Nick Wakeman, editor in chief for Washington Technology, and Ross Wilkers, senior staff reporter for Washington Technology (WT), arguably know more about the federal government technology contracting community than anyone else. Nick has covered federal government IT trends for nearly 30 years, while Ross has been a leading reporter for the publication since 2017. The two of them collaborate to deliver comprehensive news on the government market, the strategies of the companies that operate in that community and relevant financial news.
On this episode of Gov & Beyond, hosts Luca Pagni and Joyson Cherian ask Nick and Ross about observations they’ve gleaned from their reporting over the years, the types of stories they like to cover and what the issues they expect to be covering in 2025.
Tracking the Evolving Government Tech Market
Nick tells Luca and Joyson that his bosses had to explain the basic acronyms and concepts like “client-server” when he started covering technology in late 1990s. Over the years, he saw technology change – not only the technology used in government but also the technology he uses as a reporter and editor. When he started, the focus was on the printed version of the magazine; now he and Ross publish everything online.
One aspect of WT’s online presence for the past couple of years has been the publication’s WT 360 podcast. Ross explains his approach to interviewing his podcast guests, which range from CEOs in the companies WT regularly covers to fellow journalists who provide deep dives into various areas of tech and government. It’s no coincidence that the WT 360 podcast tagline is, “The market from every angle.”
Now, Nick finds that cybersecurity and artificial intelligence (AI) are demanding his attention – maybe more than he’d like. “I do get tired sometimes of talking about cyber and AI, because we kind of beat those to death,” he tells Luca and Joyson. “But when you look at sort of the challenges we face as a nation, cyber is just going to continue to drive a lot of conversations. AI is just going to continue to build.”
Nick also shares his thoughts on the qualities of the best company spokespeople. The key, as he sees it, is to convey a personal touch. “They have a passion for their customer. They have a passion for their employees. And you can sense that the way they talk about it. Where there are others that are more focused on the bottom line as their only success measure, I like the people who can tell the story that reflects who they are,” Nick says.
Finally, on a personal note, discover why Ross hopes to never again hear a song by Nickelback – a view Luca could not quite comprehend. For his part, Nick says he abhors today’s pop music entirely and prefers to stick with his classic rock.
To hear more from Nick and Ross on their experience as journalists and their views on the federal tech market in general, listen to the full podcast below or read the transcript.
Timestamps:
0:40 – Nick and Ross’ careers covering the government technology space
7:55 – The evolution of the government contracting space (past, present and future)
18:48 – AI, Chips, Space and Policy – Nick and Ross’ outlook to 2025
28:16 – What makes a compelling spokesperson for Washington Technology
33:31 – The history of Washington Technology’s WT360 podcast
40:11 – Washington Technology Move Club – Slumdog Millionaire, Marvel Movies, Old Westerns and more
45:08 – A shared disdain for brussel sprouts
46:18 – Don’t play today’s pop music or Nickelback around Nick and Ross
47:52 – Best ways to connect with Nick and Ross
Transcript
Intro: Welcome to Gov & Beyond. I’m your host, Luca Pagni, here with my co-host Joyson Cherian. This podcast features conversations with the newsmakers and influencers at the center of today’s public sector news cycle. From our studio at W2 Communications, let’s go Gov & Beyond.
Luca Pagni (LP): Welcome everyone to Gov & Beyond. I’m your host, Luca Pagni here with my co-host, Joyson Cherian. We’re excited to be joined today by Washington Technology’s Editor in Chief, Nick Wakeman and his colleague, Senior Staff Reporter Ross Wilkers. Welcome gents.
(Everyone): Thanks for having us. Thank you. Good to be here.
LP: Awesome. Well, Ross and Nick, you’ve both been at the forefront of the latest trends in news impacting government contracting for quite a while now. Could you both start by telling us a little bit more about your background, your careers and your respective roles at Washington Technology. Nick, if you want to kick us off.
Nick Wakeman (NW): Sure. You know, I sometimes I forget that I even had a background before Washington Technology. I’ve been here — I always have to stop and do the math — 28 years at Washington Technology. I started off as a reporter, became a senior writer, became senior editor, and then became the editor around the 2005-2006 time frame, and it amazes me. Before this job, I had never been anywhere more than three years.
You know, I did daily, local newspapers out in Harrisonburg and kicked around in newsletters up here in DC, and then with Washington Technology. Even though I’m surprised sometimes that I’ve been around this long that they’ve kept me, I also feel like during that time, I’ve had like, five or six different jobs. The publication has changed tremendously and my role has changed along the way. And I can talk more about that if you have questions on how journalism has changed or whatever.
But as the editor, it’s more a partnership with Ross. I don’t really feel like I’m his boss, although I think he calls me that from time to time. So we work together to set the direction and what we’re going to cover. And we both have our independent beats, in a way. I focus on a lot of the contracts — particularly bid protests — and we both sort of share M&A and contract awards, and talking to leaders across the market. We try to not to step on each others’ toes or steal somebody that the other one really wanted to talk to. But it’s a pretty informal kind of structure.
LP: Gotcha. Ross?
Ross Wilkers (RW): (I’ve spent) seven and a half years at Wash Tech. It feels like a very long time, and then it also feels like it hasn’t. Because in between six and nine months, I’ll be at eight years. Which means my re-election campaign probably should start now. (Laughs)
NW: Oh, it should have already started Ross.
RW: Right. It should have already started.
I started out actually in public sector, working in research. Then I was networked with some of the other journalists here at GovExec that I work with, ironically. So I worked my way back into it. And I worked as a reporter from 2015 to 2017 at another media and events company. And then in the spring of 2017, came on board here for Wash Tech.
So to follow up on what Nick spoke of: We work semi-independently, but it’s still a very collaborative effort. So the way that the independence operates is that you might notice — as a reader for Wash Tech — that Nick will look at something that’s going on in the market through one lens, and then I’ll look at it through another. And some of that is just a function of how we have different networks of people who we talk to. So it’s not really seen as like as a contradiction, or trying to tell the market two different stories. It’s more a function of just looking at it through a different lens.
I look at it a lot of times through the lens of a financial reporter, right? And then I don’t know how to describe the lens you look at it through, Nick. But you look at it through your own so I’ll let you pick the word and not step on your toes. But in public sector media, what it feels like a lot to me — and having done this for seven years going on eight — is that the companies that we cover here at Wash Tech, they really work in an industry of industries. Because if you work for the government, you get exposed to all – not just Defense, but basically health care, transportation, and then everybody uses technology. Even if you’re not the one who’s making it – if you’re the adopter and the user of it – it changes the calculus for how you cover it, particularly as a business journalist.
NW: Yeah, I think you described it well, Ross. I’m not sure what my lens is. It’s what interests me that day, or at that moment. But thinking of the government market as an industry of industries is a big driver for us, because it also allows us to follow what’s hot in the news. With space, we don’t really write about how rockets work or how they get up there. But we’re definitely (interested in) the business opportunity. I guess that’s what drives my coverage: What’s the business opportunity? That can be a pretty broad look at things. There is so much going on.
I feel like Ross is definitely really strong with the financial side of things. We’re both equally strong covering the business strategies and things like that. One thing I wish we did have is more — especially coming into this new administration — we’ll have to figure out how to get more from the policy aspect of things. We’re not as strong there, because neither one of us have covered things really on the Hill. So for that, we do rely a lot on our sibling publications at GovExec for that kind of coverage. You have to be flexible in this job.
RW: You have to see it as a nexus of the macro economy and industrial policy as well. Right now, some industries kind of thread that line — healthcare, transportation — to name a couple. But if your primary client is the U.S. government, it complicates your business strategy. In a way, you kind of signed up for that mix.
Joyson Cherian (JC):
Obviously, both of you have extensive experience in the government contracting and government technology space. How have you seen the industry evolve over the years? And Nick, hinting at what you alluded to a little bit ago, how have your roles evolved over that time as well?
NW: Yeah, it’s funny. I like to tell this story: The way I ended up at Washington Technology is I had gone to graduate school with a person who had gotten a job. She was already working at WT, and the Washington Post had just bought the publication. She called me because, hey, they’re hiring people, you know, why don’t you come on out?
So I sent my resume and she sent me a few copies of what was then a magazine. It’s just print. I’m reading these articles and they had these acronyms. The one that at the time I was very confused by was: They kept saying ATM this and blah, blah … ATM. And I’m like, why are they talking about bank machines? I just couldn’t figure out. And then I learned that ATM — and I assume it’s still probably in use somewhere — is asynchronous transmission mode. It’s a telecommunications networking kind of protocol. So, there was a lot of talk. I had to learn what a client server was, because that was sort of the hot thing in the late 90s.
It’s just really (about how) the whole transformation of technology, and how the technology has changed, and how the computing power (has changed). The founder of Washington Technology told me that she saw this thing coming — this democratization of technology — how it was moving away from the pure technologist, down into everyday people. I was an English major. Yet, now I’m working with technology every day.
So that trend continues. You see it with AI. We’re going to see it with quantum when it arrives. I think that’s really kind of an exciting thing to be a part of and to cover and write about.
For WT and me personally, (there was a significant) change that we were purely print sometime in the late 90s, you know? Well, we did have a website. But the website was just a regurgitation of print. We, the editorial staff, didn’t touch it at all. And then I actually wrote the first breaking news story that we put out on our website. Because at this time of year, we publish our last issue mid-December, and then the next issue wasn’t for another month. It was a big break. And during that break, the IRS awarded this huge contract to CSC, and we’re like, the paper was already at the printer. We couldn’t change anything.
So I wrote a story. I don’t remember now who we sent it off to. I think our webmaster was out in Minnesota at this company out there, and they put it on our website. And everyone’s like, wow, we could do that. I believe it probably took two days to get it out there. When we started going online so much, I sort of felt like I was going back to my daily newspaper days, where each day you come in and write something, and the pace of things just continues.
Now I almost feel like we’re like a radio show. As soon as it breaks, you go on the air. So that’s the biggest change, and it’s a lot of fun. I sometimes do miss the discipline of print, where we did more enterprise, in-depth pieces. I think we still do that, but not to the extent we did. Or at least for me personally with print. But also I think that you have to acknowledge that the readers often don’t read those bigger pieces anyway.
So we try to keep up with the news, trying to point out things that aren’t necessarily on people’s radar. Then, if you read us every day, you get that in-depth view of the market and multiple facets.
RW: Technology isn’t the only thing that’s been democratized — is that a word English major? (Laughs)
NW: Yeah, I think it is. We can make it a word.
RW: We can make it work. The information that Nick and I cover and use to work off — that’s democratized as well in the government market. So by the time that I see or Nick sees major happenings like a multi-billion dollar contract award, a CEO transition, a big merger and acquisition or some other venture capital transaction that we can talk about it later — the entire ecosystem knows about it already.
Because of how the information related to what the US government is doing and what these contractors are doing … It’s regulated and controlled so there aren’t really a whole lot of scoops for us to chase anymore. I’m not saying that they don’t exist. It’s just the opportunity for that — because of the way that these information streams work — it’s so tightly controlled that, by the time that Nick and I know something, everybody knows about it already.
So the biggest challenge for us at Wash Tech — and the evolution that I’ve seen and tried to work with firsthand here — is to try to give that value-added piecing of things together in a way that the market probably hasn’t thought about before. Or trying to find a perspective out there through the phone calls that we make where it’s like, hey, this is how I’m going to present it. Then there are the sounding boards that Nick and I use to say maybe you should think about it this way. Or this is what I’m hearing. And at least the way we present it in writing — and I hope that it comes out in writing — is that we give something a little bit of extra in there, rather than just the “five Ws and how” or a “See Spot Run … Here’s what happened” kind of thing.
JC: Perfect. You mentioned a little bit earlier about interests in space and interest in policy. How else do you think the market will continue to evolve as we head into 2025 and beyond?
NW: Wow, you always take your pick. Trends are years and years in the making. It amazes me. We’ve been talking about the cloud for 10 to 15 years and yet I talk to people in industry who have customers that are just now starting to migrate to the cloud. So you’re going to have some that are just now migrating, but others who are two or three steps beyond that, and how they’re applying it and being “cloud first.”
Now people are talking about cloud native things. It’s not an application that you’ve adapted. I think that cloud native is going to be big. With the workforce issues we face, I think we’ll see more focus on automation. I think automation will be a big area going forward, with a lot of opportunities there.
It’s funny that I hadn’t thought about this because we’ve been talking so much about AI the last few years. I was at a presentation where they were talking about where agencies are spending money and we’re still at the stage now, they said, where the AI spend right now is getting data in the condition or in the in the format that AI can use. So we’re definitely in the “barely crawling” stage. Because whether you’re looking at cyber security or you’re looking at business processes — once that data is in a more usable format, you’ll see AI really start to live up to more of the hype then. So I think those are some areas on my mind.
RW: Something to keep in mind is that — when we’re talking about data in this ecosystem and this industry — is that you can add up however much data that commercial enterprises hold in every industry. The U.S. government — the data that agencies hold — far outnumbers what commercial enterprises have to hold on to. In fact, there are laws about how government agencies have to retain data. They can’t throw it away, right? It has to go somewhere. That’s a trend that I think a lot of companies in the market miss out on or they overlook: That the agencies have to keep all this stuff.
The times have passed where you can just put it on mainframes and sit it elsewhere. It has to be more usable, to Nick’s point earlier. So that’s where the ideal scenario comes in, where artificial intelligence comes into play. That being said, the story is as old as time in government: The technology that happens and is invented in the commercial ecosystem far outpaces and out-advances what the regulatory and policy framework can keep up with. Cloud is no different. AI is no different. Chips — which is kind of a hobby horse of mine — same thing there.
So that’s becoming at the forefront what a lot of these technology services contractors are talking to their customers about: Taking that into consideration as everybody tries to embark on these tech transformation, digital transformation projects … Whatever you want to call it.
LP: It’s interesting, you know. I’d be curious to hear — because we have touched on chips, AI, space policy and a wide variety of topics. In looking ahead to 2025, are there any topics or areas that you’re looking forward to covering more of in 2025? On the inverse, are there any of them that you’re hoping to leave in 2024?
NW: (Laughs) I don’t know. I hate to sound like a cop out, but there’s so much going on. I do get tired sometimes of talking about cyber and AI, because we kind of beat those to death. But when you look at sort of the challenges we face as a nation, cyber is just going to continue to drive a lot of conversations. AI is just going to continue to build.
So as far as leaving behind? I think with the switch to the Trump administration, there’ll be less focus on climate change and diversity/inclusion and I’ll miss that. Because I do think that those are issues that have such a broad impact in across society. Of course, that might reflect some of my own biases. But I think that climate change in particular is a national security issue. When you look at some of the disasters, and those things are just going to get worse. But there are no issues I really want to leave behind necessarily.
RW: Want to leave behind? Or probably think I’ll leave behind? Cyber is probably at the top of the list. I don’t want to leave it behind, but just when I think it’s going to be left behind … I don’t know about anybody else on this call. But once you think you start to leave cyber behind and say, “Okay, now it’s on everybody’s attention,” people forget about it.
Then what do you know? Our phones go off, and yet another very expensive, very large scale data breach happens, and we all get that email in our box “Hey, your identity has been stolen. Sucks to be you.” Right? It keeps happening. So just when you think every government agency and Fortune 50 company put cyber security on the top of their agenda and say “Cyber is a team sport. It’s important to us now. We have skin in the game” … Then everybody forgets about it, and that cycle just keeps repeating. So I don’t think we’ll ever leave the cyber beat behind.
Nick and I don’t necessarily cover those data breaches in depth. But we cover the companies that try to work with government agencies to either fix it or make sure that it doesn’t happen again. And yet, every agency and every contractor will tell us to a person that their systems are already breached, which keeps a lot of people up at night.
NW: Yeah, that’s kind of funny. Just to piggyback on that, Ross: I recently had an executive round table. We were talking about cyber. There were about 12 of us, and one of the executives said the one thing that makes cyber so tough is it’s hard to know that for $1 of cyber, do you get $10 of efficiency? Do you get an adhesive? That equation is one that — not until you know you’ve been breached, and you suffer that pain – so much of it is hypothetical. He didn’t use that word, but he said that’s a hard thing to get through.
Then you just have the gradient across the market and across government like “Well, how much am I at risk if someone breaches me, versus a missile silo.” It’s another ball game there. So he said that’s the other challenge with cyber is that it’s not one size fits all, and so you have to constantly be understanding “What is my risk? How much do I spend?” A lot of times it comes down to the money.
LP: I definitely don’t think that’s going to be a topic that we’ll be able to leave behind in 2024 or anytime soon, for that matter. But, yeah, I think that’s a really good point that you brought up, that it isn’t one size fits all and there is that equation out there. It’s just we’re still trying to figure out what does it equate to at the moment?
RW: Something that is a never ending story but is always interesting — and I’m sure we’ll cover this more in 2025 — is this industry partnership angle. What I mean by that is: Let’s say we’ll just pick a number. The top 50, top 100 companies on the Washington Technology rankings? You have to work with a lot of these global commercial tech companies whose products are in gov IT systems — whether they be the cloud providers or are still trying to understand the cloud native applications that manage business process. Processes of government, right? Workflow, payroll, you name it, right?
You have to work with these companies, because these companies out in the global ecosystem, they make the kind of stuff that agencies want to have as part of their journey toward transformation and modernization. And so these contractors — these systems integrators that Nick and I cover, (let’s) set aside the agencies trying to keep up with all the advances in the tech ecosystem — these integrators have to keep up with it as well. On record, they will be diplomatic with Nick and I as to how challenging it is. Off record, they will tell you that it’s pretty stressful as well, because these new innovations are popping up left and right. So with the evolution of this partnering strategy, you have to not see these global companies as competitors, but as teammates as well. That’s an evolution we’ll continue to be covering in 2025. I don’t know what you have to say about that, Nick. But that’s what I’m looking at.
NW: Yeah, talk about changes to the market. Fifteen years ago, these partnerships were very transactional. It was by opportunity, that kind of thing. Now, what we see is everybody in particular partnering with the big commercial tech companies — the Amazons, the Salesforces, the Microsofts — those companies. And I think part of it is to keep up with the technologies that these companies are cranking out. For the integrator, it gets them early access and an early vision into where the technology is going. But it also provides a feedback loop into the commercial companies like, “Okay, this is what our government customers are looking for” and “How we can change our solution to help address them?”
To draw back on that executive roundtable: There was an executive there who (said) he was in a meeting recently with Microsoft. He told them, “You realize that you are part of the defense industrial base, so you are a target of our adversaries.” He said it was a sobering conversation for Microsoft, because they hadn’t really thought about it. He says, “You’re putting these data centers out in the Northwest. You know those are targets, because if they’re trying to cripple our economy — or triple-cripple our response to that combination of a kinetic threat and the non-kinetic — these commercial companies need to think about that.
I guess it’s similar to critical infrastructure threats and things. That’s been a big challenge, how more closely aligned the (system integrators) have become with their commercial partners.
JC: You just alluded to the conversations that both of you are frequently having. When it comes to people that you interview: What are the characteristics of a compelling spokesperson or a compelling company?
NW: Wow, that that’s a great question. I’ve thought at times that it’d be interesting to do a psychological profile of CEOs because their styles can be so different. I mean, there are CEOs who never use the “I, me, mine” pronouns. They’re very much “we.” And then there are others who are very driven by their own ego. I think that both can have success. I think one is probably more loved than the other.
But, as a good interview, you want somebody who can tell a story, who you know that what they do means something to them personally — that they have a passion for the government market. They have a passion for their customer. They have a passion for their employees. And you can sense that the way they talk about it. Where there are others that are more focused on the bottom line as their only success measure. I like the people who can tell the story that reflects who they are.
Oh my gosh, I’m drawing a blank on his name, but he was retiring as the CFO at Leidos. I was in his office doing his exit interview. Toward the end, he goes, “Look out there,” and he points out the window at one of the older, high rises in Reston, and there’s a golf course there. And he said, “You know, when I was 20, I was a caddy at that golf course. And now here I am.” It was just a fun story that he told about how “That’s where I started, and here’s where I’m ending just a half a mile away” kind of thing. I like those. People who are comfortable enough to talk about themselves and share stories about themselves — make for the most compelling interviews, stories, podcasts … Those kinds of things.
LP: It’s adding in that human element again.
RW: I certainly agree wholeheartedly on the human element and being comfortable in your own skin to share that. And I would say in general: We’re talking about CEO or CEO equivalent. You are a public figure when you sign up for that role in this market. People aren’t going to know who you are or what your company does, unless you’re willing to go out there. Wash Tech isn’t the only forum for that, but I’m just talking in general for that.
When you (put) that through a business journalism lens: One of my favorite analyst type figures on ESPN was once asked what makes for a good media performer, what makes for a good job? And he said, “You got to be willing to say stuff.” And he’s not saying you have to be controversial in that. Although I won’t preclude anybody from saying anything that’s controversial in our articles or on our podcast, because I want clicks and subscribers. I don’t know about you, Nick, but clicks and subscribers and listens are good, right?
But you have to be willing to give some insight into how things actually operate, without turning it into so much of an over-advertorial for who your company is. Be willing to take the covers off and show everybody what’s under the hood of the company — or even what’s under the market — because part of the art of being a business and technology journalist is to also illuminate more of how the industry works to an audience that knows it already, but can sometimes be very siloed. And looking at just how the part of the market that they work in operates. Because, as much as Nick and I are talking to today’s business leaders at C-level and below, we’re also talking to those that are coming up through the ranks. Because the CEO today is not going to be there ten years from now. Somebody else is going to be there.
JC: Speaking of the Washington technology podcast, could you tell us a little bit about it and what you look for in terms of guests and topics of interest?
NW: Yeah, I’ll give a little history on it, and then I’m going to turn it over to Ross, because it’s really become his baby in the last year.
So we originally launched the podcast. It was called Project 38 because it was 2018 and I had this idea, “Let’s think about what the market’s going to look like in 20 years in 2038.” So I started off interviewing executives about what their big vision was. And I realized pretty quickly that most people aren’t looking out 20 years. They’re looking out 18 months, two years, three years, four years. So the whole theme of it changed.
And then — I guess it was two years ago that we rebranded it, Ross?
RW: It started in 2023.
NW: Yeah, it started in 2023 that we rebranded as WT 360, so we’re taking that holistic view of the market. There are several things I like about doing the podcast. One, it does allow us to go more in-depth on things and really have a conversation with somebody on a particular topic happening in the marketplace. So that gets us a little bit back toward what we were able to do when we were a magazine with these longer pieces that we would write.
I also like it because it’s a venue for having conversations that aren’t necessarily driven by the headlines. We do some of those, particularly when we talk with other reporters from GovExec. But it gives us a chance to look at things that we otherwise wouldn’t in our day-to-day kind of thing. And one thing I’m really happy with: Ross, since the rebranding, he’s the lead on it much more. I’ve taken more of a back seat. Ross really keeps that engine going, and he’s doing a great job.
I’ll let Ross talk about this after I make this comment. But one thing I think Ross has done that is really valuable is he has a group of people whom he checks back in with at least once a year — if not a couple times a year — to talk about trends whether it’s on the finance side or in different areas. That’s a really valuable thing to do, and I’m glad he’s been doing that. So Ross, I’ll turn it over to you talk about WT 360.
RW: A lot of that is just wearing my old research hat. Because when you reach out into the service provider community — whether they be, at research firms, financial institutions … you name it — one of the things that I have to sign up for and agree as part of the arrangement to bring them on is that a lot of their clients are actually companies that Nick and I cover. So there’s a sometimes written and sometimes unspoken agreement that I can’t ask somebody to just, you know, talk good or bad about a company. But they can shed light on some of the client conversations that they’re having and (say) “Hey, this is what’s important to the industry …”
That happens in a way that the “business leader CEO” interview doesn’t necessarily allow for. It allows for a little bit of it, certainly. But — when I pull from people in the service provider and the research world — it’s a way to look at the market holistically and talk to the entire audience. So I do the best I can to keep a regular rotation of that. I mean — certainly the CEO and business leader interviews, much of the like — are no different than what Bloomberg or CNBC do as well, right? That’s a regular part of the rotation.
And then there’s the journalists that Nick and I work with here at GovExec — whether they be at Defense One, Nextgov or even Government Executive — and that’s another way to talk to the entire audience and inform the industry audience of what’s going on with their customers, current or prospective. Because, the way we frame that when we work with the reporters is, “Hey, these people cover the customer. Okay, so sit down and take notes of that, of what they’re telling you.” And the service provider and research community does that as well.
And just to pull on my lens, actually — or my background as a former sports reporter who somehow worked his way into public research, public sector research and then public sector journalism — is when I when we do the non-CEO/business leader interviews, it looks a lot like the Dan Patrick show on Peacock. Because he regularly pulls on that group of people — whether they’re analysts or journalists covering sports — and they are guests on his show. I’ve heard his crew talk about how — like, far and away — when they have the journalists or media type figures on, more people actually listen to that than they do to the athletes and coaches who are actually working.
I can tell you that’s not true for our particular show, because the CEO and business leader interviews do really well. But you need a regular rotation of that to change up the conversation, to give people that — just as the podcast tagline says – “The market from every angle.” Because everybody has something to say, whether you’re leading a company or you’re trying to help a company navigate the market.
LP: Awesome. Those are great insights. Kind of switching gears here for a little more fun, “get to know the reporters in the newsroom” type of question. I know that we’re near the holiday season. I don’t need that to influence your answer to this. But I’d be curious to hear what is one of your most frequently watched movies — like one of the ones that if you come across it, you’ll stop whatever you’re doing and put it on or continue watching it.
NW: Well, at this time of year for me, it’s Elf. I just think that’s such a great, great holiday movie. Otherwise, I have two teenage boys, 14 and 16. And so there’s a lot of Marvel movies that get watched in our house or when we’re going to spend the $12, $13 or $14 for a ticket. Those are the movies we generally go see at the theater. For me, of those movies, I really like Captain America: The First Avenger. I think this one of the best ones they did. For non-Marvel movies, I really like classic Westerns. So if The Searchers is on with John Wayne, I’m going to stop and watch it. Or almost any of the “Man with No Name” movies that Clint Eastwood did — his spaghetti westerns are hard to resist for me. My wife, though, is not one for scary or violent movies. So we don’t get to watch those as much unless she’s asleep, and then we could keep the volume down.
LP: Ross, how about yourself?
RW: I’ve made a list, actually. (Laughs) So these are the four that I made — and it depends on what mood I’m in — because it changes all the time. One is Almost Famous with Kate Hudson. That’s a movie that was released in 2000 set in the 1970s, but I think has aged very well as time has gone on. Then any of the Batman movies with Christian Bale. We’ll just call that one movie, right? Because it’s the same story. Then Slumdog Millionaire and Shawshank Redemption.
NW: Oh yeah, wow. Those are great choices, Ross. Maybe we should start a movie club.
RW: We have to start this next year. But I’m actually in a group of people that — once a month — it’s a Saturday morning movie club. As part of it — in this group of six or seven — one person picks the movie. They give a five-minute presentation of what the movie is about, explaining the plot without spoilers and some context. After we watch it, we have to go around the circle and present one fact about the movie or some of the cast members. That forces us to go outside of our little niche of what our movie references are. I’ll just state up front that superhero movies are not my thing. Part of the reason why they’re not — it’s not anything against the genre specifically — it’s that there’s just so many of them. And now it’s an excuse for the studios to turn it into a cash cow without really putting a lot of effort into the script writing and what not.
NW: That’s good. Now, do you guys watch the movies together?
RW: Yes.
NW: Oh, that’s great. Wow. That’s a fantastic idea.
RW: With this group of people, you talk about movies that have deep meaning and have aged very well. This was the first time that I watched that the classic movie with Cuba Gooding Jr. and Laurence Fishburne, Boyz n the Hood, which is one of the greatest coming of age films that’s ever been created. And it’s aged very well over time, even though it’s set in I believe the late 80s or early 90s. Some of the movies that we watch in this club are very confronting, and then with other ones, we just laugh out loud hysterical. We try to mix it up.
JC: Our closing question: We realize that when we talk to people and ask them about what they like, they’ll certainly tell you what they like. But if you ask them about what they hate, they’re passionate about what they hate. So is there a food or dish or a food ingredient that you do not like?
NW: Brussels sprouts, and it kills me a little bit because they’re so trendy now. I keep trying them. I don’t know. They’re just disgusting. So that’s mine. I could live without that one.
RW: We find alignment on Brussels sprouts. I just can’t. I just can’t.
LP: You can’t fry them, bake them or boil them?
RW: No, no, nothing.
Wait, we talked about movies. You’re not going to ask us a music question? Because that’s the other part. I know you said that’s the last one, but give me permission to hijack the conversation a bit.
JC: Permission granted … Tell us about your music interest. I believe we were going to ask you: What song if you never had to hear again would make you extremely happy? Do you have one of those?
RW: So I do, OK, and it’s, it’s not even a song. It’s actually a band. Anytime that the Amazon Music AI makes a decision that it’s going to give me Nickelback, I have to fast forward. Because I just can’t.
And I’ll tell you a story: So those guys, you know, they made a lot of money. They have an audience. I respect it, right? I was at a music festival in Canada during my study abroad up there. Those guys are from Canada, and Canadians have a particular pride about themselves, about bands from Canada that make it. Well, at this music festival, Nickelback appeared at the show, and they got booed in their own country! And I’m like, “OK, I find alignment with these people.” So that’s one band that I’m just like, “Congratulations. But not for me.”
NW: For me, it’s not one song. It’s the genre of today’s pop music. I’m too much of a classic rock dinosaur.
LP: I can understand that. I mean, I can’t understand the Nickelback hate. I will admit I listen to them. But I see why some people don’t enjoy it.
But you know, Nick and Ross, we both really appreciate you taking the time to chat with us today. If any of our listeners wanted to learn more about you and the work that you’re doing at Washington Technology, what would be the best way for them to reach you?
NW: Oh, come to the website. And our emails are pretty simple: I’m at nwakeman@washingtontechnology.com and I’m on LinkedIn.
LP: Awesome. Ross, same way of reaching you?
RW: Same way — rwilkers@washingtontechnology.com. I’m on LinkedIn. Once in a while, I’m out on the event circuit. That’s a goal for me in 2025, to be seen more.
LP: Awesome. Well, hopefully we and some of our listeners can come out to those events and run into you two.
NW: Absolutely.
LP: Thank you to everyone who tuned into this episode, and thank you again, Nick and Ross, for helping us go Gov & Beyond.
Outro: Thank you for joining us on today’s episode of Gov & Beyond. To learn more about our podcast and hear all of our episodes, please visit us at W2Comm.com/govandbeyond and make sure to follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter @Gov&Beyond. You can also subscribe anywhere podcasts are found.