エピソード

  • A skipping tape at a theme park exposed ten million people had been defrauded
    2026/09/10
    A skipping tape at a theme park exposed ten million people had been defrauded

    Fear that what you see is fake: a four-second backing-track loop at Lake Compounce in Bristol, Connecticut in the summer of 1989 froze two performers onstage and revealed that the voices on a multi-million-selling record did not belong to them. How did a normalized industry practice stretching back to 1926 turn a technical glitch into proof that ten million buyers had been sold a lie?

    In this episode, we trace the events on that summer night and the industry history that made it possible, following the stuck tape, the MTV camera, and the decision by a producer to use session singers while two men became the public faces-so what happened next?

    Person: Fab Morvan
    Person: Rob Pilatus
    Person: Frank Farian
    Date: Summer of 1989
    Location: Lake Compounce, Bristol, Connecticut

    - The backing track looped the phrase "Girl, you know it's" repeatedly during a live appearance.
    - MTV had a camera crew filming Milli Vanilli at Lake Compounce the night the tape skipped.
    - Fab Morvan was born in Guadeloupe and trained as a dancer in Paris.
    - Rob Pilatus grew up in Munich and worked as a model and performer before meeting Morvan.
    - Frank Farian used session singers for recordings while Morvan and Pilatus served as the public front.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    20 分
  • The Judge with a Bought Medical Degree: How Credentials Kill Trust
    2026/09/09
    The Judge with a Bought Medical Degree: How Credentials Kill Trust

    In this episode, we lay out how diploma mills evolved from nineteenth-century scams to an internet-powered industry that mimics real universities, the tactics they use to pass verification, and why conventional checks fail - and we ask what happens when credentials are weaponized to gain official power?

    Person: Allen Ezell
    Date: 2010
    Event: Arrest of 22 Mexican health officials
    Number: 210 diploma mills documented in China by 2015
    Organization: Axact reported by the New York Times

    - FBI operation DipScam ran through the 1980s and 1990s and produced measurable declines in diploma mill activity.
    - By 2015 researchers documented over 210 diploma mills operating out of China.
    - The 2010 sweep in Mexico arrested 22 health officials and uncovered a malpractice judge with a purchased medical degree.
    - Axact was reported in 2015 as allegedly operating a large international diploma mill network from Karachi, Pakistan.
    - Some fake institutions register domains under the .ac country code and claim accreditation from non-existent bodies, sometimes citing UNESCO as supposed validation.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    21 分
  • How Reddit's Dorm-Room Dream Became a Federal Data Request
    2026/09/08
    How Reddit's Dorm-Room Dream Became a Federal Data Request

    Ambition and risk collided when agents from the Department of Homeland Security walked into Reddit’s San Francisco offices in spring 2015 to ask for names connected to r/DarkNetMarkets - a public forum trading drugs, weapons, and stolen financial details - and Reddit already knew the marketplace existed. How did a site started by two college roommates, with one front page and a promise to let the crowd decide, end up hosting illegal commerce while facing a federal data request?

    In this episode, we trace the timeline from Reddit’s 2005 founding through the 2008 creation of subreddits, the 2011 Jailbait scandal and subsequent bans, and the 2015 quarantine policy and DHS visit to r/DarkNetMarkets. What choices by founders and staff allowed open marketplaces to persist on a platform of millions?

    Person: Steve Huffman
    Person: Alexis Ohanian
    Event: DHS visit to Reddit offices in spring 2015
    Subreddit: r/DarkNetMarkets
    Policy: quarantine policy introduced in 2015

    - Reddit was founded in 2005 by two college roommates, Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian.
    - In 2008 Reddit added user-created communities (subreddits) replacing one undivided front page.
    - r/Jailbait recorded 1.73 million page views the day CNN reported on it before being banned on October 11, 2011.
    - Adrian Chen published an exposé on October 12, 2012 revealing u/violentacrez as Michael Brutsch.
    - In 2014 Reddit’s licensing deal resulted in approximately 100 AR-15 rifles being manufactured and engraved with Reddit’s logo.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    22 分
  • From Lamps to Mass Death: How HASAG Became a Killing Machine
    2026/09/07
    From Lamps to Mass Death: How HASAG Became a Killing Machine

    Light turned to slaughter: a company that began with 20 lamp-makers in 1863 became the third largest user of forced labor in Germany, producing 1.5 million anti-tank weapons every month and running 11 factories across three countries - so how did lamps lead to mass death?

    In this episode, we trace the company's growth from a Paunsdorf workshop into a vertically integrated arms manufacturer, following leadership changes, military contracts, banking ties, and the paperwork that legalized forced labor; what choices and agreements accelerated HASAG’s transformation into a killing machine?

    Person: Hugo Schneider
    Date: September 18, 1863
    Location: Paunsdorf, Kingdom of Saxony
    Event: Explosion at Werk Schlieben on October 12, 1944
    Topic: Forced labor usage and armaments production

    - 20 workers founded the workshop in Paunsdorf in 1863.
    - By 1880 more than 200 people worked for the company.
    - By 1913 HASAG employed 1,200 people.
    - By 1939 HASAG had 3,700 employees and annual sales of 22 million Reichsmarks.
    - 16,581 prisoners passed through HASAG's German subcamps (minimum figure).

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    22 分
  • How He Hid S$35M in Plain Sight: The Teo Payroll Conspiracy
    2026/09/06
    How He Hid S$35M in Plain Sight: The Teo Payroll Conspiracy

    Greed and procedure collided in plain sight: over thirteen years one cabin crew supervisor diverted S$35 million through payroll entries nobody questioned, and even after assets were seized S$14 million remained unaccounted for. How could a single payroll spreadsheet funnel tens of millions into family accounts without anyone noticing, and where did that missing S$14 million go?

    In this episode, we lay out the sequence of events, the payroll mechanism Teo exploited, and the moment routine auditing uncovered the scheme, asking whether systems designed for trust can be weaponized. What exactly did the auditor see that afternoon in December to unravel the longest-running theft in the airline’s history?

    Person: Teo Cheng Kiat
    Event: Ten payments flagged on 15 December 1999
    Amount: S$35,000,000 stolen over 13 years
    Unaccounted: S$14,000,000 remaining missing after seizure
    Properties purchased: Seven private properties plus two renovated apartments

    - Ten payments landed in three bank accounts on the afternoon of 15 December 1999.
    - Teo joined Singapore Airlines in May 1975 at age 21 and was promoted to cabin crew supervisor on 1 September 1988.
    - The thefts ran for thirteen years before detection through payroll allowance entries.
    - Purchases recorded included a Mercedes for S$180,000 and a BMW for S$270,570.
    - S$1,850,000 was spent on jewellery, designer goods, and watches.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    20 分
  • The $23M Lie: How Corporations Rent What's Public Domain
    2026/09/05
    The $23M Lie: How Corporations Rent What's Public Domain

    Nobody prosecuted a company for charging thousands for a photograph the federal government made in 1936 - a Migrant Mother the Library of Congress gives away for free, yet Getty listed licenses up to $5,000. How did an industry build a multi-million-dollar business on clearly public-domain works, and why has the law designed to stop false copyright claims never been used?

    In this episode, we lay out the facts of how archives, image libraries, and corporations enforced fees on works created by government employees and other public-domain material, the legal mechanisms that allow it, and the economic incentives that kept creators and publishers paying rather than fighting. What happens when the cost of enforcement exceeds the price of compliance, and who ultimately pays?

    Person: Dorothea Lange
    Date: 1936
    Location: Farm Security Administration (federal government)
    Topic: copyfraud - false copyright claims on public-domain works
    Law: 17 U.S.C. § 504(c) (false copyright notice) - maximum penalty $2,500

    - The photograph known as "Migrant Mother" was taken in 1936 by a federal employee and entered the public domain immediately.
    - Getty Images listed that same photograph for up to $5,000 for a single six-month license.
    - Section 5-00 and 6, subsection C of Title 17 makes false copyright notices a federal offense with a maximum penalty of $2,500 and requires proof of intent.
    - Jason Mazzone documented millions of works and tens of millions of dollars collected through copyfraud while the statute has been used zero times against companies.
    - Archives often applied a single fee schedule to mixed collections, charging for public-domain items and offering no refunds even when works should have been free.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    23 分
  • When Chocolate Profits Hide Child Slavery: Who Paid the Price?
    2026/09/04
    When Chocolate Profits Hide Child Slavery: Who Paid the Price?

    More chocolate than ever and more children in danger: in 2018 researchers counted 1.48 million children doing hazardous work in West African cocoa fields while global cocoa production had risen 62%. How did an industry bringing in $100 billion a year allow farmers earning $0.50 a day and children working up to 100 hours a week to remain the backbone of its supply chain?

    In this episode, we lay out the timeline from child recruitment at bus stations and Pulitzer-winning investigations to congressional votes and a voluntary industry agreement, and we ask how voluntary promises replaced binding laws - what did that choice cost, and who ultimately paid the price?

    Person: George Mitchell
    Person: Bob Dole
    Date: 2001
    Event: Harkin-Engel Protocol signed
    Topic: Child and forced labor in cocoa

    - 1.48 million children were counted doing hazardous work in West African cocoa fields in 2018.
    - Global cocoa production increased by 62% in 2018.
    - Cocoa industry annual revenue is stated as $100 billion per year.
    - Average cocoa farmer earnings were $0.50 per day in Ivory Coast (2013-2014) and $0.84 per day in Ghana.
    - The U.S. House voted 291 to 115 in 2001 to require a "slave free" label on chocolate products, a bill later circumvented by a voluntary protocol.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    22 分
  • Bhopal's Night of Warnings: How Profit Silenced Safety and Killed Thousands
    2026/09/03
    Bhopal's Night of Warnings: How Profit Silenced Safety and Killed Thousands

    A sense of impending disaster threaded through Bhopal for months: a refrigeration unit removed, alarms disconnected, and a storage tank holding 42 tons of methyl isocyanate far above the safety limit-so how did regulators and managers allow systems to be stripped when that chemical kills within minutes? What sequence of choices turned routine safety decay into the deadliest industrial accident in recorded history?

    In this episode, we lay out the timeline and the degraded safety systems that preceded the leak, describe the living conditions and roles of the workers and city, and present the unanswered question at the heart of the tragedy: who authored the pattern of failures that made disaster inevitable?

    Person: Rajkumar Keswani
    Date: December 3, 1984
    Location: Bhopal, India
    Chemical: Methyl isocyanate (MIC)
    Tank: E-610 contained 42 tons

    - The plant opened in 1969 during India’s Green Revolution to produce carbaryl (Sevin).
    - Regulations required MIC tanks be kept no more than half full (~30 tons); in October 1984 tank E-610 held 42 tons.
    - The refrigeration unit was shut down in January 1982 and its freon refrigerant removed in June 1984.
    - The temperature alarm was disconnected and the pressure gauge on the MIC tank had been broken for about one week before the disaster.
    - At 10:30 PM on December 2, 1984 the tank pressure read 14 kPa and by 11:00 PM it read 70 kPa, a rise workers dismissed as an instrument fault.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    18 分