Ask A Genius 962: Ask Scott Anything, Session 2

Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/06/20

Rick Rosner: So when did you start doing and posting journalism?

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: I put In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal together on August 2nd, 2012, and then the publishing house informally, which it still is to the present, in 2014.

Rosner: So, almost 12 years, approximately.

Jacobsen: When doing interviews, I remember I was in the psychology department at Kwantlen, where the newsletter needed contributors. And I managed to talk my way into writing for them. They needed volunteers to fill the space. So, I interviewed some of the lab people and the instructors. And those became interviews. Then, I did a peer-reviewed interview with an economist. To this day, that would probably be my only peer-reviewed article. All the In-Sight stuff and other things are non-peer-reviewed naturally. So, in an academic sense of peer review, everything else goes through an editorial process. Sometimes, the editorial process has to be; sometimes, it’s not.

Rosner: All right. So we should talk about your output. You’ve done, with me alone, probably what? Close to 1,400 small, brief interviews, ranging from a few hundred words to a few thousand, right? And so, how many interviews or articles overall? 3,500, 4,000?

Jacobsen: That would be more than one estimate, but more for sure. I do not know for sure. Even though I was working at the farm, I created the Jacobsen Bank. It took about a year and a half to get together, but I cataloged every article or interview ever done by myself or in collaboration with another person, including outlets. So that includes republications; I didn’t separate them between articles or interviews. I know the total number. I do not see a separation between republication, original article, or original interview. So the numbers are mixed there.

Rosner: It matches or exceeds the output of highly hardworking newspaper reporters during the golden age of journalism, which might be in the first half of the 20th century. And if your pieces average 2,000 words a piece, that’s pushing eight million words, which means a thick book is a hundred thousand words, and a regular book is 80,000 words. So that’s the equivalent, the wordage of a hundred medium-sized books in 12 years, which is eight books a year, year in and year out. That’s a ton of content if you keep up. If you keep it up over your lifespan, your sheer wordage will put you among the most prolific writers ever.

Asimov wrote 500 books. He had publishers who just published whatever he wrote. The publishing industry has changed since then, but he’d write as fast as he could type, 90 words a minute, and never revise. Somebody must have reviewed his stuff for typos, but then they spit out another book. And they made money because he was a name, so 500 books. And you’re at the equivalent of 80 books, just 12 years into your career or a hundred books. Very few people manage more than a hundred books in a career. That’s just wildly exceptional. In terms of wordage, you are there before the age of 35.

Jacobsen: And that’s a humbling thing to reflect on.

Rosner: So, who do you still want to interview? I mean, everybody, but do you have some specific people in mind?

Jacobsen: I love interviewing people. I like conversation. I love the art of conversation. At this point, it’s a very natural thing. I try to set a tone for people to know, whether it’s war talk or farts with you; it’s a relaxed space, an open space. Critical questions will be asked, but there will be a baseline of authenticity and respect.

Rosner: You’ve not interviewed many Hollywood people, actors, and directors. It would be fun. Have you tried to contact people?

Jacobsen: I should. I have yet to send emails to them, as far as I can recall.

Rosner: I think that directors are a little thirstier than actors. Well, it depends on the actor’s level. Of course, you’d want to interview Clooney. But there are a ton of directors who…

Jacobsen: My favourite Clooney quote: “I’m not modest, but I’m fun.”

Rosner: That makes sense. And he is fun. From every indication, he’s a great guy. When he hit it big, he gave each of his closest friends a million dollars because he thought he shouldn’t be the only one to enjoy his good fortune. So yeah, you should interview celebs. There’s a reason they’re celebs. They are often articulate and well-informed; if not, they’re fun. Even though, they may not be models. Clooney has limited modesty because he’s been successful and has good reason. For many people who succeed in showbiz, it’s not random. It’s not by accident.

Jacobsen: I find him not arrogant. I see him as self-assured. That’s different. He has earned a place. He knows and has been successful in most departments of life.

Rosner: Is there a demo or a group of people you find hard to get to say, “Yes,” to an interview?

Jacobsen: Higher-ranking politicians tend to be standoffish. I’ve gotten two prime former ministers from Canada, people who were prime ministers for Canada, the Right Honourable Kim Campbell and the Right Honourable Paul Martin. Those are exciting interviews. Kim Campbell’s was done in two sessions; Paul’s was done in one. They were informative about doing something that will outlast you even after your time. That stuck with me.

Rosner: So in the first half of this, you mentioned that you’ve learned from interviewing people that they believe in the ethics that they profess to believe even if they don’t always live up to their ethical standards, which tells me that you ask most people about ethics. What else have you learned about interviewing people by interviewing hundreds and hundreds of people?

Jacobsen: I have interviewed more high-IQ communities, likely, than anyone. Other ones have been interviewed. They’re those people for a reason, not simply because they’re born with a capacity to be more intelligent, as established in any Psychology 101 textbook. It’s more that they’re in that position of joining a high-IQ society. They have, and I often mentioned this to Carole when I was there: a lopsided intelligence or it’s lopsided in terms of their social skills and IQ. So that’s a big lesson for people not seeking that attention. Typically, they have more balanced intelligence, or they’ll have well-balanced intelligence with their sociability. They’ll be socialized better. Like the case you mentioned about Keith Raniere, something is wrong there. Chris Langan is abused. Yourself, you had a chaotic upbringing. So some things show there. Marilyn is hyper-normal.

Rosner: I’ll interrupt to say I was a fan of the chaos because it was limited. So, I had two families because my parents divorced, and each started a new family. And the more chaotic family, I only spent a month, a year with them. I loved it there. They seemed very calm and wild and hip to me. And from what I’ve been told later, any more than a month of it would have been too much. The members of the family who were living it 12 months a year suffered from the chaos. It wasn’t as fun as I thought it was. So I got it in just the right amount, like a vaccination.

Jacobsen: When it comes to politicians, you get a wide range of people. You have people who go on to have a scandalous history. Also, at the same time, you have people who are high-functioning people generally. And they are there for a reason. They’re looking for a bit of prominence so they can speak. Also, they ended up there, like Plinko, naturally into that stream of life anyway. When it comes to artists, you get those with much sensitivity, and the words themselves are compassionate. But you can see a disjunct between the sensitivity and the characterized part of life with this music or their painting. And then how this fits, how they’re coming off to other people, is often a big disjunct there; the ones that become famous will likely have better social skills. People who were in the fashion industry when I was in sustainable fashion for a year or so. Most of those were medium to small businesses, and most were medium and small businesses.

Rosner: What do you mean you were in the fashion industry for a year?

Jacobsen: I was an ethical and sustainable journalist for maybe a year or two.

Rosner: In your interviews, you tend to avoid the personal, the human interest stuff you might see in People magazine. Is that intentional, or do you want to get to the meat of what people think and not, like what their ideal Sunday might be?

Jacobsen: When you get people working in volatile activism, it’s difficult because their time is slightly more constrained. So you have to make a pitch: 30 minutes on this topic, ten questions focused on this. It sets a bound in time and theme to let them know what to expect and what time commitment is, which automatically constrains things highly. When people don’t have as much on their plate or as many demands on them, you can have a more exploratory range of the interview. For you and me, it was just a happenstance of life when you were at a point where you were transitioning out of work, and I was starting. That became what it is now: a vast repository of work discussing everything.

Rosner: And that’s where I certainly appreciate what you’ve done with me; it’s highly appreciated. Thank you for that. And it’s monumental. I don’t know that the content that comes out of me is enormous, but the work you’ve done with me is Titanic in a good way, not the oceanic disaster way. Do you aspire to become a household name so that you can get a “yes” from any possible interview subject by saying, “Hi, I’m Scott Jacobsen”?

Jacobsen: That would be nice. Access is hard when you start. But I do not want to be based on being a household name necessarily. I want to be based on the quality of the work. So, the best advertising is the quality of the work, just the productivity in general.

Jacobsen: That’s a long commitment without any certainty of success.

Rosner: So, in the journalistic landscape, your output matches somebody from the golden age of journalism. And now journalism is hurting. The money has been sucked out of it. Magazines have gone away, and they are now in trouble. How do you deal with journalism’s less rewarding financial landscape?

Jacobsen: I’m lucky: Doing interviews, transcribing, and writing is delightful. The least pleasant part is listening to my voice in recordings. That is sheer torture.

Rosner: Your voice is fine. That’s common, “I don’t like my voice. When I have to call my bank, they play my voice. They say, “What do you want?” And then I say, “Wire transfer.” And then they play it back, “You’ve asked for a wire transfer.”

Jacobsen: I hate just hearing myself say even two words. I recall this from several interviews with actors and actresses. They have this whole thing where they feel uncomfortable watching themselves on the big screen after production is done, to the point where some of them never even watch a single movie they’ve ever been in. It’s a thing for some. I can sympathize with that in a different trade.

Rosner: So what do you think? Do you believe that you will be a lifelong journalist?

Jacobsen: The journalistic landscape is changing drastically. So I don’t know for sure. Writing will continue to be present. Because these AIs need inputs, they can be updated on meanings and languages. But it’s something that would be enjoyable for me.

Rosner: What about academia? You have much contact with academia.

Jacobsen: Yes, I must get those degrees, which will be part of a longer-term plan. They’re not off the table. It’s always great opportunities that keep arising that have a one-time chance where academia I can always come back, so the calculus is complex, but it seems more straightforward.

Rosner: If you went to Iceland for a master’s, could you even have to go there, or could you do it remotely? You’d want to go because Iceland seems incredible. But could you do it in one academic year?

Jacobsen: They have master’s degrees that might be one and a half years. You could trim it down, but I don’t know if you could do it. There are one-year master’s degrees around. They would have different contexts for living and getting a degree. So that would also depend too. I’m not 100% ten fingers and toes committed to just Iceland, but it is one of the places where I’d also like to study the culture. I want to know what they did right more thoroughly than just statistics about gender equality. They made some right moves, whereas so many other places made the wrong moves and continue to make incorrect and even worse moves. The health and well-being of society are intimately connected to the degree to which women have been empowered.

Rosner: Do you see yourself at some point in a little Icelandic house enrolled in grad school? And it’s like — I don’t know — March, and the wind is whipping, but you’re cozy inside. You’ve got an Icelandic girlfriend wrapped in a blanket and walking around in her underwear.

Jacobsen: I have no objection to that image.

Rosner: I tend to picture people in their underwear. I spend a lot time in a bathrobe or a towel. If the underwear is on, then I’m probably getting dressed all the rest of the way. But I think of other people just in their underwear a lot of the time at home. What else should we talk about? Regarding you, this is your interview, and I’ve said way too much for being the interviewer.

Jacobsen: This is your opportunity to ask me anything you want to ask me.

Rosner: You mentioned that I had a chaotic upbringing. How chaotic would you say your upbringing was?

Jacobsen: My dad’s an alcoholic. He’s been out of my life for nine years or something like that. I don’t know for sure off the top. That was not a fun upbringing. I was getting kicked out of the house for months once. I got kicked out of the house at age 14. It’s not fun. The other parents know about this alcoholic misuse, and then you lose your friends because their parents don’t want them around that, understandably. It’s your own family. But then, dad cheated on my mom with a Hell’s Angels wife. That’s not a gang you want to piss off. So there’s a whole period in our family history when my mom feared my sister going out with my dad. I do not remember this. She’s older. If she went out with my dad, the fear was that they would try to kill her, and they would think that she was the girlfriend of my dad or something like that.

Rosner: I could see that as a concern. That’s a little brutal. So Canadian Hell’s Angels are just as scary as American Hell’s Angels?

Jacobsen: Apparently. I don’t interact much with them, or I haven’t formally. Maybe they were around when I worked at the pub; I remember when I was… What do you call it? The… You’re greeting people in front of the house. The doorman. Not the greeter.

Rosner: The host.

Jacobsen: Yeah, the host, I was taking names and giving times and then asking them when they should come back, table or party of how many, and last name. This guy came up, and the girl he was with started spelling out the name, and he said, “Just ‘J’ is fine.” I looked at him and realized this was probably one of the Hell’s Angels that came to this pub frequently because he’s a little tatted up and doesn’t want to have his name marked down because he doesn’t want people to know where he is.

Rosner: Oh, right.

Jacobsen: That’s small stuff like what would happen relatively frequently. I had a boss who said, “I don’t know what’s wrong with us, the white race.” So that’s part of the small rural town. So it was part of it. And so, there was much chaos growing up. It was an evangelical community, a small village, alcoholism, and dad’s in construction.

Rosner: The town was evangelical?

Jacobsen: Yes, before, it was farmers, hippies, and art types. Artists straight up. Slowly, it became more and more evangelical. At the University, that was five minutes up the road to the Evangelical university. It became more and more prominent. So, by this point, it’s primarily run by the evangelicals.

Rosner: How were you in school? Did you have any extracurriculars? Were you quiet and diligent? Or quietly sarcastic?

Jacobsen: When I started, I was average academically. I didn’t give a shit. I spent much time in the library. I just checked out. I left for a long time, so I didn’t care.

Rosner: So when you say you were checked out, you don’t feel driven to participate in the school life, which is probably the majority position nowadays.

Jacobsen: Yes, I skipped a lot. I pursued other things independently. I did much reading, writing, journaling, and independent intellectual development outside the class. I wrote two plays in high school.

Rosner: Nice. What were they about?

Jacobsen: One of them, I forget. The other one was about some stoners in a convenience store. It was called Wile Away Hogwash. Somewhere, I have a script printed out. I was directing and doing lighting at the same time or something. It was an acting and directing class. During the performance, I constantly ran between the back and the front. I started an improv club in high school. That was fun.

Rosner: Nice, what’s the name of it?

Jacobsen: We didn’t have an actual name.

Rosner: That’s probably good. Most improv club names are annoying. I got online in 1995. In 1995, you were five years old. So you’ve been online for as long as you can remember. So, you’ve been online since you were a little kid. And then, when you’re in your early teens, the iPhone hits. How has the technology you’ve grown up with shaped you?

Jacobsen: I’d say intimately; I played many video games and watched many movies. I used to play Warhammer. I used to play Pogs. Digital entertainment was a big part of my youth. It was also an escape. A refuge from whatever life was at that point.

Rosner: All right, are you too young to have regrets?

Jacobsen: I don’t know.

Rosner: I’m almost twice your age and have many regrets for opportunities I neglected or stuff I should have done but didn’t do out of fear or because it would have been a lot of work and rejection. I don’t know about academic opportunities that I didn’t pursue. But you’ve still got much time. Plus, if we don’t have a nuclear Holocaust or some other disaster and technology proceeds apace, you might have a working life that goes all the way to the 22nd century. So, you don’t need to have regrets because you still have time. And if we can move on from there, you don’t need to have regrets, or maybe ever. Besides your insane productivity, is there anything else you’re proud of? Your ability to talk to anybody, go anywhere in the world and get by?

Jacobsen: Sure. Talking to anyone, if you treat people like people, they’ll generally return the favour.

Rosner: What are you proud of?

Jacobsen: Still surviving and around, that’s a significant achievement. The writing, the consistency, the ability to stick to it and be diligent. And that’s, as I’ve found, uncommon. I’m proud of the friendships that I have. I’m proud of being able to maintain those relationships. And I’m proud of the things that I’ve been able to work and attain many times on my own or to be able to coordinate with others to achieve.

Rosner: That’s much stuff.

Jacobsen: I mean, this cooperation just came out of thin air. We made a lot out of nothing. We are the Seinfeld show.

Rosner: I’m glad that you’re proud of that. I’m proud of it, too. For 27 months, you had a good job working at Canada’s premier equestrian center, right?

Jacobsen: One of them, one of the ones that a former Olympian ran.

Rosner: It was a good job, but we would talk a lot during that period. And it was incredibly demanding, where you were doing hard labour, 12 hours a day, six and a half, seven days a week because horses are hard. They make a lot of dookie and pee, and you have to haul that stuff around, push horses around, and do other work. Are you looking forward to eventually having a good, steady job or at least a good, steady freelance set of gigs that gives you a stable income and lets you have a home base at least?

Jacobsen: Yes.

Rosner: In previous generations, people played at being grownups, probably earlier in life than the last couple of generations. And that involved coupling up and getting a steady job and buying a starter home. Due to economic and cultural changes, that model is beyond tattered. But are you looking forward to any aspects of that model?

Jacobsen: I like the stability aspect. Even though I haven’t had that characterized in most of my life, I like having some stable base. I need that. It helps ground me. I’m an old-fashioned person. Friendships and relationships are the most important thing. I miss all my old friends from high school — my old friends, like near-retired or retired people. I had one local shop. It was called Veggie Bob’s. It was around for probably over 50 years. Not many friends left. When I was 14 and got kicked out, I became friends with mostly older adults in town and even the ones who raised me a lot. I miss them, miss them a lot.

Rosner: What else would you want to tell people about yourself or the world?

Jacobsen: You don’t matter in a cosmic sense, but… You matter, and you don’t matter. You don’t matter cosmically. You’re not entirely unimportant, though, so make sure you make your mark.

Rosner: That sounds like another way of saying that, which might be to have a sense of scale and your position in the world.

Jacobsen: That kind of perspective will instill over time. It’s a more robust way of saying to be humble. Or you could be like Clooney and say, “I’m not modest, but I’m fun.” I am not modest, but I am fun. I am.

Rosner: OK, well, there you go.

Jacobsen: Strive, but be not modest, or fun.

Rosner: Is that a good place to wrap this up?

Jacobsen: Yeah, sure. Let’s call that a thing.

Rosner: OK.

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.