Speaker 1: There Are No Girls on the Internet, as a production
Speaker 1: of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative. I'm Bridgett and this is
Speaker 1: There Are No Girls on the Internet. I am here
Speaker 1: with my fantastic producer, Joey. Joey. How are you. How
Speaker 1: was your holiday?
Speaker 2: I bridge it, I'm doing good. My holiday was I
Speaker 2: It's nice to have you know, a couple days own.
Speaker 1: Yeah, did you do anything fun?
Speaker 3: Did I do sweete? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Actually I did a drag performance for this Oh my god.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So they I'd been wanting to do for a bit.
Speaker 2: And then my friend I had like a birthday party
Speaker 2: for the weekend. It was like I want my friends
Speaker 2: to do drag performances.
Speaker 3: So I was like, all right, sure, why not.
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: It was super fun. I totally totally want to do
Speaker 2: that again. So goodway my drag debut, Oh my god.
Speaker 1: I hope to many more. Also, happy birthday?
Speaker 3: Oh no, my always my friend's birthday.
Speaker 1: Friend's birthday got okay? Well, happy birthday to your friend.
Speaker 1: Well let's get into some of these news stories that
Speaker 1: folks might have missed on the Internet this week. So
Speaker 1: first of all, we have to start with a little
Speaker 1: bit of an update, which is an update on our
Speaker 1: enemy of the pod Professional Litigate That's right, Edward Blum,
Speaker 1: the one man wrecking ball against diversity. This week on
Speaker 1: the podcast, I did a deep dive on the show
Speaker 1: Stuff Mom Never Told You into Edward Blum's legal challenge
Speaker 1: that he is bringing against the black venture capital firm
Speaker 1: Fearless Fun for giving out grants and money and support
Speaker 1: for black women entrepreneurs. After Blum successfully brought a legal
Speaker 1: challenge that gutted the Voting Rights Act and Affirmative Action Well,
Speaker 1: Blum is also challenging diversity fellowship programs for people of color,
Speaker 1: LGBTQ folks, and people with disabilities at law firms, and
Speaker 1: it looks like that challenge might have been somewhat successful,
Speaker 1: at least with one law firm, because the law firm
Speaker 1: Morrison and Forrester has removed language specifying that their fellowship
Speaker 1: is only open to black, Hispanic, Native American or LGBTQ applicants,
Speaker 1: according to a flyer from the program's website. Now the
Speaker 1: flyer has been altered to say that applicants need to
Speaker 1: quote bring a diverse perspective to the firm as a
Speaker 1: result of your adaptability, cultural fluency, resilience and life experiences.
Speaker 1: So luckily it doesn't sound like they are completely abandoning
Speaker 1: the diversity part of their fellowship program outright, but that
Speaker 1: they're probably changing the wording, probably because they're hoping to
Speaker 1: avoid a big legal challenge or legal battle with Blum
Speaker 1: and just want to be able to focus on doing
Speaker 1: their work. The fellowship is called the Keith Wetmore one
Speaker 1: L Fellowship for Excellence, Diversity and Inclusion, and it supported
Speaker 1: law students from historically underrepresented groups in the legal industry.
Speaker 1: It was also a recruitment tool to help diversify law firms,
Speaker 1: which folks probably know are notoriously not very diverse. The
Speaker 1: fellowship consists of a paid summer associate position, where and
Speaker 1: law firms can often lead to a full time job
Speaker 1: at pay in the six figures after graduation, and a
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars stipend. So way to go, Edward Blum.
Speaker 1: I hope the fact that this law firm had to
Speaker 1: amend their fellowship program is to your liking. I hope
Speaker 1: it makes you feel good. I hope you will leave
Speaker 1: these people alone. I hope you will let them just
Speaker 1: do their jobs and we will keep y'all updated on
Speaker 1: how these cases progress.
Speaker 2: It's so messed up, and it's so like obviously messed
Speaker 2: up that it's I don't even know what to say
Speaker 2: at this point.
Speaker 1: Well, I often feel like like I think that you
Speaker 1: might feel now, where I don't even know what to say.
Speaker 1: I think that Blum is someone who will not rest
Speaker 1: until a very small subsection of people him and people
Speaker 1: who look like him or making all the decisions for everyone,
Speaker 1: are the ones who are getting everything. I think that's
Speaker 1: what his I think that's what he wants. And so
Speaker 1: when I hear about the challenges that he is taking on,
Speaker 1: it's hard for me to even really know what to say.
Speaker 1: And in the episode of stuff I'm Never told you
Speaker 1: that I did this week, something that really comes up
Speaker 1: for me after doing all that that research into Blum
Speaker 1: and his motivations and the people that he's suing, or
Speaker 1: that these are people who are really have work to
Speaker 1: do right, Like they are trying to write societal wrongs.
Speaker 1: They are trying to make landscapes more equitable, and that
Speaker 1: is real work, And so I can understand why this
Speaker 1: legal firm is just like you know, if tweaking our
Speaker 1: website language is gonna maybe make this guy go away.
Speaker 1: Let's do it. But they shouldn't have to do that.
Speaker 1: They should be able to focus on what it is
Speaker 1: that they are trying to accomplish with their work. And so, yeah,
Speaker 1: I Blum remains an enemy of the show. We will
Speaker 1: keep folks posted on his next moves. Hopefully they won't
Speaker 1: include continuing to go after marginalize people and the institutions
Speaker 1: that support us.
Speaker 3: I think that's interesting.
Speaker 2: I feel like, remember, for a while, there are all
Speaker 2: these stories that were coming out about like people that
Speaker 2: would like fake being Native American scholarship or like, there
Speaker 2: were a couple of like really big cases of like
Speaker 2: people that were like claiming to be like transracial or
Speaker 2: something like. I don't know, it's it's interesting that this
Speaker 2: is happening after I feel like we had a big
Speaker 2: conversation about there was a big sort of media frenzy
Speaker 2: around that. I don't know, it's just like it's the
Speaker 2: same sort of attacking all of these programs from like
Speaker 2: different angles, which I yeah, it's this.
Speaker 3: Whole thing is so weird.
Speaker 1: It's so weird. Wem is such a weird guy. If
Speaker 1: folks are interested in more about him, his background, his motivation.
Speaker 1: Check out this week's episode with me on stuff I'm
Speaker 1: never told you because it is a doozy. So speaking
Speaker 1: of supporting or not supporting marginalized people, we got to
Speaker 1: talk about what's going on at Grinder. Folks probably know
Speaker 1: there have been a florry of big companies making remote
Speaker 1: workers come back to the office, like Google and ironically Zoom.
Speaker 1: You know, Zoom makes the tech that we all use
Speaker 1: to work remotely, but apparently won't let their staff work
Speaker 1: remotely using the tech that they build. I don't know,
Speaker 1: it's kind of a weird sitch, but employees who work
Speaker 1: at the dating app Grinder are being forced to come
Speaker 1: back to work in person, and now staff is saying
Speaker 1: that that mandate, that policy has really delta blow to
Speaker 1: Grinder's unique queer friendly workplace culture, which employees say was
Speaker 1: a rarity in tech. This is all from Wired, which
Speaker 1: today really great deep dive into what's going on since
Speaker 1: many of Grinder's employees are LGBTQ. In person work policies
Speaker 1: means having to give up access to support systems and
Speaker 1: support networks and sometimes medical care networks that you've established
Speaker 1: during a time where folks are seeing waves of anti
Speaker 1: LGBTQU violence and threats across the country. Wire talked to
Speaker 1: one trans employee that they call Robin, who said that
Speaker 1: the mandate forced a choice between a job they loved
Speaker 1: and a support system that includes trusted doctors who provide
Speaker 1: their transgender medical care. Robin ultimately chose to leave the company.
Speaker 1: Said that initially coming to work at Grinder was quote
Speaker 1: a blast of fresh air compared to other jobs in
Speaker 1: the tech industry. I felt normal. I didn't feel like
Speaker 1: one queer person or the most noticeable queer person at
Speaker 1: a company. It was what I was always looking for,
Speaker 1: and now that is gone. Robin is actually not alone
Speaker 1: because none of the eight openly trans employees who worked
Speaker 1: at Grinder chose to re locate, and the trans staffer
Speaker 1: that they spoke to said that it's really indicative of
Speaker 1: the cuts and how they are impacting more marginalized staff
Speaker 1: the most, Robin says, demanding that LGBTQ plus people move
Speaker 1: for their job in this political environment conflicts with so
Speaker 1: much of Grinder's mission that it's close to its users
Speaker 1: that it's part of the community. This all started last month,
Speaker 1: when Grinder abruptly gave its all remote staff two weeks
Speaker 1: to pledge to work from an office two days a
Speaker 1: week starting in October, or lose their jobs come August
Speaker 1: thirty first, eighty two out of the one hundred and
Speaker 1: seventy eight employees that's forty six percent of the staff,
Speaker 1: or let go after rejecting that mandate. According to the
Speaker 1: Grinder union, which went public tis two weeks before the ultimatum,
Speaker 1: the policy would have forced many of them to relocate
Speaker 1: to La Chicago or San Francisco. Now, this is all
Speaker 1: happening against the backdrop of Grinder's recent unionization. The Communications
Speaker 1: Workers of America, which now represents employees of Grinder, filed
Speaker 1: two unfair labor practice charges with the US National Labor
Speaker 1: Relations Board against Grinder, accusing the company of unlawfully suppressing
Speaker 1: discussion of working conditions in company chats and through an
Speaker 1: agreement that terminated employees were offered in exchange for Sefrance pay. Now,
Speaker 1: Grinder does say that this abrupt back to office plan
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with the recent unionization. That is
Speaker 1: just a huge coincidence according to the Grinder's higher ups. However,
Speaker 1: the staff says that the cuts disproportionately impacted union supporters.
Speaker 1: Now out of the eleven union organized and committee members
Speaker 1: were forced out. Staff is also worried about how this
Speaker 1: will ultimately impact the site. Obviously, for dating apps and
Speaker 1: hookup apps, privacy concerns are heightened. He's important on any
Speaker 1: app or any platform, but especially an app where you're
Speaker 1: meeting people, You're having intimate conversations, photos are being exchanged,
Speaker 1: you're meeting up, that kind of thing. The exodus has
Speaker 1: raised concerns among the remaining staff about Grinder's functionality as
Speaker 1: an app. Were calling Elon Musk's employee project Twitter and
Speaker 1: the ensuing glitchy chaos. So this really does seem to
Speaker 1: be part of a larger pattern playing out within tech companies.
Speaker 1: I know that this came up on one of our
Speaker 1: previous newscasts, but Ben Collins at NBC calls this ceo contasion,
Speaker 1: where there's this vibe of tech CEOs like cleaning house,
Speaker 1: firing everybody, laying everybody off without real meaningful regard for
Speaker 1: how it will impact the platforms that they run and
Speaker 1: could ultimately make those platforms worse.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and like, obviously, like this case is particularly sensitive
Speaker 2: since so much of the employees there are like LGBTQ
Speaker 2: plus identifying. Honestly, I'm surprised, not all of them, but yeah,
Speaker 2: like I've I feel like this is part of a
Speaker 2: pat I don't know, Like like my job, they're starting
Speaker 2: to like open up the offices again and encourage people
Speaker 2: like come back into the office. And I technically the
Speaker 2: office I work for is in a different state than
Speaker 2: I live in, so like I'm crossing my fingers hoping
Speaker 2: in they're not gonna like mandate that anytime soon.
Speaker 3: But it is so weird.
Speaker 2: It's been three years where we've been working remotely and
Speaker 2: things have been going pretty smoothly. It's definitely Yeah, like
Speaker 2: like you said at the end there, like it is
Speaker 2: this whole like CEO contagion about not really sure what
Speaker 2: the I mean. I guess the motivation is to get
Speaker 2: people to like whatever.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I don't understand this whole push all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: and it just seems like it's gonna end.
Speaker 3: With a lot of chaos.
Speaker 2: But yeah, Also, yeah, Grinder with the privacy thing, that's scary.
Speaker 2: That's I mean, that's a hookup app like that isn't
Speaker 2: especially like any dating app.
Speaker 3: I'd be worried, but like Grinder especially.
Speaker 1: It's not the kind of app where I would feel
Speaker 1: comfortable showing up if they arbitrarily and phazardly gutted the
Speaker 1: privacy and security staff. And it sounds like that's what
Speaker 1: according to this Wired piece, that's what some of the
Speaker 1: staff are worried about that if they just make these
Speaker 1: massive cuts to the workforce in mass, like, it's gonna
Speaker 1: be that much harder to ensure a state and secure platform.
Speaker 1: And when you're dealing with a hookup app, your people
Speaker 1: on that app really need to be able to feel
Speaker 1: like they're on a safe and secure platform.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I feel like this is just like a
Speaker 2: good example of like rainbow capitalism still capitalism. Rainbow CEOs
Speaker 2: are still CEOs. They're still gonna put their own interest first.
Speaker 2: And yeah, that's just that's that's messed up. I don't
Speaker 2: know a ton about Grinder, like as an organization. I know,
Speaker 2: like a couple of years back, there was some sort
Speaker 2: of like discussion about like how trans people's experiences on
Speaker 2: the app were and stuff like that. So again it's
Speaker 2: like the if you know what they're like, the eight
Speaker 2: openly trans employees like decided not to relocate, I mean,
Speaker 2: how is that going to affect the app like not
Speaker 2: having any trans people on the team of your or
Speaker 2: maybe losing all the trans people on your team. That
Speaker 2: just it doesn't seem like it's gonna.
Speaker 1: En Well, yeah, that's such a good point. And the
Speaker 1: trans employee that Wired spoke to, I mean, I don't
Speaker 1: know what's going on at Grinder, but it does sound
Speaker 1: like if one demographic it's just like no longer represented
Speaker 1: at your workforce. Management really has to ask how equitable
Speaker 1: was were these layoffs, How equitable was this rollout if
Speaker 1: it completely got rid of an entire sub section of
Speaker 1: your workforce in that way, Like, it just seems to
Speaker 1: me like obviously something's going on there. I think that
Speaker 1: the staffer that they talked to who said that it
Speaker 1: is impact these cuts are impacting the more marginalized staff more,
Speaker 1: it seems obvious that that's the case. And so I'm
Speaker 1: curious how it's going to work out. But I feel
Speaker 1: for a staff who, like if in the piece they
Speaker 1: talk about how this was rolled out very abruptly and
Speaker 1: how for the last few months staff who worked remotely
Speaker 1: were like, are we gonna have to come back to
Speaker 1: the office and management was like, no, you'll be fine, no,
Speaker 1: we're not. We have no plans to make that change.
Speaker 1: And then coincidentally, after the unionization was successful, Now this
Speaker 1: is like abruptly rolled out. And so yeah, it just
Speaker 1: seems like a situation where management is really going out
Speaker 1: of their way to roll out this policy in the
Speaker 1: most abrupt chaotic way possible, possibly in retaliation for unionization
Speaker 1: question mark. I don't know, but you know that timing
Speaker 1: does seem awful coincidental to me.
Speaker 4: Let's take a quick break.
Speaker 1: At our back. So I do want to balance as
Speaker 1: scales a little bet. You know, we talk a lot
Speaker 1: about corporations doing the wrong thing when it comes to
Speaker 1: supporting marginalized staff. So it is nice to be able
Speaker 1: to report on a company doing something kind of good
Speaker 1: going in the opposite direction. Indeed, the online job search
Speaker 1: company is offering ten thousand dollars to trans employees or
Speaker 1: immediate family members if they need to move to escape
Speaker 1: laws restricting trans healthcare. So them reports that they've actually
Speaker 1: been doing this policy since July after employees expressed concern
Speaker 1: over anti LGBTQ plus legislation in Texas and Florida. But
Speaker 1: they're only now making this policy public. The relocation moneies
Speaker 1: are being treated as a stipend, and indeed it's also
Speaker 1: covering any taxes on that money, which is pretty important. Indeed,
Speaker 1: it's already provided that support to at least one worker,
Speaker 1: a senior content creator who moved from Texas to Colorado
Speaker 1: not long after indeed announce the initiative. As soon as
Speaker 1: I found out that I was getting the money, it
Speaker 1: was very much like a weight had been lifted, the
Speaker 1: employee told Bloomberg. Them reports that indeed is not alone.
Speaker 1: This is actually a slow trend of companies offering this
Speaker 1: kind of support to staff. Financial software company into it
Speaker 1: offers real Q money, and even the Air Force. And
Speaker 1: now it's that they would help trans service members and
Speaker 1: their families relocate if they are stationed in states with
Speaker 1: discriminatory laws. Obviously, I, as you were saying earlier, Joey, like,
Speaker 1: I don't like the idea of like, oh well, now
Speaker 1: trans folks can like join the military industrial complex too, right,
Speaker 1: But you know, it is what it is. You gotta
Speaker 1: take what you gotta take what you can get. And
Speaker 1: I guess I feel like I don't know. It is
Speaker 1: a bummer that we live in a reality where this
Speaker 1: kind of policy is necessary, but that is the reality
Speaker 1: that we live in. And even though I obviously think
Speaker 1: this is great, everybody deserves to live in a place
Speaker 1: where they can have access to whatever medical care they need,
Speaker 1: and everybody deserves to live places where policies are not
Speaker 1: hostile to their very existence. And so I am really
Speaker 1: happy that people have access to this relocation support. But
Speaker 1: it shouldn't be a luxury just for people who have
Speaker 1: like good office jobs. It should really be for everybody.
Speaker 1: Actually be the bottom bare minimum that people can expect.
Speaker 2: Right. I think that's the one thing that kind of
Speaker 2: concerns me about this, because I remember seeing this article
Speaker 2: that or an article about it and being it was
Speaker 2: the same thing. I was like, Wow, that's really cool.
Speaker 2: I don't know, maybe I'm just like a skeptic When
Speaker 2: I was sort of like this seems I feel like,
Speaker 2: a are they going to actually do this or are
Speaker 2: they just saying they are?
Speaker 3: So it's good to hear that. I guess they've They've
Speaker 3: done it in.
Speaker 2: One case now, But I feel like what the people
Speaker 2: that I'm more worried about is like, like, who is.
Speaker 3: It who is this open to?
Speaker 2: Because again, like if you're working like a service job
Speaker 2: in like Texas or Florida where you're not making a
Speaker 2: lot of money or like living paycheck to paycheck. I mean,
Speaker 2: you're probably going to be the one in the most
Speaker 2: danger of living under these policies and how they're going
Speaker 2: to affect you, Like is that covered in it? Which
Speaker 2: is not to say again like obviously I had my
Speaker 2: little office that office job because I don't have an
Speaker 2: office right now, Like it's important that everybody's that kind
Speaker 2: of respect and help.
Speaker 3: But yeah, it's it's I don't know, I am cautiously
Speaker 3: optimistic about this.
Speaker 2: I think it's a it's good to see that like
Speaker 2: a company is doing something at least.
Speaker 1: Yeah, your concern is definitely well founded. I want to
Speaker 1: say it was Netflix, I'll have to look it up.
Speaker 1: But so when Netflix rolled out this very generous, unlimited
Speaker 1: prontal leave program, they got so much good press, lots
Speaker 1: of applause. However, they had one big problem because that
Speaker 1: program was only for full time staff. It did not
Speaker 1: include part time staff. It did not include folks who
Speaker 1: were working in their DVD distribution centers. So this was
Speaker 1: back when Netflix still had those DVDs and the sleeves
Speaker 1: they would send out and so yeah, I'm with you, Joey.
Speaker 1: Whenever I see policies like this, I hope that it's
Speaker 1: just not for like, oh, for our office workers, as
Speaker 1: people like to say on the internet, people who have
Speaker 1: the email jobs quote unquote. But I hope it's truly
Speaker 1: for everybody who works there, not just a certain subs
Speaker 1: section of people who get access to this.
Speaker 2: I like the the email jobs because I feel like
Speaker 2: I've been having a hard time befriends. Like who again
Speaker 2: back to the other story, like I don't work get
Speaker 2: an office. I actually visited the iHeart office for the first.
Speaker 1: Time, the one in Atlanta.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, the one in there's one in New York. Okay,
Speaker 3: I haven't meant at the Atlanta one.
Speaker 2: Yet, but I was like that, this is the first
Speaker 2: time since I was like interning that I've been inside
Speaker 2: of an office. But yeah, it's again. Yeah, I good friend. Indeed,
Speaker 2: I'm glad to hear this. I hope they follow through
Speaker 2: with it. I guess, you know, well, we keep an
Speaker 2: eyes on the story, see what happens.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, the Air Force thing too, I'm a little
Speaker 3: that I don't know.
Speaker 2: It's whenever the military comes up, it's so complicated because
Speaker 2: there is a whole history of like there's a lot
Speaker 2: of trans people who have been in the military or
Speaker 2: are in the military.
Speaker 3: Just kind of.
Speaker 2: And and again because I remember when when all this
Speaker 2: happened with like the Trump administration banning trans people from
Speaker 2: doing the military, there was discussion about like access to
Speaker 2: like benefits and stuff and all that's important.
Speaker 3: That being said, I'm not willing.
Speaker 2: To I don't know, I'm always gonna sort of take
Speaker 2: a step back, I think when it comes to military
Speaker 2: stuff and just yeah, I don't know, I don't know
Speaker 2: where this is going.
Speaker 1: Joey pat hates the troops. No, just kidding. So important
Speaker 1: question for you. Do you drive a car? You live
Speaker 1: in New York, Probably don't you.
Speaker 2: I mean I don't. I like, I have my driver's license,
Speaker 2: I have driven. I like drove my family's car when
Speaker 2: I was home. But yeah, currently do not own a car.
Speaker 2: Uh don't really have a reason too.
Speaker 1: Well, that's actually good news for you because if you
Speaker 1: drive a newer car, I have some bad news, which
Speaker 1: is that your car is probably spying on you in
Speaker 1: addition to collecting data about you, like normal car data
Speaker 1: like whether you drive too fast or if you were,
Speaker 1: your seatbelt or whatever. Your car might actually know who
Speaker 1: you have sex with. This is according to a new
Speaker 1: report from Mozilla. Just full quick disclosure, I do host
Speaker 1: Mozilla's podcast IRL about AI and ethics. I just wanted
Speaker 1: to say that.
Speaker 4: So.
Speaker 1: Mozilla's Privacy Not Included project found that every major car
Speaker 1: brand fails to adhere to the most basic privacy and
Speaker 1: security standards in their new internet connected models. All twenty
Speaker 1: five of the car brands that Mozilla examines failed their test.
Speaker 1: Mozilla found that major car brands collect data about their drivers,
Speaker 1: including race, facial expressions, weight, health informations, and where you drive. Now,
Speaker 1: all of that might seem like pretty reasonable information for
Speaker 1: your car to collect about you, but this is really wild.
Speaker 1: Some of the cars tested collected data that you would
Speaker 1: not expect your car to be able to collect about you,
Speaker 1: including details about your sexual activity, race, and immigration status.
Speaker 1: According to Mozilla, key privacy policy reserves the right to
Speaker 1: monitor quote your sex life. I don't know about you,
Speaker 1: but I don't know how I feel about my car
Speaker 1: knowing about my sex life.
Speaker 2: Whoa, whoa, yeah, wait did they explain how they do this?
Speaker 2: I'm actually gonna do it, but like I are there
Speaker 2: like cameras in the car that are this is so
Speaker 2: that's so freaky. That is so I have so many questions.
Speaker 1: So that's a really good question. According to the report,
Speaker 1: a lot of these newer cars have come enabled with
Speaker 1: like cameras in them, with microphones in them. They have
Speaker 1: like hands free technology where you can talk to the cars,
Speaker 1: and so the cars have microphones and they can hear
Speaker 1: conversations happening in there. And so yeah, I think that
Speaker 1: we don't usually think of a car as collecting information
Speaker 1: about us as we're driving, But that's what's happening.
Speaker 3: That's so, that's so freaking. I just okay, I'm always
Speaker 3: really behind on my TV.
Speaker 2: Should I just watched the new Black Mirror, like the
Speaker 2: first episode with what's her face Alexis from Shitzkrieg and
Speaker 2: I and I that was so freaky.
Speaker 3: I just this.
Speaker 2: I'm thinking of this because I'm like, oh, there's so
Speaker 2: many things that are just yeah, that's oh my god.
Speaker 1: That was my favorite episode of the new season.
Speaker 3: It was good.
Speaker 1: I reference it quite a bit. So Jen call to
Speaker 1: writer program director of Privacy Not Included, shares your disbelief
Speaker 1: of that this is happening Jen says many people think
Speaker 1: of their car as a private space, somewhere to call
Speaker 1: your doctor, have a personal conversation with your kid on
Speaker 1: the way to school, cry your eyes out after a breakup,
Speaker 1: Oh boy, have I been there? Or drive places that
Speaker 1: you might not want the world to know about. But
Speaker 1: that perception no longer matches reality. All new cars today
Speaker 1: are privacy nightmares on wheels that collect huge amounts of
Speaker 1: personal information.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 2: One thing that I do I love just like you know,
Speaker 2: every once in a while, you just gotta like scream
Speaker 2: and like I'll go to like if I'm have access
Speaker 2: to a car, like if I've ever heard how I
Speaker 2: was Like, sometimes I'll just like sit in the car
Speaker 2: like scream and I'm like, oh my god, favorite now home,
Speaker 2: like going over.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm said, well, how new was your parents car?
Speaker 2: I think it's about seven years old, so like twenty
Speaker 2: sixty to twenty seventeen.
Speaker 1: Okay, you might be Okay, you might be Okay. This
Speaker 1: this whole thing makes me happy. I mean, I I
Speaker 1: barely drive. I don't I think I'd probably drive like
Speaker 1: once a month. But my car is a like fifteen
Speaker 1: year old clunker, So it makes me kind of happy,
Speaker 1: it doesn't. I still have to do the thing where
Speaker 1: you plug in like a Bluetooth receiver into the ox
Speaker 1: Core into the ox Sport to like listen to music
Speaker 1: on my phone if I want to like listen to
Speaker 1: something that's not the radio. So it is very janky,
Speaker 1: it is very old school, doesn't have GPS, isn't bet anything.
Speaker 1: But as janky as it is, at least I don't
Speaker 1: have to worry about my car listening to me talk
Speaker 1: to my doctor on the phone, or like have an
Speaker 1: argument with my partner. I'd be like, oh, it looks
Speaker 1: like she's arguing about finances. Let's send her some ads
Speaker 1: about car refinancing or whatever.
Speaker 2: I feel like there's always you always have such emotional
Speaker 2: conversations in cars too. I don't know if it's I
Speaker 2: don't know if you do this too, but like, I
Speaker 2: feel like I've had a lot of very especially like
Speaker 2: as a teenager, a lot like it would be like
Speaker 2: a friend would be dropping me off, or I'd be
Speaker 2: having like a really dramatic conversation with my.
Speaker 3: Parents or something, and it's just I don't know, that's yeah, well.
Speaker 1: I think you're right, I do. I don't even know
Speaker 1: how to put this. I spent a summer living in
Speaker 1: LA and so when I was in La, I had
Speaker 1: a car, and I probably had it was it was
Speaker 1: a tough summer for me, and I probably had most
Speaker 1: of my intimate moments, like where I was questioning myself
Speaker 1: or having tough conversations with friends and family in the car,
Speaker 1: Like the car is feels like an intimate space. It
Speaker 1: feels like a private space. How many times have you
Speaker 1: taken a long drive and done or said things that
Speaker 1: you would that you thought were just between you and
Speaker 1: you know, just you and your God, right, Like the
Speaker 1: idea that the car is listening, the car is collecting
Speaker 1: that information, the car is using it to serve you
Speaker 1: targeted as these conversations and these moments that were happening
Speaker 1: in a place that felt so private and so intimate
Speaker 1: and so sacred, it's just not a good situation. Mozilla
Speaker 1: said that a number of car brands say that it
Speaker 1: is the driver's responsibility to let passengers know about their
Speaker 1: car's privacy policies, which you know, because that's a totally
Speaker 1: normal conversation that you have when somebody gets in your car.
Speaker 1: When you get into a car, it's a totally normal
Speaker 1: thing to be like, oh, let me just quickly brief
Speaker 1: you on my car's privacy policy so that you're aware
Speaker 1: of them. That is an absurd standard they have to
Speaker 1: opt people into. That's an absurd way to handle people
Speaker 1: being having to opt into this, or you know, when
Speaker 1: you get into an uber or a taxi cab, Like,
Speaker 1: how is that handled? And even beyond that, that doesn't
Speaker 1: really help because these policies are always inscrutable in the
Speaker 1: first place. So if it is your responsibility as a
Speaker 1: driver or the owner of this car to tell people
Speaker 1: about the privacy policy that you didn't set up when
Speaker 1: somebody gets into your car, how can you do that
Speaker 1: if they're written in such a way that it's intentionally
Speaker 1: inscrutable to the point where you can't even summarize what
Speaker 1: the policies are. Like, one of the car brands they
Speaker 1: talked about had twelve different privacy policies, So how the
Speaker 1: hell are you meant to be letting somebody know about
Speaker 1: your car's privacy policies if you can't even understand them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it all of us feels like letting somebody into
Speaker 2: your house and being like, oh, sorry, by the way,
Speaker 2: if you like.
Speaker 3: Talk about x things. There's like a little I don't
Speaker 3: know which I.
Speaker 2: Guess some people have like Alexis and stuff now, so
Speaker 2: I don't know who knows what that's doing.
Speaker 3: But yeah, man, there's just this. There's no privacy anymore.
Speaker 1: It's scary, not even in the ride.
Speaker 4: Let's take a quick break.
Speaker 1: Ed are back. Okay, So this is a story happening
Speaker 1: in your neck of the woods, Joey, because short term
Speaker 1: rentals like Airbnb and verbo are basically over in New
Speaker 1: York City thanks to new regulations. So last week, new
Speaker 1: rules said that rentals shorter than thirty days are not
Speaker 1: allowed unless the hosts registered with the city. Hosts must
Speaker 1: also commit to being physically present in the home during
Speaker 1: the duration of the rental, sharing the living quarters with
Speaker 1: their guests. More than two guests at a time are
Speaker 1: not allowed, so in effect kind of barring families from
Speaker 1: doing short term rentals like Airbnb in New York City.
Speaker 1: So that was last week. Well, this week that went
Speaker 1: into effect, and The Guardian reports that not many hosts
Speaker 1: were able to comply with registering with the city, so
Speaker 1: Airbnb is not allowed to process those rentals. Very few
Speaker 1: hosts had successfully registered and New York City says that
Speaker 1: it approved just under three hundred of the more three
Speaker 1: eight hundred applications received now. Housing advocates say that the
Speaker 1: apartments were basically being used as hotels, which is a
Speaker 1: big problem in a city like New York where there
Speaker 1: is very much, you know, as I'm sure you know,
Speaker 1: an active housing crisis.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, Arabnb does not get enough crop for like
Speaker 2: the way that they have contributed to the housing crisis
Speaker 2: and so many major cities like all over the world.
Speaker 2: I like, I remember talking to like somebody who lived
Speaker 2: in like Florence and Italy that it was like the
Speaker 2: same situation they were talking about, how like, and that
Speaker 2: that's like a huge tourist city, and that part of
Speaker 2: the reason that it's impossibly going to have like an
Speaker 2: apartment there now is just Airbnb has gotten so many
Speaker 2: apartments New York.
Speaker 3: Same thing.
Speaker 2: Does concern me a little because I do think I
Speaker 2: have a friend who's staying in New York next week
Speaker 2: who has an Airbnb, so I probably should.
Speaker 3: Check in with her.
Speaker 1: Check in on your friend.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, But I mean I am glad that's that
Speaker 2: they're they're cracking down on that because it's it's out
Speaker 2: of control.
Speaker 1: I completely agree. Airbnb is fighting these new rules in court,
Speaker 1: arguing that they are essentially a ban on Airbnb and
Speaker 1: that they would hurt this looking for affordable accommodations. So
Speaker 1: I actually say, Airbnb, I have a little bit of
Speaker 1: firsthand knowledge, and I'll say this, they are very good
Speaker 1: at this kind of thing. So I honestly would not
Speaker 1: be surprised if this policy was short lived in New
Speaker 1: York City. I hope it's not short lived, but I
Speaker 1: would not be surprised because Airbnb is very good at
Speaker 1: this kind of thing. So here's a little bit about
Speaker 1: what you can probably expect. You can expect to see
Speaker 1: them really highlighting the local people who they say are
Speaker 1: just like local community members making extra income by welcoming
Speaker 1: in travelers on a budget into their spare bedrooms. You know,
Speaker 1: it's all like Nanna and pop pop who just want
Speaker 1: to make their lasagna for somebody from out of town. Like,
Speaker 1: definitely they're going to make that or try to make
Speaker 1: that the face of like who's being hurt by this
Speaker 1: Airbnb crept down, So they're not going to tell you
Speaker 1: about the company or the wealthy landlord who has bought
Speaker 1: up multiple properties the a that would be available housing
Speaker 1: and has turned them into hotels for people they probably
Speaker 1: will never even meet. No, they will not tell you
Speaker 1: about that. They will definitely be trotting out like Nana
Speaker 1: and Pop Pop and telling you how this is like
Speaker 1: hurting your like local community members. Again, I can tell
Speaker 1: you from personal experience. And Airbnb hires what they call
Speaker 1: community organizers to help create what I would argue is
Speaker 1: like an astro turf movement specifically to represent their corporate interests,
Speaker 1: but then make that seem like a completely grassroots collection
Speaker 1: of just like concern community members sticking up for their communities.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I again like, even though I'm complaining about AIRBNBA,
Speaker 2: I've stayed in Airbnb's a couple of times, and I
Speaker 2: think honestly most of it, especially if it's like me
Speaker 2: and my friends traveling where we're like on a tight
Speaker 2: budget a lot of times, like it's a company that
Speaker 2: we're reaching out to. It's not like locals or whatever.
Speaker 2: They're trying to like position themselves. As I it is
Speaker 2: very weird because also I remember like when Airbnb was
Speaker 2: first like becoming a thing, that was how they were
Speaker 2: marketing themselves. It was like it's a you know, same
Speaker 2: sort of like Uber where it was like just sharing
Speaker 2: rights or sharing living space for the you know week
Speaker 2: or whatever. But it's yeah, the whole community organizers thing too.
Speaker 2: That's so vile just to especially like, I don't know,
Speaker 2: if you're looking at like again, if you're looking at
Speaker 2: like a job site and you see community organizer, I
Speaker 2: think you're expecting a very, very different job than working
Speaker 2: for Airbnb.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, I completely completely agree. I don't want to
Speaker 1: say anything that, I don't want to say anything wrong.
Speaker 1: I'll just say that I used to work for an
Speaker 1: organization that provided free or low cost digital training for
Speaker 1: progressive organizers, real organizers, and we did that. It was
Speaker 1: usually a network of volunteers, and that was done out
Speaker 1: of the desire to build social change, to build up
Speaker 1: the lefts you know, muscle, and in order to create
Speaker 1: social change. And imagine my surprise when some of those
Speaker 1: folks took that training that was given, you know, from
Speaker 1: the goodwill of our of our time and labor, to
Speaker 1: Airbnb to to do community to do quote community organizing.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I I I I guess I'll just leave
Speaker 1: it there. It was a it was a it was
Speaker 1: a surprising turnative events. Folks were not thrilled that that happened.
Speaker 1: But yeah, so Airbnb is so good at this. They're
Speaker 1: so like, I I gotta give props or prompts are due.
Speaker 1: I They're like, if you were not a savvy person
Speaker 1: and you were looking at the people who are probably
Speaker 1: opposing this legislation in New York, you would think this
Speaker 1: is just like community members who are speaking out. But
Speaker 1: Airbnb they're really good at that. They really know what
Speaker 1: they're doing. And yeah, I'm I should say like the
Speaker 1: same as you. I don't. It's not like I don't
Speaker 1: use Airbnb, but I try to use it sparingly and
Speaker 1: I try to just be very aware, like it would
Speaker 1: be It's one of those things where it would be
Speaker 1: nice if I could be like, oh, I'm just staying
Speaker 1: with like somebody who has a spare bedroom in their house,
Speaker 1: and like, you know, this is just like she's getting
Speaker 1: extra money. I'm getting to eat the fresh bake cookies
Speaker 1: that she's making me. This is all great, but that's
Speaker 1: not what it is in twenty twenty three. What it
Speaker 1: is in twenty twenty three is like generally somebody who
Speaker 1: is running airbnbes as a business, it is usually not
Speaker 1: their their their home that they're letting you into. It
Speaker 1: is like maybe at best it is their vacation home
Speaker 1: or something like that, but generally it's a business. And
Speaker 1: so I just wish that we could we could talk
Speaker 1: about it in reality and not in this way that
Speaker 1: it's just like a fantasy. Again, I think that you're
Speaker 1: right that it started that way. My very first time
Speaker 1: ever staying in an Airbnb, this was like when the
Speaker 1: company first got started, I was staying on somebody's couch
Speaker 1: in the house that they lived in with their family,
Speaker 1: and it very much was like I'm just crashing here.
Speaker 1: But that certainly isn't what it's like in a meaningful
Speaker 1: way in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think there was.
Speaker 2: There was like one time when I was I was
Speaker 2: in Amsterdam with some friends that we were like staying
Speaker 2: at somebody's apartment that it was like there's it actually
Speaker 2: was like a spavorite, spare bedroom and they were super
Speaker 2: nice and like you know, gave.
Speaker 3: Us recommendations of places to go and stuff.
Speaker 2: But yeah, it's I don't know the last like airbnb
Speaker 2: that I've stayed in again, it was I didn't book
Speaker 2: it a friend and I'm not sure what the situation was,
Speaker 2: but like there was an ant infestation in the house.
Speaker 2: It was terrible. It was terrible experience. So I'm still
Speaker 2: I met at Airbnb about that experience anyways.
Speaker 3: But.
Speaker 1: Are you one of those people who was like, oh,
Speaker 1: it's hotels all day. I'll never stayed on Airbnb if
Speaker 1: I don't have to.
Speaker 2: I try to, Like I don't do as much traveling now,
Speaker 2: just kind of at this point in my life. But
Speaker 2: I like, usually if I am I'm going to visit people,
Speaker 2: so I'll go like crash at their place. But yeah,
Speaker 2: I usually like try to go for a hotel. You
Speaker 2: know they're gonna clean. You know they're gonna clean the
Speaker 2: room every day. It's like nice.
Speaker 3: I like that. That's a nice part about traveling.
Speaker 1: And you don't like The thing that gets me about
Speaker 1: airbnbes and this if there's been a whole if folks
Speaker 1: haven't seen there's been a hole back and forth of
Speaker 1: like airbnbes were just hotels. One of the things is
Speaker 1: like with Arabian bees, there was a time where their
Speaker 1: fees were just out of control, where you'd be paying
Speaker 1: like a cleaning fee but also get a list of
Speaker 1: shores to do, so you'd be like, why am I
Speaker 1: paying this cleaning fee if I'm doing the laundry and
Speaker 1: like meant to be sweeping up?
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah exactly. I was like, I don't know.
Speaker 3: Maybe if I'm on vacation, I want to be in
Speaker 3: a hotel. I don't want to be doing any of
Speaker 3: the work.
Speaker 1: That's totally fair. Okay, So why don't you ask me
Speaker 1: what our favorite person is up to these days?
Speaker 4: All right?
Speaker 3: So, oh, I know where.
Speaker 1: This is going. I bet you can already tell.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I have a lot of thoughts on this. It
Speaker 3: is what's Elon up to?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: Well, I spent my labor day on vacation at the beach.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk spent his labor day being very anti Semitic.
Speaker 1: He spent this week fighting with the head of the
Speaker 1: Anti Defamation League because the ADL is basically telling the
Speaker 1: truth to advertisers about the rise of anti Semitic hate
Speaker 1: speech on the platform since Elon Musk took over. Musk
Speaker 1: accused the ADL of being quote the biggest generators of
Speaker 1: anti semitism on Twitter and threatened a four billion dollar
Speaker 1: lawsuit against them, saying that they were scaring away advertisers.
Speaker 1: So it should be said that per Twitter's own metrics,
Speaker 1: her own API, the use of anti Semitic hate speech
Speaker 1: has has risen since Elon must took over. It's just
Speaker 1: a fact. But you don't have to have access to
Speaker 1: that data, nor do you have to be the head
Speaker 1: of the ADL. To see that this is true. All
Speaker 1: you have to do is follow Elon Musk on Twitter
Speaker 1: and see the kinds of things he tweets and the
Speaker 1: kinds of tweets that he engages with. Elon's brand of
Speaker 1: anti Semitism, I would say, like previously was sort of
Speaker 1: loosely coded. He would use like George Sorows or the ADL,
Speaker 1: or like people who control the media, like pretty big
Speaker 1: dog whistle as a stand in to denigrate Jewish people.
Speaker 1: So this is not new for him at all. This
Speaker 1: has been a long standing pattern of behavior with Musk,
Speaker 1: but I think that more recently anti Semitism has gotten
Speaker 1: more overt, engaging with tweets that straight up attack Jewish
Speaker 1: people as a whole. He replied with an exclamation point
Speaker 1: to this tweet that purported to show that like he
Speaker 1: replied to a tweet from a white supremacist that purported
Speaker 1: to show a poll showing that Jewish people hated free speech.
Speaker 1: So I would argue that he is someone who is
Speaker 1: always trafficked in anti semitism, but it's it's especially concerning
Speaker 1: that it seems to be getting more and more overt
Speaker 1: and less and less coded.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, as a Jew who controls the media, I'm.
Speaker 3: So excited at this podcast.
Speaker 2: Yeah, obviously it's you know, Oh God, I'm so glad
Speaker 2: we're talking about this story.
Speaker 3: I have so many thoughts on this.
Speaker 2: So, like first things first, I will say upfront, ADL
Speaker 2: not necessarily a good organization. Their platform, their well, they're
Speaker 2: their idea what they market themselves out, which again is
Speaker 2: like an an anti hate speech, fighting anti semitism, fighting bigotry.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of criticisms of the organization itself. They've
Speaker 2: done a lot of things in the past. They've designated
Speaker 2: certain groups as being anti Semitic that weren't anti Semitic.
Speaker 2: They were more just sort of like critical of Israel
Speaker 2: or anti Zionist, which is not the same thing as
Speaker 2: anti semitism. That is a very valid political opinion. Again,
Speaker 2: I'm not a out of the ADL.
Speaker 3: They are.
Speaker 2: I disagree with the organization fundamentally in a lot of things.
Speaker 2: I think they've actually done a lot of shit that's
Speaker 2: been sort of like detrimental to a lot of anti racist,
Speaker 2: anti anti bigotry, even like anti anti Semitism sort of movements.
Speaker 3: That being said, like the criticism is clearly like this
Speaker 3: is this is a.
Speaker 2: Situation where they're going after this organization for being a
Speaker 2: Jewish organization, for being a group that speaks out against
Speaker 2: anti Semitism. I recently, it was it was probably like
Speaker 2: a month or two ago, the CEO of the ADL,
Speaker 2: Jonathan green Blatt said in an interview. He compared he
Speaker 2: said that Elon Musk is like the Henry Ford of
Speaker 2: our generation, which also is really ironic because Henry Ford
Speaker 2: was like notoriously anti Semitic. So I was like, I
Speaker 2: don't know, like like if somebody called somebody like the
Speaker 2: Henry Ford off something to me, I would be like, okay,
Speaker 2: so they're a piece of shit, Like I don't know.
Speaker 3: Anyways, he meant it as a compliment.
Speaker 2: So I think this is a good example of like
Speaker 2: again so called like human rights organizations, if you're gonna
Speaker 2: like use your time and your energy and your platform
Speaker 2: to like cheer on people who have this history of
Speaker 2: going against other marginalized groups that aren't your own, Like
Speaker 2: they're gonna come after you too, Like you're just setting
Speaker 2: your like I don't know, like that they're not gonna save.
Speaker 3: You, surprise.
Speaker 2: I just this whole situation there's again it's so messed
Speaker 2: up because you know, you know that mean, that's like
Speaker 2: the worst person, you know a great point.
Speaker 3: Oh, it's a virsion of that where it's like.
Speaker 2: I can't believe I'm defending the ad L of all
Speaker 2: things like I but yeah, it's it's like nobody again,
Speaker 2: I might disagree with some of their platform, but nobody
Speaker 2: should be attacked for just being a Jewish organization.
Speaker 3: And also the whole idea of like the anel contributed
Speaker 3: being the most anti s about it. I don't know
Speaker 3: that it is so weird that it is so weird.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there are like I mean, I I it's it's complicated,
Speaker 1: and I appreciate the nw ones that you're bringing to it.
Speaker 1: Elon must saying that the ADL is the most is
Speaker 1: spreading the most anti Semitism. There are people on the
Speaker 1: platform who tweet swastikas, like there are people on the
Speaker 1: platform who like, so that's just like not true, and
Speaker 1: it's so funny that you're saying this. The critic Mark
Speaker 1: Lamont Hill, who Mark Lemont Hill like he is someone
Speaker 1: who has been very open about the fact that he
Speaker 1: feels like he was like personally attacked by the ADL,
Speaker 1: And even even.
Speaker 2: He was like, yeah, and again this is just my opinion,
Speaker 2: but I'm Jewish. I was, you know, very involved in
Speaker 2: a lot of Jewish activists spaces around what that was happening,
Speaker 2: like he was attacked, but yeah.
Speaker 1: And yet even he this week was like Elon Musk,
Speaker 1: what Elon Musk is doing with the ADL is anti Semitic.
Speaker 1: And it's not like he was like, I am someone
Speaker 1: who is attacked by them, and even I can say, like,
Speaker 1: what's happening is really fucked up, And so it is.
Speaker 1: It is this very interesting moment in time, I guess where.
Speaker 1: And honestly, the ad L when it comes to this
Speaker 1: Elon must situation, they didn't really have to do anything
Speaker 1: to to like get Elon Musk to go off on
Speaker 1: this string of anti Semitic behavior and comments like I
Speaker 1: don't know if he is trying to.
Speaker 2: I always say it didn't he like compare George Sorows
Speaker 2: to like Magneto.
Speaker 1: Or he sure did, he sure did.
Speaker 3: Which also I'm a big xpen fan Magneto.
Speaker 1: Excuse you, excuse you?
Speaker 3: Like so no, no, no, like that's a favorable comparison.
Speaker 1: Actually, yeah, like this is.
Speaker 3: This has been an ongoing thing. He's said a lot
Speaker 3: of anti spotics off.
Speaker 1: And yet to be clear, Like I think I think
Speaker 1: we did an episode about this. It might have been
Speaker 1: on the Patron but regardless, like it's one thing to
Speaker 1: be critical of, like like Sorows is a very wealthy,
Speaker 1: well connected, you know, influential person in politics. It's one
Speaker 1: thing to be like, oh I am critic all of
Speaker 1: George Soros's policies of XYZ or like his positions on
Speaker 1: x y Z. It's quite another to compare him to
Speaker 1: Magneto like that is and so like if you like,
Speaker 1: I think that with Musk, he's really cool. He previously
Speaker 1: he was like good at staying like keeping it coded,
Speaker 1: keeping it a dog whistle. And the fact that now
Speaker 1: he's like no, it's just open, like it just signals
Speaker 1: to me that there's been a shift and a change,
Speaker 1: and it really concerns me for the state of Twitter.
Speaker 1: I don't remember, Joey, are you still on the platform?
Speaker 1: A is it a platform that you engage engage on?
Speaker 2: I have an account, I don't use it a ton anymore,
Speaker 2: but like, I'm still.
Speaker 3: On it and I'm hanging on.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to see how long till the website.
Speaker 3: Collapses on itself.
Speaker 2: But it's it's been such a shit show lately, Like
Speaker 2: it hasn't been fun to be on the platform.
Speaker 1: So it does seem like we've hit a new moment
Speaker 1: with Twitter where folks are just really starting to see
Speaker 1: just what you said that it's just not fun, it's
Speaker 1: not pleasant. Civil society groups are pushing to get advertisers
Speaker 1: to stop spending money advertising on Twitter. I actually did
Speaker 1: a pretty personal deep dive into my own relationship with
Speaker 1: Twitter on Patreon, where I heard from folks who similarly
Speaker 1: are feeling a little bit weird about our relationship with
Speaker 1: the platform in this specific moment, but who also feel
Speaker 1: it as a deep loss. Roe, who gave me permission
Speaker 1: to share this, wrote, I keep having this conversation with myself.
Speaker 1: I only keep it because of the community connections that
Speaker 1: will be lost if I leave, but so many are
Speaker 1: already gone. I run a mutual Aid meal delivery in
Speaker 1: my city and one weekend we had extra food. While
Speaker 1: I was delivering, I pulled over and tried to reach
Speaker 1: a single mom I know only through Twitter to offer
Speaker 1: to drop by. She's left the platform and I have
Speaker 1: no means to contact her. Now. Twitter was so important
Speaker 1: when Ottawa was overrun by the Freedom in Quotes Convoy
Speaker 1: last year. I don't know where we could share information
Speaker 1: this at the same scale now. So the too long
Speaker 1: Didn't Read is that I stay on Twitter out of
Speaker 1: fear and I'm incredibly resentful that an awful man broke
Speaker 1: a critical resource for my community. And boy, roe did
Speaker 1: I identify with that? That is exactly how I am feeling.
Speaker 1: I'm really wrestling with a lot of that same stuff
Speaker 1: of like, this used to be a resource that was good.
Speaker 1: It wasn't perfect, it had its problems. If folks want to,
Speaker 1: I will talk all day about some of the issues
Speaker 1: I had with pre musk Twitter. But something about this
Speaker 1: week just I was like, this is just not fun.
Speaker 1: It's not pleasant. I don't enjoy showing up here. The
Speaker 1: example that I gave on the Patreon was I was
Speaker 1: having a conversation with somebody about Bravo's Real House Bars
Speaker 1: of Atlanta, and I don't probably I don't know if
Speaker 1: you watched the show, but like this season hasn't been great.
Speaker 1: And somebody was like, oh, who would be a grave
Speaker 1: if you were doing a cast a casting, who would
Speaker 1: you cast? And somebody was like, T Madison, who is
Speaker 1: this black trans woman like Blugger and contact creator. I
Speaker 1: was like, oh my god, Tea Madison will be amazing.
Speaker 1: Why didn't that occur to me? Like she's so funny,
Speaker 1: she's so good at like clapp m back blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: Love Team Madison. And it didn't take long until people
Speaker 1: with blue check marks were intentionally misgendering Team Madison, calling
Speaker 1: like dead naming Team Madison. And this was just like
Speaker 1: a fun conversation about a television show. And it's like,
Speaker 1: that's it's not pleasant to show up to a platform
Speaker 1: and try to have a like fun light conversation and
Speaker 1: then next thing you know, you're like someone is intentionally
Speaker 1: dead naming and misgendering somebody. It's no longer against Twitter's
Speaker 1: terms of service to do that, because that was one
Speaker 1: of the things that Elon Musk one of the policies
Speaker 1: that he changed, but the first thing that he did,
Speaker 1: and you know, the whole conversation turned into people being like,
Speaker 1: this is fucked up, don't do this, and then people
Speaker 1: being like saying transphobic things, and it's like, we can't
Speaker 1: even have a conversation about Bravo Housewives without this nonsense.
Speaker 1: It's just not good, doesn't feel good, it doesn't feel fun,
Speaker 1: and I don't feel good knowing that I am supporting
Speaker 1: Elona Musk and helping to make the platform look like
Speaker 1: it's still viable by showing up there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree with that, and I feel like, especially
Speaker 2: what Roward said, just feeling resentful that again, feeling resentful
Speaker 2: that this man like broke Twitter, and sort of almost
Speaker 2: feeling like like I feel like at this point, I'm
Speaker 2: kind of staying on out of spite, Like I'm sort
Speaker 2: of like, no, like you can't scare me away, Like no,
Speaker 2: first staying here, but yeah, it's I then it's but
Speaker 2: then yeah, the other side is like it's it's not
Speaker 2: usable anymore. I not seeing my friend's posts. I'm yeah,
Speaker 2: seeing a lot of just blue check mark stuff. I also, yeah,
Speaker 2: like Twitter was, especially during like the height of the
Speaker 2: pandemic when stuff is on lockdown, Like that was.
Speaker 3: How I was staying connected to people.
Speaker 2: I was still in college at the beginning of the pandemic,
Speaker 2: and and like we were using Twitter to like get
Speaker 2: mutual aid to people and help people like get information
Speaker 2: that like the school was not telling us get informat.
Speaker 2: That's how I was able to get like my vaccination
Speaker 2: appointment where that was first happening.
Speaker 3: Sam was crazy. He was trying to get like my
Speaker 3: vaccine in New York.
Speaker 2: It's such a it has become such an important tool,
Speaker 2: and it's just it's so sad to like see this happening.
Speaker 1: It is sad. I should mention. While all of this
Speaker 1: was going down, Twitter's CEO maybe CEO, Linda Yakarino, while
Speaker 1: Elon Musk was like engaging with anti Semitism and all
Speaker 1: of that, she was busy tweeting did somebody say sport
Speaker 1: after a huge Labor Day weekend? Ex video views continue
Speaker 1: to search above last year. So, while Linda Yakarino, as
Speaker 1: supposedly the CEO of Twitter, was saying all of this
Speaker 1: stuff about how Twitter is now advertiser friendly, brand friendly,
Speaker 1: blah blah blah. My question for Linda Yakarino is how
Speaker 1: does Elon Musk tweeting all of this anti Semitic nonsense
Speaker 1: squared with her publicly stated intention to make Twitter a
Speaker 1: place where brands want to show up and want to
Speaker 1: spend money in advertising. I'm curious, Like, if I were
Speaker 1: the CEO of a company and my head of engineering
Speaker 1: was tweeting like this, I might have something to say
Speaker 1: about it, But not Linda. I'm so curious what's going
Speaker 1: on there. So yeah, if folks want to know my
Speaker 1: thoughts on the should I stay or should I go?
Speaker 1: Of it all? Please check out our patreon. And I
Speaker 1: also would love to hear where folks are at with Twitter,
Speaker 1: like are you still there? Have you left?
Speaker 4: Are you?
Speaker 1: What are the vibes like for you? Let me know,
Speaker 1: I would love to know.
Speaker 4: More. After a quick.
Speaker 5: Break, let's get right back into it.
Speaker 1: Okay, So this last story is really just like a
Speaker 1: story tailor made for me, so hopefully it is interesting
Speaker 1: to others as well, because I was like very invested,
Speaker 1: and that is that something is rotten over at Rotten Tomatoes.
Speaker 1: So Rotten Tomatoes is a movie criticism aggregate platform They
Speaker 1: have a thing called the Tomato Meter, which aggregates critics
Speaker 1: reviews of movies and gives a percentage score. The Tomato
Speaker 1: meter may be the most important metric in entertainment, yet
Speaker 1: it is also erratic, reductive, and easily hacked. This is
Speaker 1: from a very interesting report on Vulture. So Vulture reports
Speaker 1: that back in twenty eighteen, a movie called Ophelia, which
Speaker 1: was meant to be kind of a feminist retelling of
Speaker 1: hamlets starring Daisy Ridley, was getting not super great reviews
Speaker 1: from critics, meaning that its aggregate score on Rotten Tomatoes
Speaker 1: was a dismal forty six percent, which is not good,
Speaker 1: especially for a prestige film. They were trying to sort
Speaker 1: of like find a studio home for and kind of
Speaker 1: thought maybe might have some award season buzz. The film
Speaker 1: was rotten on Rotten Tomatoes, which means that it scored
Speaker 1: below sixty percent. Bunker fifteen, a movie publicity firm, recruited
Speaker 1: a bunch of smaller, obscure, often self published critics who
Speaker 1: are nevertheless part of the pool track by rotten Tomatoes.
Speaker 1: Bunker fifteen paid these critics fifty dollars or more to
Speaker 1: write reviews. These payments are typically not disclosed, and Rotten
Speaker 1: Tomatoes says that it prohibits reviewing based on a financial incentive.
Speaker 1: So Bunker fifteen told Vulture a lot of stuff like
Speaker 1: I would read the article if you want to want
Speaker 1: the whole thing. But essentially what Bunker fifteen told Vulture
Speaker 1: was pretty much an obvious code for we don't tell
Speaker 1: them to write good reviews, but we pay them to
Speaker 1: write reviews so that we can raise the Rotten Tomatoes score.
Speaker 1: And it's really nice that those reviews are good reviews.
Speaker 1: So like, essentially we pay them they write good reviews.
Speaker 1: If they didn't like the film, they don't write a review,
Speaker 1: and that's how we're able to get the Rotten Tomatoes
Speaker 1: score up.
Speaker 3: I'm not surprised by this.
Speaker 2: I feel like there's been so many weird especially like
Speaker 2: you know, we've talked about review bombing on the show,
Speaker 2: and that's become such a prevalent thing. Whenever you know,
Speaker 2: there's some about anybody that's not a straight white man,
Speaker 2: and uh, like Ron Tomatoes, maybe there's like a theme
Speaker 2: with this. I feel like it was the same thing
Speaker 2: where with air Baby, where it was like kind of
Speaker 2: cool when at first, like was a thing and it
Speaker 2: was like, you know, the people's kind of method of
Speaker 2: reviewing movies, and it was like but but then it's
Speaker 2: so quickly like now.
Speaker 3: I don't even look at it.
Speaker 2: I don't like I see especially like like I'll like
Speaker 2: if if, whenever the for a movie I want to see,
Speaker 2: like the Ron Tomato stuff will come out, but like
Speaker 2: and I'll like, I'll look at it, but it's not
Speaker 2: like like I always take it with a grain of
Speaker 2: salt now because I don't know.
Speaker 3: There have been some movies that were rated.
Speaker 2: Great that I did not enjoy, and there were other
Speaker 2: movies and the opposite happened, like didn't getting a review
Speaker 2: and I thought it was fun and it just maybe wasn't,
Speaker 2: you know, not for everybody, but it's still fun.
Speaker 1: So it's so interesting to hear you say this. I
Speaker 1: might be like a little pollyanna ish, like this vulture
Speaker 1: piece blue, like blew the lid right off off this
Speaker 1: thing for me because I probably spend more time browning
Speaker 1: rotten tomatoes in every any other site. Like I'm a
Speaker 1: movie person. I love film. I love cinema. It is
Speaker 1: my first love. And the I guess it should have
Speaker 1: occurred to me that rotten tomatoes could be hacked, could
Speaker 1: be bought, could be bombed, could like be artificially inflated
Speaker 1: or deflated.
Speaker 5: It just I don't know.
Speaker 1: I think I think I'm usually pretty skeptical about tech.
Speaker 1: But I wonder if I let my pure love of
Speaker 1: movies blind me the truth that was right in front
Speaker 1: of my face.
Speaker 2: Nah, I mean, I cut the I will also like,
Speaker 2: I'm a big f like I love movies.
Speaker 3: I'm a big movie person.
Speaker 2: But I feel like my opinion too, My view is
Speaker 2: always I think ultimately like it's objective. Everybody's got their
Speaker 2: own interest and opinions and stuff, and I think, you know,
Speaker 2: it is hard to like universally.
Speaker 3: I don't know, but but.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it's just seeing all these incidences of
Speaker 2: review bombing.
Speaker 3: I'm not surprised.
Speaker 2: But the thing, the thing that does prize me is
Speaker 2: the fact that it's like because I feel like there's
Speaker 2: usually the official tomatoman and then there's the fan one,
Speaker 2: and yeah, it's it's interesting, like, so this article is
Speaker 2: saying that it's affecting the like official tomato meter are.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so that's a great question. So basically the official critics,
Speaker 1: so for folks who don't spend all their time on
Speaker 1: fucking rotten tomatoess like I do. It has two different tracks.
Speaker 1: There is the audience score and the critics score, and
Speaker 1: the critics score is the one that really matters. And
Speaker 1: so to answer your question, Joey, yes, the critics score
Speaker 1: can be gamified. Here's how it works. The scores can
Speaker 1: sort of be hacked by studios. When a studio is
Speaker 1: prepping the release of a new title, it will screen
Speaker 1: the film for critics in advance. It's a film publicist
Speaker 1: job to organize these screenings and invite the writers they
Speaker 1: think will respond most positively. Then that publicist will set
Speaker 1: the movies review embargo, in part so that its initial
Speaker 1: Tomato Meter score is as high as possible at the
Speaker 1: moment when it can have the maximum benefits for word
Speaker 1: of mouth and early ticket sales. They really rely on
Speaker 1: fan side. So even though like traditional critics are probably
Speaker 1: less likely to write a glowing review for like a
Speaker 1: superhero movie, studios can generally count on somebody who is
Speaker 1: a big fan of that franchise to write a positive review.
Speaker 1: And even if they write that positive review on like
Speaker 1: a self published fan side or like a medium page
Speaker 1: that can sometimes still count toward the Rotten Tomatoes aggregate
Speaker 1: critics review, So it doesn't seem like it's really that
Speaker 1: hard to gamify those critics scores, and it people listening
Speaker 1: might be like, why are you telling me this? Why
Speaker 1: does this matter? Well, it matters because Rotten Tomatoes is
Speaker 1: actually kind of a big deal. It can really make
Speaker 1: or break a film's release. If you watch one of
Speaker 1: my favorite shows on HBO Max the other two, there's
Speaker 1: a whole plot line about how powerful Rotten Tomatoes is,
Speaker 1: unshaping how a film is perceived. Studios are so scared
Speaker 1: about Rotten Tomato's Tomato Meter score that they actually work
Speaker 1: with a company called screen engine ASI, which attempts to
Speaker 1: forecast scores. Publicist spoke to Vulture and said, I put
Speaker 1: in our original business plan that we should not do
Speaker 1: films that score less than eighty. Rotten Tomatoes is the
Speaker 1: only public stamp of approval that says this is out
Speaker 1: of immense quality, and all critics agree, but like, not necessarily,
Speaker 1: And so if studios and publicists are using this as
Speaker 1: a stamp of approval, but it's also easily hacked and
Speaker 1: easily gamified, it seems like a little bit of a scam. Anyway,
Speaker 1: the whole piece is definitely worth a read.
Speaker 2: That not focusing on films to score less than an eighty,
Speaker 2: I feel like that's so concerning because people, I think,
Speaker 2: because the film industry is it's like an industry, and
Speaker 2: it is this very like hyper capitalized.
Speaker 3: It is still like art.
Speaker 2: It is still art that's very accessible to people too,
Speaker 2: and that's the reason, like film has such an important place,
Speaker 2: and like, I don't know, I have a lot of
Speaker 2: feelings about the film industry, but I feel like, yeah,
Speaker 2: like there's plenty of movies like I love that have
Speaker 2: like seventies or like even yeah, even in like the
Speaker 2: fifties or sixties, the like cult classic films that like,
Speaker 2: like if studios are only focusing on movies that score
Speaker 2: over eighty, we're not gonna get so much of like
Speaker 2: the culture around film or the culture that the film
Speaker 2: industry produces.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the thing.
Speaker 2: And I think it's the same thing with like all
Speaker 2: the Netflix stuff, with all these like TV shows that
Speaker 2: are getting canceled. There's been a lot of things, you know,
Speaker 2: like we're in the middle of the writer's strike for
Speaker 2: a reason. There's like all these movies that are getting shelved.
Speaker 2: There's like TV shows that are getting canceled after one
Speaker 2: season because it's film is an art form, and it's
Speaker 2: like these companies are trying to take that aspect away
Speaker 2: and the creative aspect away, and that's just like concerning overall. I.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm almost like tearing up here when you
Speaker 1: talk about this, because it film is something that I
Speaker 1: take very seriously. Art and culture and film. It's like
Speaker 1: the thing that saved me, and it's really really important,
Speaker 1: and it feels like we're losing it. This is a
Speaker 1: little bit of a longer read, but I want to
Speaker 1: read this quote that Richard link Later, one of my
Speaker 1: favorite directors, said. So he was asked in an interview
Speaker 1: about what he thinks about the current state of American
Speaker 1: movie making, and he said, it's a little bit long
Speaker 1: sibitter with me. He said, it feels like it's gone
Speaker 1: with the wind or gone with the algorithm. Sometimes I'll
Speaker 1: talk with some of my contemporaries who I came up
Speaker 1: with during the nineties and we'll go, oh my god,
Speaker 1: we could never get that done today. So on the
Speaker 1: one hand, selfishly, you think I guess I was born
Speaker 1: at the right time. I was able to participate in
Speaker 1: what always feels like the last good era for filmmaking,
Speaker 1: and then you hope for a better day. But man,
Speaker 1: the way distribution has fallen off. Sadly, it's mostly just
Speaker 1: the audience. Is there a new generation that really values
Speaker 1: cinema anymore? That's the dark thought. I have a film society,
Speaker 1: and I run into so many young cinema loving kids
Speaker 1: who actually have the Criterion Channel and they watch all
Speaker 1: kinds of amazing movies. But I know that culturally that's
Speaker 1: the exception. I fear that there's not enough of a
Speaker 1: critical mass and the culture to sustain what was. Who knows.
Speaker 1: I don't think I have any deeper analysis than anyone
Speaker 1: else would, and it's not in my nature to make
Speaker 1: huge statements about whether it's all over. I just feel
Speaker 1: we're all treading water and hoping we don't drown. Challenging
Speaker 1: times are certainly here, with a changing culture and a
Speaker 1: changing technology, it's hard to see cinema slipping back into
Speaker 1: the prominence it once held. I think we could feel
Speaker 1: it coming when they started calling films content. But that's
Speaker 1: what happens when you let tech people take over your industry.
Speaker 1: It's hard to imagine indie cinema in particular having the
Speaker 1: cultural relevance that it did. It's hard to imagine the
Speaker 1: whole culture is going to be on the same page
Speaker 1: about anything, much less filmmaking. We can be so self
Speaker 1: absorbed and say it's just about cinema, but it's really
Speaker 1: all of our modern cultural life. You could say the
Speaker 1: same things about reading books. A lot of young people
Speaker 1: can't really read a book because they're just on their phones.
Speaker 1: Some really intelligent, passionate, good citizens just don't have the
Speaker 1: same need for literature and movies anymore. It doesn't occupy
Speaker 1: the same space in the brain. I think that's just
Speaker 1: how we've given over our lives largely to this thing
Speaker 1: that depletes the need for curating and filling ourselves up
Speaker 1: with meaning from art and fictional worlds. It has been
Speaker 1: filled up with, let's face it, advanced delivery system for advertising.
Speaker 1: It's sad, but what can you do. I also don't
Speaker 1: want to go through life thinking our best days are
Speaker 1: behind us. That's just not productive. So in your own area,
Speaker 1: you just have to persist and do what you can
Speaker 1: on behalf of the things that you believe in. You
Speaker 1: have to believe that everything can change and things can
Speaker 1: go back to being a little bit better. Isn't that
Speaker 1: what we all want for everything these days, from democracy
Speaker 1: on down? Can't we just go back to things being
Speaker 1: a little better? And why that answer really punched me
Speaker 1: in the gut because I feel like that's where we're at,
Speaker 1: where these things that are that we're just purely good.
Speaker 1: Movies are good, culture is good, art is good, music
Speaker 1: is good. We are losing that, and we're losing the
Speaker 1: kind of collective cultural understanding that those things have value
Speaker 1: and that they're not just content to fill streamers and
Speaker 1: content to put advertising on. That they are value. They're
Speaker 1: what make us us, right, like when all of us
Speaker 1: are dead, that's those are the things that people are
Speaker 1: gonna watch and read and listen to and consume to
Speaker 1: understand what we were in twenty twenty three. And it's
Speaker 1: really sad to me the idea that as a culture
Speaker 1: collectively we might not hold that as a value, that
Speaker 1: cultural longevity. We might be losing that. Really it really
Speaker 1: it hurts.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I feel like the same way. I
Speaker 2: think it is really concerning to see what's happening. The
Speaker 2: one thing I do kind of disagree with with that quote.
Speaker 2: I think the kind of lens of like, oh, people
Speaker 2: just don't want these kind of movies, don't want these
Speaker 2: kind of like indie really like more artistic movies anymore.
Speaker 2: I think that's that I'm a little bit more cautious of.
Speaker 2: I don't think it's necessarily that people don't want it.
Speaker 2: I think so much of it just has to do
Speaker 2: with the fact that, like the way that the film
Speaker 2: industry has acted in the past like decade, it has
Speaker 2: kind of given people like it's become so much more centralized.
Speaker 2: There's been so much more emphasis on, like you know,
Speaker 2: a lot of like special effects and CGI and stuff
Speaker 2: that isn't even particularly good coming from a lot of
Speaker 2: these studios. But like, and I mean, I think this
Speaker 2: whole idea of like these film franchises has become such
Speaker 2: a bigger thing culturally. But a lot of that is
Speaker 2: because that is what these production companies have like sort
Speaker 2: of engineered the film industry to look like to look like.
Speaker 2: And again, like I brought up the strike writer strike earlier,
Speaker 2: it's the fact that the power, the monetary power is
Speaker 2: so centralized right now, and the people that are the
Speaker 2: ones making this art, aren't getting compensate, aren't able to
Speaker 2: live their lives.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think it's just the fact. And the one
Speaker 3: thing that I think kind of.
Speaker 2: Gives me hope in this sort of situation is the
Speaker 2: fact that I think we are reaching a point where,
Speaker 2: like all these superhero movies keep flopping because people have
Speaker 2: gotten really sick of it.
Speaker 3: Because again, like I love super movies. I think they're fun,
Speaker 3: They're always.
Speaker 2: Gonna be a thing in American culture, but like we're
Speaker 2: all kind of sick of the of the like Avengers thing,
Speaker 2: Like they kind of did their big thing, and it's
Speaker 2: like we're ready for the next thing. I feel like
Speaker 2: lately there's been like a couple more that I've sort
Speaker 2: of like I remember, okay, everything everywhere all at once
Speaker 2: when that I love that movie so much. I know
Speaker 2: lots of people love that movie, and I remember talking
Speaker 2: to a friend about it and they were just like
Speaker 2: I felt so like like it felt new. It was
Speaker 2: the first thing that I watched in a while that
Speaker 2: felt like new and original. And I feel like I'm
Speaker 2: seeing a little bit more of that, and like, I
Speaker 2: don't know, I saw like Bottoms last weekend.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, how was it. I'm seeing it. I'm
Speaker 1: seeing it tomorrow. Is it good?
Speaker 3: It's so good?
Speaker 2: Okay, that is like one of my new favorite movies again,
Speaker 2: solidarating with the Writer's show you soleidraating with the actors,
Speaker 2: like I know they're not doing promotion right now, so
Speaker 2: I don't want to be like, but but it's an
Speaker 2: amazing movie. I totally recommend peop'll go see it. But
Speaker 2: even like with that, I remember seeing a tweet from
Speaker 2: somebody about it where they were like, here's the budget
Speaker 2: and here's what it made. It it's opening weekend and
Speaker 2: it was less than the budget. But I was like, okay,
Speaker 2: but that's just opening weekend. Like and also it opened
Speaker 2: to only a couple of theaters. This isn't like a
Speaker 2: Marvel movie where they're trying like there was that whole
Speaker 2: thing for a while, where.
Speaker 3: Like Disney kept trying to like one up.
Speaker 2: It's like most money made for a movie, and there
Speaker 2: was like a whole thing.
Speaker 3: It was between like The.
Speaker 2: Avengers and like Avatar for a while, and like, I
Speaker 2: don't care, like it.
Speaker 3: Was one of those things.
Speaker 2: I was sort of like, they made billions of dollars,
Speaker 2: why are they still trying to make more money just
Speaker 2: to be just really a pr stunt. So I think again,
Speaker 2: I think the issue is less like people don't want
Speaker 2: this stuff.
Speaker 3: I think people do. I think people always will.
Speaker 2: Yes, there's argument that like with you know, TikTok and
Speaker 2: twitch streamers, there's all this much more like packaged targeted
Speaker 2: content out there. And again, like the whole using the
Speaker 2: word content versus film, which I agree with that I
Speaker 2: think calling content feels a little weird. But yeah, but
Speaker 2: at the same time, I think, you know, people like art.
Speaker 2: People want art that's like a part of humanity that
Speaker 2: has existed forever.
Speaker 3: And yeah, again I am hopeful.
Speaker 2: I do think like the fact that like A twenty
Speaker 2: four has kind of taken off in his popularity.
Speaker 3: Like as much as I don't like film Twitter as.
Speaker 2: A whole, I think the fact that like film, Twitter
Speaker 2: and letterbox and all these things are sort of like
Speaker 2: a bigger thing, I think it just shows that, like
Speaker 2: there's still people interested in this, there's still people that
Speaker 2: want to see this. It's just the industry is fucked,
Speaker 2: Like honestly, it's yeah, I'm hoping for the best, but yeah,
Speaker 2: we'll see what happens.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, I love everything that you just said.
Speaker 1: First of all, I think I'm I'm like an a
Speaker 1: twenty four stan, I'm probably I'm probably the person on
Speaker 1: film Twitter that you're like, God, you're so annoying.
Speaker 2: I like, I'm also it is a thing where I'm like,
Speaker 2: I'm part of the problem, and I.
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, I'm the problem. It's me.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: But this is so hopeful. This is such a hopeful
Speaker 1: note to end on, like, support the writer's strike as
Speaker 1: much as I like, as much harm as these like
Speaker 1: billionaire streamer Hollywood ceo bastards have given us the fact
Speaker 1: that they robbed us of a Bottoms press tour, I
Speaker 1: will never forgive them.
Speaker 2: But they're like a couple of videos I did before
Speaker 2: the before the strike, We're just like beautiful but yeah again.
Speaker 3: And I go see Bottoms.
Speaker 2: The way to support the strike is to show these
Speaker 2: executives that people want these movies, that people want this creativity.
Speaker 3: Go see Bottoms. Fantastic film.
Speaker 1: That is a great place to end. You have your
Speaker 1: assignment for the weekend, folks, go see Bottoms. Joey, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for being here. I really appreciate it,
Speaker 1: of course, and thanks so much to all of you
Speaker 1: for listening. We will talk to you very soon. If
Speaker 1: you're looking for ways to support the show, check out
Speaker 1: our March store at tangody dot com slash store. Got
Speaker 1: a story about an interesting thing in tech, or just
Speaker 1: want to say hi, You can read us at Hello
Speaker 1: at tegody dot com. You can also find transcripts for
Speaker 1: today's episode at TENG Goody dot com. There Are No
Speaker 1: Girls on the Internet was created by me Bridget Tod.
Speaker 1: It's a production of iHeartRadio and Unboss Creative, edited by
Speaker 1: Joey pat Jonathan Strickland as our executive producer. Tari Harrison
Speaker 1: is our producer and sound engineer. Michael Almado is our
Speaker 1: contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want
Speaker 1: to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.