Speaker 1: Your whole job is to be about like empathizing with
Speaker 1: the human experience enough to be able to tell a
Speaker 1: story that resonates with people. And yet like here's a
Speaker 1: real human being going like hey, hey, I'm over here,
Speaker 1: call me, and no d ms are open, like there
Speaker 1: are No Girls on the Internet. As a production of
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio and Unbossed Creative, I'm Bridget Todd, and
Speaker 1: this is there Are No Girls on the Internet. You're
Speaker 1: listening to a brand new season of their No Girls
Speaker 1: on the Internet. And if you've been with us at
Speaker 1: the beginning, thank you so much for your support. It
Speaker 1: means a lot. And if you're one of our new listeners,
Speaker 1: We're so glad you're here. I'm Bridget Todd. I spend
Speaker 1: an inordinate amount of time thinking about the Internet and
Speaker 1: how we show up on it. We share parts of
Speaker 1: ourselves online. What gets lost by now? You know the
Speaker 1: drill that nobody's online presence tells the full story of
Speaker 1: who they are. We're all creating a digital highlight reel
Speaker 1: and none of it is really real. But what about
Speaker 1: the way is the Internet itself latins out who we
Speaker 1: are and the full scope of our humanity? When you're
Speaker 1: viewing them through a screen, It's easy to see people
Speaker 1: as one dimensional caricatures, distortions of who they really are.
Speaker 1: And if you think about your own online experience, I'm
Speaker 1: sure you felt this one way or another. Now, imagine
Speaker 1: what that would be like as an exoner ee, exonerated
Speaker 1: for a high profile crime of which you were falsely accused.
Speaker 1: That's Amanda Knox's reality. Amanda Knox, his name is still
Speaker 1: synonymous with a crime that she did not commit, the
Speaker 1: murder of her roommate Meredith Kircher by Rudy Gouday in
Speaker 1: Italy in two thousand seven. Amanda's spent almost four years
Speaker 1: in prison before being acquitted. Since her release from prison,
Speaker 1: Amanda has worked to change the conversation around the criminal
Speaker 1: justice system and the people caught up in it through writing,
Speaker 1: advocacy and her podcast Labyrinths. But in an online landscape
Speaker 1: that profits from distorting people according to the most salacious
Speaker 1: stories attached to them, sure or not, Amanda continues to
Speaker 1: be flattened into a Foxy Naxy caricature, the same caricature
Speaker 1: that led to her being locked up for a crime
Speaker 1: that she didn't commit. Understandably, Amanda is particular about what
Speaker 1: parts of herself she shares with the internet, for instance,
Speaker 1: concerned her story would become fodder for tabloids and online trolls,
Speaker 1: Amanda and her husband Chris waited to reveal to the
Speaker 1: world they were expecting their first child until she was
Speaker 1: already born. Soon after I gave birth, And of course
Speaker 1: I didn't immediately tell the world that I had given
Speaker 1: birth because I was I didn't want to emotionally and
Speaker 1: psychologically navigate the difficulty of tackling how the internet and
Speaker 1: how the broader world was going to react to my
Speaker 1: daughter um in those first weeks of having given birth,
Speaker 1: like I us needed to like be chill and secret
Speaker 1: and hidden and no one to know. But of course
Speaker 1: that means that no one knows, and I still have
Speaker 1: to keep doing my job and responding to the world
Speaker 1: as if I don't have a two week old baby
Speaker 1: that's keeping me up at night, news suckling on me constantly.
Speaker 1: I loved how you chronicled your journey to become parents
Speaker 1: on Instagram. Did it have the desired effect you were
Speaker 1: looking for, like like revealing it in that way where
Speaker 1: by the time you were like, oh, we're expecting your
Speaker 1: child was actually already here, when it didn't have the
Speaker 1: desired effects of just giving you all a little more
Speaker 1: space to not have to wonder how the Internet would
Speaker 1: react to this, this change in your life. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: then it also did um a sort of I started
Speaker 1: at a bait and switch kind of thing, like I
Speaker 1: was when I was doing when I was sort of
Speaker 1: revealing on a daily basis, like week per week photos
Speaker 1: on my Instagram. It sort of like giving that sense
Speaker 1: to my my followers, but also to like the greater
Speaker 1: Internet in general, because of course I know that the
Speaker 1: tabloids are constantly scanning my Instagram in order to like steal,
Speaker 1: you know, photos of me and strip them of context
Speaker 1: and then vilify me. Like I was anticipating this um
Speaker 1: and sort of addressing directly this feeling of like anticipation
Speaker 1: and wanting more and wanting like acknowledging that, like, as
Speaker 1: I'm getting bigger and bigger, it's very human and natural
Speaker 1: to be like, oh my god, the baby's next, the
Speaker 1: baby's next. And then my goal at the very end
Speaker 1: of it was two show one image of my child
Speaker 1: and explain why I was not going to be sharing
Speaker 1: any other photos of her on the internet because of
Speaker 1: how I knew both the Internet to be a thing
Speaker 1: that maybe you should opt into instead of automatically put
Speaker 1: into by your parents, but also because of how much
Speaker 1: my own social media and internet life has been mined
Speaker 1: for content and mind for exploitation by tabloids, um, and
Speaker 1: I did not want to sort of offer my own
Speaker 1: daughter on a platter. And so I wanted to like
Speaker 1: give the sense of like, yes, we're all in it
Speaker 1: together and we all are really excited. But also this
Speaker 1: is why I'm sort of withholding something from you, And
Speaker 1: I was hoping to make a point, um by revealing
Speaker 1: my pregnancy that way. Yeah, I mean, what is it
Speaker 1: like to be Amanda Knox on the internet, Like, what
Speaker 1: is that experience like for you? Well, um, it means
Speaker 1: that I am in You know, when I came home
Speaker 1: from prison after I was first acquitted, I knew that
Speaker 1: I was walking into a world where there would be
Speaker 1: a version of me in people's minds no matter what.
Speaker 1: Like that's just a reality. Um. People heard of Foxy Knoxy.
Speaker 1: Now they have a very clear idea of who I am.
Speaker 1: Except it's not who I am. And so I'm going
Speaker 1: to be perpetuating conversation with that like prejudice about me
Speaker 1: that as I'm walking through the world, and it made
Speaker 1: me acutely aware of how much my identity as it
Speaker 1: had been constructed, especially in the digital space, was not
Speaker 1: actually a product of my own making. And I think
Speaker 1: this honestly is very, very true of everyone. We all
Speaker 1: aren't totally the authors of our identities, especially online. Um.
Speaker 1: We like to think, I think we have this like
Speaker 1: false sense of security that like, oh, my Instagram feed
Speaker 1: is my own and oh, you know, when I present
Speaker 1: myself online, all people will understand what I mean when
Speaker 1: I say a thing, And the reality is that's not true,
Speaker 1: and we all are facing certain kinds of prejudices as
Speaker 1: we encounter people, especially across the distance of the Internet.
Speaker 1: As much as it brings us close, it also keeps
Speaker 1: us distant from each other because we're not physically there. Um.
Speaker 1: And so I feel like I have a unique perspective
Speaker 1: of like I feel like I have because I've been
Speaker 1: such like pushed to such extremes through the Internet that
Speaker 1: had like utterly vilified and also like totally reached out
Speaker 1: to by people like total random strangers who just say,
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, I'm so inspired by what you went
Speaker 1: through and how you've dealt with it like I have.
Speaker 1: I have personally felt all like and pushed against all
Speaker 1: of the edges of the Internet and the way that
Speaker 1: it works. So I feel like I appreciate in a
Speaker 1: sort of fine tuned way how the Internet works and
Speaker 1: how much of myself and therefore everyone else is a
Speaker 1: construct of these like interplaying, you know, impulses and um
Speaker 1: and that sense of ownership that really, really we have
Speaker 1: a false sense of ownership of ourselves online and we
Speaker 1: really don't own ourselves online. Actually there's some a really
Speaker 1: interesting did you hear about the woman who was an artist?
Speaker 1: Um and she had like you know, as an artist does.
Speaker 1: She has an Instagram account. I think it was called
Speaker 1: the metaverse. Her Instagram goes go metaverse right, and like
Speaker 1: Facebook decided, oh, we're the metaverse now, so we're just
Speaker 1: gonna delete you. And they have that power, which like
Speaker 1: again reinforces that sense of like, well do we own
Speaker 1: ourselves on the internet? Do we own ourselves on the internet?
Speaker 1: So w E b du Boy has this concept of
Speaker 1: double consciousness whereby black folks experience consciousness in two distinct
Speaker 1: ways at once. The way that we understand and see
Speaker 1: ourselves and the way that we are aware of being
Speaker 1: seen by a white supremacist society. And I've always felt
Speaker 1: this concept was really useful, not just in navigating the
Speaker 1: I r L world, but in navigating my own online
Speaker 1: experiences as well. When I share myself online, I'm very
Speaker 1: aware that it's a convergence of two consciousnesses, who I
Speaker 1: actually am and who people are perceiving me to be.
Speaker 1: I don't even really consider my online persona to be me.
Speaker 1: I think of her as my avatar, a stand in
Speaker 1: for my digital experiences, completely distinct from the real me.
Speaker 1: I spend a lot of time thinking about our digital
Speaker 1: experiences and the experience of showing up online and just
Speaker 1: what that's like for us, and I often referred to
Speaker 1: my online self as my avatar. You know, I don't
Speaker 1: even see her as really myself. I see her as
Speaker 1: a stand in, and so I can only imagine what
Speaker 1: that experience is like for us, this person who has
Speaker 1: been vilified and really turned into a caricature. How you
Speaker 1: might feel that there are these all these different competing
Speaker 1: versions of yourself out in the world, but at the
Speaker 1: same time really knowing you know, this isn't me, like
Speaker 1: having this composite, sketch version of yourself, of what people
Speaker 1: see you as, all these different projections of of people's
Speaker 1: understandings of who you are or who they want you
Speaker 1: to be or need you to be. When I was
Speaker 1: preparing for this interview, I was reading some headlines, and
Speaker 1: there was this one tabloid story that had clearly taken
Speaker 1: a picture of you and your husband, maybe when you
Speaker 1: were out at a party or something. And there are
Speaker 1: so many pictures of you and your husband that anybody
Speaker 1: could use to accompany a story about you, but they
Speaker 1: had clearly gone out of their way to choose a
Speaker 1: picture where y'all were at a party to kind of
Speaker 1: add to this media created idea that y'all were weird.
Speaker 1: You know, It's like they went out of their way
Speaker 1: to say, look at these two, aren't they weird? Look
Speaker 1: at this weird picture. But it's like they chose the picture.
Speaker 1: This is obviously something that you wanted to use to
Speaker 1: create to tell the story that you were trying to sell,
Speaker 1: and that story was these two are weirdos. And for you,
Speaker 1: it must be so difficult to retain and protect your
Speaker 1: sense of self when there are so many forces out
Speaker 1: there projecting all of these competing, negative, out of context
Speaker 1: versions of who they think you are or who they
Speaker 1: want you to be or need you to be. M Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: it's true, especially because and I think this is true
Speaker 1: of other people as well. Like it's not like it
Speaker 1: just limits itself to the Internet space, Like it definitely
Speaker 1: has repercussions in my actual real life. It makes it
Speaker 1: so that it's difficult for me to make friends or
Speaker 1: to get a regular job. Like these are always that
Speaker 1: the stigma of whatever that person, that that idea of
Speaker 1: me that's in someone else's mind impacts me on a
Speaker 1: on an actual level. Like I actually went to prison
Speaker 1: because people were, you know, cherry picking um moments of
Speaker 1: my life and portraying them in the worst possible light.
Speaker 1: And like I went to actual prison for that. So
Speaker 1: like and you know, to this day, you know, I'm
Speaker 1: not being put in a jail cell because of people
Speaker 1: talking badly about me on the internet and portraying me
Speaker 1: as a weird person. But it does mean that, you know,
Speaker 1: if I go and take a meeting with someone, I'm wondering,
Speaker 1: are they taking a meeting with me because they want
Speaker 1: to see how weird I am? Or they want to,
Speaker 1: you know, or are they actually seriously interested in my
Speaker 1: professional work? Do they even know about my professional work?
Speaker 1: Because of course the tabloids are really happy to tell
Speaker 1: stories about me going to parties, but they don't ever
Speaker 1: talk about the work that I do because that doesn't
Speaker 1: go with their story. So I don't know. Like it's
Speaker 1: made me acutely aware of how powerful storytelling is, and
Speaker 1: it's made me think about, like, well, who is allowed
Speaker 1: to tell stories? And what what stories are they telling us?
Speaker 1: And how are we complicit in them the choices they
Speaker 1: are making as storytellers in selling us a product. Let's
Speaker 1: a clipbreak at her back. Last year, Amanda spoke out
Speaker 1: about the film Still Water, which stars mcnaman as a
Speaker 1: father who travels to Europe to see his daughter, who
Speaker 1: has been in prison for the murder of her roommate
Speaker 1: and lover in France. There's going to be a spoiler
Speaker 1: for the film in just a Moment. Director Tom McCarthy
Speaker 1: said he was quote inspired by Amanda's experience. I was
Speaker 1: pretty fascinated with the Amanda Knox case back a long
Speaker 1: time ago and did a pretty deep dive into it. Okay,
Speaker 1: so here's the spoiler in the film, the character inspired
Speaker 1: by Amanda is revealed to have been withholding relevant information
Speaker 1: about the murder that she has not shared with authorities.
Speaker 1: That she paid the man who actually killed her roommate
Speaker 1: and told him to get rid of her, but it
Speaker 1: was a miscommunication. She meant to throw her out of
Speaker 1: the apartment, not murder her. Amanda says this isn't so
Speaker 1: much a fictionalization as it is trafficking in a specific
Speaker 1: falsehood that still persists all these years later, that even
Speaker 1: if she didn't actually kill Meredith Kircher, she must have
Speaker 1: been involved in some way. On medium in a piece
Speaker 1: called who Owns My Name, Amanda rights, I continue to
Speaker 1: be accused of knowing something I'm not revealing, of having
Speaker 1: been involved, even if I didn't plunge the knife. So
Speaker 1: Tom McCarthy's fictionalized version of me, it's just a tabloid,
Speaker 1: conspiracy guiltier version of me. By fictionalizing away my innocence,
Speaker 1: my total lack of involvement, by erasing the role of
Speaker 1: the authorities, and my wrongful conviction, McCarthy reinforces an image
Speaker 1: of me as a guilty and untrustworthy person, and with
Speaker 1: Matt Damon Starpower. Both are sure of profit handsomely off
Speaker 1: of this fictionalization of the Amanda No saga that is
Speaker 1: sure to leave plenty of yours wondering maybe the real
Speaker 1: life Amanda was involved somehow. Yeah, I mean that was
Speaker 1: one of the reasons I was so interested to talk
Speaker 1: to you today, um your tweets about the film Still Water.
Speaker 1: You know, I had never really thought about the idea
Speaker 1: of profit, right, So who not just who is telling
Speaker 1: someone else's story, but who was making money off of it?
Speaker 1: And it seems to me that so many different Hollywood
Speaker 1: executives and actors, etcetera, etcetera, are it's okay for them
Speaker 1: to tell this like deeply fictionalized story about that purports
Speaker 1: to be about your life and make money from it.
Speaker 1: And it's like everyone else, it seems like everyone else
Speaker 1: is allowed to a tell your story and then profit
Speaker 1: from it except for you. You know what is that
Speaker 1: like to to experience? Well, it's so surreal that most
Speaker 1: people just assume that I am profiting off it, right,
Speaker 1: Like the number of people who reached out to me
Speaker 1: to be like, oh, congratulations on Stillwaters. So great that
Speaker 1: you're getting another project, and it's like Nope, nope, no one,
Speaker 1: uh no one talked to me about that, like I
Speaker 1: have nothing to do with that, and um no, I
Speaker 1: am in no way benefiting from and in fact, I
Speaker 1: am just bearing the cost of whatever story they liked
Speaker 1: to tell about me this time. So, and you know,
Speaker 1: thinking about the Netflix documentary, this is something that I
Speaker 1: thought was some interesting where the billmakers reached after you
Speaker 1: and they said, we are not in We only want
Speaker 1: to tell this story if you are part of that
Speaker 1: storytelling process. I can imagine folks coming to you and saying, listen,
Speaker 1: we're gonna tell this story whether you want me to
Speaker 1: tell it or not. So you've got to decide whether
Speaker 1: we're telling it for you or if you're going to
Speaker 1: be a participant. And it almost kind of feels like
Speaker 1: a shakedown, you know, And it's like, oh, it totally is.
Speaker 1: How can we get to a place where like, you're
Speaker 1: not being shaken down to be forced to participate against
Speaker 1: your will in a story that is meant to be
Speaker 1: about you? I mean, I just like I can't even
Speaker 1: imagine what that must be like to experience and how
Speaker 1: difficult that must be to navigate. Yeah, and and again
Speaker 1: it's not just a thing that happens to me, like
Speaker 1: it happens to a lot of people, a lot of
Speaker 1: like you know, agnorees, wrongfully convicted people come out of
Speaker 1: prison and they're told, if you don't tell your story
Speaker 1: right now out to us, like you're never going to
Speaker 1: have another chance, and no one's ever gonna believe you.
Speaker 1: And of course you're walking out of prison, you know
Speaker 1: you've been exonerated, but you're still carrying the stigma of
Speaker 1: the accusation. You still are trying to like figure out
Speaker 1: how to get back on your feet, and you like
Speaker 1: to be put on the spot and asked to process
Speaker 1: the worst experience of your life for someone else's entertainment
Speaker 1: product is and like the I guess, like what I
Speaker 1: was hoping to do by writing that essay for The Atlantic,
Speaker 1: and you know, doing like the tweets about still Water
Speaker 1: in particular, was because I wanted to point out that
Speaker 1: this is a way that we are treating real human
Speaker 1: beings without And I don't know if the people who
Speaker 1: are doing it realize what the human cost is because
Speaker 1: they're in their own little like echo chamber journalists and
Speaker 1: are in their echo chamber and they're thinking, well, I
Speaker 1: have to get the scoop, and if I don't get
Speaker 1: the scoop, now, I'm going to move on to the
Speaker 1: next story and try to get that scoop or the
Speaker 1: you know, the Hollywood filmmakers are thinking, Oh, well, I'm
Speaker 1: just going to like be inspired something that happened in
Speaker 1: real life, and then I'm just going to let the
Speaker 1: writer's room do what it does. And that's just how
Speaker 1: stories are made. And and why would someone who is
Speaker 1: my inspiration feel any kind of ownership over that? It's
Speaker 1: my art? And it's like, well, did you did you
Speaker 1: pause to think how this was going to impact the
Speaker 1: human being who is your purported source or inspiration? Like
Speaker 1: do you as a storyteller, as someone who is sharing information, oh,
Speaker 1: the person who is the source of that inspiration or
Speaker 1: your story anything? And that's a that's a question, Like
Speaker 1: I'm asking the question, and I'm offering a new perspective,
Speaker 1: which is, well, maybe you didn't think about this before,
Speaker 1: but here's how it's impacted me. Here's how when you
Speaker 1: keep telling a story over and over and over again
Speaker 1: about a girl on girl sex crime, you are actually
Speaker 1: misrepresenting what happened to my roommate who was raped and
Speaker 1: murdered by a man and me who had no part
Speaker 1: in a girl on girl sex crime. So do you
Speaker 1: do you understand that when you keep telling that story
Speaker 1: over and over again, that is what ends up being
Speaker 1: the definitive story about me, whether you intended that or not.
Speaker 1: And do you understand that that's also what's happening to
Speaker 1: people who are even more disempowered than me, Because I
Speaker 1: can't tell you the number of people that I've tried
Speaker 1: to um advise and who've reached out to me saying
Speaker 1: there's only one person who's ever interested, like been interested
Speaker 1: in my story. And I don't know if I trust them?
Speaker 1: Should I trust them? Is this my only chance to
Speaker 1: tell my story? I don't know if I'm ready yet,
Speaker 1: but they're telling me that I have to do it tomorrow,
Speaker 1: and if I don't do it, like these are all
Speaker 1: huge red flags for me that are just showing how
Speaker 1: like other people's lives are being taken from them in
Speaker 1: various different ways. And the last thing I want to
Speaker 1: see for someone who's just spent year us in prison
Speaker 1: for something they didn't do is for them to feel like,
Speaker 1: oh now my story is being stolen again from me.
Speaker 1: But in a whole new way we owe exonorees, and
Speaker 1: they wrongly convicted so much better, like they deserve so
Speaker 1: much better than as soon as they're out being put
Speaker 1: in these situations where they can be I mean, they're
Speaker 1: already so vulnerable they deserve they don't deserve this, and
Speaker 1: I have to I mean, do you think it's possible
Speaker 1: to have a different kind of media landscape for axonorees
Speaker 1: where where they don't feel like they have to immediately
Speaker 1: continuously retell this traumatic thing that happened to them or else,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe the tabloids will make up their own
Speaker 1: story about what happened. You know, did you do you
Speaker 1: believe in a world where a different kind of landscape
Speaker 1: as possible for these folks? I mean, sure, I'm trying
Speaker 1: to invent it along the way, um, but I think
Speaker 1: that like the thing that I'm sort of experimenting with
Speaker 1: with my own journalism and my own podcast Labyrinths, is
Speaker 1: this sort of more like collaborative experience between the storyteller
Speaker 1: and their subject, Because I think that there's been this
Speaker 1: longstanding perspective that if you are at the center of
Speaker 1: your own story, you can't have a storyteller's perspective of
Speaker 1: that story. Like you you, you can't have authorship over
Speaker 1: your own story because you're going to be biased or
Speaker 1: you're going to misrepresent things, and you can't be objective.
Speaker 1: But first of all, I want to point out that
Speaker 1: the storyteller is not by definition objective. Just because they
Speaker 1: aren't personally in the story doesn't mean that by telling
Speaker 1: the story, they aren't putting themselves in the story, and
Speaker 1: they aren't approaching that story from a certain perspective. And
Speaker 1: it's also totally discrediting the idea that someone who's at
Speaker 1: the center of their own story might have a valuable
Speaker 1: perspective about it, like they might, having had felt this
Speaker 1: human experience firsthand, have some interesting human things to say
Speaker 1: that is worth being a part of the story. So
Speaker 1: I'm just trying to like convey that, Yeah, not all
Speaker 1: of us are are professional storytellers, but professional storytellers can
Speaker 1: help people tell their own stories. And of course everyone
Speaker 1: should be held accountable to the truth, like as long
Speaker 1: as we're not like making up crazy you know, conspiracy
Speaker 1: theories to account for non evidence, Like you know, evidence
Speaker 1: still matters in the truth still matters. But it's okay
Speaker 1: for you to give like as a storyteller to offer
Speaker 1: someone the opportunity to voice their own experience and that's
Speaker 1: still a valuable story. Oh absolutely, you know, we're all
Speaker 1: experts in our own experiences. And I hate this myth
Speaker 1: of objectivity that if you're close to a story or
Speaker 1: it's happening to you or put to your community, you
Speaker 1: couldn't possibly be objective. I feel like it's really, at
Speaker 1: least in journalism, I feel like it's really been used
Speaker 1: to create a really like sexist, racist, classist narrative that like,
Speaker 1: oh it is straight white men who are objective. Everybody
Speaker 1: else is just gonna be biased. You shouldn't even list,
Speaker 1: like they're not going to be a reliable source of
Speaker 1: something that happened to them or their community. And it
Speaker 1: just really erasist the fact that like people know what's
Speaker 1: up with themselves. People know people are Like give people
Speaker 1: the space to be experts in their own experiences and
Speaker 1: their own stories, and don't pretend that you don't have
Speaker 1: your own baggage that you're bringing to the story by
Speaker 1: who being whoever you are exactly, you know, So just
Speaker 1: take ownership of like be self aware, like do enough
Speaker 1: like self auditing to be aware that maybe I might
Speaker 1: be approaching this story or that story from a certain perspective,
Speaker 1: and let that be like acknowledge that in your own
Speaker 1: storytelling process, and as you are encountering the person, because
Speaker 1: they might be coming from a whole, completely new perspective
Speaker 1: that you don't have access to. And if you are
Speaker 1: automatically defining yourself as the objective party and them is
Speaker 1: the subjective party, you are automatically making like doing a
Speaker 1: hierarchy of whose prejudice and whose bias counts more than another's.
Speaker 1: I find it interesting that your story is not often
Speaker 1: framed as a story of someone who was wrongfully convicted
Speaker 1: and then exonerated, right. I think there's probably so many
Speaker 1: people out there who like think they know the Amanda
Speaker 1: Knock story, you know, heavy scare quotes, but they probably,
Speaker 1: you know, don't know Meredith Kercher's name. They probably don't
Speaker 1: know the name of the Italian prosecutors who like bungled
Speaker 1: this case. They don't know the name of the actual
Speaker 1: guilty party. And it's just so interesting to me how
Speaker 1: what you went through obviously you like was a huge
Speaker 1: part of your life, but the way that that story
Speaker 1: is told off then I don't know it at the
Speaker 1: same time denies agency of the actual major players of
Speaker 1: what happened to your roommate while also giving you this
Speaker 1: like outsized role in that story. It's like, like, why
Speaker 1: aren't why aren't these other hugely like huge major parties
Speaker 1: of what happened? Why are they not household names? Why
Speaker 1: are they not the names that are like connected to
Speaker 1: what happened there? Why is it just you who like
Speaker 1: actually was kind of like it's not like side character
Speaker 1: and all of that. Yeah, That's one of the things
Speaker 1: that I've always like pushed back against with people is
Speaker 1: like when you when you think Amanda Knox, the first
Speaker 1: thing that you think of is murder, because that's you know,
Speaker 1: that's ultimately what it comes down to, Amanda Knox, murder
Speaker 1: and my stuff. Like I have never witnessed a murder.
Speaker 1: I've never participated in murder. I've never been you know,
Speaker 1: the the closest I've been to murder is I maybe
Speaker 1: what could have been murdered that And if I hadn't
Speaker 1: met raphael A five days earlier and was spending the
Speaker 1: night at his house, Like that's that's my experience of murder.
Speaker 1: And the fact that that action, that horrific action that
Speaker 1: that happened to first of all, my friend Meredith, who
Speaker 1: is the victim, and people don't remember her. The fact
Speaker 1: that that action is not actually prescribed to her murderer
Speaker 1: and instead people think of me when they think of
Speaker 1: her murder. That just goes to show that it really
Speaker 1: does matter what you call a thing. And when you
Speaker 1: call Meredith Kircher's murder the Amanda NOx saga, you're doing
Speaker 1: a disservice to the truth because I played no role
Speaker 1: in that. My the Amanda NOx saga for me is
Speaker 1: I'm on trial for something I didn't do, and now
Speaker 1: I'm trying to reclaim my life in a world that
Speaker 1: doesn't want me to reclaim my life, you know, Like
Speaker 1: that's that's my experience. Um, but like I it drives
Speaker 1: me crazy that it's it's so so often that the
Speaker 1: person who actually committed this crime is referred to as
Speaker 1: an afterthought, like he's either not named at all, he's
Speaker 1: called the other guy who was accused, you know whatever,
Speaker 1: Like no one cares about that. And it's and to
Speaker 1: me that conveys that like people don't actually really care
Speaker 1: about what happened to Meredith. They care about the scandal,
Speaker 1: and they care about the sexiness that they can you know, portray,
Speaker 1: you know, project onto, Like the sexy idea is what
Speaker 1: resonates with people more than the actual human experience. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I just it's impossible to not see all the
Speaker 1: ways that you've become this character. So either it's like
Speaker 1: she's weird or she's like American loud mouth or like
Speaker 1: a temptress. It's like you kind of become this thing,
Speaker 1: that this character that anybody can project whatever they want onto,
Speaker 1: and it doesn't like who you actually are as a
Speaker 1: human who went through been traumatic. It's just bond in
Speaker 1: the conversation. Yeah. Yeah, and and then you know, even
Speaker 1: when i'm you know, it's found out that I'm innocent,
Speaker 1: and I'm I'm held fully innocent. Um the again that
Speaker 1: like mystique of who is Amanda Ox really it's like, well,
Speaker 1: here's an idea, like I have a podcast where I
Speaker 1: talk really openly about all my ideas and all my experiences.
Speaker 1: Have you considered listening to that? No? No, of course not,
Speaker 1: because then Amanda is actually authoring her own experience. We
Speaker 1: want to talk about her, We don't actually want to
Speaker 1: talk to her and it's it's just like, I mean,
Speaker 1: you aren't obviously you're talking to me, and I greatly
Speaker 1: appreciate that because, honestly, like, what a freaking gift in
Speaker 1: the world to just talk to another human being, like
Speaker 1: a real person. Like I can't tell you enough how
Speaker 1: much it means to me that you reach out to
Speaker 1: me and say I actually care about what your experiences.
Speaker 1: I you know, I don't want to just talk about you.
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you, like, thank you for that.
Speaker 1: It means a lot. I mean, I deeply appreciate that.
Speaker 1: I really do. But again, like when the Stillwater conversation
Speaker 1: was happening, I think something that was so frustrating is
Speaker 1: it's not like you're not like you, Yeah, you have
Speaker 1: a great podcast that's critically acclaimed, you have a huge
Speaker 1: body of work. The fact that they wouldn't even reach
Speaker 1: out to you, like I just randomly DMD you on
Speaker 1: Twitter and you replied, It's not like it was hard.
Speaker 1: I'm one person who made the podcast out of my kitchen, right,
Speaker 1: It's not like you're making it difficult to find yourself
Speaker 1: or and it's not it's not like you're not having
Speaker 1: these public conversations about who you are and your story
Speaker 1: and your experience, and I think it is people just
Speaker 1: don't want to hear it. It's it's it's more gratifying
Speaker 1: to talk about you than it is to give you
Speaker 1: space to talk about your experiences. And I think that's
Speaker 1: so clear. I don't think people. I just think that
Speaker 1: people are just really wrapped up in the story they
Speaker 1: have in their head and retelling that over and over again.
Speaker 1: And I really appreciate it that you pointed out that
Speaker 1: that film, they weren't just fictionalizing it. They were kind
Speaker 1: of parroting the salacious, you know, girl on girl sex
Speaker 1: crime like lie that that was told to have you
Speaker 1: locked up for so many years. And that's not a
Speaker 1: political that's not neutral, that's not fictionalizing something that was
Speaker 1: not Like it's different too. I guess. I feel like
Speaker 1: the fact that they relied on what was the dominant
Speaker 1: narrative that led to you being falsely imprisoned is so hurtful,
Speaker 1: but also like deeply political and not neutral, Like that's
Speaker 1: a real choice and to not even acknowledge or deal
Speaker 1: with that again is a real you know, just a
Speaker 1: real choice like that that did. I guess I didn't
Speaker 1: like how in that interview, I think it was Matt Damon.
Speaker 1: He was like, oh, well, you know, we got to
Speaker 1: thinking like what if it was like this, and it's like, no,
Speaker 1: you just you just parroted the incorrect lie that le
Speaker 1: to you being falsely imprisoned. Yeah. No, they it was
Speaker 1: just lazy storytelling on their part, like they were like, oh,
Speaker 1: we're inventing things, and it's like, you didn't invent ship
Speaker 1: my friend. Good job, you invented France as opposed to Italy,
Speaker 1: Like good jobs. It's lazy. It's lazy. Yeah, and it's
Speaker 1: too bad because like, honestly, again, my position and all
Speaker 1: of this has been I'm really easy to talk to
Speaker 1: and I'm actually like, I think we could have a
Speaker 1: really worthwhile conversation here. I feel like maybe I was overlooked,
Speaker 1: but like here's an opportunity to not overlook me and
Speaker 1: that's okay, Like let's talk about that and nothing just crickets,
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, nothing nothing. Yeah, it's you know, they're they've
Speaker 1: moved on to the next story and it doesn't matter
Speaker 1: that there are repercussions in my life. So I mean
Speaker 1: it's just insane, Like how like how removed do you have?
Speaker 1: Like your storyteller. Your whole job is to be about
Speaker 1: like empathizing with the human experience enough to be able
Speaker 1: to tell a story that resonates with people. And yet
Speaker 1: like here's a real human being going like hey, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm over here, call me and no d ms are open,
Speaker 1: Like I'm really nice. I don't know, it's it's um
Speaker 1: it's a fascinating experience. And I feel like, again, it's
Speaker 1: it seems like it's this weird, extreme thing because it's
Speaker 1: not every day that you know, someone's life has turned
Speaker 1: into a Hollywood movie. But I feel like there are
Speaker 1: versions of this that happen all the time to people
Speaker 1: all the time. What story is being told about you
Speaker 1: and what circumstance by whom and how are they not
Speaker 1: allowing you to be a part of the conversation Like
Speaker 1: that that happens all the time to lots of people.
Speaker 1: And it's something that I always have a little bit
Speaker 1: of a red flag for because it just seems like
Speaker 1: it's it's wanna it's it's gas lighting. Honestly, it's when
Speaker 1: you're not allowed two have a voice in the story
Speaker 1: that defines who you are. It you basically are being
Speaker 1: told by the rest of the world that you don't
Speaker 1: you don't matter, and your perspective doesn't matter. And we're
Speaker 1: going to tell you who you are and what you
Speaker 1: mean and why you matter. More. After a quick break,
Speaker 1: let's get right back into it. Who gets to have
Speaker 1: a say in their own story in a media moment
Speaker 1: where we're looking back on the way that women from
Speaker 1: Pamula Anderson to Monica Levinsky were unfairly maligned by society.
Speaker 1: It's a question worth asking, And at first reached out
Speaker 1: to Amanda because I saw her tweets about the New
Speaker 1: York Times documentary Framing Britney Spears. Now, she wasn't condemning
Speaker 1: the film or the filmmakers, but rather posing a complex question.
Speaker 1: She tweeted, with all these new Britney Spears documentaries out,
Speaker 1: I'm asking myself, did Brittany participate in any of them?
Speaker 1: Did she consent to them? Did she want them to exist?
Speaker 1: Does anyone care? The answer to the first two questions
Speaker 1: is no, she did not participate or grant her approval.
Speaker 1: And while I'm sure the documentary filmmakers would have preferred
Speaker 1: that she gave them her approval, when she didn't, they
Speaker 1: plowed ahead anyway. Is that okay. She goes on to say,
Speaker 1: I'd like to live in a world where Brittany and
Speaker 1: Brittany alone guests to decide if she wants her personal
Speaker 1: legal drama to serve as your next Netflix boinge. When
Speaker 1: filmmakers Rod Blackhurst and Brian McGinn reached out to Amanda
Speaker 1: about making a Netflix documentary, they said they would only
Speaker 1: go through with the film if she participated, and it's
Speaker 1: a big part of why she agreed to do it
Speaker 1: in the first place. They had the ethical sense to
Speaker 1: understand that I would be deeply impacted by that film
Speaker 1: and that my consent and participation mattered. They decided it
Speaker 1: was better to make no film than one without me.
Speaker 1: She tweeted. When I first reached out to you, I
Speaker 1: was in the process of researching an episode for the
Speaker 1: podcast about the Free Britney movement, and when I saw
Speaker 1: your tweets, it really so I stopped my research because
Speaker 1: one of the points that you made was, you know, hey,
Speaker 1: this documentary was made without Britney Spears's consent, and I
Speaker 1: really had to have to really have a deep think
Speaker 1: about what that meant, right, Like, I was very happy
Speaker 1: that Britney Spears's conservatorship was overturned. I was happy to
Speaker 1: see the role that that documentary maybe played in some
Speaker 1: in some like public awareness of it, But I never
Speaker 1: even thought to ask, what does it mean that this
Speaker 1: this content was just released without her say, without her voice,
Speaker 1: against her will? And I think we're in this moment
Speaker 1: where there are so many different pieces of media asking
Speaker 1: us to look back to how women were maligned, you know,
Speaker 1: And I guess I wonder, like, what does it mean
Speaker 1: that so many of those you know, documentary podcast what
Speaker 1: have you? Are created about the about a woman without
Speaker 1: her side of the story, without her voice, and then
Speaker 1: sometimes against her will? Like, like what do we do
Speaker 1: with that? How do we find a balance to be? Like, Oh, well,
Speaker 1: maybe it's good that this documentary helped her overturn her conservatorship,
Speaker 1: but it's also fucked up that it happened against her will,
Speaker 1: Like isn't that just another way of violating someone who's
Speaker 1: already been like so maligned and violated? Yeah? Yeah, Like
Speaker 1: it did Brittany ultimately want her you know horror like
Speaker 1: family drama to be so public? Um, because like she
Speaker 1: didn't get a choice in that, right, Um, did it
Speaker 1: make a difference in her trial. Is she grateful to
Speaker 1: all the people who support of her? Of course? Um?
Speaker 1: But it is interesting to me and I and I
Speaker 1: think it is again one of those moments where it's
Speaker 1: worth pausing and asking, like, wait, what is her perspective
Speaker 1: in all of this, Like, since everything is going to
Speaker 1: be impacting her the most, shouldn't she have some kind
Speaker 1: of say and um, And you know, I'd be curious
Speaker 1: to know like how Brittany feels today about the fact
Speaker 1: that there were documentaries made without her consent and yet
Speaker 1: they played, you know, a supportive role towards her, Like
Speaker 1: that's an interesting you know, mental space to be in
Speaker 1: in terms of like over the course of your own life.
Speaker 1: Again there's it's but again it's almost like a hint
Speaker 1: of that conservatorship, right, like we know what's good for you,
Speaker 1: so we're gonna do it even if you don't want
Speaker 1: us to, Like, oh, it's just there. It's me. It's
Speaker 1: like a weird thing to have to unpack, right, And
Speaker 1: I guess I I'm I want to see more public
Speaker 1: like media makers wrestling with it because I feel like, yes,
Speaker 1: it's a complicated square to circle, but I want to
Speaker 1: I want to see that you're that you're aware of this,
Speaker 1: aware of this dichotomy is a thing that exists and
Speaker 1: the thing that we should be asking questions about and
Speaker 1: pushing up against exactly. I think that if there were again,
Speaker 1: it's that like self auditing, that introspection, that awareness that
Speaker 1: you could have that your actions could have unintended consequences,
Speaker 1: and that you are thinking about the people who like
Speaker 1: you know you. Presumably, if you're a documentary filmmaker who's
Speaker 1: making a documentary about Brittany, you can presumably assume that
Speaker 1: whatever it is that you end up doing is going
Speaker 1: to impact her. So like maybe think about how and
Speaker 1: why and and how you can mitigate potential harm, because
Speaker 1: that's what you don't want to do as a as
Speaker 1: a storyteller. You don't want to just harm other people
Speaker 1: for the sake of a story. I mean, at least
Speaker 1: I would hope so. And I mean, I think in
Speaker 1: this moment where we're really interested in like looking back
Speaker 1: at the way that meet, the way that media, our
Speaker 1: media ecosystem harmed women unfairly. So I pull this closure
Speaker 1: live for a like you're wrong about style podcast as like, oh,
Speaker 1: let's go back and revisit. But part of me wonders
Speaker 1: if we are so busy looking back that we're not
Speaker 1: seeing the ways that's happening now. Like, Okay, Britney Spears
Speaker 1: was was unfairly maligned, you were unfairly maligned, and its
Speaker 1: accident fairly maligned, all these people. But are we are we? Like,
Speaker 1: what's the point of that kind of content if it
Speaker 1: does not prime us to see it happening before our
Speaker 1: eyes in real time? Like I don't want to have
Speaker 1: to wait five years down the line for the podcast
Speaker 1: thing tells us not that the media shouldn't be profiting
Speaker 1: off of the pain and you know, shittiness to like
Speaker 1: a vulnerable person. I don't want to have to wait
Speaker 1: for a look back retrospective on that. What's the point
Speaker 1: of this media if it doesn't allow us to do
Speaker 1: this now? That's a really great point and I think
Speaker 1: that that is that is another way that if we
Speaker 1: are going to be spending time looking back, because I
Speaker 1: think it's a worthwhile thing to do, let's not do
Speaker 1: it just for a sake of like nostalgia. We can
Speaker 1: all feel good about ourselves today because we're not doing
Speaker 1: that like they did in the nineties. Like that there's
Speaker 1: the danger of it approximating that where it's like, oh man,
Speaker 1: we were terrible to women in the nineties, we can
Speaker 1: feel totally we can pat ourselves on the back today.
Speaker 1: There is nothing wrong with the way that we're treating
Speaker 1: women today because look at what we did in the nineties.
Speaker 1: Like it's important to to take stock of how things were,
Speaker 1: how things have changed, but also how things haven't changed,
Speaker 1: and if we can see echoes of what happened in
Speaker 1: the past happening today and and try to be better. Definitely.
Speaker 1: I mean this brings me to one of my last questions,
Speaker 1: you know, what kind of world, Like that's given what
Speaker 1: we know about how the media and the internet can
Speaker 1: treat women, what kind of world do you want for
Speaker 1: your daughter to grow up in? And like, what what
Speaker 1: will you tell her about your life? And what will
Speaker 1: you tell her about the kinds of the kinds of
Speaker 1: experiences that she can expect from the world. Yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: what I'm hoping that we're heading towards is a world
Speaker 1: where everyone is more media literate and understands not just
Speaker 1: how the industry functions, like how how does it even
Speaker 1: just how do you on a day to day basis
Speaker 1: put content out into the world, like, well, they're you know,
Speaker 1: their incentive structures, and there's a monetary aspect to it,
Speaker 1: and like there's a whole business side of it that's
Speaker 1: important to know when you're consuming information. Um, there's a
Speaker 1: human psychological role to it, Like what stories quote resonate
Speaker 1: with people and with whom? And why why do certain
Speaker 1: stories get uplifted and others get squashed? Why are some
Speaker 1: people's stories just you know, discarded as if they aren't
Speaker 1: valuable and other people's are constantly in the headlines? Like
Speaker 1: these are all really important questions that I think as
Speaker 1: consumers we should be asking, because we as consumers ultimately
Speaker 1: have the power to say, you know what, I'm not
Speaker 1: going to tune into your style of content anymore. I'm
Speaker 1: going to tune into something else that I think is
Speaker 1: more responsible or ethical or truthful. Um, and that that's worthwhile. UM.
Speaker 1: So I hope that that's the world that we're gearing towards,
Speaker 1: because as social media has democratized content creation, we all
Speaker 1: feel like we can have a hand not just in
Speaker 1: consuming media but also in producing it. Um. That's my hope. UM.
Speaker 1: I don't know if that's actually going to happen. But um,
Speaker 1: I'm hoping that I'm gonna let my daughter sort of
Speaker 1: take the lead in in how much she wants to
Speaker 1: know and how important my experience is going to be
Speaker 1: for her, because one thing that I'm worried about is
Speaker 1: her feeling like, you know, as much as I feel
Speaker 1: very much in the shadow of the worst experience of
Speaker 1: my life, like, I don't want her to feel like
Speaker 1: she's forced to live in the shadow of the worst
Speaker 1: experience of my life. Um, she should be able to
Speaker 1: have her own life if she wants and if and
Speaker 1: I I hope to raise her as a very curious,
Speaker 1: thoughtful person. And so I my guess is that she's
Speaker 1: going to be curious. And of course, if she's going
Speaker 1: to be coming to the Innocence Network conference with me
Speaker 1: every year, meeting other wrongfully convicted people, like, she's going
Speaker 1: to start to notice that there's a there's an interesting
Speaker 1: pattern happening here, like, oh, you were in jail, you
Speaker 1: were in jail. Why has everyone been in jail? Like,
Speaker 1: you know, she's gonna know since she's gonna ask questions,
Speaker 1: and I think I'm going to be honest with her
Speaker 1: of the time, always answer her questions. Um, but of
Speaker 1: course I'm not gonna like give a six year old
Speaker 1: tutorial on crime scene footage, you know, like, so yeah,
Speaker 1: waituntil she's seven, when we're all that's that's the appropriate age.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I think that like I want her to
Speaker 1: feel like she it's not a taboo subject. It's absolutely
Speaker 1: like anything about me and my experiences on the table
Speaker 1: for her, should she need it and want it, um,
Speaker 1: But that she doesn't need to feel like it needs
Speaker 1: to be an important part of her life because honestly,
Speaker 1: like no one's trauma. No one should feel like they
Speaker 1: are bound to their trauma as if it's the most
Speaker 1: important thing in their life either. So I think that's
Speaker 1: another important thing. Yeah, that's such a good point. There
Speaker 1: are so many interesting pieces of who you are that
Speaker 1: like that's just one of a quilt of who you are.
Speaker 1: And you know, thinking about your daughter, you've written so
Speaker 1: beautifully about sort of long prison sentences and for you
Speaker 1: how it was a kind of like forced impertility. Do
Speaker 1: you see criminal justice and reproductive justice as like linked
Speaker 1: in that way? Absolutely? And I think that nobody's noticing that, um.
Speaker 1: I mean, and it's and it's hard for like the
Speaker 1: it's hard for men to write like it's sure men
Speaker 1: are not are not limited in that way, like they
Speaker 1: don't have a very specific window and they're fertile, but
Speaker 1: they do have very specific window when they're capable of
Speaker 1: forming the kinds of relationships that would turn into families
Speaker 1: even and so like for me, I think that especially
Speaker 1: with the way that there are prison sentences in this
Speaker 1: country where they just are nonsensically long, like no one
Speaker 1: should be sentenced to three hundred years in prison, Like
Speaker 1: it just doesn't make any like, just just be reasonable,
Speaker 1: like let's let's consider what the sentence is going to
Speaker 1: mean for an actual human beings life and take that
Speaker 1: into consideration when we're thinking about sentencing. And I think
Speaker 1: that the ways that women have sort of been pushed
Speaker 1: into a justice system that was built by and for men,
Speaker 1: and their needs and and and physical realities aren't really
Speaker 1: taken into consideration in that process is an incredible disservice too,
Speaker 1: And it's an incredible harm that we're committing as a society.
Speaker 1: Like it it matters that by sentencing someone to such
Speaker 1: a long amount of time, you are effectively limiting not
Speaker 1: just their freedom, but so much more about their life
Speaker 1: that is fundamental to being a human being. UM, Like
Speaker 1: I I never should have faced the prospect of never
Speaker 1: getting to have a family of my own for because
Speaker 1: I was accused of a crime I didn't commit, and
Speaker 1: yet I did. Amanda, thank you for using this platform
Speaker 1: to speak up for other wrongly convicted folks and even
Speaker 1: rightfully convicted folks, because like here, the other reality is
Speaker 1: like a lot of the women that I met in prison,
Speaker 1: they did commit crimes, they were also victims of crime
Speaker 1: before they ever committed crimes. And how is it that
Speaker 1: society had let them fall through the cracks and had
Speaker 1: refused them good opportunities to be productive people and just
Speaker 1: punished them in the process, like the amount of like
Speaker 1: you know, I was one of the most fortunate people
Speaker 1: in that circumstance, and I and I say that as
Speaker 1: an innocent person who was wrongly accused and put in prison.
Speaker 1: So like, you know, it's it matters. We're all sort
Speaker 1: of implicated in the way that society um limits the
Speaker 1: opportunities of people, and we should be mindful of that. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: I feel like every time you talk to women who
Speaker 1: are in prison, it's it's like, oh, you were obviously
Speaker 1: coerced or like you are a survivor of domestic violence
Speaker 1: or trafficking like it is, and I just, I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm this is such a so long along our conversation,
Speaker 1: but I'm right there with you. I think like when
Speaker 1: you actually look at who we are lacking up sometimes
Speaker 1: were like this comically long amounts of time and the
Speaker 1: circumstances they came from, it's clear that we are not
Speaker 1: making our community safer, we are just spreading more harm.
Speaker 1: And I'm right there with you. Yeah, yeah, Well, it's
Speaker 1: it's a difficult thing to look at because I think
Speaker 1: a lot of us would just like to think, oh,
Speaker 1: we'll just put the bad people and somewhere else. We'll
Speaker 1: just take bad people and put them away. And it's like, not,
Speaker 1: that's not it's not just good people and bad people.
Speaker 1: It's not just who gets put away versus who doesn't
Speaker 1: get put away. Is not doesn't also fall neatly along
Speaker 1: those lines, like, let's be real, it's way more complicated
Speaker 1: than that, and and oftentimes it's actually just the most
Speaker 1: vulnerable people who end up get putting away. Amanda, Where
Speaker 1: can folks keep up with Labyrinth and all the amazing
Speaker 1: work that you are doing well, thank you for asking. Um.
Speaker 1: You can go to Knox Robinson dot com to follow
Speaker 1: all of the work that me and my husband do.
Speaker 1: We have a Patreon so patreon dot com slash Knox Robinson.
Speaker 1: You can follow me on Twitter at Amanda Knox and
Speaker 1: on Instagram at a Mama n NOx. This season on
Speaker 1: there Are No Girls on the Internet, you can expect
Speaker 1: more conversations about what it means for marginalized people to
Speaker 1: show up online and in technology. If you'd like to
Speaker 1: stay connected with the show, you're in luck because you've
Speaker 1: got a brand new newsletter with stories that go way
Speaker 1: beyond what you hear on the spot cast. You'll get
Speaker 1: links to other shows I'm listening to and exclusive takes.
Speaker 1: I'm the latest news and impacting marginalized folks online. Sign
Speaker 1: up at tangodi dot com slash Newsletter, and while you're there,
Speaker 1: pick up one of our new t shirts, mugs, notebooks,
Speaker 1: and other merch at tangodi 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 be us at Hello
Speaker 1: at tangodi dot com. You can also find transcripts for
Speaker 1: today's episode at tangodi dot com. There Are No Girls
Speaker 1: on the Internet was created by me bridget Tod. It's
Speaker 1: a production of I Heart Radio and Unboss creative Jonathan
Speaker 1: Strickland as our executive producer. Terry Harrison is our producer
Speaker 1: and sound engineer. Michaelmato is our contributing producer. I'm your host,
Speaker 1: bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate
Speaker 1: and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts from
Speaker 1: iHeart Radio, check out the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcast,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. How the Well would