Dear John,

I am so fortunate to be able to work with Prof. Robert Reich, including through Inequality Media Civic Action.

I can honestly say that none of what he writes is more personal and timely than his daily substack newsletter. He uses his substack in a way that’s different from social media, and other platforms. It's more of a testbed for new ideas, where he interacts with us readers in the comments, and helps refine many of the frameworks we end up making videos about here at Inequality Media Civic Action.

F or his newsletter community, he writes commentary on the news of the day often in real time. Whether it’s exposing Elon Musk’s hypocrisy, analyzing the January 6 committee hearings, or explaining the main drivers of inflation (see: corporations!) -- to name just a few recent topics -- he dives in to share his thoughts and hear your feedback. He even often participates in the discussion that appears at the bottom of whatever he posts. Of course it helps that the substack doesn’t have the trolls who bully people on Twitter and other social media.

It isn’t all politics and policy though. He also shares personal anedotes, from memories from his childhood to reflections on how he stays hopeful. He combines his writing with playful sketches, and each Sunday does a cartoon caption contest à la The New Yorker. He provides direct access to his coursework, holds regular “office hours,” polls readers about how we are feeling (and acting on) various topics, and he’s always experimenting with new ways to connect and engage. Here’s the deal: joining the substack is completely free, but for just $50 for the whole year, you can help support the work that goes into creating it and get some extra perks, too. Will you sign up as a subscriber for Robert Reich’s daily substack newsletter now?

The next twelve months are likely to be critical, for all of us -- from Merrick Garland's decisions about prosecuting Trump and efforts to avoid a recession, the the start of a new Congress and the beginning of the presidential context for 2024. I'll be tuning in to Prof. Reich's substack to keep me informed, and somewhat sane!

That’s my two cents’ worth, but providing an example of what you’re missing might be even more helpful, so I wanted to share with you a recent one on why he turned down an offer to appear on Dr. Phil’s TV show.

It’s not a call to action. It’s not an urgent campaign. It’s just a personal story that gives insight into the person, and decision-maker, he is. I think you’ll like it and I hope after you’ve checked it out, you sign up to join us and become a member of the newsletter community today.

Thanks, too, for being a supporter of Inequality Media Civic Action. It’s an honor to work alongside all of you.

Heather Kinlaw Lofthouse
Executive Director, Inequality Media Civic Action

What Dr. Phil wants me to do

And why I'm refusing

A few days ago, I received an email from an associate producer at the Dr. Phil Show. They recently came across my film “Inequality for All” and wanted to know “if I’d be interested in joining Dr. Phil as an expert guest for an upcoming episode.”

Hey, why not? The Dr. Phil Show is the number 1 rated daytime TV talk show in America. It has over 2 million viewers. I have lots to say to those viewers about the perils of widening inequality.

Then I read the rest of the email.

“For this conversation we will be asking questions like do college admissions enroll minorities over prospective Caucasian students? Are Caucasian teachers and professors being laid off to ‘make up for past discriminations’ against minority educators, as seen in Minneapolis?”

These were the only questions included in the email. In other words, it will be a show about favoritism to Black people over white people.

What’s going on here? The Dr. Phil Show isn’t on Fox News. It’s carried by CBS.

Phil McGraw himself isn’t a rabid right-winger. At least not that I know of.

(He did appear on Fox News soon after the start of the pandemic to argue against temporarily closing down the economy -- claiming that the likelihood of dying from COVID was no greater than the likelihood of dying in a car accident or drowning in a swimming pool. By that time 3,000 people had died of the infection. Two years later, it had taken the lives of 1 million.)

But the point I want to make isn’t solely about Dr. Phil. It’s about the people who produce popular TV talk shows.

They decide two hugely important things: (1) the topics to be discussed, and (2) how those topics are framed.

These two decisions determine what issues the public focuses on (out of an almost infinite number bubbling up each day) and what’s debatable about them (out of an almost infinite number of possibilities).

And these two determinations in turn fuel public emotions -- ranging from anger, indignation, and outrage, to hope, pride, and confidence. They affect our daily conversations. They shape our politics. They divide or connect Americans. They help set the national agenda.

Take the recent contract agreement between the Minneapolis teachers union and the Minneapolis school district -- the issue Dr. Phil’s associate producer wants me to talk about.

That contract says that if school budgets must be cut, white teachers will be laid off before those from “underrepresented” populations, regardless of seniority. If school budgets then expand, “underrepresented” teachers will be reinstated before white teachers, regardless of seniority.

MAGA outlets, blogs, and social media sites have gone nuts over this. Racial preferences for Black people have become a hot-button issue, especially among struggling working-class whites.

Viewed this way, this issue lends itself to the rightwing argument that “coastal elites” have rigged the economic game against white working people in favor of “less-deserving” people of color. Naturally, this infuriates a lot of working-class whites.

Presumably, this is the debate Dr. Phil’s producer has in mind. But it’s the wrong issue and the wrong debate.

Go a bit deeper and you’ll see why. The goal of the Minneapolis school board is to remedy continuing effects of past discrimination, by supporting “the recruitment and retention of teachers from underrepresented groups” [emphasis added].

This is a particularly important goal in Minnesota’s schools, where 5.6 percent of licensed teachers identify as a teacher of color or American Indian, compared to 30 percent of students.

Research shows having teachers of color in the classroom has a positive impact on students -- not just students of color but also on white students -- including improved test scores and higher graduation rates.

But in a last-in-first-out seniority system, teachers of color are more likely to be laid off when budgets are cut. That’s because they’ve entered the profession more recently, so have less seniority.

In the Minneapolis public schools, fewer teachers of color are tenured than white teachers. State law requires that teachers be on probation until completing three consecutive years of work.

So the new Minneapolis contract is serving a particularly important public purpose in a system where seniority and tenure would otherwise discriminate against people of color. The contract is leveling the playing field and helping ensure that more teachers of color are in classrooms.

But do you think for a moment that I’d be able to explain all this on the Dr. Phil Show?

Not a chance. I’ve been doing television interviews for forty years. I’d be lucky if I got out two sentences before another guest, representing the “other side” of the issue, jumped down my throat, charging “racism!”

So what are millions of daytime TV viewers likely to learn from this discussion about whether “Caucasian teachers” are “being laid off to ‘make up for past discriminations’ against minority educators, as seen in Minneapolis?”

That government is favoring Black teachers over white teachers -- and that lots of people are mad about it.

I’m sending my regrets.

My bigger regret is that the national conversation is in the hands of producers chasing ratings and advertising dollars, with no regard for how they’re distorting the public’s understanding of what’s important or the core choices lying ahead.

Robert Reich

Why subscribe?

You’ll receive free:

• My commentaries (for example, on inflation driven by corporate profiteering, the GOP’s culture war distraction, memories from the White House, reasons to remain hopeful, the truth about America’s second civil war, and many other issues),

• Drawings, including our weekly caption contest, and podcasts,

• Weekly videos.

If you become a paid subscriber, you’ll also be able to:

• Comment and join a wonderfully thoughtful community of writers and activists.

• Add your views to discussion threads with me in my once-a-week “Office Hours.”

• Join in on special or spontaneous events such as “Ask Me Anything” Q&A sessions (in reality Q & O, because I have more opinions than answers).

• And you will have my abiding appreciation for supporting and sustaining this work.

(As always, those unable to pay but keen to engage should please reach out to us.)