“Our target with podcasts is to reach youth and different audiences”

Pelin Akın Özalp, Board Member of Akfen Holding, hosts her famous guests on different subjects in the series titled ‘The Reset’ of the ‘74 Podcast’.

Pelin Akın Özalp, Member of Akfen Holding Board of Directors, started her podcast series titled The Reset on the ‘74 Podcast’ broadcast on Spotify. Explaining that they started The Reset podcast series with the increase in the performance of chat platforms that have reached a large audience recently, Özalp said, “We were fed by conferences and seminars in the pre-Kovid life and we had the opportunity to explain ourselves. Since we did not have such a chance in this period, we thought that as the young generation, we should take part in new platforms as well. Voice platforms over the Internet have established an important status for themselves in a very short time. So, we decided to start a podcast series where we think that our conversations with different characters in our business and social lives can reach young and different audiences.” In The Reset podcast series, which will consist of 9 episodes in the first phase, Pelin Akın Özalp discusses different topics in approximately 40-minute conversations with world-famous guests who are experts in their fields. Podcasts can be followed via Spotify from “The Reset” section on the “74 Podcast” channel.

HER FIRST GUEST WAS LEBANESE ACTIVIST
SARA AL-YAFI

Ozalp hosted Sara Al-Yafi, a Political Consultant, Socio-Political Writer and Lebanese Political Activist, in the first episode of The Reset series, published in English.Sara El-Yafi, whose grandfather is the former prime minister of Lebanon, while describing in her podcast that it was not this connection that inspired her to start her own career in public policy making and that the book which changed her life, she also talks about the flaws of today’s politics and the devastating consequences of the Beirut explosion in 2020. While Sara Al-Yafi, whose grandfather is the former prime minister of Lebanon, while explaining on her podcast that it was not this connection that inspired her to start her own career in public policy making, and a book that changed her life, she also mentioning about the flaws of today’s politics and the devastating consequences of the Beirut explosion in 2020.

CHAT WITH ARIZONA MUSE “THE ENVIRONMENTAL AWAKENING”

After the first episode of The Reset series, which attracted attention, Özalp’s guest in the second episode was Arizona Muse, a famous US model, designer and activist in sustainability. Talking about the early days of her fashion career and what triggered the world’s environmental awakening, Muse shares key points with the audience on how to lead a more sustainable life.

PAÖ: Hello, Paul. Thank you for joining me today. It’s a great pleasure to have you here.

P.D: Thanks very much for the opportunity to speak.

PAÖ: Always, always! [0.0s] I think the first time I heard you was on TV. Was it the BBC or NTV? I cannot recall. You were the guest speaker and I was fascinated by how simply explained what I tried to understand for like 15 minutes. And then I met you and really saw that this is what makes you different from the other economists and obviously your jokes.

P.D:Thank you. I’m a big believer in the fact that we should try and communicate economics simply. Everybody makes economic decisions all of the time. There’s no need to use fancy language and equations and jargon. We should be talking plainly about economics I think.

PAÖ: It’s so true. It’s I mean, it’s just overcomplicating things, isn’t it, what you try to say to straightforward simplify it and then the world is easier.

P.D: Absolutely. And I think that it’s very important to help people to understand economics and what’s going on around them, particularly at the moment. The economics is a very important part of everyday life. And so we should be using simple language to make sure that people understand the decisions that they’re making.

PAÖ: Absolutely. Absolutely. OK, but apart from that, diversity, inequality and gender issues are some other issues that you’re enthusiastic about, which is very impressive, again, because this is not a usual economist conversation. But aren’t they actually the milestones of the economics?

P.D: I think that that this is a pretty important part of economics. And I mean, economists have been writing about issues around diversity or prejudice on the more negative side, at least since the 1950s. If you look back at Gary Becker, who is a very famous American economist, he was writing about these issues in the mid late 1950s. But a lot of the things that we’re describing in economics, the decisions that we’re taking, it’s all about diversity of opinion, diversity of taste. You know, somebody likes this and really wants to buy it. Somebody doesn’t like it and wants to sell it. I mean, that’s a market, for goodness sake. So, yes, I mean, I think that these issues are important. But what’s more important, as we start to consider where economies are going in the longer term, how they’re going to develop the role of people, the role of ideas becomes really, really important in determining where an economy is going over the longer term and the role of people, the role of ideas. I mean, that is diversity and inclusion right there. That’s what the whole subject is about, you know, getting the right person in the right job at the right time, getting a range of opinions to make sure you make the best possible decisions, diversity, and inclusion.

PAÖ: Absolutely. And this is exactly what you wrote about in your last book, is the Net Profit and Prejudice?

P.D: Yes, this is it. I mean, the profit and prejudice is looking at issues around diversity and inclusion and the damage that prejudice, not having diversity and inclusion can do, and the fact that I think prejudice is likely to become even more damaging in the years ahead as we go through a process of structural change, partly because I think prejudice is more likely to take place and partly because I think diversity and inclusion will become even more powerful as drivers of economic growth. So for me, this is the single most important topic in economics in the next 20 years.

PAÖ: I love the sentence that was highlighted. Let me read it out to you and then maybe you can comment on it. The more prejudice there is, the harder it will be for companies and countries to profit from. The changes ahead for profit is not the main argument against prejudice, but can certainly help fight it. I loved it.

P.D: Thank you. I mean, I do feel this, that obviously when we’re talking about prejudice or diversity, we’re talking about treating human beings equally. I mean, that’s essentially the core of it. And that’s a moral issue and a social issue. And moral and social arguments must dominate. I mean, obviously, they must. But there is a very powerful economic argument for diversity and inclusion. There’s a powerful economic argument for fighting prejudice. And I believe strongly that when it comes to two issues around prejudice, let’s face it, we’re all prejudiced. Everyone has their own prejudices. We all have these irrational views of the world. And so we need to fight against our own prejudice. We need to help other people fight against theirs. And if economics can just move the argument a bit in the direction of greater diversity and inclusion, then that’s going to help. And the economics of this are powerful arguments. They really are. Because, you know, if you are not using the talent of your people to the best possible ability, then you’re going to be losing out. You’re going to be experiencing a lower standard of living. You’re going to be a less efficient economy or a less efficient company so that the arguments in favor of very, very strong morality and your basic human kindness, in my view, is a more powerful argument over time. But I still think the voice of The Economist should be heard, though I’m biased on that point. Obviously, so am I.

PAÖ: But do you think this pandemic will change the perspective a little and we will move towards what you just described? Do you think it gave us some time to reconsider what you’ve been talking about?

P.D: The full implication of the pandemic is very difficult to assess, I think, and it’s not necessarily going to move us in a positive direction. So well, so one thing I think is that the pandemic has accelerated some of the structural changes that were going to happen anyway. The fourth industrial revolution, the big structural changes that we’re seeing is already underway. But the pandemic has moved everybody online. Even my mother is doing online shopping now. Amazing. My mother is not a fan of technology. She doesn’t even follow me on Twitter. And now she’s calling me up every week with the list of online price discounts that she’s found. My mother is a fan of price discounts, it should be said. So you’re seeing this transformation, but it’s happened a lot, lot faster now. Why does that trouble me? I’m not against change. Far from it. I’m all in favor of this. But the problem is, when you get social change, when you get the disruption, you if you were working for a UK department store that has closed and you’ve lost your job, you know, this sort of thing can very often encourage prejudice because it’s natural. People want someone to blame. They want a group to blame for what’s going on. It’s not my fault I lost my job. Well, it’s not your fault. I turned up for work every day. You did your job to the best of your ability. It’s just your job isn’t really relevant in the modern world.

PAÖ: Anymore.

P.D: Exactly. And that’s difficult to comprehend. And so there is perhaps a tendency to sort of say, well, it’s not my fault. It must be the group of those immigrants who’ve done it. It must be too many women in the workforce. It must be that racial group or that sexuality group that’s cost me my job. And that’s the sort of language that you hear. And so my concern is that the more rapid process of change that the pandemic has brought about, though, in the long term, this is a good thing. Might lead to faster change in the economy. The other thing that we have seen, and it remains to be seen how this adapts, is that certain groups in society have been more negatively affected by the pandemic than others. So the younger generation have been far more likely to lose jobs. Women have been far more likely to lose jobs. And this may be returning to stereotypes. This may be that, you know, people saying, well, women should look after the children. And if you’re now you’re teaching your children at home because the schools have closed, that burden falls disproportionately on women rather than men. And if you don’t have an equitable balance in the household during the pandemic, that can create more problems for women than for men, for example. Right. You may get growing resentment between different age groups. The differences of opinion between the younger generation and the older generation do seem to be growing. And that, too, potentially can cause tension so that the pandemic has given us time to reflect, which is a good thing. It’s it perhaps has led people to reset, you know, things that they find important, things that they value. But it has also increased disruption and the pace of disruption. And it has perhaps. Defaulted to some stereotypes about how different groups in society work, and those are the negative things to come out of this.

PAÖ: Wow. And so do you think the new leaders of the world, the characteristics of the new leaders of the world will change? What we’re looking for is going to be different from what we’ve been describing up till today.

P.D: I think that the situation that we’re going through requires a different sort of policy. Certainly it requires a different sort of understanding. And so that, I think, is going to be important. It means that you’re from an economic policy point of view, leaders are going to have to recognize that you can’t just sort of throw money at the problem and it will go away because that doesn’t actually work when you’re talking about disruption and you’re talking about risks of prejudice. A lot of this is focused on social status and social status is not necessarily about money. It’s about having pride in your work and things like that. And that’s a that’s very important in terms of who is likely to succeed in the future and the skills that are going to be encouraged. This is also a difficult thing to get right, because what you need to do is encourage flexibility. And I don’t mean, you know, make it easy to fire somebody, that’s not what I’m talking about. I mean, what you need is to have people who can adapt, who can change as the world around them changes and who are not afraid of that change because that will help to reduce the risk of prejudice occurring, because people are more likely to feel comfortable in a changing world if they know that they can adapt to it. I think that the value of education goes up in this situation, and this is something that leaders need to emphasize. And that’s education to encourage flexibility, to encourage adaptability, to encourage people to challenge. I mean, that’s also important to say. You know, just because we’ve always done it this way doesn’t mean it’s right. Perhaps we should think about different ways of doing things.

PAÖ: What got you here won’t get you there.

P.D: Exactly. That the way the world worked in the last 30, 40 years is not how it’s going to work in the next 20 years. And so you need to challenge the status quo and you need to accept being challenged. And that can be very difficult. I mean, I’ve been doing my job a long time. And, you know, if a junior colleague says, I think you’re wrong, you know, my immediate instinct might well be to say, well, you know, I’ve been doing this a lot longer than you have. I don’t think I’m wrong. Be quiet. But that’s not the right approach. You’ve got to accept that. Actually, that person’s got a different viewpoint from yours and it’s just as valid as yours. And if they’re challenging you, maybe you need to think about your preconceptions and whether you’re stuck in old ideas or whether they might have a better way of doing things. So that’s also a very important part of this whole process.

PAÖ: Finally, the younger are being listened now.

P.D: Yes, absolutely. I mean, the younger generation has got very valid viewpoints. And the fact that you know, I’ve been doing my job for 30 years or so, well, great. But the experience I had 30 years ago is not necessarily terribly relevant to what’s going on today. When I started work, we didn’t have email, for goodness sake. We didn’t have the Internet. So how is my experience 30 years ago are in a world without Internet relevant to today? So, yeah, you’re listening to all sorts of people. And yes, I have experiences which are useful. So, you know, younger people should still listen because it’s the rules. Exactly. And I think the final thing that comes out of education is educating yourself about people who are different from you, because the thing about prejudice and the economic damage that prejudice can do, it’s actually very rare to be prejudiced against people that you know, because once you know them, you realize they’re human just like you are, that they’ve got the same hopes and fears and risks and foibles and all the rest of it. And so if you have experience either in person or through social media or traditional media, if you have experienced people from other groups, you are far less likely to be prejudiced. So that form of education, I think, is also very powerful.

PAÖ: I think it’s important to explain here that when you say education, we don’t necessarily refer to university education, but on the opposite continuous education, like keeping on reforming yourself with new areas and whatever your job may require you.

P.D: Right, absolutely. I mean, I’m educated all the time and through all sorts of ways. So, yes, you know, I studied at university, of course, and that is an education. I learn from colleagues at work that I work with some extraordinarily talented people who have areas of expertize totally different to mine. But I’m you know, I can also be educated in in other ways by your traveling around the world and talking with lots of people and lots of different backgrounds. I find out things I during the lockdown in the UK last year, I had a garden wall that need repair. And so I learned how to repair the garden wall by watching YouTube videos. Well, that’s education.

PAÖ: There you go.

P.D: Yeah, exactly. And now I’ve recently been listening to some podcasts on Modern Art, which is an area I didn’t know very much about and which I’m educating myself. And I’ve discovered all sorts of things which I would never imagined of, of discovering just through listening to podcast. So, yes, education is a continuous process, you know, you should be learning all the way through your life. It’s what makes life interesting after all.

PAÖ: I think we need more policymakers to be educated continuously because they seem to solve structural problems, as you’ve mentioned, with cyclical solutions. And it doesn’t really help at the moment, doesn’t it?

P.D: Well, there is a need for cyclical support, of course, because of the pandemic. But my concern is that that now, particularly this year, as we emerge gradually from the pandemic, we do need to see more focus on solutions to the structural change. There is, I think, a natural tendency for policy to look backwards and to come up with solutions for the last crisis, not for the next one, as it were. So we are hearing a lot about infrastructure spending, for example, in the United States at the moment. And we’ve had some of this in the U.K. now. I’m not against infrastructure spending and environmental sustainability needs it. But if it’s more, we must build a new rail link in London. Well, why? What happens if we’re all working from home? This rail link is not necessarily going to be needed. You know, maybe we should be putting the money into faster Internet connections rather than faster train connections. For example, a rail link might be necessary. You might find a use. But the tendency is to is to look backwards rather than forwards in politics. And again, I think this is partly because when you’ve got a lot of dramatic change going on, you’ve got a lot of structural change going on. It is very difficult to be certain about the future inevitably. And so policymakers, I think, sometimes struggle with that a little bit.