Today Kat Abugazaleh of Mother Jones and Zeteo News returns to tell us what the DNC in Chicago was like. How did the Harris campaign try to court influencers and creators? How were the influencers treated differently than the press, and what responsibility does a "creator" have, given that they're not journalists but are also not formally with the campaign? How did the Harris campaign deal with the Palestine solidarity movement? Kat, who was on the ground in Chicago at the convention, tells us what political conventions are really like and how it differs from the spectacle presented on television.

Robinson 

Well, you're back on the program because you've had a very interesting experience at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, and I really wanted to ask you all about this.

Abu 

Please ask me everything.

Robinson 

I want to know how it really is because I've never been to a political convention. I've written about politics for a dozen years now, and I've never gone to one of these. What are they, actually?

Abu 

They're basically big parties for that political party. It's like a huge festival, essentially, except you have to have credentials that are vetted by the Secret Service to get in, except for one part at the DNC. It had two big centers: the McCormick Place, and then the United Center, which is where all the big stuff happened. The caucus meetings were at the McCormick Place. And you also had an expo, which was open to the public. It had tables for different causes. There was one that was talking about being an atheist voter. You get tons of pins, stickers, stuff like that. But that's the only thing that's open to the general public. And then you have the actual United Center, which is where all those big speeches happen, and you need credentials to get into there. And those are also kind of a big party, because you're filling a whole stadium. But you also have, during the day, different electeds there, a bunch of people making content, and press trying to get places. This year, they tried to make it more focused on creators. That's why I was there. I hate the term “creator,” but what else are we going to call us?

Robinson 

I was not going to use that to introduce you.

Abu 

I appreciate that.

You had 200 credentialed creators, and I was one of them. They had this blue carpet where you could do talking to the camera or with another politician. They had a bunch of different workspaces for us, and they tried to update it a bit. I think it paid off, at least from a DNC comms perspective,

Robinson 

Yes. I want to discuss a bit what this means for journalism, because there were some discussions about the kind of blurry lines between creation and journalism.

Abu 

I have so many thoughts on this.

Robinson 

There were articles about how the Democrats were deliberately doing what they called rolling out the red carpet, or the blue carpet in this case, for content creators, for influencers, because they thought that as part of the Democratic strategy to reach the young people and get them excited about the Harris campaign, it would be a good idea to bring these people in and treat them well, and in fact, treat them better than they treated actual journalists who were complaining about being shunted to the side a little. Is that accurate?

Abu 

So, I think I have kind of a unique perspective on this, because I do come from a journalism background. I spent four years at Media Matters, where I was just critiquing journalism. I had education in it, and pretty much everyone I know is a journalist among my close friends. So, I feel like I had a different perspective on this, because I do have a journalism background. I try to be really purposeful when I use the term journalist. I like what John Oliver has done for pretty much the entirety of his show, which is anytime someone calls him a journalist, he corrects them and says, the local reporters on the ground, those are the journalists—I'm just relaying the information.

I think some of these creators thought they were more than, better than, or the same thing as press. And I thought some of the press was incredibly condescending to these creators, because there were some really great interviews that came up. There were some great streams. People tried to highlight important issues, and it reached a lot of people. There were so many things that, like with reproductive justice, reached a lot of people. Hasan [Piker] did a stream at the sit in. I did a stream at the sit in. A lot of really great content was created. At the same time, that is not the same thing as press, and that is not the same thing as original reporting. Trying to look down your nose at these creators because it's a new and young thing, and because you're just so entrenched in traditional media, that's lame. You're lame if you do that.

At the same time, if you are one of those creators—we had this group chat for everyone there for coordination, and the amount of complaints I saw about the press that were just totally ridiculous were innumerable. And I just wanted to be like, guys, what you're doing isn't original reporting, and that's okay. I do a little original reporting now as a freelancer, but for the most part, I'm providing analysis and context, and that's not the same thing as journalism, and that's okay. I saw someone that was saying, if we're so much worse than the press, why did we give our merch to a crying intern who felt really sad after the press was mean to her? And I'm like, that's not what journalism is. That is just not what journalism is. There was a lot of this weird rivalry that felt kind of manufactured. I personally didn't feel it.

But also, we were treated a lot better than pretty much everyone else there. We had our own designated workspace that had free drinks. It was like nine bucks to get a soda there, but in the creator workspace, we had free beer and wine, and that was really nice. I appreciated that I didn't have to pay $9 for Stella.

Robinson

Well, I agree, because I am not a journalist. I'm people call me a journalist too, and I'm not. I'm an analyst. I take the news that other people report, and then I try and explain what it means or what I think of it.

Abu

And then someone will analyze that, and it'll just get more and more and more incestuous, as the media landscape does.

Robinson 

Right, and then there's an endless loop. But I think it's important. I actually think that a lot of the work that people like you and Hasan do is really important because you're explaining how the world works to people. I don't know if the Democrats looked up your work and Hasan's work before giving you credentials, but clearly they thought—

Abu 

I definitely felt like a token.

Robinson 

—that they were going to get the creators to essentially produce—well, propaganda is a dismissive or derisive term, but they weren't giving you free drinks because they thought you would come and report critically on the Palestine issue. They credential a lot of creators, but my question for you is, did they get a lot of the kind of PR boost that they wanted to?

Abu 

Yes, I think they got both sides. I saw there were tons of creators that were pro-Palestine, for one, that wore keffiyehs or the scarves that said “Democrats for Palestinian rights.” I don't want to make it sound like I'm the one lone voice that was critical of the DNC, because that was absolutely not the case. I met so many incredible creators there that do awesome work, and a lot that helped me amplify my video at the sit in. But you could tell when we got there that the DNC was structured for us to be cheerleaders. In that workspace I mentioned, there was a giant thing on the wall that said, “Creators for Kamala Harris.” Not “DNC creators” or “Harris convention creators.” It was “Creators for Kamala Harris.”

I actually have a sweatshirt, because when I got my credentials one day, they gave me this bag that had all this stuff in it. It was really cold in the stadium, and I didn't bring a jacket, and so thank god I took it because that night was the sit in, and I was fucking freezing. And I thought, well, I guess this is what we're doing. But wow, there was a lot of incentive to be a cheerleader, especially when it came to the parties at night. I didn't attend any, but from everything that I saw and everything on the invite and all the information that was provided, they were for a purpose, which I'm sure the vast majority of these people saw through or wanted to support. But it's not the same thing as press where you have to be unbiased, or you have to represent your publication's ideas. You are an independent creator. I think those are things that we should all talk about a little more, especially for those of us in the creating community. Reflecting on the DNC, creators were definitely given way more privilege than any other place covering it. There were like five plugs [electrical outlets] in the entire United Center, and they gave us power strips and stuff, and they gave us ring lights.

Robinson 

I think what's interesting here is that, as I mentioned, you and I agree that the derision towards creators or people who do analysis or commentary is unwarranted because it's actually very important work. But we do know that the journalism profession has a code of ethics and independence, and there are things that if you did them, it would obviously violate journalistic ethics.

If you were a journalist walking around with a “Journalist for Kamala” shirt, you would be compromising your journalistic integrity. Whereas, because this idea of the creator is so new, it's not actually clear—there's no code of ethics. How close can you get to the campaign? If you believe in it, but also you want to be ethical and report critically on it, what are your obligations as someone covering it? Do you have any obligations? Can you be a cheerleader? Because there's no established schools of creator ethics. I don't think there are answers to these questions.

Abu 

Yes. And I don't even think we need to ask them in some cases. Some people went because they wanted to support the campaign and that's what they choose to do. That's totally fine, as long as you're upfront about it. But I think when you have these self-inflicted comparisons to the press, or are trying to act as if you're better than the press, which, once again, most of the creators did not do—I think it's an over inflated problem, but it was definitely an issue the way people talked about the press. If you want to complain or pretend that you're better than, you should subject yourself to the same circumstances they do. You shouldn't take advantage.

Robinson 

Go and try finding a power strip elsewhere.

Abu 

Yes, go try finding a power strip. Go try finding a quiet spot to work. Go pay $9 for your Coca-Cola, or Pepsi, actually, because that's what they provided.

Robinson 

How close you should get to a campaign, and whether you have obligations of any kind of neutrality, is not clear. Obviously, there are different kinds of people under the umbrella of "creator."

Abu 

Right, and it's really whatever you structure your content as. I am worried that people see some of this content as a replacement for journalism, which corporate overlords would love. I personally don't want to spend all day on a school board beat going back and forth to different areas of the city. That's why we have journalists who do so. I think there should be more talk in this community of how you present yourself, how you interact with the press, and also with the press of not being a dick. Don't be a dick because maybe they want to amplify your work. Maybe these creators have something to say that you didn't think of. Maybe they are providing a perspective that is hard to get in a newsroom because of inherent discrimination.

Robinson 

Now I want to talk a little bit more about what the convention is, because I am totally fascinated by this thing.

Abu 

It's insane that we do this, by the way. It's insane we spend so much money on having a weird cult gathering twice every four years.

Robinson 

I was looking back at the 1968 convention and reading a bit about it, because I was interested in how Vietnam was discussed there. Obviously, people have drawn the parallels. You had a Democratic president in '68, an anti-war movement, and an unpopular war. And in the '68 convention, there were floor debates about the Vietnam plank of the Democrats platform because, as I understand it, the convention used to have actual business done there.

Abu 

Well, there's still caucus meetings. That happens.

Robinson 

How does that work? What is done there?

Abu 

In the caucus meetings, you have various groups. There was even a panel for Palestinian human rights that Monday morning. That happens in the other convention center. I'm not sure about every DNC, but for the Chicago one, you had two different centers where you can get in with based on your credentials. So there are caucus meetings. They talk about relevant issues and discuss what's coming up this convention. And then at the big place where you have the speeches and stuff, there's much less of that work done. I use the stadium as a backdrop for one of my TikToks. You're able to interact with people, especially that night as they come in when you have a better chance of finding a congressman or a senator or other influencers. So those are the two basic tenets of the Democratic Party. It's essentially a giant political family reunion where people also argue a bunch

Robinson 

The kind of strange thing about this convention is that there’s the image of the smoke filled room as the place where the decisions really get made, and this election is a little weird in that nobody's voted for the candidate. The candidate is being presented, and then we all celebrate the candidate at the convention.

Abu 

It's like Gerald Ford. He was the only President that no one voted for.

Robinson 

Nobody voted for, he's just the President now.

Abu 

Nobody voted for him. He wasn't even voted for on the ticket.

Robinson 

Here's your president. That's your guy. He's now in charge.

Abu 

Enjoy. I think that if there was a genuine primary, though, I'm not sure if it would have been Kamala Harris, but I think there would have been a different candidate than Joe Biden.

Robinson 

I think that's completely right. The polls show people didn't want Joe Biden, so in a way, this does conform to democracy.

Abu 

Right. And she was on the ticket. I do want to say it felt really good to see all these people who were so fucking awful to me when I said Joe Biden should drop out right after the debate, who are now like, Kamala, Kamala, Kamala. And they were telling me then, she's Black, she's a woman, and she would never be able to win against Trump. And I said, how about we try it? And now they're super psyched. They've always wanted this. They never didn't want it. They never called you a slur. They've never said anything racist to you.

Robinson 

Isn't that bizarre? Isn't the rewriting of the history eerie? I was writing for about two years that the Democrats needed to drop Biden, and everyone was refusing to discuss this. All of a sudden, it becomes a consensus. He's gone. He's replaced. The day after he drops out, everyone knows who the candidate is, and we all act like she's been the candidate all along.

Abu 

It was so funny. I went back to check some of my replies from that original TikTok I did, and some of the tweets that I did after that, and went to the profiles of the nastiest people on those, and half of them had Kamala Harris in their banner immediately after the announcement. But whatever. I'm not salty. Y'all are salty.

Robinson

I want to ask you about the Palestine question. You see all of this celebration, everyone's ecstatic, they have a candidate you might actually want to vote for. They have a vice presidential candidate who everyone likes because he's so personable—he's like your neighbor or your dad or your teacher. We're all so happy, and Oprah's there. The impression that I got, the impression that they successfully gave, was that they were all really united and overflowing with joy at the convention. However, at the same time, Kamala Harris serves an administration that is responsible for funding and arming the worst crime against humanity in the world right now, with a possible exception to the war in Ukraine. And so, how did this kind of hang over the convention?

Abu 

So, I have to say, if it had been a Joe Biden DNC, I'm almost positive I wouldn't have been credentialed, and even if I had, I'm not sure I would have gone. I know that I would have felt uncomfortable. I had my keffiyeh tied to my backpack the entire time if it wasn't on my shoulders or on my head when I was outside. I did see tons of people with keffiyehs. It was not something that you were ashamed for talking about, especially amongst creators, in most cases. So one of the things I stressed at the DNC and that I was really passionate about was they should talk to Arab Americans, Palestinian Americans, Muslim Americans, uncommitted voters—whatever it is, they should talk to them. And I was one of, if not the only, Palestinian American creator, and this wasn't as a plug. When I had a one-on-one meeting with them, or when I sent emails, I said, it doesn't have to be me, but just know I'm here. I would love to talk about Gaza. I know that's such a first thing, to be the only person in the world that's willing to say that and not, fuck this, everything sucks. Anyway, I told them, I'm one of, if not the only, Palestinian creator. I would love to talk about Gaza, especially with electeds who have not articulated their policy or want to change course now that there's this new energy in the Democratic Party.

Robinson 

Yes, and I'm sure they'd love to talk about that.

Abu 

They did not get back to me. I was like, look, I'm not going to give super easy questions, but it's also not going to be some gotcha, because for Palestinian Americans, we know that best case scenario in this country is still far less than what is deserved. We are fully aware of that. The Uncommitted Movement, for example, are Democratic delegates. Those are Democratic voters that voted in a Democratic primary and voted “uncommitted” as an alternative to Trump or not voting at all. So I was just really honest. I said, please don't lose another election because you ignore one constituency. Please don't do this. They were really sympathetic over Zoom, and then I never heard back. I even filled my forms requesting campaign surrogates and articulating which questions that I wanted to ask them and a general gist of what I wanted to talk about. I never heard back at all. I did end up interviewing Representative Ro Khanna, and it was a really great conversation, but that was not through the DNC. They didn't set that up. And if I had known that they weren't going to, if I had known that the proper channels were either being ignored—there were a lot of logistical issues at the DNC—or were genuinely being thrown to the side, I would have spent more time trying to get in contact with campaign representatives or electeds that would be at the DNC on my own.

Robinson 

It does seem, the impression that I get, is that the strategy that they settled on was that there can be a panel discussion on Palestine—they’ll have one—and then they are going to ignore this issue as much as possible. And the Uncommitted Movement that you mentioned had a demand, which was, we want a Palestinian American speaker at the convention.

Abu 

To be clear, that wasn't a demand. The Uncommitted Movement’s demands were for an arms embargo and a permanent ceasefire, and they asked for a Palestinian American speaker because it seemed obvious. This is the big tent party, and it wasn't like a specific demand with those two. And the DNC strung them along and strung them along, and then on Wednesday night, they said, no. They were told, verbatim, I was told to tell you the answer is no, and that is when the sit in happened. Because it wasn't a demand. They genuinely thought that this wouldn't be a problem that a Palestinian American could get on stage in the same way as Uber's chief legal defense. He was up there, but a Palestinian American—

Robinson

A bunch of Republicans, or Leon Panetta—

Abu

A bunch of Republicans, the CEO of American Express—all those people can talk, but not a Palestinian American. And it wasn't, have a Palestinian American that's a part of the Uncommitted Movement. It wasn't, have someone of the Uncommitted Movement, at all. It wasn't, have someone that loves Hamas. It was a Palestinian American. This is racial discrimination, or at least ethnic discrimination, if we want to get really specific about it, and that's screwed up. That's really messed up. And it wasn't to provide a counterbalance to the family of the hostage that spoke—that was beautiful. Everyone at the sit in was like, they deserved to speak, their story deserved to be told, and we were glad they spoke. It was because Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, uncommitted voters, anti-war voters, are all critical parts of the Democratic Party, just like every other part of the Democratic Party, and they're willing to sacrifice that? They're willing to sacrifice those votes when it comes to this election that we all know is incredibly important? It makes no sense.

Robinson 

It's very strange, because it's both obviously morally incompatible with everything that they're professing to believe in, and it's also strategically incredibly stupid, because all of these people who are there, who want to support you, who want you to just give them the thing that allows them to support you—

Abu 

The bare minimum.

Robinson 

—to just sort of give them the finger is very strange.

Abu 

Yes, it's wild. And we were happy that people said “ceasefire” so much on stage. That was a good thing, but bare minimum.

Robinson 

Although, what do they mean by it? We don't know.

Abu 

Bare minimum. Exactly. “Permanent ceasefire” would be nice, but you can't just spam the ceasefire button and be like, well, that's enough if, a) you're not going to put any actions behind it, and b) you think Palestinian Americans should be silent. I said this in my video last week, but why should we believe that you see our needs when you expect us to be invisible? It makes no sense.

Robinson 

And quite literally, they expect you to be invisible. Could you have someone speak for two minutes, four minutes? 

Abu 

Right. It's a vetted speech of a vetted Democratic official. It was pre-written. There was nothing controversial about it. I encourage everyone to go read it on the Mother Jones website. It's a beautiful speech that was very heartfelt. It makes no sense that you can have an anti-choice person on stage, but not a Palestinian American.

Robinson 

You must have had very mixed feelings about the convention then. On the one hand, they seem to have pulled it off very well. The candidate swap worked out well. They're talking in relatively progressive language. They picked Tim Walz, who the whole left was kind of pushing for as the VP. On the other hand, this exclusion of Palestinians is grotesque. It's abhorrent. Children are dying in the most gruesome ways in Gaza every day, and it's really strange and disturbing to see the contrast between the joy and then what you know that the Biden Administration is responsible for, and that Harris will not comment on, does not want to talk about, and does not want to take a question about.

Abu 

Right. And in my interview with Ro Khanna, he even said that Harris needs to break from Biden, like Hubert Humphrey did from Johnson, but he did it too late. Humphrey did it in October. If he had done it in September, he might have won. But I'm genuinely am not saying that my vote is contingent on this. It is something I care about a lot. I am saying all of this because I want Kamala Harris to win. I am not saying, don't vote. I am also saying I'm not here to lecture. But I am urging people, from a strategic standpoint, that if you're some Dem staffer right now, are you willing to sacrifice all those votes? You don't need to give that much lip service. Like I said, we are used to getting far less than the bare minimum. This is the first time people have actually cared about Gaza. But a ceasefire—a permanent ceasefire—is wildly popular, and it makes no sense to sacrifice all of these votes, and especially that weirdly hawkish speech that Harris gave at the end of her speech, just going all in on lethal military. I was on Leftist Mafia when that was going on, and you can see my live reaction. It doesn't make any sense to do this. And there's one part of me that's hoping that maybe she's trying to pull a Jimmy Carter by seeming like this, and then easing up, because Harris has been pretty much the only person in the Biden administration who has frequently talked about specific measures that need to be taken for aid in Gaza. She is pretty much the only person in the Biden administration that hasn't said wildly racist things about Palestinians. So it was such a shock to me—

Robinson 

Low bar, but she does clear it.

Abu 

It's a very low bar, but she does clear it, which in America is like a middle bar, at least.

Robinson 

Not an outright racist.

Abu 

Right. Like Biden said, we have an ancestral hatred of Jews. Trump uses Palestinian as a slur, and Kamala Harris has said that women in Gaza need feminine products—they need more than just flour and dirty water to survive. So it just made no sense to me that she went that hard into the military stuff and providing unconditional support of giving weapons to Israel, and then talking about Palestinian self-determination. But Trump has also mentioned those exact words. That's very up to interpretation, depending on who you are. Do you mean two-state solution? Do you mean that they should get their own vote? Do you think that they should be allowed to have election? What does that mean? And so there's part of me that is hoping, and this could totally be a pipe dream—it's definitely copium—that there's something like that going on here of trying to appeal to this larger demographic that are Nikki Haley voters, or people that don't like Project 2025—they love Trump, but they hate Project 2025 and are evangelicals, something like that. I really don't know. It's all baffling to me.

Robinson 

Well, people were saying she used the most pro-Palestine language ever. But actually, that's not true. If you go back, presidents always use this kind of “we believe everyone deserves self-determination” language.

Abu 

And mentioning sexual assault specifically on October 7 in that speech plays into this trope of demonizing the other, especially brown and black people who are going to come rape your women, especially when there are arguments happening in the Israeli legal system right now of whether it should be legal to rape Palestinians, of whether that is okay.

Robinson 

And documented evidence that occurs in Israeli prisons.

Abu 

With documented evidence of letting out rapists. It's been documented. And so it was really egregious to me for her to state it like that. Once again, I understand the bar is really low here. But if you're gonna try to characterize it like that, you should at least throw a bone talking about war crimes or something, like even really vague language. And once again, this is not coming from a moral place. This is coming from a strategic place. If I am a speechwriter, I’m thinking, well, if I'm going to say this, let me just throw that little thing for the progressives to latch on to, that little ray of hope for fairness there.

Robinson 

Yes, it's alarming. Because then not only are you not committing to policy changes, but not even making rhetorical changes that could allay people's concerns.

Abu 

Right. And rhetoric is the name of the game right now. I get Harris not doing specific policy stuff. I read a really great piece two weeks ago, I can't remember where, talking about how that was kind of a negative for Hillary Clinton. She had all these specifics in her plans, and then reporters would try to turn them against her all the time, and you wouldn't get the same for Trump who didn't provide those specifics. So I get not providing really nitty-gritty specifics on a lot of Harris' agenda from a campaign standpoint, but you got to do more on this topic. You really do if you don't want to sacrifice all of these voters in swing states. And I think she has a chance to come back, too, if these protests start up on college campuses next month. If that happens, she has a chance to redeem herself there. She has a chance to talk about freedom of speech and interact with campuses directly. It's really going to be on her to not go full Biden.

Robinson 

I'm worried that they may have learned the wrong lesson.

Abu 

Yes, they always do.

Robinson 

There have a bad track record here. The reports say that because the protests outside were less large and disruptive than some feared, they think, okay, well, this isn't really—

Abu 

Like at the sit in?

Robinson 

Well, because not enough protesters descended on Chicago for Democrats to feel like enough people cared, or whatever the New York Times said.

Abu 

Here's the thing, though, there weren't enough credentialed protesters. There were big protests at the park that was nearby the United Center, but at the United Center, you had to have credentials to get in there.

Robinson 

They sealed themselves off.

Abu 

Right, exactly. So at the sit in, it was, I think, eight of us that stayed overnight, and there would have been more, and there would have been more supplies. The DNC, by the way, did provide us with blankets because it was freezing out there, and some food. And they also told the cops to buzz off, which was nice. So they're not completely dumb on the optics, but if it wasn't just a credential issue.

Robinson 

Well, '68: you don't really want the TV images of the cops and the protesters.

Abu 

Right. Or, come the next morning, you don't want to have someone shivering on the sidewalk, and then you get a snapshot of that. So they were at least not completely dumb on the optics. But if you didn't need credentials to get in there, there would have been far more people. That's just the truth. And you had to go through Secret Service. They had to go through your bag. There would have been far more people if you could just walk off the street.

Robinson 

Just to conclude here, it sounds like your general verdict on the convention is that it was very well done by the Democratic Party, but it is interesting that there's the mixture between the competence with which they got this together and the ineptitude of their handling of what is actually a serious issue, one that imperils Kamala chances of beating Donald Trump.

Abu

I thought that the energy was crazy. It was not what I expected if it had been Joe Biden. It was exciting. There were so many people. There were so many young people in the creator lounge that were all amped up to try this new DNC, to try this new Democratic Party. And it ended on a really soured note. It ended on a note of discrimination and false promises, and the Democratic Party should do better. It's just that simple.

Transcript edited by Patrick Farnsworth.