Speaker 1: There Are No Girls on the Internet. As a production
Speaker 1: of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative. I'm Bridget Toad and this
Speaker 1: is There Are No Girls on the Internet. I am
Speaker 1: here with my producer, Mike. Mike, thank you so much
Speaker 1: for being here.
Speaker 2: Thanks for having me, Bridget. I'm glad to be here
Speaker 2: in the wake of that FEMA alert that happened earlier
Speaker 2: this week.
Speaker 1: I know, as far as I can tell, I think
Speaker 1: we all survived this week's FEMA emergency alert without activating
Speaker 1: any kind of deadly vaccine related illnesses. In case folks
Speaker 1: missed it, conspiracy theorists said that the government was using
Speaker 1: the emergency alerts that we all got on our phones
Speaker 1: this week to trigger bloodborn slash, maybe bat related question
Speaker 1: mark illnesses in people who were vaccinated.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think those were the conspiracy theories. I was
Speaker 2: pretty impressed by how quickly they came together, because I
Speaker 2: didn't hear that alert was going to happen until like
Speaker 2: a day or two before it did. Maybe the conspiracy
Speaker 2: people are like really plugged into when FEMA is scheduling
Speaker 2: these alerts, But I feel like they really pulled this
Speaker 2: conspiracy together in like forty eight hours.
Speaker 1: Oh, you think conspiracy theorists who gather online are not
Speaker 1: plugged into what FEMA is doing. They don't. They're not
Speaker 1: like super on that. I'm sure that's on their radar. Listen.
Speaker 1: I knew I wanted to do a little bit of
Speaker 1: like brief banter on this on the pod, but part
Speaker 1: of me was sort of like, let's wait until after
Speaker 1: the alert, you know, just in case, let's just be
Speaker 1: let's just cover all of our bases. Let's let's plan
Speaker 1: to do this after after we make it through the alerts.
Speaker 2: There was a tiny part of me that was like,
Speaker 2: wouldn't it just be funny if we did all start
Speaker 2: like bleeding from our eyeballs and turn into zombie bats.
Speaker 1: It would serve us right for doubting them in the
Speaker 1: first place. In case it's not clear. Obviously, those conspiracy
Speaker 1: theories were completely base. Despite the fact that people reported
Speaker 1: that they were planning on turning off their power, turning
Speaker 1: off their phones to protect themselves from what ended up
Speaker 1: not happening. Nobody got sick. It was all just a
Speaker 1: conspiracy theory. But you know what's not a conspiracy theory.
Speaker 1: It's the way that men infiltrated the Gracehopper Celebration this year.
Speaker 1: So the Gracehopper Celebration, named after the historic computer programmer Gracehopper,
Speaker 1: is a big tech conference that is one of the
Speaker 1: largest gatherings of women and non binary folks in tech worldwide.
Speaker 1: It's organized by the nonprofit anitab dot Org. Quick side note,
Speaker 1: I was actually just a guest on Anita Bee's inaugural
Speaker 1: podcast episode, which you all check out. We will throw
Speaker 1: the link in the show notes. And I was actually
Speaker 1: meant to attend the Gracehopper event down in Orlando, Florida
Speaker 1: this year, but I had a scheduling issue. It's kind
Speaker 1: of a big deal, like all the big tech companies
Speaker 1: are there, Apple, Amazon, and it's a great place for
Speaker 1: folks who are looking for jobs, like it's full of
Speaker 1: job opportunities and networking. But at this year's conference, men
Speaker 1: showed up in as on LinkedIn. Anitab dot Org, a
Speaker 1: nonprofit that runs the conference, said there was a quote
Speaker 1: increase in participation of self identifying males at this year's event. Now,
Speaker 1: Anita Bee did say that they believe allyship from men
Speaker 1: is really important, and they also noted that they cannot
Speaker 1: ban men from attending due to federal non discrimination protections
Speaker 1: in the United States. Now to be super clear, there
Speaker 1: are definitely men out there who want to support allyship
Speaker 1: and want to be champions of women, Like it's not
Speaker 1: unheard of for men to attend this event, and I
Speaker 1: think that there are probably some men who turned up
Speaker 1: at this event who wanted to do exactly that and
Speaker 1: that's why they were there. But it sounds like a
Speaker 1: lot of other men were not there to champion women
Speaker 1: and to be good allies to women. It sounds like
Speaker 1: they were there to take up space, to take opportunities
Speaker 1: from women, and also to troll and gaslight us while
Speaker 1: doing it. Colin White, chief impact officer at anitab dot org,
Speaker 1: said some men even lied about their gender identity, They
Speaker 1: lied about being non buy to get a chance to
Speaker 1: network at the conference. So it just sounds like the
Speaker 1: vibes were not great at this year's event. The conference
Speaker 1: has historically been a really joyous celebration and a way
Speaker 1: for people who are not often centered in technology to
Speaker 1: really take up space and connect and have community with
Speaker 1: each other. Like I've heard people say that this is
Speaker 1: an event that they look forward to their entire year,
Speaker 1: Like it is a it is a real vibe, generally speaking,
Speaker 1: but it sounds like this time around, these men kind
Speaker 1: of rumined it for everybody. The attendees at this year's
Speaker 1: event described a feeling uncomfortable with the chaotic scenes like
Speaker 1: men cutting women in line for the job fair, people
Speaker 1: running and rushing around, and long lines. As one attendee
Speaker 1: described it, the Kens have taken over. Barbieland Bo Young,
Speaker 1: Anita b dot Org's advisory president, commented on how this
Speaker 1: impacted the overall vibe of the event.
Speaker 3: I want to address all that I've been hearing over
Speaker 3: these days at GHC. This is my third GHC, my
Speaker 3: first just part of staff, and it's always been joyous.
Speaker 3: In the past, it has always felt safe and loving
Speaker 3: and embracing. And this year I must admit I didn't
Speaker 3: feel this way, and I know that many of you
Speaker 3: felt the same. Many of you are feeling unsafe physically
Speaker 3: and psychologically, and you're feeling unheard. I want you to
Speaker 3: know that we're taking this so personally, and I'm taking
Speaker 3: it personally. I do the work I do to create
Speaker 3: a world where my two girls can thrive. We try
Speaker 3: to create a safe space, and this week we saw
Speaker 3: the outside world creep in. This makes me angry, and
Speaker 3: it makes me sad, but mostly it makes you want
Speaker 3: to fight. We're not fighting simply because of the concerns
Speaker 3: you express, but because that's our mission. Our mission is
Speaker 3: to uplift and celebrate women and non binary technologists. This week,
Speaker 3: we hope to do just this. We prepared and we
Speaker 3: did our best, but it was not enough. I can't
Speaker 3: guarantee you that we'll have solutions tomorrow, but I can
Speaker 3: promise you that we'll be working on solutions, and we
Speaker 3: won't do it in a bubble. We've heard your recommendations
Speaker 3: and many of them are great, and we'll make sure
Speaker 3: that we're holding ourselves the truth of our mission and
Speaker 3: need to be has always stepped up to the challenge,
Speaker 3: and I promised you that we're ready to step up
Speaker 3: to this new challenge, and we'll do so in community.
Speaker 3: I want to thank you all for speaking up, for listening,
Speaker 3: and I really hope to see you tomorrow. Thank you all.
Speaker 1: Bye. I do think that part of this is just
Speaker 1: a reflection of the landscape for tech jobs right now,
Speaker 1: like the landscape is pretty bleak thanks to the waves
Speaker 1: of layoffs and the tech sector. But as bleak as
Speaker 1: that landscape is, it is even worse for people who
Speaker 1: are marginalized, like women and non binary people. Sixty nine
Speaker 1: point two percent of all tech layoffs, according to the
Speaker 1: Women Tech Network, were women, on top of the industry's
Speaker 1: existing gender imbalance, where women made up just a third
Speaker 1: of those working in STEM jobs as of twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1: This is according to the National Center for Science and
Speaker 1: Engineering Statistics. So as bad as things are for women,
Speaker 1: and it's pretty bad, it is made that much worse
Speaker 1: to have men pulling stuff like this in a space
Speaker 1: that is supposed to be for us. And I guess
Speaker 1: part of me feels like if you were a man
Speaker 1: who misrepresented yourself or cut the line in front of
Speaker 1: a woman at a job fare or networking event at
Speaker 1: an event that is for women and non binary people,
Speaker 1: is this somebody that you would want to have on
Speaker 1: your team, like the kind of man who would do this?
Speaker 1: Do you think that the people on your team are
Speaker 1: going to feel safe and supported working on a team
Speaker 1: with somebody like this. If had I been a recruiter
Speaker 1: at this event, I would have refused to speak to
Speaker 1: anybody who behaved in this way, And I do think it.
Speaker 1: It's one of those things that these people might think
Speaker 1: they're getting a leg up, but in reality, I think
Speaker 1: that they're making themselves look really bad and perhaps like
Speaker 1: somebody that you would not want to have on your team.
Speaker 2: Yeah. For sure, people want to be on teams with
Speaker 2: people who are emotionally literate and concerned with issues of
Speaker 2: privilege and representation. And at least people that I know,
Speaker 2: that's what the sort of teams they want to be on.
Speaker 2: It sounds really crummy.
Speaker 1: And at the very least people want to be on
Speaker 1: teams with people who don't shove others and like cut
Speaker 1: the line, like nobody wants that person on their team.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, Like these people aren't trying to get jobs
Speaker 2: on like the Wolf of Wall Street, right, They're competing
Speaker 2: for tech jobs where they're going to be like filing
Speaker 2: Jira tickets with other tech workers. You know, it's not
Speaker 2: like a shoving in line kind of industry.
Speaker 1: So obviously I agree with you, but I was shocked
Speaker 1: to hear that not everybody in tech feels the same way.
Speaker 1: There was a post un Blind, which a forum for
Speaker 1: tech workers to post online anonymously, that basically cheered on
Speaker 1: the men who behaved this way at the conference, saying
Speaker 1: that having tech events solely for women is sexist and
Speaker 1: that these men were doing a good job by showing
Speaker 1: up there, taking up space and doing what had to
Speaker 1: be done. The post reads quote, are we still all
Speaker 1: about equality? I saw this year that a lot of
Speaker 1: men showed up to the Grace Hopper conference and women
Speaker 1: had to compete slash weight in line with those men
Speaker 1: to talk to recruiters. As a man, I completely support
Speaker 1: those guys. They allow non binary people to enter the conference,
Speaker 1: then why not just represent as non binary. Let's be honest.
Speaker 1: There is no need for conferences just for women, because
Speaker 1: if it was the opposite, just for men, then it
Speaker 1: would be sexist. Just because you are a woman doesn't
Speaker 1: give you the right to talk to big firm recruiters.
Speaker 1: Guys work just as hard and they don't get that chance.
Speaker 1: So wow. If you are the person who wrote this
Speaker 1: post on Blind, or you know the who wrote this
Speaker 1: post on Blind, just know that I've officially added you
Speaker 1: to our list of official enemies of the show. Whoever
Speaker 1: you are, you're probably not listening to this podcast of
Speaker 1: help uplifting marginalized people in technology. But if you are
Speaker 1: you're on my list guy?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I feel you're right that they're probably not listening
Speaker 2: to our podcast.
Speaker 1: And I think it really comes down to something that
Speaker 1: we've talked about a lot on the show, which is
Speaker 1: this really bad knee jerk reaction to things like diversity
Speaker 1: initiatives or DEI or you know, suing grants for marginalized people.
Speaker 1: This false notion that we're all starting from an equal
Speaker 1: playing field, so any opportunity needs to be like equal
Speaker 1: otherwise it's not fair. That really assumes that we're all
Speaker 1: working under the same conditions, that we have an equal
Speaker 1: playing field, which as those stats about how dismal things
Speaker 1: are for women and on binary people in the tech industry,
Speaker 1: we know that's not true. And I think we're going
Speaker 1: to continue seeing this kind of backlass to anything that's
Speaker 1: for us, whether that us is black folks or women,
Speaker 1: or trans folks or queer folks. And I think it
Speaker 1: also shows just how fragile are spaces and opportunities are.
Speaker 1: We historically get less and even when we try to
Speaker 1: carve out something for us, you know, something for ourselves,
Speaker 1: they will come for that too. So it shows that
Speaker 1: our spaces are very fragile. But also why we need
Speaker 1: those spaces for ourselves more than ever.
Speaker 2: You know, it was interesting that earlier on in this
Speaker 2: segment you were giving a nod to like allyship and
Speaker 2: like some men are allies and that's great, and like
Speaker 2: that is great. You know, allies are good. You know,
Speaker 2: I'm a man. I like to think of myself as
Speaker 2: a good ally. But like these guys who show up
Speaker 2: at this conference, it's pathetic in so many ways. And
Speaker 2: I would guess that many of them would probably think
Speaker 2: of themselves as like men of science, or men of numbers,
Speaker 2: or you know, some sort of like objective science y
Speaker 2: thinking folks. Right, they work in tech. But those statistics
Speaker 2: you cited about the underrepresentation of women in tech, I
Speaker 2: don't even think you cited statistics about like median income.
Speaker 2: There's one hundred other statistics that one could easily look
Speaker 2: at to see like, yeah, there are pretty big disparities
Speaker 2: in not just who works in tech, but like all
Speaker 2: up and down every sector of the workforce. For these
Speaker 2: guys to just like bury their head in the sand
Speaker 2: and ignore that, it really betrays how either uninformed or
Speaker 2: like wilfully ignorant they are of the true situation. Of
Speaker 2: I don't know gender in the workplace or whatever you
Speaker 2: want to say it.
Speaker 1: Oh, I'm sure they. These guys sell at the kind
Speaker 1: of guys who have described projects that they work on
Speaker 1: as data driven or data informed, unless that data is
Speaker 1: data about gender bias intec, in which case it's all equal.
Speaker 1: But data doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: Yeah, one hundred percent. Yeah, I we should do like
Speaker 2: a survey or something to get it there. I'm gonna
Speaker 2: think about this one, because you're absolutely right. I bet
Speaker 2: all of them, you know, all day long, talk about
Speaker 2: how they're making data driven decisions. They're following the data,
Speaker 2: they're following the science, except for this huge area where
Speaker 2: it concerns like them getting paid. Then they're not interested
Speaker 2: in the data. They're not interested in the science. They're
Speaker 2: just interested in like getting theirs at the exclusion of
Speaker 2: women exactly.
Speaker 4: Let's say, quick break at our back.
Speaker 1: Okay, So let's move on to a slightly less infuriating story,
Speaker 1: which is maybe Instagram is not ruinting national parks after all. So,
Speaker 1: as you'll probably know, I am a avid hiker and
Speaker 1: I think of myself as an outdoors woman, you know,
Speaker 1: like I'm you know, I have pooped in holes, I
Speaker 1: have taken intense hikes. Well, I'm comfortable calling myself a
Speaker 1: outdoors someone. I'm gonna I'm gonna own that label for myself.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you get to decide if you're an outdoors.
Speaker 1: You looked like you were about to object to that
Speaker 1: self proclaimed title.
Speaker 2: No, no, you you've earned it.
Speaker 1: Okay. So I did a lot more outdoor activities, especially
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty when the pandemic was shutting down indoor
Speaker 1: spaces together. So obviously it is important to be good
Speaker 1: stewards of outdoor spaces that we visit, like packing out
Speaker 1: your litter, staying on trail, all of that kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: But in twenty twenty, a growing chorus of advocates we're
Speaker 1: really urging people not to geotag their specific locations on
Speaker 1: social media platforms like Instagram when they posted pictures. The
Speaker 1: thinking there was that if somebody posts a really beautiful
Speaker 1: looking spot on social media, other people will see that
Speaker 1: spot and want to visit that specific spot or that
Speaker 1: specific park and contribute to over visitation. I heard horror
Speaker 1: stories in twenty twenty and twenty twenty one of already
Speaker 1: popular national park locations basically being overrun with crowds to
Speaker 1: the point where they were almost not usable. Did you
Speaker 1: hear those stories?
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I remember that. It was a big It
Speaker 2: was big news during the pandemic because people couldn't fly anywhere,
Speaker 2: and so people were flocking to national parks, which, on
Speaker 2: one hand is great that people are taking advantage of
Speaker 2: this incredible treasure that we have. But it was a
Speaker 2: big problem too because it was just too many people, right, Like,
Speaker 2: the parks can only handle so many people to there
Speaker 2: be huge lines of cars. People were sitting in them
Speaker 2: running their engines for like hours waiting to get into
Speaker 2: the park, and then like crowd into a space to
Speaker 2: look at some buffalo or cliffs or something.
Speaker 1: Well, now, a new report might be casting some doubt
Speaker 1: on just how much Instagram impacts outdoor land use. OPB
Speaker 1: reports at a study in land economics called the Instagram
Speaker 1: Effect is social media influencing visitation to public land? Suggests
Speaker 1: that social media might not be a huge driver of
Speaker 1: visitation after all. So for this study, Ashley Low McKenzie
Speaker 1: and her colleagues used eighteen years of visitation data and
Speaker 1: compared it with geotagged Instagram content from fifty popular Oregon
Speaker 1: state parks. McKenzie summarizes, there were four parks that went
Speaker 1: really viral on Instagram, and the really engaged in content,
Speaker 1: not just the general uploading activity people sharing stuff, but
Speaker 1: those that really got a lot of engagement had an
Speaker 1: impact on the growth that was seen at those parks.
Speaker 1: So viral Instagram photos of four Oregon parks, smith Rock,
Speaker 1: Silver Falls, Acola, and Oswald West were linked to growth
Speaker 1: rates of about four percent, So some impact, but maybe
Speaker 1: not the huge impact that we were all sort of
Speaker 1: summarizing what's going to happen when we were telling folks
Speaker 1: not to geotag their locations on Instagram. Another wrinkle of
Speaker 1: this that I actually didn't know is that national parks
Speaker 1: now require folks who are monetizing content that they get
Speaker 1: at parks to buy a special photography permit, which kind
Speaker 1: of makes sense. I do sort of wonder how much
Speaker 1: of this is like discomfort around influencers and like influencing
Speaker 1: as a profession, as a thing that people do. Sometimes
Speaker 1: when I hear people have intense reactions to crowds and
Speaker 1: people taking photos, it feels like what they're actually annoyed
Speaker 1: at is why are there so many women taking photos
Speaker 1: in this National park? So whenever I'm talking about people's
Speaker 1: concerns around influencers, I always want to be sure that
Speaker 1: we're not falling into a trap of just sexism and
Speaker 1: hating on something that young that is perceived as a
Speaker 1: young woman activity or pursuit. This is obviously anecdotal, but
Speaker 1: when I was gearing up to go to Archest National
Speaker 1: Park in Utah, so many people were like, oh, it's
Speaker 1: overrun with influencers now, like influencers have ruined it. Like
Speaker 1: good luck trying to do anything or go anywhere because
Speaker 1: it's full of influencers. It's so crowded. And so I
Speaker 1: showed up thinking it was going to be a nightmare
Speaker 1: that we were gonna be I was gonna be waiting
Speaker 1: forever and ever. But they had just started doing this
Speaker 1: timed pass entry, and it actually wasn't crowded at all.
Speaker 1: I think I waited in the car for like maybe
Speaker 1: fifteen minutes, and it wasn't any crowded than any other
Speaker 1: National park that I'd ever been to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well maybe that was because they started implementing the
Speaker 2: timed entry, you know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it was a big fan of the timed entry,
Speaker 1: and folks might have seen a similar conversation happening around
Speaker 1: leaf peeping and fall leaves and sort of how the
Speaker 1: perception that, like, young women want to do their fall
Speaker 1: photo shoot in front of pretty leaves, and they're going
Speaker 1: to like pretty small towns and wreaking havoc with they're
Speaker 1: Starbucks cups and they're over the any boots.
Speaker 2: They must be stopped, these young women taking some photo
Speaker 2: in front of leaves.
Speaker 1: Well, if you're in Pomfret, Vermont, that's exactly what you think.
Speaker 1: So in this small town in Vermont, the town board
Speaker 1: agreed to block anyone but locals from using a specific
Speaker 1: dirt road that has very pretty rural leaf views during
Speaker 1: peak leaf peeping season from the twenty third of September
Speaker 1: to the fifteenth of October. It does actually seem like
Speaker 1: the town had legitimate issues with people who were coming
Speaker 1: to just look at leaves and take pictures of leaves.
Speaker 1: The town has dubbed these people ticktokers, but like instead
Speaker 1: of the way that TikTok is actually spelled, it's like
Speaker 1: tick space tck e rs.
Speaker 2: These clock stops clock people.
Speaker 1: So basically they said that these people have been coming
Speaker 1: to look at the leaves, but when doing so, they
Speaker 1: sometimes block the access for emergency vehicles with their own cars.
Speaker 1: They their cars get stuck in dirt or mud because
Speaker 1: it's a dirt road and not everybody can drive on
Speaker 1: dirt or mud. Well, or they leave trash. They they
Speaker 1: hot people's private fences. The town actually started working with
Speaker 1: influencers to get people with big platforms to spread the
Speaker 1: word that folks who are visiting this town in Vermont
Speaker 1: need to respect the property and the people that live there.
Speaker 2: Well that ends on a nice note.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I kind of like that. It's not just like
Speaker 1: when I first read the article, I was like, Oh,
Speaker 1: they're just like demonizing pretty girls who like fall, which, like,
Speaker 1: what did we ever do to anybody? No, I'm just kidding, uh,
Speaker 1: But No, I like that they're actually acknowledging that these
Speaker 1: people are coming because they want to appreciate the land,
Speaker 1: and then using the platforms that these influencers have to
Speaker 1: spread the word about how you like, what you need
Speaker 1: to be considerate of if you are genuinely trying to
Speaker 1: be a good steward of this land, Like don't trapes
Speaker 1: all over it, don't cause a nuisance, don't be annoying
Speaker 1: to the people who actually live there. I do think
Speaker 1: that as you were talking about the rise of people
Speaker 1: exploring the vast natural beauty of the domestic United States,
Speaker 1: I do think that that is great. But I think
Speaker 1: that sometimes social media can influence people to do that
Speaker 1: in a way that does not always prioritize what is
Speaker 1: the most important thing always, which is safety, like your
Speaker 1: safety and the safety of others, and recipect for the land,
Speaker 1: and so yeah, I mean it's one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why I don't really use geo tags on Instagram of
Speaker 1: outdoor spots that I visit. Like sometimes I'll tag something
Speaker 1: in a general sense, like I'll tag Joshua Tree National
Speaker 1: Park or Sdandoah National Park as opposed to tagging a
Speaker 1: specific loop or arch or mountain. And you know, I
Speaker 1: think I'm going to continue that practice even if it's
Speaker 1: not related to environmental impacts like the study suggests, because
Speaker 1: I don't know. I just think that I worry that
Speaker 1: posting a really cool specific spot will this encourage people
Speaker 1: to try to recreate like that same itinerary that I did.
Speaker 1: I have certainly felt that, or somebody posts a really
Speaker 1: cool looking image of some outdoor spot on social media
Speaker 1: and I'm like, I gotta go there and take that picture.
Speaker 1: But I don't I don't want to contribute to that. Like,
Speaker 1: I don't think that, especially when it comes to the outdoors,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's good to encourage folks to see
Speaker 1: the outdoors as this commodity where they can just recreate
Speaker 1: itineraries themselves, like ordering on a menu. You know, I
Speaker 1: think that social media can sometimes prompt us into losing
Speaker 1: the thing that is so good about exploring the outdoors
Speaker 1: and nature, right, the aspect of fascination or discovery that
Speaker 1: comes with outdoor travel experiences. I know that I have
Speaker 1: felt it before, and I just don't want to contribute
Speaker 1: to it in other folks.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a beautiful way to put it. And yeah,
Speaker 2: why why would you want to like geotag your exact spot? Like,
Speaker 2: if you find some really wonderful, beautiful spot that you
Speaker 2: feel a personal connection to, why would you want to
Speaker 2: like broadcast that to everyone to be able to recreate
Speaker 2: and to know right like that that's yours. It's between
Speaker 2: you and the spot. Let other people find their own spot.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Like, part of the fun of exploring the outdoors
Speaker 1: is finding your own spot. And like the work that
Speaker 1: it takes to find it is like part of the experience,
Speaker 1: and I want to encourage that, not just like here's
Speaker 1: the place to go for a photo, everybody just like
Speaker 1: get in, take your photo, and get out. I feel
Speaker 1: like it's really easy to miss what is so special
Speaker 1: about spending time outdoors when you do that totally.
Speaker 2: And I think there's also a connection to the point
Speaker 2: you were making about that town in Vermont encouraging influencers
Speaker 2: to post messages and encourage their followers to like respect
Speaker 2: the land and respect property and respect the people who
Speaker 2: live there. Like those are not values that are unique
Speaker 2: to Vermont in the fall time. Those feel like pretty
Speaker 2: universal values, right, like respecting the where you are, respecting
Speaker 2: the people who live there. And I think there is
Speaker 2: something about the commodification of places that can get really
Speaker 2: promoted via Instagram photos that discourages that kind of respect
Speaker 2: for a place.
Speaker 1: I completely agree. I mean, I've seen it, you know,
Speaker 1: I've seen those spots where the Instagram photo is so beautiful,
Speaker 1: but then in reality, it's like there's a line of
Speaker 1: people standing off trail to get waiting to get that
Speaker 1: one photo. And that doesn't feel good to me. I
Speaker 1: just don't think that we should be treating our natural
Speaker 1: resources that are so special and beautiful and unique and
Speaker 1: aspiring like their cardboard cutouts of a celebrity to get
Speaker 1: a picture with.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and some spots are so unbelievably beautiful that we
Speaker 2: can't help it, right, Like you mentioned Arches National Park,
Speaker 2: and what is it? The delicate Arch is that iconic
Speaker 2: arch that we've all seen a million times in photos,
Speaker 2: and yet everybody's gonna want a photo of that. But
Speaker 2: hopefully along the way hiking up to it, people will
Speaker 2: see the ten thousand other beautiful vistas and formations along
Speaker 2: the way and develop some kind of affinity for them.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I guess I'm getting a little flowery here.
Speaker 1: No, I know what you mean. And that's the thing,
Speaker 1: like having been having hiked the delicate Arch. The delicate
Speaker 1: arch is beautiful and you should get I got a
Speaker 1: photo with it. People should get photos with it. I'm
Speaker 1: not being like, oh, if you take a selfie with
Speaker 1: a delicate arch, you are an asshole. That is not
Speaker 1: what I'm saying. But what I'm saying is I think
Speaker 1: that just the one iconic photo or the particularly beautiful vista,
Speaker 1: or like the iconic viral locations on social media that
Speaker 1: we saw, particularly in twenty twenty. I think that that
Speaker 1: can discourage people from enjoying the hike to the arch
Speaker 1: and like really ating the beauty of the twenty different
Speaker 1: amazing arches that are not necessarily iconic on Instagram, but
Speaker 1: that are beautiful in their own way. And I think
Speaker 1: it can like lessen it can encourage people to not
Speaker 1: actually appreciate what is exciting and fun and fascinating about
Speaker 1: being outside, which is all of it. It's not just
Speaker 1: the thing that you recognize from Instagram. You know. It
Speaker 1: reminds me in Mexico. I mean, I'm I get taken
Speaker 1: by this too. When I was in Mexico, there's this
Speaker 1: hot spring that I was like, oh my god, I've
Speaker 1: seen it on Instagram. It looks amazing. I cannot wait
Speaker 1: to do it. And when I went, it has these
Speaker 1: like outdoor heated pools formed on the side of a
Speaker 1: rock formation above a vista. It is so gorgeous on Instagram.
Speaker 1: When I actually went, I was like, oh my god,
Speaker 1: are these the you know, rock formation hot hot springs?
Speaker 1: They're like yeah. I got in and it was really cool.
Speaker 1: But the actual most fun part is the part that
Speaker 1: you almost never see on social media. It's these underground
Speaker 1: caves that have hot walter where you're standing in hot
Speaker 1: water and it's got hot water pouring from above. Those
Speaker 1: were that was the most fun part by a wide margin.
Speaker 1: It doesn't photograph all on Instagram, and you almost never
Speaker 1: see them on Instagram. So I got the like picture
Speaker 1: of me and the iconic thing that everybody recognizes. But
Speaker 1: the thing that I spent the most time in and
Speaker 1: that I appreciated the most was the thing I had
Speaker 1: never seen on Instagram. And like, I guess that's my
Speaker 1: point is that sometimes social media can trick you into
Speaker 1: thinking that the thing that looks the best on Instagram,
Speaker 1: that pops the most on social is the most fun,
Speaker 1: when in reality, that's not necessarily the most fun. It
Speaker 1: just looks the coolest. Okay, so let's move on. I
Speaker 1: have to give a little bit of a trigger warning
Speaker 1: for this next segment. It deals with non consensual deep
Speaker 1: fakes and sextortion. So we've talked a bit about the
Speaker 1: threat presented by non consensual deep to fake images before
Speaker 1: and now a group of young girls in all Mendrajeo,
Speaker 1: Spain say they received fabricated nude images of themselves that
Speaker 1: were created using an easily accessible undressing app power by
Speaker 1: artificial intelligence, which really raises a lot of the questions
Speaker 1: that we talk about on this show around the scope
Speaker 1: and harms that such apps can cause. According to an
Speaker 1: ABC report, over thirty victims between the ages of twelve
Speaker 1: and fourteen years of age have been identified so far,
Speaker 1: and the police in Spain so they've had reports of
Speaker 1: this happening elsewhere in the country too. ABC reported that
Speaker 1: the culprits are a group of young male perpetrators who
Speaker 1: were also miners, who police say knew most of their victims. Basically,
Speaker 1: these guys found photos of their victims on social media
Speaker 1: and uploaded them to a newdify app, which is an
Speaker 1: app that allows people to submit images of anybody and
Speaker 1: then generate AI created nude depictions of them. The perpetrators
Speaker 1: created a group chat on WhatsApp and Telegram to disseminate
Speaker 1: these non consensual, fabricated nude images, and the fake images
Speaker 1: were used to extort at least one victim on Instagram
Speaker 1: for real nude images or money. So pretty awful behavior
Speaker 1: from these boys who were targeting these young girls.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was like pretty gross but then when you
Speaker 2: got to the part about the extortion for money or
Speaker 2: newt images that it took like a super gross turn.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and remember, just because these images are faked using
Speaker 1: AI does not mean that social media platforms don't have
Speaker 1: a responsibility to treat them just like they would any
Speaker 1: other kind of threatening child sexual abuse material. WhatsApp spokesperson said,
Speaker 1: we treat this situation the same as any kind of
Speaker 1: child sexual abuse material we become aware of on our platform.
Speaker 1: We would ban those involved and report them to the
Speaker 1: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. So it gets worse.
Speaker 1: ABC reached out to the people who created this app,
Speaker 1: and what they got back is really telling. Basically, the
Speaker 1: folks who created this new Toifi app basically just say
Speaker 1: that it's all a big joke. The team behind the
Speaker 1: app said that their main reason for creating this type
Speaker 1: of service was to make people laugh processing their own
Speaker 1: photos and laughing together by processing each other's photos and
Speaker 1: by laughing on them. We want to show people that
Speaker 1: they do not need to be ashamed of nudity, especially
Speaker 1: if it was made by neural networks. So ha, just
Speaker 1: a big joke. Oh, you're a miner who is being
Speaker 1: extorted with AI created digital non consensual deep fakes of yourself. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's meant to be a joke that is lessening the
Speaker 1: shame of your nudity. Uh, I don't think so.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think so either.
Speaker 1: When ABC asked the people who made this app what
Speaker 1: kind of safeguards they put in place to avoid people
Speaker 1: generating this kind of material, particularly of children, the makers
Speaker 1: of the app said that if somebody tried to upload
Speaker 1: an image of a miner twice, then they were blocked
Speaker 1: from the app, which, yikes, what a terrible policy. Two
Speaker 1: strikes for creating child sexual abuse material. But even beyond that,
Speaker 1: if anyone gets two goes at uploading an image of
Speaker 1: a miner to create you know, inappropriate images of that person.
Speaker 1: If they get two chances to do that and they
Speaker 1: then work in a network like these perpetrators are accused
Speaker 1: of doing, that is plenty of room for them to
Speaker 1: do a lot of damage like these perpetrators did.
Speaker 2: Well. It's also not even an answer because like, how
Speaker 2: does their app know if an image is child sexual
Speaker 2: abuse material? Are they using AI to detect it? If
Speaker 2: that's the case, why do they give them two chances?
Speaker 2: Or are they depending on somebody to report it as
Speaker 2: child sexual abuse material. If that's the case, then it's
Speaker 2: not really any sort of safeguard at all. That's like
Speaker 2: not even an answer. That's right up there with we
Speaker 2: created this app to make people laugh.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know who's not laughing the twelve year old
Speaker 1: girls who have been targeted by this. So there was
Speaker 1: a paid version of this app which worked with payment
Speaker 1: processors that you've heard of, like Visa and PayPal, but
Speaker 1: those payment processors pulled their services from the app after
Speaker 1: this ABC report came out. What's really sad to me
Speaker 1: is that these girls obviously felt a lot of shame
Speaker 1: or pressure to stay silent about being targeted in this way.
Speaker 1: One of the parents of a victim posted a plea
Speaker 1: on Instagram saying here we are united to stop this now.
Speaker 1: Using other people's images to do this barbarity and spread
Speaker 1: them is a very serious crime. Girls, don't be afraid
Speaker 1: to report such acts. Tell your mothers. After the parents
Speaker 1: of one of the victims posted this to Instagram, more
Speaker 1: victims came forward, so Professor Klaermaglenn, a law professor at
Speaker 1: Durham University in the UK and an expert on violence
Speaker 1: against women and girls, says that platforms are amplifying this
Speaker 1: kind of neudified content. She says this is a direct
Speaker 1: abuse of women and girls by technology that is specifically
Speaker 1: designed to abuse women and girls. Google returns newdified websites
Speaker 1: at the top of its ranking, enabling and legitimizing these behaviors.
Speaker 1: There is no legitimate reason to use nonutifle by apps
Speaker 1: without consent. They should be de ranked by search platforms
Speaker 1: such as Google. Mike kind of to your point about
Speaker 1: the people who made this app their like non answer, Google,
Speaker 1: in response to this kind of kind of gave the
Speaker 1: same old song and dance about how they really care
Speaker 1: about amplifying the best content blah blah blah, and how
Speaker 1: they're working to keep this kind of junk off their platform.
Speaker 1: But honestly they need to do better now. We don't
Speaker 1: need to hear platitudes. The group of girls who have
Speaker 1: been targeted by this kind of behavior like these platitudes
Speaker 1: probably mean nothing to them. This is not a faraway
Speaker 1: harm that is posed to happen in the future down
Speaker 1: the line. It is happening now. These girls are living, walking,
Speaker 1: breathing proof of it, and platforms like Google need to
Speaker 1: do better now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm so curious what Google actually said in response,
Speaker 2: because I just typed Newdify into Google and the result
Speaker 2: is like the Newdify app inviting me to upload an
Speaker 2: image and you know undress whoever. Uh, so they've like
Speaker 2: obviously done nothing.
Speaker 1: A Google spokesperson responded by saying, quote, like any search engine,
Speaker 1: Google index is content that exists on the web, but
Speaker 1: we actively design our ranking systems to avoid shocking people
Speaker 1: with unexpected, harmful or explicit content. We also have well
Speaker 1: developed protections to help people impacted by involuntary fake pornography.
Speaker 1: People can request the removal of pages about them that
Speaker 1: include this content. They added that as this space and
Speaker 1: technology evolves quote, they are actively working to add more
Speaker 1: safeguards to help protect people based on systems we've built
Speaker 1: for other types of non consensual explicit imagery. None of
Speaker 1: that meet like tell that to the victims. Tell the
Speaker 1: victims that, oh, after you've already been extorted by these images,
Speaker 1: you can have them. You can submit and request to
Speaker 1: have them removed after the fact. Don't worry once your
Speaker 1: friends have seen it, once it's been put passed around
Speaker 1: on a WhatsApp group and it's already really impacted your
Speaker 1: young life at an impressiable time, impressionable time for you.
Speaker 1: Don't worry. You can just request us to remove it,
Speaker 1: and we are working actively to add more safeguards to
Speaker 1: help protect women like you. Like it just means nothing.
Speaker 2: Is there a date on that statement from them?
Speaker 1: There is not. The piece was published October second.
Speaker 2: So that was three weeks ago. Excuse me, it was
Speaker 2: three days ago. As of today, you type newdified into
Speaker 2: Google and it gives you a whole wealth of apps
Speaker 2: that will do this for you for free, like top
Speaker 2: ten free apps that will do this for you, roundups,
Speaker 2: reviews of apps. They're just like doing it. They've obviously
Speaker 2: done nothing, So like Google actively doing something according to them,
Speaker 2: means like Google doing nothing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I wouldn't say they're doing nothing. In fact,
Speaker 1: they're enabling and legitimizing these kinds of apps and their
Speaker 1: use on social media. So yeah, Google, this is their
Speaker 1: platitudes are not enough. Like I'm enraged. This is enraging.
Speaker 1: Google needs to do more. The threat is here today.
Speaker 1: The threat is being experienced by real women and girls today.
Speaker 1: Google needs to act. I don't want to hear more
Speaker 1: platitudes about how they're building better tools than YadA YadA YadA.
Speaker 1: That means nothing to me unless it is paired with
Speaker 1: actual meaningful action.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and like, I don't know how many more Atlantic
Speaker 2: articles we all need to read about how broken Google
Speaker 2: search is, but like, it definitely is, but apparently this
Speaker 2: one area is like not broken at all. It's like thriving.
Speaker 1: Oh, if you want to get a non scammy answer
Speaker 1: to your your basic question on Google, that's not an ad.
Speaker 1: Good luck. If you want to see a non consensual
Speaker 1: image of a minor, we got you.
Speaker 2: So.
Speaker 1: Kind of to that point. There was a new report
Speaker 1: in the Washing Post about online sextortion, which is on
Speaker 1: the rise. This is a very troubling, heartbreaking story. This
Speaker 1: kind of sextortion is especially targeting young men and boys.
Speaker 1: The report says that the number of sextortion cases targeting
Speaker 1: young people has exploded in the last couple of years,
Speaker 1: with teen boys being the specific targets. This is from
Speaker 1: Lauren Coffrin, executive director of the Exploited Children Division at
Speaker 1: the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. They're using shame, embarrassment,
Speaker 1: and fear, and they're tapping into that Coaufrin said they're
Speaker 1: exploiting children's worst nightmares. Basically, how it works is that
Speaker 1: someone will pose as another young person, getting to know
Speaker 1: the victim, flirting with them, and then pressuring the victim
Speaker 1: and descending nude images that specifically include their face. Then,
Speaker 1: once they have those images, the perpetrator turns around and
Speaker 1: demands money from the target, threatening to send those images
Speaker 1: to their contacts, their friends and family if they don't
Speaker 1: send it. This is sadly happening more and more. The
Speaker 1: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has receive more
Speaker 1: than ten thousand tips of financial sextortion of miners, primarily boys,
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two. By the end of July twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three, they had already received more than twelve thousand,
Speaker 1: five hundred reports, with more continuing to pour in. What's
Speaker 1: even more troubling is the impact. The repercussions of the
Speaker 1: abuse are devastating. At least a dozen boys died by
Speaker 1: suicide in twenty twenty two after they were blackmailed. So,
Speaker 1: like a lot of sexual violence, a big part of
Speaker 1: how these cases work is shame. The victims feel ashamed,
Speaker 1: they don't report it, and then the perpetrators can just
Speaker 1: move on without any consequences and continue to target others.
Speaker 1: Kids are, sadly often finding themselves navigating this more or
Speaker 1: less on their own. They may feel afraid or ashamed
Speaker 1: to involve a guardian once they're targeted. The Washington Post
Speaker 1: spoke to Emily Mudler, program director from the Family Online
Speaker 1: Safety Institute, which emphasized that while parents should set rules
Speaker 1: and boundaries for technology use for kids, regulations must come
Speaker 1: with a caveat that if your kid finds themselves in
Speaker 1: real trouble, they can come to you as a guardian
Speaker 1: for help. Mulder says, you don't want it to be
Speaker 1: a case for your kids are so fearful that they
Speaker 1: broke the rules that they don't want to tell their parents.
Speaker 1: So young boys are particularly vulnerable to being targeted. Samir Hinduja,
Speaker 1: co director for the Cyber Bullying Research Center and professor
Speaker 1: of criminology at Florida Atlantic University, says the center receives
Speaker 1: an incredibly disproportionate number of health requests from male victims.
Speaker 1: Presuming that sexting is a precursor to sextortion, it is
Speaker 1: possible that females may send nuds. More So, in the
Speaker 1: context of a romantic relationship, whereas males may do so
Speaker 1: more casually and experimentally. This fact makes males more of
Speaker 1: an easy target. The article on the post had some
Speaker 1: really heartbreaking accounts from real young people who dealt with
Speaker 1: this in their families. They include one teen's text to
Speaker 1: his parents after he set nude images over Instagram and
Speaker 1: the perpetrator asked for three hundred dollars. The victim says
Speaker 1: things to his parents as he's confessing what's going on.
Speaker 1: He says things like, I'm so so sorry, I messed up,
Speaker 1: I'm so stupid. I wish you had a better son.
Speaker 1: And reading those text messages that he frantically sent to
Speaker 1: his parents for help, like in the midst of a
Speaker 1: spiral from this really broke my heart. And in that instance,
Speaker 1: the perpetrators actually did make good on their threat. They
Speaker 1: sent nude images of this minor boy to his parents'
Speaker 1: cell phones. The parents didn't really know what to do
Speaker 1: because you know, their child is being extorted financially, but
Speaker 1: also they now have a nude image of a minor
Speaker 1: on their cell phones, cell phones that they use for work.
Speaker 1: So the parents were like, we don't know what to do.
Speaker 1: They called the police, and the police basically could not
Speaker 1: offer them any real help. They then reported the account
Speaker 1: who was extorting their son to Instagram, but the count
Speaker 1: remained active and kept messaging them and threatening to release
Speaker 1: these images more widely. This in action by authorities and
Speaker 1: tech companies is another big part of the problem. This
Speaker 1: particular boy's parents said, Instagram needs to own a partial
Speaker 1: responsibility for this. We hold our son accountable. He made
Speaker 1: a bad choice. We're not saying it's Instagram's fault, but
Speaker 1: I still feel like they should care more about trying
Speaker 1: to protect these kids. And I agree, I hard hard agree.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they are making plenty of money. They should have
Speaker 2: humans monitoring that report feature, and they should block an
Speaker 2: account that is reported for sex storting a minor.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Something else that makes this apparently difficult to deal
Speaker 1: with is that many of the perpetrators are based outside
Speaker 1: of the United States, a lot of them in Western
Speaker 1: African countries, but they're targeting youth in the United States,
Speaker 1: which makes tracking them down and bringing them to justice
Speaker 1: that much more difficult. It's also just realistically like a
Speaker 1: very difficult and complex thing for parents and guardians to
Speaker 1: navigate with their kids, Like, I'm sure somebody listening is
Speaker 1: just like, well, this is why young people just shouldn't
Speaker 1: have iPhones or shouldn't have social media, or I know
Speaker 1: that as somebody without kids, I always say things like this, like,
Speaker 1: when I have a child, they're never gonna be around screens.
Speaker 1: It's just gonna be books and wooden toys. And then
Speaker 1: watch when I have a kid how quickly that changes.
Speaker 1: But you know, it's just not realistic to in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three have expect a parent to tell a teenager,
Speaker 1: like a fifteen sixteen year old, that they can't have
Speaker 1: a phone, that they can't have social media when all
Speaker 1: the other kids in their grade have that right, And
Speaker 1: the reality is is that kids do need to learn
Speaker 1: to navigate these online spaces safely, right, and so like
Speaker 1: just saying you don't, like, okay, if this is going
Speaker 1: to be a threat, you aren't going to be on
Speaker 1: social media or have an iPhone or whatever, particularly when
Speaker 1: your kid is in that weird in between stage of
Speaker 1: like fifteen, sixteen seventeen, where you're not a child, but
Speaker 1: you're not an adult, and you're like away from your
Speaker 1: guardians for several hours a day at school, maybe you
Speaker 1: have a job. It's just very complicated, both as a
Speaker 1: parent or a guardian, trying to navigate the Internet and
Speaker 1: social media and all of the promise and peril and
Speaker 1: threats and community that it's offered there. For young people,
Speaker 1: it's just a lot, Like it's a huge expectation that
Speaker 1: I think when you have these threats that are so real,
Speaker 1: it makes it that much more difficult.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I can't imagine being a fifteen year old boy
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty three. I can't imagine being the parent
Speaker 2: of a fifteen year old boy in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 2: It's got to be so difficult, so complicated.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And what really breaks my heart about all this
Speaker 1: is that exploring sex and sexuality is normal and healthy
Speaker 1: for young people. Young people should be able to do
Speaker 1: that in ways that are safe and age appropriate and
Speaker 1: that don't have them like, don't have their natural curiosity
Speaker 1: or exploration being weaponized against them. Like it breaks my
Speaker 1: heart that these kids, the text messages of the young
Speaker 1: man who was confessing to his parents that he had
Speaker 1: sent these images online. He should be able to have
Speaker 1: a healthy and safe and age appropriate exploration of what
Speaker 1: sexuality is as he's as he's aging without worrying that
Speaker 1: it's going to be exploited and weaponized in such a
Speaker 1: cruel way. And so it just breaks my heart that
Speaker 1: kids aren't getting something that I think is like a healthy,
Speaker 1: normal part of growing up for all of us.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you know, it's interesting that the article says
Speaker 2: that this is like a rapidly growing problem, particularly for boys.
Speaker 2: Like we don't. We don't spend a whole lot of
Speaker 2: time talking about problems that disproportionately affect the boys on
Speaker 2: this show. But for some reason, this one like hurts
Speaker 2: and it feels like important more.
Speaker 4: After a quick break, let's get right back into.
Speaker 2: It and talking about the biggest boy of them all,
Speaker 2: Elon Musk. What's Elon done now?
Speaker 1: Well, Elon Musk has removed all link texts from Twitter
Speaker 1: when you post links. So now when you post a
Speaker 1: link to a news article or any kind of article,
Speaker 1: the only thing that comes up is a picture from
Speaker 1: that article, and then you click the picture to take
Speaker 1: you to the article. It's awful, if you've seen it,
Speaker 1: it's awful. It's hostile to news media and factfinders and
Speaker 1: a healthy media ecosystem, which obviously has got to be
Speaker 1: part of the point.
Speaker 2: Right, Oh my god, it's so stupid. It's so this
Speaker 2: is like a niche example, but I'm going to give it.
Speaker 2: I you know, I'm a scientist. I publish scientific articles
Speaker 2: and like scientific journals, and some of them, increasingly many
Speaker 2: of them require you to submit like a cover image
Speaker 2: to go along with it. And you know, sometimes your
Speaker 2: article has like a cool graph or something that is
Speaker 2: like a useful cover image, but like that's not really
Speaker 2: what they want. So most of the time what I
Speaker 2: do is I'll go to like texels dot com or
Speaker 2: some sort of like free stock image service to find
Speaker 2: a stock image to upload with it. This image has
Speaker 2: nothing to do with the goddamn story that like the
Speaker 2: article is about. It is like tangentially related. Most of
Speaker 2: mine are like someone holding a cell phone or something, right,
Speaker 2: because it's like, oh, mobile health. The idea that he's
Speaker 2: going to strip the headline and only show the image
Speaker 2: is like, let's focus on the least informative thing we can. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I guess, just to like add to the sense of
Speaker 2: confusion and lack of coherence that is the order of
Speaker 2: the day on Twitter these days.
Speaker 1: Well, people are using that to troll elon they're posting
Speaker 1: articles that use his image, and they're tweeting things because
Speaker 1: you can't see any text, so it's just an image
Speaker 1: of Elon Musk, and they're tweeting things like Elon Musk
Speaker 1: found dead or breaking police have found human remains and
Speaker 1: evidence of cannibalism, and Elon Musk's la home that he
Speaker 1: sold in twenty twenty two, because it's just an image,
Speaker 1: and who knows what the article says, Like, who's gonna
Speaker 1: click the article to find out what it says. So yeah,
Speaker 1: chaos abounds on Twitter.
Speaker 2: That's hilarious. But also he probably loves that because it's
Speaker 2: attention for him. He loves the attention. That's why he
Speaker 2: spent forty four billion dollars so that people could like
Speaker 2: make little jokes about him and post his photo.
Speaker 1: Well, you want to know what else Elon Musk has done? Now?
Speaker 2: I guess I don't have to tell you. No, no,
Speaker 2: tell me. I want to know what's Elon continued to do?
Speaker 1: Now, Well, you might actually like this one. He got
Speaker 1: hit with the defamation lawsuit. Huffington Post reports that Ben Brody,
Speaker 1: a twenty two year old Jewish man from California, filed
Speaker 1: a lawsuit against Elon Musk after he and his family
Speaker 1: were forced to flee their homes for their own safety
Speaker 1: after content when you'd harassment and threats, after Musk promoted
Speaker 1: a baseless and dangerous conspiracy that Brody was a federal
Speaker 1: agent involved in a neo Nazi group. So Brody is
Speaker 1: being represented by attorney Mark Bankston, who previously represented two
Speaker 1: of the Sandy Hook parents who ya might remember won
Speaker 1: forty five million dollars in damages against conspiracy theorist Alex Jones,
Speaker 1: after Jones spent years falsely claiming with the twenty twelve
Speaker 1: school shooting that left twenty kids and six adults dead
Speaker 1: never happened, that was a false flag, their kids were
Speaker 1: at crisis actors whatever, So Mark Bankston, attorney says, and
Speaker 1: yet another example of Elon Musk's serial pattern of slander,
Speaker 1: he falsely told the world that Ben Brody participated in
Speaker 1: a violent street brawl on behalf of a neo Nazi
Speaker 1: extremist group. Brody is seeking more than a million dollars
Speaker 1: in damages from Musk, and honestly, Brody, we hope you
Speaker 1: get it.
Speaker 2: He should ask for more. That's like nothing to this guy.
Speaker 1: That's like the change in his cushions, his couch cushions
Speaker 1: for him. So I do have a little bit of
Speaker 1: good tech news for you, bike. You ready to hear it?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'll take some good news.
Speaker 1: So good news. New York City became the first public
Speaker 1: health system in the United States to offer abortion care
Speaker 1: via telehealth. NYC residents can access medication abortion services over
Speaker 1: the phone or via video services like Zoom up to
Speaker 1: ten weeks of pregnancy. The service Virtual Express Care is
Speaker 1: offered seven days a week from nine am to nine pm.
Speaker 1: Patients must attest that they're in New York City and
Speaker 1: will take the medication while they're in New York City
Speaker 1: or receive the medication at a New York City address.
Speaker 1: So a big part of abortion is access, like people
Speaker 1: not being able to get to clinics or get the
Speaker 1: care that they need. So abortion by mail or telehealth
Speaker 1: abortion is a great way to expand access. So I
Speaker 1: don't say a lot of good things about Eric Adams,
Speaker 1: the Mayor of New York, but this one I like.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is the probably the first really good thing
Speaker 2: I've heard about Eric Adams. So I'll give it to
Speaker 2: him on this one. Good job let's not get crazy.
Speaker 2: I feel like maybe he didn't know, Like maybe they
Speaker 2: snucked it. Yeah, but that is great, Like telehealth is
Speaker 2: the future, it's what people want. People love it. The
Speaker 2: federal government really opened up access to telehealth during the
Speaker 2: pandemic and people loved it. We're accessing care in new
Speaker 2: ways that were like convenient and that lowered costs for everyone.
Speaker 2: It was like such a win win and it's nice
Speaker 2: to see it expanding, particularly for the super important area
Speaker 2: of abortion access.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we have all this technology. It is making our
Speaker 1: lives harder and more harmful in all kinds of ways.
Speaker 1: Why not make it easier and better in a few ways.
Speaker 1: I like it. I like to see it.
Speaker 2: Hell yeah.
Speaker 1: So the last few weeks, I have been invited to
Speaker 1: come do talks and lectures and panels at universities and conferences.
Speaker 1: Thank you. If you are listening and you have asked
Speaker 1: me to come out and speak to your group or
Speaker 1: your conference or your college, thank you. And if you
Speaker 1: are listening and you're like that is something that I
Speaker 1: would like, get in touch with me. You can email
Speaker 1: me at hello at tangoti dot com And I would
Speaker 1: love to come to your college, your campus your panel,
Speaker 1: your workplace, whatever. Hit me up.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you should definitely do it. Bridget is a great speaker.
Speaker 2: She's not one of these podcasts hosts. It's going to
Speaker 2: phone it in. She's gonna come, she's gonna she's gonna
Speaker 2: prepare some remarks, she's gonna host the panel. You should
Speaker 2: definitely invite Bridget to come speak at your campus.
Speaker 1: I want to speak at your campus. I want to
Speaker 1: moderate your panel. I want to host her event. I
Speaker 1: do it all. I love meeting people. I might seem
Speaker 1: awkward on the podcast, but I swear people enjoy my
Speaker 1: company in person. Hit me up, Mike, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for being here.
Speaker 2: Brigitt, thank you for having me. It was great to
Speaker 2: be back. I love doing the show with you. Thank
Speaker 2: you for giving me the opportunity.
Speaker 1: And thanks to all of you for listening. As always.
Speaker 1: If you want to support the sh and find ad
Speaker 1: free content, check us out our Patreon at patreon dot com.
Speaker 1: Slash Tangody no pressure, but you can find us there
Speaker 1: and we'll see you on the internet. If you're looking
Speaker 1: for ways to support the show, check out our March
Speaker 1: store at tegoty dot com. Slash store. Got a story
Speaker 1: about an interesting thing in tech, or just want to
Speaker 1: say hi. You can reach us at Hello at tegody
Speaker 1: dot com. You can also find transcripts for today's episode
Speaker 1: at tengody dot com. There Are No Girls on the
Speaker 1: Internet was created by me bridget Tood. It's a production
Speaker 1: of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative edited by Joey pat Jonathan
Speaker 1: Strickland is our executive producer. Tari Harrison is our producer
Speaker 1: and sound engineer. Michael Almado is our contributing producer. I'm
Speaker 1: your host, bridget Tood. If you want to help us grow,
Speaker 1: rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts
Speaker 1: from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts.