Reviewing the premiere episode of the CIA podcast “The Langley Files”
When the Central Intelligence Agency announced on Twitter that they were starting their first podcast (that they admit to, at least), the response was exactly what you’d expect. “Why’d you guys stop getting Havana syndrome as soon as they gave you a bunch of money for it” one user asked. “At the very low cost of $100,000,000 per month in Patreon you can choose which country you want to overthrow” quote tweeted another account. We all had a good laugh.
But what about the content of the podcast itself? Obviously the CIA openly admitting they’re starting a podcast means one thing: propaganda. But when I listened to the first episode, I was struck by two things.
- It’s only 20 minutes.
- The CIA’s most extensive intelligence operation must have been a decades-long investigation on how to conduct self-fellatio.
Before getting to the miniscule content the premiere episode provides, I want to talk about a few articles I’ve seen covering it since it was announced. NBC News ran an article titled ‘Langley Files’: CIA launches podcast to ‘demystify’ its spy work” that was essentially a 1:1 reprint of what the podcast was and what was said. The only original addition was this paragraph: “The CIA’s first podcast comes as the agency is seeking to recruit a more diverse workforce, and as it commemorates its 75th anniversary under a director with a penchant for more openness.” Do you remember that poorly received “Humans of CIA” ad that literally nobody liked? That went live 6 days after Burns was sworn in. It’s likely that the planning and filming of that ad was done far before he was Director, but apart from that, I’m not sure what NBC could possibly be referring to. Give us sources, NBC. The Independent article I read was largely the same.
Surprisingly, the most critical article I read came from Variety, who introduced the show in the second paragraph with “But don’t expect any major revelations from CIA’s ‘The Langley Files,’ which is really a PR-outreach initiative to burnish the agency’s image as well as dispel notions that it’s a glamorous line of work as often portrayed in pop culture.”
PR-outreach initiative, propaganda piece. Potato, potato.
But without further ado, let’s get into it. Here’s the transistor.fm link for anyone interested in listening to it themselves
“Hello, sir. Thank you so much for joining us today”
Pro-tip, if you plan to review a podcast. Check to see if it already has a transcription before trying to write down as much as you can. Once again the CIA has screwed over a communist.
After waxing poetic about “the truth shall set you free” being engraved in CIA HQ and stories about “duty and ingenuity,” we’re introduced to our hosts, Dee and Walter. The first tip-off that this podcast is deeply unserious (besides the phrase “The CIA has launched a podcast”) is that neither of these people give us any last names. Trying to separate fact from fiction and earn trust is a hard job when we literally have no idea who you are. However, the first guest in this series is the director, CIA Director William Burns, whom Dee and Walter consistently refer to as “sir.”
Unless you’re actually Nathan Fielder, chances are, if you pitch a podcast where you sit down with the head of your company to ask them questions, there’s not going to be any meaningful examination of their role. I’d like to imagine a world where Dee sits down with William Burns and asks “Sir, what do you think about the CIA removing 900 documents during Daniel J. Jones investigating the use of torture? How do you explain senior members of the CIA spying on Senators?” Instead of “Did you ever think that you would be the Director of the CIA?” At that point, you’re not even trying.
Walter: …what do you think are some of the biggest misconceptions that people have about the CIA?”
Director Burns: I should start by saying that I love spy movies.
The attempt of the infamous CIA to “foster an honest discussion” is painfully transparent. The content of Burns’ answers and the questions he happily responds to are in sharp contrast. In response to the above “misconceptions” question, Burns talks about how intelligence gathering is boring actually, before he goes on a long tangent touting that the CIA provided intelligence that Putin was going to invade Ukraine before the fact, and that the drone-killing of Ayman al-Zawahiri, a prominent leader of Al-Qaeda in Kabul was thanks to the CIA’s intelligence. He then goes on a perfectly placed tangent about visiting Ground Zero, and reflecting on that military strike.
Director Burns: I’d add only that I was in New York City a few days ago, and I had a chance to make a quiet visit to the 9/11 Memorial at ground zero, which is always a powerful experience, as many of your listeners know. But it was especially powerful this time because it gave me a chance to reflect a little bit on how that successful strike by the United States brought at least a measure of justice for the victims and their families.
A powerful moment, coming from the head of the agency that failed to prevent 9/11. In many ways, the imperialism and coups the CIA fosters in the name of “democracy” led to an environment where people would want to attack the US. In this episode where the CIA tries to presents a self-critical entity, eager to reflect on their history, any actual attempt to do so is as present as proof of WMDs. Director Burns exactly says “So the 75th, I think, is an opportunity to reflect on what we got right and what we got wrong over those years through the Cold War and then the war on terror in the two decades since 9/11.”
What did you get wrong, Burns? Because all I hear in this episode is you patting yourself on the back until your palm reaches through your lungs. We all know you don’t see toppling democracy for US interests as a wrong, otherwise you wouldn’t be head of the CIA, but what about the agency objectively failing in the goal in intelligence?
At one point, Burns is asked, completely naturally, about a photo hanging in his office. He describes how this is a wall in Kabul airport with black check marks that denotes stranded U.S citizens and Afghan allies that helped in the past two decades of war, and how powerful it is. That’s great, Billy, except that only 1% of Afghan allies have been evacuated from the country as of September 19th. How absolutely degrading it must be to be used as CIA propaganda in a dingy 20 minute fluff piece while your life is under threat of death for helping the US in their destructive war (this is not to make a statement on whether or not individual Afghan choices to fulfill these roles were justified).
Beyond that, the unfortunate reality of this episode is that there really isn’t anything new or interesting to discuss. Burns talks about creating a department specifically to monitor China, their actions that have been public over the past year, and talking about how brave CIA agents are by “serving the nation.” An AI plugged into the latest news could have written something equally as compelling.
But there was one moment where I had to put down my exploding cigar and rub my temples to clear out the LSD I was dosed with. After grandstanding about how the words “ingenuity” and “dedicated” are two words that accurately describe the CIA, Burns tries to carefully thread the needle, by adding a secret, third thing.
Burns: I guess I would just add one other word to ingenuity and dedication. And that’s “apolitical”
I’ll give you a minute to soak that in.
The intention of this purely bonkers statement is not that the CIA is “apolitical,” instead that they’re “nonpartisan.” The agency clearly enjoys support from both Democrats and Republicans while interfering in global politics, but again, anyone who isn’t listening to this podcast knows that. The word choice is intentional, though, because “nonpartisan” is something that’s been diluted in this post-Trump era. By choosing “apolitical” he’s attempting to scrub the CIA (a government agency and therefore POLITICAL) of any accountability. They don’t operate in any political way. They’re just gathering intelligence to help policy-makers make decisions. We know you intervene in foreign elections, shut up. “Apolitical” my ass.
Honestly, this episode is an endurance test for those even slightly aware of the CIA’s real-world actions against countries around the world. Obviously they don’t portray themselves as the tip of the spear for US empire, but even so: the smug, self-satisfaction reaches far too many high points. I’ll outline the highlights here because if I had to hear it, you have to read it.
Dee: …we mentioned the words such as dedication and ingenuity to describe our workforce-what it is that we do here. Um, and like you just mentioned those two words exactly. So why do you think words such as dedication and ingenuity speak to who we are as an agency?
It’s simply incredible that in the CIA’s inaugural podcast episode, the hosts straight up tell us that they wrote complimentary words in the prerecorded intro, hear their boss use those same words, then reply “Wow, you used the same words as us, so why are we so good?” As if this stiff and uncomfortable banter isn’t scripted to the last inflection.
Director Burns: But I’m convinced, as I know you are, that in our democracy, where trust in institutions is in such short supply, that it’s important to try to explain ourselves as best we can and to demystify a little bit of what we do.
The CIA, famously an agency equipped to build trust.
Dee: So we’re going to promise that we are going to do our best to make this both entertaining and informative enough where you’re going to want to press play on every one of our future episodes.
You’ve immediately failed.
That’s it. Listen to the rest yourself if you’d like, but there’s not much substance to be had. At the end they lay out their “goals” with the podcast, and even do a fun “trivia” section that attempts to sound thrown together but is so obviously pre-scripted. Maybe I’ll listen to more episodes in the future, maybe I won’t. But one thing’s for sure: The CIA’s great, cool and good.
Scott Martin is a writer with articles published in The Beaverton, Passage, and Canadian Dimension. He’s a TMUJournalism undergrad, runs the YouTube channel Pinko Punko, and hosts the Haphazard History podcast. He can be found on Twitter.
