Alex Gibney's Theranos Scandal Documentary
In Silicon Valley, where “fake it till you make it” is a mantra, Elizabeth Holmes stood out. Theranos, the company she founded, drew the support and accolades of investors and senior statesmen alike – that is until a Wall Street Journal reporter’s prying questions spelled the beginning of the end. What originally looked like a revolutionary technology in blood sampling quickly became a scandal that swept the nation.
Today we are joined by award-winning business and tech broadcaster, and host of the Gender Knot, Nastaran Tavakoli-Far, as we explore the Theranos saga of the enhanced functionality of a so-called "nanotainer" through the lens of Alex Gibney’s The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley (2019).
We discuss how this fraud was able to happen and to what extent the culture of Silicon Valley is to blame.
A fantastically made documentary about a dangerous company, it makes us question yet again the cult of charismatic leaders.
“That’s the beauty of America that if you’ve got a big idea you're not necessarily going to be laughed at. She kept referencing a Thomas Edison quote, that if you fail ten thousand times, that's so you get it right the ten thousand and first time.” - Nastaran Tavakoli-Far
Time Stamps:
01:37 - The film we’re going to be looking at today.
02:08 - Why Nas chose this film.
03:28 - The story of Theranos.
06:11 - Whether Elizabeth was setting out to commit fraud from the beginning.
07:15 - The negative aspects of Silicon Valley culture.
10:09 - The different ways journalists covered the story.
14:25 - Analysing the John Carreyrou clip, and how he was able to see through the fraud.
15:57 - The danger to people's lives.
18:11 - Elizabeth's past and what drove her to start Theranos.
19:22 - Why the documentary is so gripping and successful.
25:05 - The way the documentary is edited and presented.
28:58 - How her femininity influenced people to believe her and accept her.
29:44 - Why this could only happen in America.
32:57 - The reasons no one spotted her earlier on.
37:36 - All of the people that were involved with Elizabeth.
39:05 - Nas's impressions of America when she was younger.
41:08 - What Nas's impressions of America are now.
Resources:
The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley
Theranos
The Gender Knot
Alamo Pictures
Connect with Nastaran Tavakoli-Far:
Interesting Reading from Factual America:
What Makes a Good Documentary Film?
6 Best Film Schools in London
The Best Alex Gibney Documentaries
The 10 Best Cult Documentaries
6 of the Best UK Production Companies
Best Documentary Films about Black America
Top 22 Female Documentary Filmmakers
19 Best Documentaries about New York
10 Award-Winning Documentaries About Star Wars
13 Shocking Documentaries About Scientology
15 Intense Documentaries About Scams and Fraud
Film Investors: Essential Insights for Successful Funding
10 Best D.A. Pennebaker Documentaries: Unveiling Cinematic Gems
10 Best Errol Morris Documentaries: A Definitive Ranking for Film Enthusiasts
Transcript for Factual America Episode 3 - Alex Gibney's Theranos Scandal Documentary
You're listening to Factual America. This podcast is produced by Alamo Pictures, a production company specializing in documentaries, TV and shorts about the USA for international audiences. Subscribe to our mailing list or follow us on Instagram and Twitter at Alamo Pictures to be the first to hear about new productions, festivals were attending and how to connect with our team. Our homepage is alamopictures.co.uk. And now, enjoy factual America with our host Matthew Sherwood.
Matthew: Welcome to Factual America, the podcast that explores America through the lens of documentary filmmaking. I'm your host, Matthew Sherwood, and I will be interviewing documentary filmmakers their subjects and subject matter experts in politics, history, culture, just to name three. And today we have Nas Tavakoli-Far. Did I get that right? Yeah, great. Who certainly falls in that latter category. She's an award-winning science and tech, business journalist and broadcaster. Currently with the BBC current affairs radio, she's a radio documentarian herself. And she also hosts the podcast, The Gender Knot, about how men and women can do a better job of getting along. So without further ado, I welcome Nas to the show.
Nas: Thanks for having me.
Matthew: It's a pleasure having you. Nas has chosen The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley, which came out in 2019 as the film that's going to serve as the backdrop to today's discussion. It's a film by Alex Gibney, who is a leading light in documentary filmmaking, and he's made such films as Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Scientology Going Clear, among others. So now without further ado, why don't you tell us why you chose this film?
Nas: And so this one brings together several of my obsessions, in a sense. So I've been a business and tech reporter, and I do this podcast agenda, not a lot about men and women getting on. So I think so many of the important themes from these different scenes come together in this film. So Theranos, they were a blood testing company, I think they ran for about 11 or 12 years until they were kind of shown to be a complete fraud. And the founder was Elizabeth Holmes, and she was the first self-made female billionaire. So out in Silicon Valley, where it's full of male founders, and you know, the scene doesn't have very good reputation when it comes to gender diversity. You have this woman who has this massive vision about completely disrupting health care, and it yet it's just so many, so many big themes that not only am I interested in, but that have really big in society today like disrupting things, women rising, how do women try and get on in a boys club, it all really comes together. And it's just such an incredibly compelling story and really cautionary tale as well.
Matthew: This is Alex Gibney, I would say it is finest. But for those who haven't had a chance to see the film, maybe you could tell us a little bit about what the story is or haven't been following the Theranos story for the last five years or so.
Nas: So Theranos was this blood testing company in Silicon Valley. And the concept was that you could get all these sort of blood test on through one pinprick of blood. And Elizabeth Holmes is the founder. Her vision was that every house could have a small box, kind of the size of like an old school computer or something in your house and you could take a finger prick of blood for the sample into this box, and then get all these results, just there and there. So it was kind of revolutionized blood testing and the company I think they existed for 11 or 12 years before they were exposed. What is fascinating is that back in, I think was 2016, The Wall Street Journal did a big investigation where the entire thing was a sham, and not meaning that it didn't work very well, or there were problems. There was no device, like there was nothing. And that is the crazy thing about it, because you often hear about frauds or about companies doing badly and it's like, maybe they've overestimated something or there are big problems and it's a legit that people report on that. But what was just so mind blowing was that there was nothing this box just didn't work at all. There was literally nothing and that's just mind blowing. And also the other famous thing about Theranos is that Elizabeth Holmes was the first self made female billionaire. A also because Silicon Valley, it's all a bit of a boy's club. And so it is quite fascinating that not only was she a woman, but I thought it was very clever that she aligned herself with the medical side of things. Because often we think like women-medicine, there's a really good tie in. So I just think it was, whether she did that on purpose or not, it was just perfectly done. But just blowing the lid on the fact that there was absolutely nothing there.
Matthew: Well, I guess you you've actually raised the question that I wanted to raise. Let's look at Elizabeth Holmes. Is this fraud from the beginning? Was she a true believer? I think that's what the film really kind of lets us come to that conclusion, doesn't it? I would keep wanting to say spoiler alert when I'm discussing this film, because even though it's a documentary, and we already know the results, although still going to trial, it has that feel to it.
Nas: It's like a thriller.
Matthew: It is a thriller. It's got everything. It is got Greek tragedy. You've even got the professors like the Greek chorus on the side coming in every now and then bringing us back to reality. But what is your view on Elizabeth Holmes? Was this a fraud from the beginning?
Nas: I don't think it was. I feel a bit torn saying this. I say aside from the movie, I've read a lot about Theranos, I've listened to podcast about the company, and I get the feeling that no, she was just kind of overly confident and overly ambitious and it got out of hand. That was I didn't get the feeling like she was going for a fraud from the start. And I think maybe the culture of Silicon Valley, which is all like fake it till you make it, I think big, move fast and break me... I think these things just kind of added so there was the part where, one of the laboratory scientists said that, if you raised concerns about how things were going, you'd be told, oh, you're just not a Silicon Valley. Which I thought was quite interesting because it was like, No, you should kind of always be pushing instead of being skeptical. Right? Yeah. I don't think it was a con from the start.
Matthew: So do you think it's an indictment of Silicon Valley?
Nas: Yeah.
Matthew: Okay. So do you think Silicon Valley is full of Theranoses?
Nas: Yeah.
Matthew: Companies?
Nas: Yeah. Another reason I like the story a lot is because being a reporter in that sort of scene, even though I'm in London, so it's not as overblown, I think the journalists always feel like the sort of mean skeptical ones who are always sort of questioning these things. So I think I really related to the Wall Street Journal's reporter as well, who was kind of asking questions. And I think there is, I think a lot of that scene, there is very much a culture of questions that are not really good. Like it's not great to ask questions. You're kind of trying to hinder progress, you know, you're meant to be positive about everything all the time. And hence why, if scientists had concerns they'd be told, oh, well, you're just not a Silicon Valley person. So I do think it is an indictment of S.V. There was another part where one of the laboratory scientists was talking about the box. Well, these tests were meant to happen. And he was trying to tell Elizabeth, but can we make it a little bit bigger? Because there are certain laws of thermodynamics, which mean that this size will constrain what we can do. And it was this thing of No. And he kept saying that you can't argue with the laws of physics. So I think, yeah, it is an indictment of S.V.
Matthew: And he didn't say, but basically the rejoinder to that is, they were saying, yes, you can, because it's Silicon Valley. And you have to have a vision. And if you don't, as Dan Ariely said there's this fine line between being a visionary and then having your foot in reality. And I think that's something he has studied the quite a bit as a behavioural economist. I think you raise further interesting points. I think someone else was talking about the difference between the tiled part of the company and the carpeted part. And you had all these scientists who are labouring under sometimes extreme conditions and just saying no, this wasn't going to work. And yet, everyone, the Silicon Valley types all just jumping around and saying you're not with the program. So you say it is an indictment of Silicon Valley is an indictment of journalism too, because you were kind of highlighting this. We have a whole host of characters in this this film, and we have Ken from the New Yorker, we have Roger Parla from Fortune, who seemed like very sincere individual. But maybe you could say a little bit more about that. Given your background as a journalist.
Nas: Yes, Ken Auletta did a big profile of her for The New Yorker. And Roger Parla did a profile of her for Fortune magazine and she was on the cover. I think the title was The CEO Is Out For Blood. Or maybe that was one of the other covers she was on. And then there's John Kerry of the Wall Street Journal who actually broke the story. And, John, I'm a massive fan of because he's just the exact right type of character. He's just very deadpan New Yorker who, you know, just sees through nonsense. So I think it was fascinating just watching the personalities. And so Ken Auletta who'd written about her for The New Yorker, he still seemed quite upbeat in general. And I raised that because Roger Parla seemed really embarrassed and felt almost responsible for having put her on The cover. And so seeing the contrast between these two people was also very interesting for me because, Roger Parla felt like, responsible for having helps this company grow and you know, they're doing serious stuff about patients health, whereas Ken Auletta seem to just not really care. He was like, Oh, yeah, well, she lied to me. So, yeah, it did make me think a little bit about what I don't want to make it personal and diamonds or any of these reporters, but kind of like, why are you a reporter? Because, yeah, I would feel some sense of responsibility if I hadn't gotten that wrong.
Clip1 (from the movie The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley)
Matthew: So we've just listened to this great clip with John Kerry. Say something about that. I mean, what was it that he saw and why wasn't the wool pulled over his eyes where it was for these others?
Nas: Yeah, it’s interesting. I’m wondering if it’s because he was based in New York. So away from a lot of the hype that is talked about all the time. And also, he’s an investigative reporter. He’s done reporting about medicine and about science. I think he’d won a Pulitzer for a previous medical education. So he seemed like the kind of guy who kind of was in the know. And I just love the fact that it was only one quote that made him think this is nonsense. So just this one quote, and he’s like, no, no way. Wait a minute. I’ve also wondered, just because I think about cultural things a lot. He’s half French.
Matthew: Yes.
Nas: I wonder if there's a sort of European scepticism to these things.
Matthew: Possibly, I mean after studying in US, his early journalistic days were all in Holland. Away from the US. He came back to the Wall Street Journal. So he comes across as the rational adult, there's not too many of them in this film. He and, is it Phyllis Gardner? He and the professor at Stanford are the two adults in the room. And this is all going on. The other thing we've discussed a lot about, this didn't work. So it's a fraud. They've attracted, we know that, over $900 million in investment. People who've invested in leading Silicon Valley firms were investors. What we haven't mentioned yet is that people's lives were in danger.
Nas: Yeah.
Matthew: I mean, maybe you could say a little bit more about that. I can see why Roger was eclectic. Because having to call, getting lab tests and discovering that they were wrong and having to call people up and tell them to rush to the hospital.
Nas: Yeah. Not to give a spoiler, but Theranos had made deals with Walgreens and CVS, where there would be sort of Theranos Wellness Centres in the stores. So you could go there and get the blood test on there. And what was happening was that they were taking vials of blood instead of a small, small finger prick, and sending these back to the lab in California, and then running them on normal commercial analysers. But also, they were doing sort of strange things like taking fingerprint tests, but then they'd have to dilute them so that they could put these in these commercial analysers, which is not how the machines are meant to run. So people were coming back with crazy results and results that were off the charts, which is kind of crazy. So you might not go to the doctor about something serious or you might freak out. Because you've got some crazy results coming back. So, yeah, people's lives were at risk. And I think I'm not sure if it came up in this documentary. I think one person died as a result of Theranos's tests.
Matthew: I don't think that's in the documentary. But there's been so much written about this. And it's absolutely amazing. And in my opinion, I'd like to hear what you think. We love storytelling here at Factual America and Alamo Pictures. This all gets back to the fact that she had a compelling story doesn't it?
Nas: Yeah.
Matthew: You know, there's that one scene where they just pick this, she repeated it so many times, they had 1620 clips up all at the same time, her telling the story about her, her uncle who passed away... We find out it was an industry that was ripe for disruption. And there were these two companies that were basically monopolizing blood. So there was a good reason to be in this business. But again, maybe you can say a little more about that in terms of the story.
Nas: The story was amazing because one of her grandfather's was an entrepreneur, the other was a great medical pioneer. She's this young woman, she's just dropped out of Stanford to go into like the medical field. And there's a story she tells often about an uncle she used to spend a lot of time with, and then he got a disease that had they have caught it earlier, maybe he would have survived. And so the whole the whole premise of Theranos was so that no one has to say goodbye to soon. And from stuff I've read elsewhere, apparently, she'd only met that uncle twice.
Matthew: I did wonder, which is interesting, because, getting back to the documentary itself, there's a limit to what you can put into an hour and a half, two hours of film and to tell us story and get compelling cinema out of it. But do you feel like maybe there's even some... I mean, Alex had to leave certain things out. Because I think he tried to give that feeling across. But it didn't explicitly say that she'd only met that uncle.
Nas: Yeah, I actually liked the way he made it because I think every medium is good for conveying different parts of a story. And I think with not just Theranos, but Silicon Valley in general, the story of the founder is such a big deal. So it's almost like founders are like rock stars. And that personal story is so important. And it's especially interesting talking about this now, because we've just had the situation happened with WeWork who also had a very compelling charismatic founder, and they've completely been called out for being full of crap as well. But I think that's why this documentary works so well because a lot of it was focused on her and also I mean, she was kind of creepy, she is kind of sociopathic, she blatantly lies, she doesn't blink. She's weird, you know what I mean? And I just find it visually quite a fascinating story as well because I think like she just had the right look as well. She used to wear all black. Black like Steve Jobs. And visually I found it fascinating because she was very beautiful, but not too beautiful, which I think was just perfect. Yeah, like she was very classic looking. It's also kind of not very sexual. And I just think it works perfectly in the paradigm of a female medical inventor. So I think what I liked about the movie is just the focus on the visuals. And there's a lot of really famous images of her in like, you know, her black turtleneck, her blonde hair in a slightly messy bond. So she looks elegant, but not to polished and she's holding up these tiny test tubes of blood, they're sort of tiny, you can hold them in between your fingers, and it's just such compelling imagery. And it just looks fantastic.
Matthew: And speaking of compelling imagery, I mean, they even bring Errol Morris
Nas: Yes, yes. To make the sum of some of the adverts. Yeah. And so you know, she's standing in front of a white backdrop. And she's talking about no one needs to say goodbye too soon and she doesn't blink. She's got these enormous blue eyes and she doesn't blink. And it's creepy. And I think that's what Alex Gibney did so well, because, visually, it's weird because I remember seeing Elizabeth Holmes around. I wasn't hugely into the story before they went down. But it was this elegant, smart woman... The visuals are good, but the way he had put the visuals together with all this creepy music, it just worked really well. It was like, wow! And maybe this is less of a visual thing, but the other two characters who really stood out for me were two of the young lab technicians who both whistleblow. So one of them was a young woman, Erica Chung. And the other was Tyler Schultz, who was grandfather of George Schultz
Matthew: and Sonia
Nas: Yeah. Grandson George Schultz, also former secretary of state who was on the board. And Theranos's board is another thing. It was all like former diplomats and statesman and no medical people were on the board.
Matthew: That's right.
Nas: And I, I've really admired these two because they were the two youngest people at the company and they kept trying to talk to people about it. They kept trying to speak to George Schultz, they both went to regulators, they both spoke to the Wall Street Journal. And watching that movie was interesting for me, because there was so many people who talks about the problems with Theranos. And it looks like none of them really did anything. And these two who were the youngest people at the company did. And that really, that really stood out for me, because I'm not impressed with other people who like all have all these problems, but they didn't bother to try and do anything. And I think visually the contrast between... Because I think they were only a few years younger than Elizabeth so she's just like very sort of elegant well put together person and they're just these two really scruffy young 20 year olds, I mean that in a nice way there's a realness to them.
Matthew: I'm hoping my children turn into them.
Nas: Yeah. And they actually bothered to keep pressing, keep pushing and they were being followed, they were being sued, they were in serious trouble. That was very striking for me.
You're listening to Factual America. Subscribe to our mailing list, or follow us on Instagram and Twitter at Alamo Pictures to keep up to date with new releases and upcoming shows. Check out the show notes to learn more about the program, our guests and the team behind the production. And now back to Factual America.
Matthew: Welcome back to Factual America, where we've been discussing the film The Inventor Out For Blood in Silicon Valley by Alex Gibney, the Oscar winning director who Esquire called the probably the most important documentary filmmaker of his time. This film came out this year premiered at Sundance in January 2019. released in March, but you'll know Alex Gibney from Enron smartest guys in the room Scientology going clear. And he's probably still got bodyguards because of that, and some other films that are sort of now part of the canon. With that in mind and given the discussion we've had, we've discussed a lot about the sort of the plot you if you will, now might be good to talk about the filmmaking side of this and Alex has gotten some criticism for maybe not baking a judgment basically on Elizabeth Holmes and her partners.
Nas: Hmm. You know, that didn't stand out to me. Maybe it's because in a way it's so self explanatory. Just the file. But what they did was so harmful and it was such a massive fraud. I don't feel like it needed much of a sort of editorial line on top.
Matthew: It's the story itself is so heavy hitting that he doesn't need to hit us over the head with his own polemics. If you will, I guess.
Nas: Yeah, yeah. But at the same time, though, I've referenced the fact that there's a lot of creepy sounding music and a lot of old school footage of inventions gone wrong. I feel that stuff kind of did editorialize it a little bit. Because kind of the whole story went into the realm of delusion. And a lot of the imagery he's used of Elizabeth, even the way a lot of the images of her were used... so bit like really zone in on her eyes or zone in on some very grandiose poses she was in, I think that, in some ways did editorialize it that this is a delusional person?
Matthew: And he let the actors speak for themselves. We were talking about is this an indictment of Silicon Valley? I mean, he talked to the first investors who you could say were the sort of the ones who really got this all going because if they didn't put money in at the beginning, she wouldn't have been put in touch with all these other people.
Nas: Well, I don't think that part of the story was bad at all it because like, any company or any idea you have, you're going to take a risk. So, I don't think that was necessarily a bad thing. She's got a big idea. So many things we use every day came from someone having a crazy idea. So I think that part of it was okay, it was more the fact that once things weren't working, they weren't changing tack. So again, once her laboratory scientist was like, this box needs to be bigger, it doesn't work with the laws of physics. They weren't listening. So I think the indictment was I feel it was more about just like delusion, and not wanting to listen and wanting to do the impossible, even when it's not possible. There's an early scene where she talks to Phyllis Gardner, where they talked to Phyllis Gardner, who is this Stanford professor, and I think she's, she's got a lot of patterns in medicine, as well. And a lot of students would go to her with, you know, their business ideas. And she was talking about when Elizabeth had come to see her. And it was it was something like a patch. She had an idea for a patch, which would administer antibiotics or something like that. And Phyllis was saying, this is actually impossible. It doesn't fit with biology and biochemistry
Matthew: physics
Nas: Exactly. So I think those were the bits that really stood out just the letting these actual scientists be like this doesn't fit with the laws of science. Yeah, more than the fact that she had a big idea and some people put some money into it early on.
Matthew: Yeah. But then she goes to the head of science, not get back into the plot again. But she goes to the head of science at Stanford who's like, oh, yeah, I see the next Steve Jobs. As you've already alluded to, it's all these men who are about the age of her grandfather.
Nas: Yeah.
Matthew: Who buy into her. And it's an interesting, sort of subplot to all this. Yeah. What was it about her? I mean, even George Schultz. I forget how many different Republican administrations he's been in, he was former secretary of state as a sunset. He survived Watergate in Iran-Contra with his reputation unscathed. And he buys into it to the point that he even doesn't really believe his grandson.
Nas: But I wander how much it was also wanting a woman to succeed. Because Silicon Valley has a very bad reputation for being a boy’s club. And not to be rude but maybe slightly autistic men who are kind of nerdy scientist and don't really get people. So I think there was this real kind of urge that like, yeah, a woman she can succeed. And again, just I can see why these older men liked her because she was very classic. She was very well spoken. I mean, she was very beautiful, but also quite safe in a way so I can totally see the appeal there.
Matthew: So you've lived in the United States, you've went to the top journalism school in the United States at Columbia. So do you think this is something that would only happen in America?
Nas: Yes.
Matthew: And why do you think that?
Nas: It's a bit like I've heard a lot of people talk about cults and how they never happen in Britain.
Matthew: No one believes anything.
Nas: Everyone's sceptical here. It was why I was mentioning that. I wonder if John Kerry being half French had something to do with him like smelling this out. I definitely think so. I think it's not just a Silicon Valley story. I think it is a real American thing of like ambition, doing the impossible, doing something big, change the world maybe that's more of a Silicon Valley thing but I think it's a very American concept and in some ways really good as well. And like I think of myself as someone who went to the US for grad school it was because of these ideals of you can do the impossible if you work hard and you've got a big vision but I think maybe also vision is the term that comes to mind with this and with America I think our ambition and vision and that would not, I just don't think it would fly here.
Matthew: So do you think that American society has bought into that so much that that even is hindered. There's a lot of layers to this onion, this story, obviously, but that is even affected - the journalism, the investors, maybe even Walgreens, one of the leading pharmacies in the United States never even opened up the box, doing the testing and the other things. So this is sort of suspension of disbelief in wanting to believe that the big vision thing can happen.
Nas: Yeah. I mean, it's interesting, because it's also why I personally think that's also the beauty of America that if you've got a big idea, you're not necessarily going to be laughed at, it's more like, well, you know, give it a try. And she kept quoting, she kept referencing a Thomas Edison quote something about if you fail 10,000 times that so that you get it right the 10,001st time. I think these are really beautiful values there. But I think it's like if it's in the wrong hands, they can be very damaging values. And I think the other thing that also strikes me as quite an American thing is the focus on the founder. And this almost cult of personality. So a compelling person. I feel like, again, that wouldn't fly here as much.
Matthew: That goes back to the even those early investors, they make comments of how her great grandfather was an entrepreneur, her great uncle started a hospital.
Nas: surely
Matthew: So I won't even look at the financials or the business plan. I mean, I'd say that glib about it, but they're the ones that made that point.
Nas: Yeah.
Matthew: But do you think, because you said is an indictment of Silicon Valley, or possibly even American capitalism, or is it merely just a side effect? You know, this is the kind of the ill that you get with all the good because we've all got smartphones in our pockets. And that's come from there and think about all the many things that are that many of the great things that have happened the last 10 years in terms of tech.
Nas: Yeah, I think maybe a bit of both. But maybe it is because... This comes up from the movie. I can't remember who said it, but maybe even John Kerry said there's something about... Because a lot of these companies in Silicon Valley were private or are for a long time, there's no real need to have to show what's going on to investors. So the secrecy is a bit of a problem.
Matthew: It's the rise of the unicorn. Compared to the late 90s when firms are going public much sooner, they can stay private for longer so they can keep... Even the, she said, I think, even at least five years didn't even have a website, kept their heads well below the parapet and before making this big splash.
Nas: But just going back to her though, I just she is so the personality type that would not fly here. She's super grandiose, says all these grandiose things. I'm sure the war on Theranos when you walked in, it had some quote from Yoda which is something like there is no try you only do or something like that. That kind of stuff does not fly here it's not cool.
Matthew: It doesn't fly here with my thought on that was to run away quickly from any company that has quotes from Star Wars characters painted in their reception.
Nas: Exactly. Sure. But I hate to say this but just looking at her, she wouldn't blink she just looked sociopathic and so whited. I don't know. It just seems a bit... Yeah, it just wouldn't fly here. For the exact same reason that cults don't tend to happen in the UK because, for good and bad, people are too sceptical of big ideas and visions to let that fly.
Clip2 (from the movie The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley)
Matthew: So would that had flown here, that clip them coming out dancing to MC hammer's don't touch this?
Nas: In an unironic way? I didn't think it would. And also, they had had one minor test approved by the Food and Drug Administration. So it was like making this massive party for like some minor thing. I don't know, man. I don't know. I didn't think it would.
Matthew: I don't know. Well, as someone who's been over here while now I can tell you it wouldn't. I would have have spoken to two groups of companies. No, it would never flown here. I'll make t a little personal side here for me. When I saw that scene, a couple things just all came together. And there's another side to the story that we've touched on a few times. It's the Washington DC story. And the last time I saw people dance like that was when I was in an inaugural ball in the 1990s in Washington, DC. And, she comes from a family's long time, several generations, Washingtonians well connected. She felt the need beyond getting the investors from both sides. She had Bill Clinton introducing her at conferences, former secretaries of state and defense from both administrations, Henry Kissinger for my goodness, is involved. James Mattis left the Trump administration now. And her father was an executive at Enron. You just wonder if she couldn't help it that this was, she was part of this sort of milou. That just said, this is the way things are done.
Nas: Yeah, this is making me think because that political establishment is sort of being unseated by the tech establishment. So maybe it was a way that they wanted to still stay relevant. Maybe?
Matthew: Yeah. I think getting back to sort of what we were talking earlier, about, how would that go over here? I mean, you yourself personally. I mean, what, think back, what were your first memories, impressions of the United States?
Nas: When I went there?
Matthew: No, before, even as a child, when you were even a young adult, what was the thing that comes up? In these interviews when I talk to people like you, as someone who was born and raised there, they don't understand what it was like, you know, for us. I think someone once said to me, we all wanted to go to high school in the United States.
Nas: No, no, no
Matthew: No, no, no. I don't want ever go throughout that again. But what were your... Do you remember?
Nas: Yeah, I think it was that thinking big thing. Ambition thinking big. Like, you can do anything if you put your mind to. Yeah. Which is why studying there was interesting.
Matthew: Exactly.
Nas: That was interesting because I went to journalism school in New York. And like in hindsight, you really appreciate something. So I was at quite a fancy university, and every week, reporters would come in from The New York Times or whatever, and tell us that journalism is dying. Why the hell are any of you here? This is a really bad idea. And it was not what I was expecting. From America. And I'm sure like, one of my classmates, he was doing like a dual degree at the business school and he was “the rhetoric is totally the opposite”. He was always finding like this weird dynamic between the two schools on campus just a few meters away. So that was an interesting thing. So maybe Silicon Valley does kind of feed into a lot of visions of America that we see outside. And because being in a journalism school then I was kind of more introduced to the lefty strain of America, maybe the kind of Bernie Sanders type
Matthew: Noam Chomsky.
Nas: Yeah, that was very much more prevalent at journalism school. And maybe that kind of sides travels less outside the country. Because that was new to me being like, oh, all these super lefty Americans who are very...
Matthew: But you were also in New York City. I think many of us would tell you.
Nas: That's true. But I was...
Matthew: Texan and me coming up.
Nas: I was surprised though, but even New York was like Empire State and stuff.
Matthew: So what are your imprint? So I've asked you about your impressions before. Now that you've lived, studied there, work there, and now you're back here. What are your impressions know?
Nas: Full of capitalism. Which is a big thing that's happening. I think maybe what's interesting about stories like Theranos, or what's recently happened with WeWork and with Uber and other big tech companies where there's been a lot of scepticism about them, that maybe these ideals and visions are misguided.
Matthew: Okay. Well, thank you Nas for coming to Factual America. It's been a pleasure having you. You have the privilege of being one of the first guests and we look forward to having you again, in the not too distant future, especially when we get to maybe podcast number 100 or so. To our listeners out there. Please tell your friends and family about us. Get on the Apple podcast and like us and share and don't also forget that Nas has her own podcast The Gender Knot which is well worth listening to, and give her like and a share. So until next time, this is Factual America signing off.
You've been listening to Factual America. This podcast is produced by Alamo Pictures specializing in documentaries, TV and shorts about the USA for international audiences. Head on down to the show notes for more information about today's episode, our guest and the team behind the podcast. Subscribe to our mailing list or follow us on Instagram and Twitter at Alamo Pictures, to be the first to hear about new productions, festivals were attending and to connect with our team. Our homepage is alamopictures.co.uk