Newport, when

24:52

he brought out

24:54

that book a few years ago? Anyway, he

24:56

was sort of talking about how social media will

24:59

become like smoking at some point. It's

25:01

bad for you, right? So the consumer

25:03

is aware of that now, and I

25:05

think behavior is changing. So companies like

25:08

Meta, who make their money

25:10

from social media networks, they will have

25:12

to augment and change themselves so

25:14

that they can fit this changing profile of

25:17

the user. So, yeah, I mean, the

25:19

company is very established. It's very profitable. Cheryl

25:22

Sandberg has done a remarkable job to scale

25:24

a company like that, to have started when she

25:27

did and to leave it at this behemoth. Like,

25:29

it is such a blue-chip established

25:31

tech company now. That

25:34

is a remarkable thing to have witnessed for

25:36

this singular person. I think,

25:38

really, her main legacy will be, remember, she wrote

25:40

that book Lean In, which is like how to

25:42

be a woman executive or whatever. I

25:44

hated that book so much. Why? Why did you

25:46

hate it? I found it offensive. Yeah,

25:49

but like why? Because it just...

25:53

it was not speaking to women like me. Ah,

25:56

okay. Yeah, it was... I mean, it

25:58

was sort of iconic. quite

26:00

wish you refer to it as a sort of

26:02

feminist manifesto, but it, it leaning

26:04

has become such, you know, it entered the

26:06

parlance, hasn't it? But

26:09

I think there's there are women that love that book. And

26:11

then there's women that don't like that book. And

26:13

I remember just reading, I didn't finish it. And

26:15

I just remember starting to read it and being made

26:17

to feel bad about myself for the choices that I made

26:19

in the way that I lead my life. And I'm like,

26:21

I do not need this book in my life. Totally.

26:24

I think it was it was a specific

26:26

book for a specific type of woman doing

26:28

a specific kind of career path. And

26:30

I think the reason it was so popular was

26:32

it was quite practical. Like if you're in meetings

26:34

and this happens, do this, this works. But like

26:36

who's in those meetings, you know, like there's like

26:39

1% of women in the world are at this

26:41

sort of corporate level. But I think

26:43

the book really like I think the real legacy of the book

26:45

is I don't know if you've ever seen the comedian

26:47

Ali Wong, but she's like, I don't want to lean

26:49

in. I don't know. I don't know. Well,

26:51

we are out of time. Huge

26:58

thank you to our guests this week. Jessica Sire

27:00

from the Australian Financial Review. Thank you so much

27:02

for joining us for our very first episode of

27:04

2024. So good

27:06

to be here. And Meg Coffey, you know the pleasure

27:08

is always ours. Thank you so much for joining us.

27:11

Thank you. I love joining you guys. And

27:14

if you enjoyed the show, make

27:16

sure you leave a review on

27:18

whichever podcasting app you happen to

27:20

peruse. We don't judge. We do

27:22

judge actually, frequently. On

27:24

whichever podcasting app you happen to peruse. And with

27:26

that, I shall leave you. My name

27:28

is Mark Fell. And thank you for listening to a brand

27:31

new year. Thank

27:55

you. You've

28:26

been listening to an ABC podcast.

28:29

For more great ABC podcasts,

28:31

live radio and exclusives on the

28:33

ABC Listen app.