Speaker 1: Hi, bridgett Here. The other podcast that I make with
Speaker 1: Mozilla about AI called IRL was nominated for an Anthem Award.
Speaker 1: It would mean so much to me if you could
Speaker 1: take just a few seconds and vote for IRL to win.
Speaker 1: Just go to tangoti dot com slash I r L
Speaker 1: or use the link in our show notes. You can
Speaker 1: vote until December twenty first. Thank you so much. It
Speaker 1: means a lot. There are No Girls on the Internet.
Speaker 1: As a production of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative, I'm bridget
Speaker 1: Todd and this is there are no Girls on the Internet.
Speaker 1: I am here with my producer Joey. Joey, it's nice
Speaker 1: to see you back.
Speaker 2: We missed you, Hi, it's nice with you too.
Speaker 1: So as y'all know, we are trying to start every
Speaker 1: episode with a little bit of light banter, just sort
Speaker 1: of ease us into the episode. I tried my hardest
Speaker 1: to do it last week. We bank Yeah.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: Listener Susan actually emailed us with a great banter suggestion
Speaker 1: of using the time to sort of get to know
Speaker 1: our producers. Because we hear from Joey, we hear from Mike.
Speaker 1: Listeners don't necessarily know who these folks are, even though
Speaker 1: I feel like, you know, I'm talking to them all
Speaker 1: the time. So to do that, let's play a little
Speaker 1: bit of my favorite game, would you Rather? Would you rather?
Speaker 1: As one of my favorite games. I play it endlessly
Speaker 1: on car trips. I've annoyed all my friends. I all
Speaker 1: text would you rather? Okay? Would you rather? Be able
Speaker 1: to use the internet only for twenty minutes every day?
Speaker 1: Or you can use it like normal? But your boss
Speaker 1: gets a detailed report of everything you did online every day?
Speaker 3: Oh my god, I haven't think of all that now,
Speaker 3: Like what do I do on the internet? I feel
Speaker 3: like I need to go through Okay, that's rough, Like
Speaker 3: this is my problem. I get way too strong, like
Speaker 3: I love these things, but also and then I spend
Speaker 3: too much time.
Speaker 2: Being like but what would I do? What if this
Speaker 2: was real? I don't know. I uh, but I think.
Speaker 3: My boss is pretty chill. That's what I so I'm
Speaker 3: thinking of, like my boss currently. Hi, Maya, if you're
Speaker 3: listening to this, But like I wouldn't like I feel
Speaker 3: like that would be fine, Like I wouldn't like there's
Speaker 3: nothing I write, yeah, Like she would just sort of
Speaker 3: be like all right, whatever, Like Maya wouldn't even look
Speaker 3: do you spend like an embarrassing amount of time on
Speaker 3: like Twitter?
Speaker 2: So like I don't, like, I.
Speaker 3: Don't really know if I want that like out into
Speaker 3: the world.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna say.
Speaker 3: Tentatively, I think my boss gets a detailed report on
Speaker 3: what internet just because I can't like the idea of
Speaker 3: only having twenty minutes on the Internet, Like I'm like,
Speaker 3: that is not I don't beyond even just like the
Speaker 3: normal stuff I like need to look up, Like I
Speaker 3: don't know how to like function, Like I don't think
Speaker 3: I've ever cooked a meal without ever having to look
Speaker 3: up something like really stupid, Like I don't know. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: that's my answer. What about you, bridget what about you?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm my own boss. Really, I will say, you're
Speaker 1: to your point about like the things that I have
Speaker 1: to google when I'm cooking, like a tablespoon is you
Speaker 1: know how many cups into tables? Like things I feel
Speaker 1: like I should have learned in grammar school, Like if
Speaker 1: I if people, if if another human got to see
Speaker 1: the level of a nane things that I have to
Speaker 1: check via Google, I will be very embarrassed.
Speaker 2: Oh the other one.
Speaker 3: Recently, I've been working on a project currently. That's making
Speaker 3: me go through some like Jstore articles and some like
Speaker 3: really academic stuff, which is super fun.
Speaker 2: I love doing that stuff, like honestly, like that's kind
Speaker 2: of shit. I like, I'll nerd out over.
Speaker 3: However, it's been a minute since I've read like academic articles,
Speaker 3: and I don't There's a lot of words that I've
Speaker 3: had to google just like that are like weird words.
Speaker 2: Like like but yeah, like I I feel like my
Speaker 2: my recently.
Speaker 3: It's either that or like if I'm writing something and
Speaker 3: I'll be like, I keep spelling this word wrong. Those
Speaker 3: are usually like stupid ones like that's usually like I
Speaker 3: can't remember how to spell like schedule or something like
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: That might be a little embarrassing, but you know what,
Speaker 2: yeah I can't. I can't. I don't know what words mean.
Speaker 1: I think, okay, so here there are no girls on
Speaker 1: the internet. We have been watching the Republican debate so
Speaker 1: that y'all don't have to. It has been interesting and frustrating.
Speaker 1: I would say like eighty percent of what comes up
Speaker 1: on the on the Republican Debate so far has been
Speaker 1: like stunts or scams or grand standing or conspiracy theories,
Speaker 1: and then maybe like twenty percent is actual policy discussions
Speaker 1: genuinely I've had. When I watched it this week, I
Speaker 1: had to turn it off for a little while and
Speaker 1: like collect myself and then return to it. So technology
Speaker 1: has come up in most of these debates, specifically whether
Speaker 1: or not TikTok should be banned. Former South Carolina Governor
Speaker 1: Nikki Hayley has been all in on banning TikTok, and
Speaker 1: in this week's debate, she dropped a startling statistic that
Speaker 1: just thirty minutes spent on TikTok makes people seventeen percent
Speaker 1: more anti semitic.
Speaker 4: We really do need to ban TikTok once and for all.
Speaker 4: And let me tell you why. For every thirty minutes
Speaker 4: that someone watches TikTok every day, they become seventeen percent
Speaker 4: more anti Semitic, more pro hamas based on doing.
Speaker 1: That, which is like a pretty big claim. So whenever
Speaker 1: I hear a candidate make like a clear specific claim
Speaker 1: like that, you gotta dig into it to find more, right,
Speaker 1: because it should be pretty cut and dry, right, like
Speaker 1: find the stat confirm whether it's accurate or not. So
Speaker 1: I thought this is going to be a straightforward fact
Speaker 1: check for y'all when I tell you this was so
Speaker 1: much more complicated. So that seventeen percent figure that Haley
Speaker 1: cited actually came from a data analysis shared on Twitter
Speaker 1: on November thirtieth by Anthony Goldbloom. Goldbloom is the former
Speaker 1: CEO of a data science platform called Cagold. I looked
Speaker 1: into Goldbloom. He is like a macro economist from Australia.
Speaker 1: So first, Hayley misstated what Goldbloom's analysis found. Gold Bloom's
Speaker 1: analysis suggests that people who spend thirty minutes a day
Speaker 1: or more on TikTok are seventeen percent more likely than
Speaker 1: others to hold antisemitic or anti Israel views. We'll come
Speaker 1: back to that point in just a moment. For comparison,
Speaker 1: According to this analysis, use of Instagram for thirty minutes
Speaker 1: today was associated with a six percent increase in the
Speaker 1: likelihood of anti Semitic views, and the use of Twitter
Speaker 1: for thirty minutes today was associated with a two percent
Speaker 1: increase in likelihood. Side note, When Goldbloom tweeted this, you
Speaker 1: know Elon Musk was in the thread being like interesting.
Speaker 1: This says that actually Twitter is not a big driver
Speaker 1: of anti Semitism. You don't say that's great for me,
Speaker 1: unsurprising Gloom. So Hayley has definitely misstated the conclusions of
Speaker 1: this analysis. She said during the debate, for every thirty
Speaker 1: minutes that somebody watched TikTok, and that's simply not with
Speaker 1: this analysis suggests the state of conclusions of the analysis
Speaker 1: are that people who spend thirty minutes or more on
Speaker 1: TikTok every day are seventeen percent more likely to hold
Speaker 1: anti Semitic attitudes. What it does not suggest is that
Speaker 1: spending thirty minutes on TikTok will bolster someone's anti semitic
Speaker 1: use by seventeen by sev which is like, like, that's
Speaker 1: like a real like how this.
Speaker 2: Would get seventeen?
Speaker 3: I want I want to like, I would love for
Speaker 3: an interviewer to ask Indicky Haley how exactly somebody gets
Speaker 3: sevent Like, what is the metric to measure that? What
Speaker 3: is seventeen more anti semitic? Seventeen percent more anti semitic
Speaker 3: than what you previously were.
Speaker 1: That's yeah, So I think that's why what you said.
Speaker 1: I think that's exactly why people are really responding to
Speaker 1: this on Twitter, that people are like, like, what is
Speaker 1: the metric that you're using? Like, how are you quantifying this?
Speaker 1: Had I been the moderator of that debate, I would
Speaker 1: have definitely pressed her because it's like you can't drop
Speaker 1: a stat like that and then you just like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: seventeen percent, my am I anyway, moving on, like that's
Speaker 1: really a stat that like, she clearly got it from somewhere,
Speaker 1: and so I do think the moderators it would have
Speaker 1: behooved them to ask a little bit more about where
Speaker 1: that stat came from. So she is just flat out
Speaker 1: misstating what that analysis actually said. But then there's the
Speaker 1: issue of the analysis itself that is a bit more complicated.
Speaker 1: So I want to be super clear that I am
Speaker 1: like no researcher. I don't have an educational background in
Speaker 1: this at all. But our producer Mike has a PhD
Speaker 1: and does survey research for a living. I had Mike
Speaker 1: take a look at the analysis and he raised a
Speaker 1: few questions. First, Goldbloom does not describe his methods in
Speaker 1: the survey, so we don't know a ton about how
Speaker 1: he came to these conclusions around that seventeen percent figure.
Speaker 1: It's entirely possible that these methods are perfectly sound. But
Speaker 1: because when he shared his analysis, he did not also
Speaker 1: share his methods, we have no idea and we can't
Speaker 1: even look into it to say. This was not a
Speaker 1: study published in a scientific journal. It is just an
Speaker 1: analysis that somebody posted on Twitter and GitHub, So definitely
Speaker 1: like keep that in mind when thinking about this. The
Speaker 1: stat second is the way that Goldbloom framed the survey
Speaker 1: questions to determine how often that people responding to the
Speaker 1: survey use TikTok. According to his data, ninety percent of
Speaker 1: all respondents use TikTok at least once a day, which
Speaker 1: is certainly not representative of the larger United States population.
Speaker 1: He also did not control for age. You know, we
Speaker 1: know that folks who use TikTok tend to skew younger,
Speaker 1: and we also know that younger people tend to be
Speaker 1: more sympathetic to Palestinians. So in his correlational study, in
Speaker 1: which he didn't control for age at all, it is
Speaker 1: possible that the entire effect is driven about the fact
Speaker 1: that the people who use TikTok tend to be younger
Speaker 1: than the people who don't. We just don't know. So
Speaker 1: another points that I wanted to make which this is
Speaker 1: coming from noted non researcher me Fridgid and not researcher Mike.
Speaker 1: Is the way that Goldbloom correlates anti Israel views with
Speaker 1: anti Semitic views on Twitter, Goldbloom fleshed this out saying
Speaker 1: TikTok users are more likely to believe Jewish people are
Speaker 1: dishonest in business, are disloyal to America, and have too
Speaker 1: much power in media. They're also more likely to disagree
Speaker 1: that Israel has a right to defend itself against those
Speaker 1: who want to destroy it. And I guess I just
Speaker 1: have questions about this framing that puts very clear anti
Speaker 1: Semitic tropes like Jewish people have too much power alongside
Speaker 1: specific policy opinions about the state of Israel to make
Speaker 1: the overall claim about TikTok users being anti Semitic. I
Speaker 1: just have questions about how those survey questions are being
Speaker 1: understood in this in this analysis.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's definitely like the biggest dread flag for me.
Speaker 3: Also not I'm also not a preno professional researcher. I
Speaker 3: did how every good a journalism school, and they teach
Speaker 3: to us a lot about you know, not asking leading
Speaker 3: questions or not how framing questions in a specific way
Speaker 3: like kind of determines how Like I don't know, I
Speaker 3: learned that at like ap stats too, Like that's a
Speaker 3: pretty big concept. And this is like a what it
Speaker 3: does whenever you have something that's talking about anti semitism
Speaker 3: and you are also roping in the most basic questions
Speaker 3: about Israel and the Israeli military and like yeah, like
Speaker 3: this said specific policy questions, Like that's that is so
Speaker 3: much more complicated than just simply asking about anti semitism.
Speaker 3: And also then what it ends up doing is falsely
Speaker 3: equivocating any sort of criticism of Israel with anti semitism,
Speaker 3: which is not true.
Speaker 2: It is not like look like I we're in the middle.
Speaker 3: I mean, and I think now, especially now we're seeing this,
Speaker 3: like there's a lot of like people that are Jewish
Speaker 3: that are very critical of Israel or Zionism or like
Speaker 3: the Israeli state. There are people I know that Like,
Speaker 3: I mean, I don't know, I have family members that
Speaker 3: aren't even like super that are definitely like Zionists, that
Speaker 3: are definitely more.
Speaker 2: Pro Israel, but like they're very critical of the Israeli state.
Speaker 3: Because the estate is currently like has a super far
Speaker 3: right government in charge. But yeah, no, that's that is
Speaker 3: a weird Like I think that that to me, just
Speaker 3: hearing that he put those two things together and use
Speaker 3: that as one sort of set of data and to
Speaker 3: make like one assumption about whether or not people are
Speaker 3: anti smatic and hold antismatic views, that to me just
Speaker 3: qualifies the entire results of the survey, because if you're
Speaker 3: if you're not making that distinction, you're not going to
Speaker 3: get accurate results.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I want to be clear, like I am fully,
Speaker 1: fully ready to believe that it's possible that TikTok drives
Speaker 1: harmful attitudes like anti semitism. We already know that TikTok,
Speaker 1: Like this is something that happens on social media platforms.
Speaker 1: This is not like a surprise media matters that an
Speaker 1: analysis that found that TikTok recommends users content that is
Speaker 1: misogynistic and deeply transphobic and and uses that kind of
Speaker 1: uses transphobia and misogyny as a entry point to lead
Speaker 1: them down far right rabbit holes. And so that is
Speaker 1: the thing, right, But I wanted to bring this up
Speaker 1: because I do think it says something about our current
Speaker 1: like political and media climate right now, it is very
Speaker 1: weird to me that someone running for office, running for
Speaker 1: president could clearly and specifically state something as an an
Speaker 1: a clear fact based on just an analysis that somebody
Speaker 1: put out there on Twitter, and that that claim would
Speaker 1: be this difficult and complicated to verify. You know, I've
Speaker 1: seen people like dismissing Haley's claims, which I also like
Speaker 1: kind of understand because it does. Like I was when
Speaker 1: I was like looking into this, I was ready to
Speaker 1: be like wanted Nikki Haley completely misunderstand or like, why
Speaker 1: did she pull this completely ridiculous stat from thought that
Speaker 1: I thought it was going to be like a made
Speaker 1: up stat that she just like fabricated. And I'm realizing
Speaker 1: now that like that isn't necessarily the case. And I
Speaker 1: actually do think it matters how platforms are shaping and
Speaker 1: stoking social attitudes. But I wish that we could have
Speaker 1: that conversation in a way that doesn't misstate findings or
Speaker 1: that does it spotlight you know, analysis that's just murky
Speaker 1: murky in the sense of like it's not clear how
Speaker 1: it was how it was gathered, right, So, like I
Speaker 1: don't think that this is actually helping us to get
Speaker 1: there and I actually would be curious to have that conversation.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, definitely, I think this is a weird one
Speaker 3: because I also, Yeah, I think my immediate i'd seen that,
Speaker 3: Like I saw that clip on Twitter, and my immediate
Speaker 3: response was just like, oh my god, Like, of course
Speaker 3: Nikia Harley is saying some weird stuff.
Speaker 2: But yeah, no, it definitely is indicative of something.
Speaker 3: And I think it also like the way the fact
Speaker 3: that like something like TikTok that's just a platform has
Speaker 3: been politicized so much, like that makes it so hard
Speaker 3: to actually analyze like what we're talking about and analyze
Speaker 3: the way that yeah, like what there is a conversation
Speaker 3: to be had about these sites like stoking hate and
Speaker 3: like not to say any semitism, but yeah, like racism
Speaker 3: and transphobia, homophobia, misogyny. There is an there's a conversation
Speaker 3: to be had there, and it's important that we like
Speaker 3: figure out ways to address that problem. But like there's
Speaker 3: so many intersexting issues here. A it's the fact that
Speaker 3: TikTok's been politicized, and it's so hard to actually do
Speaker 3: that research when it's been politicized in this way.
Speaker 2: And then on the other hand, like, I think this.
Speaker 3: Is why it is so important to distinguish between what
Speaker 3: is actually anti Semitic and what is simply criticism of
Speaker 3: Israel that's not necessarily anti smetic, because it's so like
Speaker 3: I feel like I'm having this This has been a
Speaker 3: frustrating thing lately when trying to find just like statistics
Speaker 3: and info about anti semitism in particular, is it so
Speaker 3: much of it is so hard to like really get
Speaker 3: real clear answers just because yeah, so many people, whether
Speaker 3: just sort of by assumption or like with a specific agenda,
Speaker 3: have included criticism of Israel or have included criticism of
Speaker 3: Zionism within their analysis of anti semitism.
Speaker 1: And I'm not.
Speaker 3: Saying, like again not saying that aren't criticisms are all
Speaker 3: of Israel and Zionism out there that turned into antisemitic
Speaker 3: talking points.
Speaker 2: Obviously that is a thing too, and that is bad.
Speaker 3: But like those you should be addressing those as anti semitism,
Speaker 3: and because of the anti semitism that go, not because
Speaker 3: they're just criticizing a government that is separate from just
Speaker 3: an a group of people that share an identity.
Speaker 2: But yeah, that is it's weird. It is a weird,
Speaker 2: Like it's one.
Speaker 3: Of those I feel like this is another one of
Speaker 3: those things where like some of the other Republican parties
Speaker 3: and something really weird and it's like a meme for
Speaker 3: a bit and then you like we all think about
Speaker 3: it like a week later and are like, oh, oh no,
Speaker 3: this is bad, like these are and again like this
Speaker 3: is somebody running for president of the United States.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Also, I'm sorry, I don't like this is the like
Speaker 2: the Republican Party.
Speaker 3: This is y'all are the like Jewish space Lasers party,
Speaker 3: Like you can't be out here being like it's chip
Speaker 3: took that's making people antise medic Like I don't know,
Speaker 3: that's the calls were coming from inside the house, Like yeah.
Speaker 1: I was literally just thinking that when you were saying that,
Speaker 1: I was thinking this. I was thinking the same line
Speaker 1: like me coming from some of the houses on that one.
Speaker 1: Let's take a quick break at her back, so we
Speaker 1: got to talk about this Amazon lawsuit. Quick heads up
Speaker 1: at this conversation does involve the sexual exploitation of a minor.
Speaker 1: So two years ago, a Brazilian teenager was participating in
Speaker 1: a foreign exchange student program, so she was living with
Speaker 1: a host family in West Virginia, and while she was there,
Speaker 1: she discovered that her host family or someone in the
Speaker 1: host family had put a spy camera purchased from Amazon
Speaker 1: in her bathroom to obtain intimate footage of her in
Speaker 1: the bathroom. So now she is suing Amazon for selling
Speaker 1: a product that was advertised for potentially illicit uses and
Speaker 1: was allegedly flagged to Amazon's product safety team, which her
Speaker 1: suit says inspected the sale of that camera on their
Speaker 1: platform three times and still failed to prevent the severe
Speaker 1: foreseeable harms that still affect her today. I'm sure those
Speaker 1: harms do affect her today. That is horrible. So Amazon
Speaker 1: filed a motion to dismiss the case back in March,
Speaker 1: but this week the judge hearing the case did not
Speaker 1: buy most of Amazon's arguments, so the case will proceed
Speaker 1: to discovery and maybe even a trial. The judge let
Speaker 1: or claims stand negligence, product viability, torts of outrage which
Speaker 1: is the intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy,
Speaker 1: but the judge did dismiss our racketeering claim against ammaz On.
Speaker 1: So this case is super disturbing to me, and it
Speaker 1: also highlights that Amazon's marketplace does knowingly sell things that
Speaker 1: are pretty obviously not just used for illegal harmful behavior,
Speaker 1: but basically like advertised that they can be used for
Speaker 1: that illegal harmful behavior. The camera that her host family
Speaker 1: had bought on Amazon is called hidden Clothes hook camera.
Speaker 1: It's a camera that it's meant to look like a
Speaker 1: hook that you would hang a towel on in a bathroom.
Speaker 1: And in fact, images that appear in the marketing on
Speaker 1: Amazon's website advertising the camera show a bunch of bath
Speaker 1: towels and they have the copy that says quote it
Speaker 1: won't attract any attention underline and a very ordinary hook yuck.
Speaker 1: So it's pretty clear like but what they are advertising
Speaker 1: right like side note on this, I have seen products
Speaker 1: for sale on Amazon that could be used for other
Speaker 1: kinds of illicit purposes, but they actually are not super
Speaker 1: explicit about this. Like when you buy a sk on
Speaker 1: Amazon that could be used to weigh drugs, for instance,
Speaker 1: on Amazon, they'll show like a tiny piece of green
Speaker 1: lettuce being late being weighed on that scale, not like
Speaker 1: a piece of marijuana, because they don't they don't want
Speaker 1: to advertise it can be used for weighing marijuana, so
Speaker 1: they it's like a roundabout way of them not advertising
Speaker 1: that this can be used for less of behavior.
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 3: I totally forgot that it's still technically illegal to buy weed.
Speaker 2: In most states. What I was like, Oh, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: all right.
Speaker 1: Every time I leave like one of the handful of
Speaker 1: cities and I spend a lot of time in like DC,
Speaker 1: New York City, Brooklyn, Virginia, I'm like, oh, yeah, I
Speaker 1: don't find myself in those places often. But when I am,
Speaker 1: I'm like, oh yeah, y'all, don't do that down here.
Speaker 2: Yeah. No, it's so mad. It is like, I don't
Speaker 2: know a whole other TANGI yeah, I know.
Speaker 3: I had a friend visiting greasily from a state where
Speaker 3: it is not legal, and they were just like, like
Speaker 3: we could just there's just like a store across the street.
Speaker 2: We had got to Yeah, I know. It's anyways.
Speaker 1: So I do think that marketing is a pretty good
Speaker 1: argument for the fact that Amazon was well aware what
Speaker 1: this product was being used for and like how it
Speaker 1: was being like what use case it was being advertised
Speaker 1: to be used for, which is exactly what the lawsuit
Speaker 1: argues to the lawsuit says that Amazon's product safety team
Speaker 1: was aware that the close hook camera was intended for
Speaker 1: unlawful purposes, citing exactly what I just read the marketing
Speaker 1: that says that the hidden camera will not attract attention
Speaker 1: from the victim, who would presumably hang a towel to
Speaker 1: be used in drying her undressed body. The complaint reads,
Speaker 1: the intended use of this spy camera, as explicitly portrayed
Speaker 1: on Amazon's online retail store e g. As a towel
Speaker 1: hook in the bathroom to secretly record undressed individuals without
Speaker 1: their consent is a federal felony and also a crime
Speaker 1: under West Virginia law. So the judge didn't outright dismiss
Speaker 1: the case against Amazon, because the judge said, quote Amazon
Speaker 1: approved product description suggesting cannsumer use of the spycam to
Speaker 1: record private moments in the bathroom. Amazon cannot claim shock
Speaker 1: when a consumer does just that. So there are plenty
Speaker 1: of like non creepy reasons that somebody might put a
Speaker 1: camera in their home. I have a lot of issues
Speaker 1: with it, but my mom has cameras all over her
Speaker 1: house because my dad is disabled and might be in
Speaker 1: another room and need help. But those cameras are not
Speaker 1: disguised as bathroom hooks. Professor Eric Goldman, who runs the
Speaker 1: Tech and Marketing Law blog, said that this ruling could
Speaker 1: have potentially changed the way that spycams are sold through
Speaker 1: online retailers like Amazon. He writes, the court's analysis could
Speaker 1: indicate that all surreptitious hook cameras are categorically illegal to sell,
Speaker 1: even when buyers plan to use them completely legally. That
Speaker 1: makes this a dangerous ruling for the spycam industry and
Speaker 1: for Amazon. At the same time, I'm curious to hear
Speaker 1: more about what Amazon's product safety team thought when it
Speaker 1: evaluated this item, because according to the suit, they evaluated
Speaker 1: it three times and still allow it on their platform.
Speaker 1: And I do think it kind of goes back to
Speaker 1: what we were talking about when we talked about TikTok shop,
Speaker 1: Like I don't think that platforms should just be off
Speaker 1: the hook. Like I don't think that they should be
Speaker 1: able to knowingly profit from the sale of items that
Speaker 1: make clear that what their intended use is for is
Speaker 1: something that is illegal and super harmful.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And like, honestly, the whole idea of having a
Speaker 3: camera that you can disguise as like a clothing hook,
Speaker 3: Like I don't know, I can't think of any situation
Speaker 3: where you would need that where it like it seems justifiable.
Speaker 3: I don't know, like honestly, like I feel like that
Speaker 3: is something that you only use to like get footage
Speaker 3: of people without their permission, and like this is usually
Speaker 3: the outcome of that. Like I don't know, I feel
Speaker 3: like specifically just designing it as like a hook, like
Speaker 3: I can't I don't see any argument for why that's
Speaker 3: something that somebody would need. The whole idea of like
Speaker 3: hidden camera which comes upon the show like surveillance and
Speaker 3: like hidden cameras, Like we're all ways too comfortable.
Speaker 2: With this idea of hitting cameras.
Speaker 3: I like, I seriously, like it seems really strange to me,
Speaker 3: and it seems like this is just we're gonna see
Speaker 3: more and more of this happening and more like of
Speaker 3: these kind of stories.
Speaker 1: Joey, don't even get me started. You know, it's holiday season.
Speaker 1: I'm sure people are gonna be buying all kinds of
Speaker 1: cameras and devices with cameras and recording devices to be
Speaker 1: given to their loved ones to like put in their home.
Speaker 1: So that Amazon can misuse as as they have done.
Speaker 1: They settled a lawsuit about their staff using cameras to
Speaker 1: like peep at consumers or so that police can get
Speaker 1: your information, like, don't do it, take it from me,
Speaker 1: Like like you loved your loved ones more than giving
Speaker 1: them the gift of surveillance, give them the gift of
Speaker 1: privacy instead. So we talk a lot about the irl
Speaker 1: consequences of misinformation online on the show, and that means
Speaker 1: that we really have to take a look at what's
Speaker 1: happening in Ireland. So last week in Dublin, social media
Speaker 1: fueled disinformation turned into a situation with very real world consequences.
Speaker 1: Three young children and a woman were injured in a
Speaker 1: knife attack near a school in Dublin last week. The
Speaker 1: suspect was apprehended. I think it was like a situation
Speaker 1: where like people walking by, people nearby just all helped
Speaker 1: to apprehend the suspect and help the victims. The motive was,
Speaker 1: according to police, entirely unclear. However, according to The New
Speaker 1: York Times, the police said that the attack was followed
Speaker 1: by destructive riots that they blamed on the far right,
Speaker 1: weaponizing misinformation about the knife attack. So the evening after
Speaker 1: the attack, chaotic scenes broke out in the city after
Speaker 1: a group of rioters attacked police vehicles and set fires.
Speaker 1: Videos from that scene showed like stores being broken into,
Speaker 1: police cars and buses being set on fire, people clashing
Speaker 1: with police officers all of that. In the wake of
Speaker 1: that attack, far right figures were using social media to
Speaker 1: spread rumors about the nash finality of the attacker, and
Speaker 1: one protester said that quote, Irish people are being attacked
Speaker 1: by the scum. Drew Harris of the Dublin Police suggested
Speaker 1: that they were being driven by misinformation online about the
Speaker 1: knife attack being spread for what he called malevolent purposes.
Speaker 1: Ireland's President Michaeld Higgins said that the idea that the
Speaker 1: attack would be used or abused by groups with an
Speaker 1: agenda attacks the principle of social inclusion and is reprehensible,
Speaker 1: referring to these far right protesters, and that it deserves
Speaker 1: condemnation by all who believe in the rule of law
Speaker 1: and democracy. So that happened last week, now this week,
Speaker 1: social media platforms were being taken to task for what happened.
Speaker 1: The Independent, which is where I get most of my
Speaker 1: news about what's happening in Ireland. Had a really comprehensive
Speaker 1: breakdown of what happened, which will go on the show notes.
Speaker 1: Irish politician Tanista Michael Martin said he was concerned about
Speaker 1: the rapid mobilization of so many people via social media platforms.
Speaker 1: So Facebook, TikTok, and Google, which all have Dublin headquarters,
Speaker 1: appeared before the Test Media Company to discuss this information
Speaker 1: media literacy and the response to the chaos in Dublin.
Speaker 1: So guess who didn't even bother to show up to
Speaker 1: that committee to talk about what happened? Can you guess?
Speaker 3: Ooh, I am sneaking, sneaking, suspicion and might be.
Speaker 2: One formerly known as Twitter.
Speaker 1: All right, you are right. So that's what Elon Musk
Speaker 1: has not done now, which is that he didn't even
Speaker 1: show up to this committee and the politicians who were
Speaker 1: running this thing were not having it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he doesn't have to ask a like answer to
Speaker 3: the American government. Why would he have to answer the
Speaker 3: Irish government?
Speaker 1: You know? Find Gail td Kieran Cannon encouraged Twitter employees
Speaker 1: to drop an email to the owner of Twitter, Elon Musk,
Speaker 1: suggesting that he desist from commenting on affairs within Ireland,
Speaker 1: which he patently knows nothing about. He also added that
Speaker 1: Elon Musk personally served to stoke up hatred and conflict
Speaker 1: and recent times here in Ireland, and that he should
Speaker 1: be deeply ashamed of those actions. Let him know. Canon, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I would not.
Speaker 2: I would not fuk with the Irish like with this
Speaker 2: sort of thing too, Like Elon Musk, I feel like
Speaker 2: that would also be very poetic justice if this was
Speaker 2: what led to the Elon Musk downfall.
Speaker 3: And I think that would be really funny, but probably
Speaker 3: won't unfortunately.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you don't want this, don't You don't want that.
Speaker 1: You don't want smoke with the Irish. I gotta tell
Speaker 1: you right now, Elon Musk, this is not a fight
Speaker 1: you want to pick. They've gone through so much so
Speaker 1: the platforms who did actually show up kind of gave
Speaker 1: the usual song and dance. I gotta say, like I
Speaker 1: I was sort of heartened to hear what TikTok said
Speaker 1: that they had done in light of this incident. So
Speaker 1: Susan Moss they had a public policy for TikTok Ireland
Speaker 1: said that TikTok had activated its crisis management protocols to
Speaker 1: remove violating content and to prevent the spread of misinformation.
Speaker 1: She said, we activated our emergency fact checking procedure in
Speaker 1: collaboration with those fact checkers. We have a fact checking
Speaker 1: organization here in Ireland. And what they did is that
Speaker 1: they were flagging content, not this on TikTok, but horizon
Speaker 1: scanning across the Internet and flagging to us these individual
Speaker 1: claims that they were seeing that helped us to stop
Speaker 1: the content spreading on TikTok. She said that there were
Speaker 1: twenty five individual claims or type of stories that she
Speaker 1: saw moving across the platform, and she did say that
Speaker 1: she felt that TikTok's response had been very fast moving
Speaker 1: and that she was very confident in it. But then
Speaker 1: contrast that with Facebook. So Facebook said that they removed
Speaker 1: a thousand pieces of misinformation from the platform in the
Speaker 1: first half of this year, which I'm sorry that is
Speaker 1: not a lot. Like a thousand pieces of misinformation is
Speaker 1: just not a lot, and also it just doesn't work
Speaker 1: like that, Like trust me, this was my flagging individual
Speaker 1: pieces of misinformation for removal was my job at one
Speaker 1: point in my life. And I can tell you that
Speaker 1: job was the equivalent of playing whack a mole, like
Speaker 1: even if it's removed, which is that than nothing, it
Speaker 1: just pops back, It pops right back up. And so
Speaker 1: Facebook saying like, oh, this piecemeal strategy that we already
Speaker 1: know is not really that effective. That was our main
Speaker 1: line of defense. That is shocking to me and like
Speaker 1: almost laughable. They also said that they use debunking labels
Speaker 1: on false contact, which we also know isn't always that effective. Like, again,
Speaker 1: it's better than nothing, but they're like using these tactics
Speaker 1: that we have known for a while are not necessarily
Speaker 1: the most effective. Lawmakers also asked specifically about the issue
Speaker 1: of a voice note that was being shared on the
Speaker 1: Facebook owned messaging app WhatsApp calling for immigrants to be killed,
Speaker 1: and asked if there was a failure to curb it
Speaker 1: from spreading like wildfire. I will say that WhatsApp being
Speaker 1: a closed platform where the messages are encrypted, means that
Speaker 1: like tackling harmful or inaccurate information, there is like a specific,
Speaker 1: unique challenge Like that is true, But I was really
Speaker 1: surprised by just how not robust what Facebook was offering
Speaker 1: was in comparison to what TikTok was saying that they
Speaker 1: were doing, Like like they're very different platforms. But I
Speaker 1: just can't believe that, like this is what Facebook brought
Speaker 1: to these lawmakers in Ireland after such a such chaos
Speaker 1: that that these folks say was was sparked by social
Speaker 1: media platforms.
Speaker 3: Well, you know, TikTok's too busy making everybody seventeen percent
Speaker 3: anti Semitic for every thirty minutes you spend on TikTok.
Speaker 3: Not to go back to that, but now I'm wondering,
Speaker 3: is it you get progressively more anti semitic, like the
Speaker 3: more like the more thirty minute chunks go by. Yeah, see,
Speaker 3: their TikTok's too busy. They can't they can't be spreading
Speaker 3: misinformation in Ireland.
Speaker 1: So if you use an hour, if you use a
Speaker 1: TikTok for an hour a day, are you like thirty
Speaker 1: four percent more anti Sibmitic? How does that work? Is there?
Speaker 3: Like I'm I want to graph, I want to chart,
Speaker 3: I want the full again.
Speaker 2: I took ape stats. I know how this is supposed
Speaker 2: to work.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, but there definitely is something I mean like
Speaker 3: and not not to give TikTok too much credit because
Speaker 3: again they're a big social media company that you know
Speaker 3: deserves much of the criticism it gets, but like it
Speaker 3: really is says something. I feel like that TikTok is
Speaker 3: under fire so much, like in the news cycle, and
Speaker 3: it's like and yet they seem to be the only
Speaker 3: platform that's like responding.
Speaker 2: To these kind of things.
Speaker 3: You know, I guess everybody makes fun of the fact
Speaker 3: you can't say like there's certain words you can't say
Speaker 3: on TikTok, Like people started saying like unlived instead of
Speaker 3: killed and stuff like that. But like it's I don't know,
Speaker 3: something to be said on the fact that I'm like
Speaker 3: TikTok at least has that in place, but like no
Speaker 3: other social media company apparently has any interest in doing
Speaker 3: anything to moderate its content.
Speaker 1: I guess I agree, And I think it really demonstrates
Speaker 1: how it really isn't about one specific platform, and so
Speaker 1: conversations like the one that happened on the GOP debate
Speaker 1: stage this week that make it about one singular platform
Speaker 1: or like are just deeply missing the point. Right. It
Speaker 1: is about having a safer, robust digital landscape, and that
Speaker 1: is that is a conversation that involves lots of platforms
Speaker 1: and a lot more, but just making it about one
Speaker 1: making one singular platform. The Boogeyman is just like not
Speaker 1: how we get to a safer media landscape where the
Speaker 1: kind of thing that happened in Dublin does not happen
Speaker 1: anywhere else, which should be the goal exactly.
Speaker 3: More.
Speaker 1: After a quick break, let's get right back into it. So,
Speaker 1: as you probably know, Time magazine released their Person of
Speaker 1: the Year and it's Taylor Swift. I've seen a lot
Speaker 1: of controverse about whether she deserved it or not. I
Speaker 1: will say, people forget that it's it's I think it's
Speaker 1: not supposed to be like the best person of the year.
Speaker 1: It's like the most impactful or important or like meaningful
Speaker 1: person of the year. A lot of folks have said, like, oh,
Speaker 1: it should be like Palestinian journalists or activists. Someone else
Speaker 1: I really respect said that it should be the concept
Speaker 1: of like disruptors or like resistors. So people who are
Speaker 1: you know, challenging power structures and technology, challenging state power structures,
Speaker 1: which I thought was cool. Remember that year when it
Speaker 1: was just like you, So it was you, Joe Way,
Speaker 1: it was me Bridget, it was every listener listening, it
Speaker 1: was all of us.
Speaker 2: Was that that was like in the middle of like
Speaker 2: lockdown right, Like, wasn't.
Speaker 1: It was that? Oh, Mike just chimed in, did you
Speaker 1: hear that?
Speaker 2: It was two thousand and six?
Speaker 1: Okay, but.
Speaker 2: Five years old? But our six years old. I was
Speaker 2: six years old.
Speaker 1: Six years old, you were Time magazines personally successful?
Speaker 3: Yeah, me and Taylor Swift. Yeah, No, there's always weird
Speaker 3: discourse about it. Like I people love to bring up.
Speaker 3: One of the people always bring up is that like
Speaker 3: in the nineteen thirties they made like Hitler personally year
Speaker 3: one time and they were like, see guys, Like people
Speaker 3: always use that as like the see they're they're bad
Speaker 3: and they keep picking and it's like no, like that
Speaker 3: was the person in current events at that time that
Speaker 3: was causing the most right weird shit going on. So like, yeah,
Speaker 3: I guess in that sense, like it makes you know,
Speaker 3: Taylor Swift has a lot of power, It has a
Speaker 3: lot of cultural power, has done a lot.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I.
Speaker 3: Don't know, I definitely agree. I think, like I'm not
Speaker 3: surprised that the Time is that magazine didn't do this,
Speaker 3: but like I would have, like there definitely are like
Speaker 3: Palestinian journalists that I think have really like changed just
Speaker 3: so much of like how we've been talking about PLO sign.
Speaker 2: I don't know, like it definitely, I think it would
Speaker 2: have been much more deserved.
Speaker 3: To maybe given to one of them. No disrespect to
Speaker 3: Taylor Swift, but yeah, it definitely. It feels like there
Speaker 3: have been a lot of big things that have happened
Speaker 3: this year, maybe some other people should have been considered,
Speaker 3: but yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's kind of what people are saying. So because
Speaker 1: she was named Time Magazine's Person of the Year, she
Speaker 1: did this wide ranging interview in the magazine and pose
Speaker 1: on a cover with her cat. So I have not
Speaker 1: actually read this interview, but I do know that Taylor
Speaker 1: has had, you know, a pretty big year with her
Speaker 1: Era's tour, which I did not know. This the highest
Speaker 1: grossing tour ever by a woman and the second highest
Speaker 1: grossing overall tour. You know, she's got this high profile
Speaker 1: romantic relationship with an NFL player. People obviously had a
Speaker 1: lot of opinions about whether or not Taylor deserved or
Speaker 1: should have been the Person of the Year, and if
Speaker 1: folks listening have opinions, I want to hear them, please
Speaker 1: let me know. However, it also seems like there is
Speaker 1: a new conspiracy theory emerging from right wing pockets of
Speaker 1: the Internet. Some of the biggest names on the far
Speaker 1: right are suggesting that Taylor Swift is being promoted right
Speaker 1: now as some kind of like sigh up campaign to
Speaker 1: get people to vote for Democrats. Question Mark conspiracy theorist
Speaker 1: Laura Lumer, who I was gonna say, like who she is?
Speaker 1: And I was like, Oh, she's not like a very
Speaker 1: important person. But I actually did not know this that
Speaker 1: just last year, Laura Lumer narrowly lost a bid to
Speaker 1: represent Florida's eleventh congressional district, While she tweeted, Taylor Swift
Speaker 1: has been named Times twenty twenty three Person of the Year.
Speaker 1: This isn't shocking since she's who the Democrats are counting
Speaker 1: on to interfere in the twenty twenty four election. What
Speaker 1: would Democrats do without their idol who runs through men
Speaker 1: like water and spew's anti Trump drivel every chance she
Speaker 1: gets her entire world tourists become a Democrat Party voter
Speaker 1: registration drive. You might be asking why would Taylor Swift
Speaker 1: architect global tour across Latin America, Australia, Asia, and Europe,
Speaker 1: specifically to register voters in the United States presidential election.
Speaker 1: Unclear how that would work, but that is what Laura
Speaker 1: Lumer says is going on.
Speaker 3: I think it is really funny that everybody, like, listen,
Speaker 3: I'm a Taylor Swift fan. I will say, like I
Speaker 3: love her music. I did go to the Airs tour.
Speaker 3: I've been following her for a while. Like people really
Speaker 3: from all sides like try to attach some sort of
Speaker 3: like political booky man thing to her. I think, which
Speaker 3: is weird because she's like when I say a political
Speaker 3: not in the like, oh I don't want to like
Speaker 3: like oh, she just like doesn't want to talk about
Speaker 3: Like she just doesn't. I don't think I've ever seen
Speaker 3: her say anything that's like remotely like political, like the
Speaker 3: I don't know the most She's spoken up a little
Speaker 3: bit about like feminism and stuff like that, but it's
Speaker 3: never like super in depth, like I've never seen her
Speaker 3: like comment on like a specific sort of issue that's happening,
Speaker 3: which I think is interesting. I think it like mostly
Speaker 3: is just the fact that she has such a big platform,
Speaker 3: and she has.
Speaker 2: Such a big platform that's like mostly young women.
Speaker 5: But then yeah, the other side is crazy because if
Speaker 5: she wanted, she has so much power, like she could
Speaker 5: I get like literally I remember seeing something about it
Speaker 5: was after the whole like Ticketmaster thing.
Speaker 3: Uh, like somebody was like somebody like needs to get
Speaker 3: her to just like say something off handedly about like
Speaker 3: student loans or something so that people like start pit
Speaker 3: or like that there needs to like like whatever they're
Speaker 3: gains the sort of political momentum from the swifties that
Speaker 3: we need to But yeah, no exactly. That is kind
Speaker 3: of crazy that she would have this whole global tour
Speaker 3: when like, all, yeah, again, all she would need to
Speaker 3: do is make an Instagram post being like I think
Speaker 3: you should vote for this person and people. I mean
Speaker 3: I think she could do it, I think if she
Speaker 3: wanted to, but like she's not going to and she's never.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and like she she did post on Instagram for
Speaker 1: National Voter Registration Day, and like that single Instagram post
Speaker 1: did drive like I think it was thirty five thousand
Speaker 1: new people to register to vote. But registering voters is
Speaker 1: not the same thing as like.
Speaker 2: Taking a stand, like making a stand or.
Speaker 1: Like it's not like she said register and vote for
Speaker 1: Biden or like vote for a specific person, So it's
Speaker 1: like just just driving registrations is nonpartisan or it certainly
Speaker 1: should be nonpartisan, right, And so like this idea that
Speaker 1: like she's a shill for the Democratic Party is so
Speaker 1: curious to me. It makes me think, like, if you
Speaker 1: feel that Taylor Swift driving people to register to vote
Speaker 1: in general is automatically her being in the can for
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, it really tells me a lot about
Speaker 1: what you think that, you know, people who are not
Speaker 1: Democrats have to offer young women voters, which is maybe
Speaker 1: not maybe not a lot.
Speaker 2: So.
Speaker 1: Former Trump White House advisor Stephen Miller tweeted, what's happening
Speaker 1: with Taylor Swift is not organic, which is like the
Speaker 1: weirdest sentence I've ever seen someone tweet.
Speaker 6: Like, Yeah, first of all, weird thing to say to
Speaker 6: begin with, weird, real weird. Also, it's like Taylor Swift
Speaker 6: has been a huge pop star for a while and like, yeah.
Speaker 2: It's that is so I thought, it is so weird.
Speaker 3: That is the Yeah, the kids these days, it's their
Speaker 3: fault rock and roll and Taylor Swift.
Speaker 1: That's exactly it. Jack Prosbyak tweeted, the Taylor Swift girl
Speaker 1: Boss Sya has been fully activated from her hand selected vaccine.
Speaker 1: She'll boyfriend to her dink lifestyle. If you don't know
Speaker 1: what dink is, it's dual income, no kids to her
Speaker 1: upcoming twenty twenty four voter operation for Democrats on abortion rights,
Speaker 1: it's all coming. I do find it interesting that they're
Speaker 1: calling her out for being like having a dink lifestyle,
Speaker 1: as if just like not having children is some sort
Speaker 1: of like morally deviant way to live.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's so weird, Like she's not, she's she's also
Speaker 3: like what like thirty three, thirty four, Like she's not.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I guess that's like thirty three, yeah, which I guess. Yeah,
Speaker 3: I guess we're like that's a normal age to whatever.
Speaker 3: I'll like get married and have kids. But like, I
Speaker 3: don't know, I know plenty of people that are like
Speaker 3: in that age range.
Speaker 1: You aren't.
Speaker 3: And that's such a weird, like dank, I've never heard
Speaker 3: that phrase before, but that is that's weird.
Speaker 2: Her vaccine chill boyfriend too.
Speaker 3: Honestly, I think Travis Kelsey, you know, this is my
Speaker 3: controversial opinion, Travis Kelsey should have been Time Person in
Speaker 3: the year. His tweets so funny, Like his tweets have
Speaker 3: been like the light in my news feeds lately, So.
Speaker 1: Joey coming in with the hata.
Speaker 3: Not seeing chill boyfriend. That's so insane, though they really
Speaker 3: like it is. Again, this is why I like, I
Speaker 3: think it is so weird that they found her to
Speaker 3: be a target of all of this, because again, she
Speaker 3: is like the most mild like I'm like, doesn't really
Speaker 3: has not said anything particularly controversial.
Speaker 2: That is so weird.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I talked about this in an episode years ago,
Speaker 1: but only recently has she been somebody who publicly identifies
Speaker 1: as a feminist, Like she was on record in her
Speaker 1: the early days of her fame being like, I'm not
Speaker 1: a feminist, I don't believe in men versus women, YadA, YadA, YadA,
Speaker 1: And it wasn't until kind of later in the game
Speaker 1: that she was like, oh no, I'm a totally a feminist.
Speaker 1: And so it's curious to me that these people are
Speaker 1: are criticizing for her for it. And I also think,
Speaker 1: like the whole thing is really like gendered and racialized,
Speaker 1: Like I think I don't think any of these people
Speaker 1: would ever say that part out loud, but like they're
Speaker 1: giving her crap for not having children, being somebody who
Speaker 1: is in a relationship with another person who earns income
Speaker 1: outs how the home and not having kids a dink.
Speaker 1: And you know, certainly they would not be clamoring for me,
Speaker 1: a black woman, to have kids, or I'd be a
Speaker 1: welfare queen, and they wouldn't be clamoring for people who
Speaker 1: aren't Sis women to have kids because they might be
Speaker 1: like threats to children, right, and so like, it's very
Speaker 1: interesting who gets kind of smeared as doing something wrong
Speaker 1: just by by virtue of them not having a child.
Speaker 1: And I guess I feel like you can't really talk
Speaker 1: about the kind of hate that she is receiving from
Speaker 1: these people without talking about like race and gender and sexuality.
Speaker 1: I did see this one kind of like men's rights
Speaker 1: influence her tweet quote it's shameful and said that a
Speaker 1: hyper promiscuous, childless woman, aging and alone with a cat
Speaker 1: has become the heroine of a feminist age. And part
Speaker 1: of me is like, side note, this person runs an
Speaker 1: organization for what they're calling hard men, like masculine manly men.
Speaker 1: I mean, because what is harder for a man to
Speaker 1: do that obsess over the dating life of a pop
Speaker 1: star on Twitter? Right, Like it's like they can't even
Speaker 1: keep their own ridiculous gender binary nonsense straight, Like if
Speaker 1: you were like I don't, I don't think like that
Speaker 1: is a paragon of traditional masculinity, caring who tailor us
Speaker 1: with this dating here you are making a big stink
Speaker 1: about it on Twitter, you know.
Speaker 2: I also, first of all, hard hard men.
Speaker 3: If you're gonna call yourself hard men, the peak of heterosexuality, okay,
Speaker 3: also okay.
Speaker 2: Hyper promiscuous, Like I'm sorry.
Speaker 3: I remember like when she brought up sex for like
Speaker 3: the first time in one of her albums, and it
Speaker 3: was like I think it was reputation, Like it was
Speaker 3: like way down the line, like she was like again
Speaker 3: very much the face of like respectable, nice white girl
Speaker 3: with her guitar, you know, for the longest time. And
Speaker 3: it's it's weird because again she really with the feminism thing,
Speaker 3: she's done like the bare minimum to you know, stand
Speaker 3: up for human rights or whatever, and that apparently is
Speaker 3: too much. But yeah, no, I just that's just it's
Speaker 3: just such a weird quote.
Speaker 2: I it's such a weird quote, but like not smarts.
Speaker 3: I also like remember it wasn't there because I was
Speaker 3: going back to about like I feel like people turn
Speaker 3: her in her image into like a lot like the
Speaker 3: symbol of a lot of political stuff without it really
Speaker 3: really knew anything.
Speaker 2: And I don't think this one, I don't think was
Speaker 2: necessarily wrong.
Speaker 3: But I remember, like a couple of years ago, there
Speaker 3: was a lot of stuff that was coming out about
Speaker 3: people talking about her music and her short of persona
Speaker 3: that she's created and how that relates to like white supremacy,
Speaker 3: and how like she kind of inadvertently has become this
Speaker 3: symbol of white supremacy, and like there I again, it's
Speaker 3: been a minute since I but I like, it's really
Speaker 3: interesting to see that that switch within a couple of
Speaker 3: years because she's dating somebody who's vaccinated.
Speaker 2: I guess, I don't know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I remember this very clearly. There was a time
Speaker 1: where in white supremacist corners of the internet she was
Speaker 1: sort of the poster girl for like Nazism essentially, and
Speaker 1: at a time this was like going back like several
Speaker 1: years now, at the time she I remember doing an
Speaker 1: episode of stuff Mom never told you talk about, like
Speaker 1: Blast in the Past, back when I was the host
Speaker 1: of the cost of that show with my friend Emily,
Speaker 1: and at the time I did not you could probably
Speaker 1: go back to the old Seminty archives and find it.
Speaker 1: I did not feel that she had done enough to
Speaker 1: like denounce that and be like, no, sorry, Nazis, I'm
Speaker 1: not your poster girl. But I do think it speaks
Speaker 1: to what you're talking about that she is someone that
Speaker 1: I think people project a lot of stuff onto and around,
Speaker 1: and I think that all of this, like all of
Speaker 1: these weird tweets about her being on the cover of Time,
Speaker 1: I really think is an anxiety about the rise of
Speaker 1: single women voters, because like a lot of her listenership
Speaker 1: and fan base is younger women, and I think that
Speaker 1: it's about anxiety around how government has failed single women
Speaker 1: voters and what that means. For the twenty twenty four election,
Speaker 1: so we know that a lot of white women voted
Speaker 1: for Trump, but it's a little more complicated than that,
Speaker 1: because it's really married white women. Specifically, married white women
Speaker 1: are more likely to vote conservative than their single white counterparts.
Speaker 1: So I think after the last few years, with like
Speaker 1: big Supreme Court decisions on things like abortion, I think
Speaker 1: that folks are rightfully starting to worry about single women
Speaker 1: as a voting block and what this means. But here's
Speaker 1: my thing, It really kind of goes back to the
Speaker 1: episode that we did with Julia Maser, who was like
Speaker 1: shamed by Tucker Carlson for just existing on the internet
Speaker 1: as a woman who is not married. I think that
Speaker 1: all that these people have to offer younger single women
Speaker 1: is shame and making fun of us and like the
Speaker 1: most tired jokes about cats and being alone and this
Speaker 1: and that, and like trying to scare us into marriage
Speaker 1: or invalidating our choices, like not everybody wants to be
Speaker 1: married or partnered, and there are so many ways to
Speaker 1: have a full life that doesn't include being married. And
Speaker 1: I just think that they don't have anything to really
Speaker 1: offer younger single women, So the best they can do
Speaker 1: is try to scare them into heterosexual marriages and then
Speaker 1: hope that that proximity to men will will make them
Speaker 1: vote more conservatively. Like I don't they have anything real
Speaker 1: to offer. It's just like all they can do is
Speaker 1: shame you and hopefully effectively scare you into marriage, which
Speaker 1: hopefully will make you vote more conservatively. And I think
Speaker 1: Taylor Swift, particularly how popular she's been this year, I
Speaker 1: think reiterates that anxiety that like, oh no, we really
Speaker 1: don't have anything to offer a pretty big section of
Speaker 1: the voting public. This might come back to bite us
Speaker 1: in the ass.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which is so funny because it's like.
Speaker 3: You just sat like, clearly you don't understand how Swifties
Speaker 3: work because you didn't even again she gave you she
Speaker 3: were in the clear. She wasn't telling anybody to go
Speaker 3: vote for Biden or do anything. Like she was doing
Speaker 3: the bare minimum telling people to go vote. Maybe not
Speaker 3: even doing that again this year.
Speaker 2: I think she like.
Speaker 3: Literally did it one time, but like she would have
Speaker 3: been fine, but it's like, no, now you've attacked Taylor
Speaker 3: Swift the Swifties like they don't care who you are.
Speaker 2: They're gonna learn who you are now, and like they're
Speaker 2: gonna start targeting you.
Speaker 3: And the Swifties are fucking terrifying, So I would not,
Speaker 3: like I I do think it would be really funny
Speaker 3: if like this was what led to like the downfall
Speaker 3: of like some one of at least one of these people,
Speaker 3: If if the Swifties could do that, I think that
Speaker 3: would be really beautiful and really uh poetic justice.
Speaker 2: But yeah, no, that's that's so weird. Why are you
Speaker 2: gotta go after the cats like she has? I know,
Speaker 2: I have. I love cats.
Speaker 1: They're great great. Who doesn't enjoy cat exactly? Joey, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for wading through all of this ridiculous
Speaker 1: tech news coorse. You know, at the top of the episode,
Speaker 1: we got to know you a little bit better. What
Speaker 1: else are you working on? What have you got going
Speaker 1: on these days?
Speaker 2: I'm so glad you asked.
Speaker 3: I recently have a show that is in the middle
Speaker 3: of coming out. We just had episode four released. It's
Speaker 3: called Afterlives, the Lelien Planco Story. I worked with Raquel Willis,
Speaker 3: who I think will be on the show soon. Yes,
Speaker 3: little teaser there, but it was based on her incredible
Speaker 3: reporting on transphobic violence and the epidemic of violence against
Speaker 3: transwoman to color in particular.
Speaker 2: In this season, we are talking about Lilien Planco.
Speaker 3: Who was a woman who died at Rikers Island Prison
Speaker 3: a couple of years back. But yeah, you should definitely
Speaker 3: check out that show. I think it's a super important conversation.
Speaker 2: To be having.
Speaker 3: I'm biased, I worked on it, but also, yes, you
Speaker 3: should definitely check that out.
Speaker 2: Episode four you just came out. Episode five is coming
Speaker 2: out next week.
Speaker 3: Again, it's called Afterlives The Lelien Planco Story And of course,
Speaker 3: as always, if you want to follow me on social media, you.
Speaker 2: Can find me at pat not prat. That's p a
Speaker 2: t t n O T p r.
Speaker 3: A t T Twitter, Instagram. But yeah, you should definitely
Speaker 3: check out the show, find me on social media.
Speaker 1: And we'll throw a link to Afterlives in the show notes.
Speaker 1: Folks should definitely listen it's it is such an important
Speaker 1: conversation and thank you for bringing bringing it to us
Speaker 1: because it's really special. And I actually have a little
Speaker 1: bit of news, which is that the other podcast that
Speaker 1: I host IRL Online Life is Real Life, which is
Speaker 1: an original podcast from Mozilla, yep, the Mozilla that makes
Speaker 1: the browser that we all love, Firefox. Well, we have
Speaker 1: been nominated for an Anthem Award for Responsible Technology and
Speaker 1: it would mean so much if folks could vote for us.
Speaker 1: If you could help celeb this nomination by voting for
Speaker 1: IRL to win, you can go to tangody dot com
Speaker 1: slash I r L. That's t A N G O
Speaker 1: t I dot com slash I r L. That link
Speaker 1: will be in the show notes. Please vote for us.
Speaker 1: I don't want to get into it, but it would
Speaker 1: be really cool to win and then maybe Mozilla will
Speaker 1: have me back to host it again. Who knows would
Speaker 1: love that? So please please please vote for us. It
Speaker 1: means the world to me to spotlight the voices and
Speaker 1: the stories of folks who are making technology like AI
Speaker 1: more trustworthy, and it's really also important to me to
Speaker 1: see those voices celebrated through winning an award like this,
Speaker 1: So please vote for us again. Tangody dot com, slash
Speaker 1: I r L. Thank you so much, and thank you
Speaker 1: Joy for being here. Thank you listeners for listening. Uh yeah,
Speaker 1: be well, and I will talk to you soon. If
Speaker 1: you're looking for ways to support the show, check out
Speaker 1: our mark store at tangoty dot com slash store Got
Speaker 1: a story about it, interesting thing in tech, or just
Speaker 1: want to say hi? You can reach us at Hello
Speaker 1: at tegody dot com. You can also find transcripts for
Speaker 1: today's episode at tengody dot com. There Are No Girls
Speaker 1: on the Internet was created by me Bridget Tod. It's
Speaker 1: a production of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative edited by Joey
Speaker 1: Pat Jonathan Strickland as our executive producer. Tari Harrison is
Speaker 1: our producer and sound engineer. Michael Almado is our contributing producer.
Speaker 1: I'm your host, bridget Toad. If you want to help
Speaker 1: us grow, rate and review us on Apple podcasts. For
Speaker 1: more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app, Apple
Speaker 1: podcast or wherever you get your podcasts.