There Are No Girls on the Internet, as a production of iHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative. I'm Bridgett and this is there Are No Girls on the Internet.
Today.
I am not joined by my producer Mike. I am joined by my producer, Joey pet. You don't always hear Joey's voice on the show, but you do hear their phenomenal editing and their phenomenal.
I don't know, internet cultural takes.
We talked about Joey's appearance on the podcast Stuff Mom ever told you really doing a phenomenal and thoughtful job breaking down that kids Online Safety Act that we're all discussing on the show. Joey, thank you so much for being here.
Hey, thank you bridget for having me on. Super excited.
I'm excited to so First I would love to just sort of let folks get to know you. What is your experience like on the internet, What do you care about online? What brings you to convert stations on the internet?
For sure? Yeah, so I again, My name is Jerry. I am a producer here at iHeart I work on a couple of different shows. I do work. When I asked stuff Mom never told you like Britchett said, should check out that episode if you can. But yeah, I am very much an Internet kind of person, a very chronically outlined person. I will call myself sometimes not necessarily in a positive way, but I you know, I am gen Z. I'm an older gen Z person. So I grew up with social media more or less like in
I don't know. I got on social media on like high school. I guess that's more or less growing up with social media. Anyways. I was a big like you know, I was really into Tumblr back in the day when that was a big thing. I personally, you know, if you've listened to Smithy, you know this. I'm a big like fandom person, so that always was my introduction to like social media sites and all of that. I am still on Twitter, unfortunately, hanging on. We'll see, although I
don't know that that might be ending sued. But yeah, I do use TikTok a lot. I'm big on TikTok. I won't be telling you all my TikTok, but if I find it on your own, congratulations. I don't use the same ad as I do for my other social media,
but do love TikTok. Do love sort of you know, my view is always I think social media is it's a medium, it can be a great tool for activism and for you know, one thing I talk about a lot is like I grew up queer in the early two thousands, early two tens or two thousands early twenty tens kind of era. Like I think I was probably like twenty fourteen when I first came.
Out, like.
But which was still like a time where there wasn't a lot of like visibility with queerness. And I really credit like the internet and social media for being my sort of space, safe space, so that always going to have a place in my heart, you know. At the same time, I think really appreciate the show for being a place to talk about like some of the negatives too.
But yeah, we have such similar trajectories when it comes to how we think about the Internet. Like similarly, the Internet, I guess it's a double edged sword, you know. I think for marginalized youth, it can be this new this place to find community and explore yourself sometimes depending on where you grew up and what your upbringing was like sometimes for the very first time.
And it also can.
Be this place where that very identity, that very thing that the Internet is this way to explore, can be weaponized against you, can be used to further marginalize you. So yeah, it's it's all of the promise and all of the peril. Like that is what it means to be a marginalized person online today, I feel and you really bring your fandom lens. I think is really helpful to understanding a lot of what happens on the internet.
We were just talking about, you know, how you could say something about activism or radical politics because people are like, okay, you talk about a fandom, then you can really upset some folks.
Yeah, I was like Richard before we started recording. I recently got in some i'm gonna say accidental beef with a very prominent TikToker. Uh was not my intention, That's why I'm saying accidental. I pointed out that he made a comment that was a little bit misogynistic, and you know, accusing a male ally of not being a feminist is
apparently the worst defense to feminism that's been a week. Anyway, It's not gonna go super into that, but I yeah, it's I existing as a marginalized person on the internet. It's always always a fun time. Always get some fun comments, you know, always Yeah.
Well, speaking of TikTok, that's a great segue into talking about news y'all might have missed on the Internet this week. So we talked on the show about TikTok, the Chinese owned social media platform owned by the parent company fit Dance, was potentially going to be banned in the United States, and how the platform was working with the US government to figure out what it needed to do to avoid
being banned. Well, now you've gotten our very first look about what all that might entail, because Forbes obtained a draft of a deal from around this time last year between TikTok and the Biden Administration's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States or CFIUS. So one quick sort of side note here is that Forbes has a little
bit of a history with TikTok. Fite Dance did confirm to Forbes that they had essentially been spying on Forbes journalists through monitoring their physical locations via their IP addresses in an attempt to sniff out leaks from inside the company. A TikTok executive actually had to resign over this. So Forbes has really been on this TikTok Beat, which is probably why they were the outlet that got this agreement
between the government and TikTok in the first place. So their reporting sos that if it were to be finalized, the agreement would provide the government near unfettered access to internal TikTok information and unpreceded control over essential functions that
it does not have over any other major platform. The draft agreement as it's being negotiated or as it was being negotiated at the time around this time last summer, would give government agencies that the DOJ and the DoD the authority to examine TikTok's US facilities, records, equipment, and servers with minimal or no notice block changes to the apps, US terms of service, moderation policies and privacy policy, veto the hiring of any executive involved in leading TikTok's US
data Security. Org order TikTok and byte Dance to pay for and subject themselves to various audits, assessments, and other reports on the security of TikTok's US functions, and in some circumstances require bytdance to temporarily stop TikTok from functioning
within the United States. So what's really interesting to me here that Forbes points out is that this agreement would essentially give the United States government a very similar kind of act success and power that lawmakers have worried about
China having forbus rights. In one revealing comment, Exchange attorneys for Byteedance explained to c si US that they have addressed language that prevents the government from demanding changes of TikTok's recommendation algorithm simply because it recommended content that the government does not like. And so that is exactly what foes have been like, Oh, China will do that, and now this agreement is saying maybe the United States government should be able to do that.
Yeah, I that is so weird to be about this whole debate, which is like, I mean and like obviously that and I guess not obviously, but like they've made it clear the attention behind it is just that they're bad, that they're not the ones that are like Facebook has been doing worship for like the law. I don't know,
it's very strange. I also I don't know. Whenever this comes up, I'm always like, what did politicians think people are like doing on TikTok like what I don't know most for you page is like I get a lot of those, like the things with people playing video games and there's like climb over it, like I don't.
Yeah, I don't know.
Anyways, that's it's this whole thing is so silly and somehow also terrifying. Yeah.
Yeah, And you make a good point that so much of what lawmakers in the US have talked about when it comes to this threat that they say that TikTok poses as from being a Chinese owned company is very hypothetical. It's not like they're saying the videos where somebody is playing Mario Kart and then there's a sitcom on top of it, those are national securities. It's not like they
have some smoking gun. It's all very hypothetical. And if the government and TikTok were to go ahead with this agreement, that would mean that TikTok would be subjected to more government oversight and scrutiny than any other social media platform that's run in the United States, like Facebook or Twitter, which I'm sure is making folks like Zuckerberg and Elon
Musk very very happy. That's sort of one of my overall concerns about legislation around TikTok is that I feel like the United States their real quibble is that they want the US to be the only game in town when it comes to big tech, and so they want to have this dynamic where American companies basically go unscrutinized by the American government, you know, unless they really break the law, and even then it's not really that much scrutiny,
and where TikTok has this completely different operating standard where they have complete scrutiny and oversight by the American government. And like, it just a weird dynamic that I just feel like is not actually rooted in keeping our data safe and secure.
It's rooted in something else.
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's it's again, it's very clearly sort of rooted in this weird sort of like anti China cetophobia that happens. The thing to me too, is it's always like, look, I'm not I don't think any country should be getting my data collecting my data. But at the same time, it's like, it doesn't the US do that to like every other country that uses are like, like,
it isn't that every country thing? It is the Facebook like we also, I don't know, it's the whole Yeah, like America wants to control all the big tag I just think it's kind of silly. Yeah. I remember also like when Facebook China banned like Facebook, and that was like a big thing, and they were like, see how repressive this government. It's like, this is not the same vision of tech. I don't not saying that was a good move either, but yes, but.
Yeah, it's the it's like the same things. It's like if that was horrible and you know, repressive, what is this like? You know, I'm I'm I just have a lot of questions. And I also think it puts a
lot of power in the hands of government. Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU's National Security Project, told Forbes if this agreement would give the US government the power to dictate what content TikTok can or cannot carry or how it makes those decisions, that would raise serious concerns about the government's ability to censor or distort what people
are saying or what it on TikTok. And I completely agree, and I think that doing that in service of quote, you know, having a more secure data privacy practice doesn't really. I mean it's just I just think that we're it's such a big grand standing around one app when what we actually need is meaningful, comprehensive data privacy laws. Like if if this agreement were to be in place, I don't think that our data would be made that much more safe.
Yeah, no, I totally agree. I also the point about like it's the government is going to be allowed to kind of dictate what can and cannot be seen. I mean the whole that episode that I did for Spin to about the whole problem with like Kosa and all these other like internet bills that are going around, is that, yeah, they're not really addressing the data privacy issue. They're just sort of trying to monitor what is or is not
going to be on the Internet. And honestly, like I said in that episode, or you listen back to it, I learned about that issue from TikTok, from a lot of like TikTokers that we're doing activism and trying to weareness raise awareness about this bell Yeah, I it's just
so weird. This also makes me thing I remember, like because this started with Trump, right, Trump tried to ban TikTok, and it was also right after there was that whole thing where like he had some huge rally that was supposed to happen and then like it ended up being like a fraction of like the people that it bought tickets, because it was like there was a whole thing on TikTok that like kids were like reserving seats and then not so yeah yeah, And I was like because I
remember when that happened, and it was like, oh, this is yeah, Trump's clearly trying to ban TikTok because he's just mad about that. Like this just seems like it's carried over from that, which I don't know. It's all very strange to me.
That is Actually when I got TikTok, I was like I was totally one of those people who was like, it's just kids dancing, Like I was like a TikTok skeptic. And then when Trump was gonna ban it, I remember reading a news headline. It was one of those headlines where like I didn't click into it, and like, actually, one of the reasons why I do the newscast. It's like headlines that you might see you didn't click into, and like here's the here's what you need to know.
But so like the headline I saw was like, oh, you have until X day to download TikTok if you want to download it, and I was like, well, I don't want the chance. I don't want to like want to have it and not have it, so let me download it. So like that was the first time that I ever got it. And then I was like, oh, there, it's actually an app that I enjoy.
So yeah, I forgot about that, but I remember it now.
Yeah, that was that was a really funny time to be on tik tik. I also, I think it was before I was also like using it a lot, like I was working on I just like had that app because everybody was downloading it. I was like, but yeah, that was like again, yeah, it's it's a it's a platform. There are problems with the platform. I would be happy to go into all the many, many problems that I have a TikTok, but also like, it's a platform that
exists in the world. There's good and bad and yeah, I ultimately it's you know, this is just going to be used to curb organizing and free speech. None of the free speech absolutists are shown up around this issue. I wonder why, like, yeah, where are they?
Let's take a quick break at our back.
Okay, So question for you, Joey. This has never happened to me, but I know that it's happened to people. Have you ever taken an uber or gotten an Instacart order or something like that and then had a worker contact you after the fact because they had your information because they wanted to date or wanted to ask you out, or like some other inappropriate vibes given?
Has it ever happened to you?
So that has not happened to me. That's definitely something I've been worried about. Like, it's something I feel like, especially if you're somebody who like designs female or feminine, you're gonna have that kind of anxiety in the back of your head. I mean maybe everybody does. I'm making assumptions, but yeah, it's definitely I'm definitely like worried about that. Haven't had it happen though.
Same, I've not had it happen, but I it's definitely something in the back of my head. And we are not alone because, according to a new survey, the rise of things like gig work also means a rise in this kind of inappropriate behavior. Two thousand British adults were surveyed by the Information Commissioner's Office or the ICO, and the survey found that seventeen percent of people have had their personal information used for a romantic or sexual proposition
after handing it over to a business. That figure rises to thirty three percent in London, where apparently this kind of thing is more common. Almost one in three Brits between the ages eighteen and thirty four have received unwanted contact from delivery drivers or other workers, asking them out on dates or propositioning them for sex. It is the way that you put it, Joey, is so true, Like this has not happened to me before. I've heard of it happening. I've seen reports of it happening. It's like
a thing in the back of your mind. Whenever you use a service like this, you know, and I think it's one of the reasons why it feels that way is by nature, when you are giving your information and your contact information over to a company, by default, you're like a little bit vulnerable, especially if somebody is coming to your house to deliver something or dropping you off at home if you're alone. Like I understand the feeling of like, oh, no, is this person going to proposition me?
You know, And I don't have any data on it, but I have to assume that this is an issue that impacts women or people who present as women disproportionately, Like I just have to assume, And I think, like, yeah, it can feel unsafe. Despite never having had to deal
with this myself, I can imagine feeling really unsafe. And Emily Keiney, a deputy missioner at the ICO, said people have the right to order a pizza or give their email for a seat, or have shop being delivered without being asked for sex, or on a date a little while later, And I completely agree. I also think that
some of this might be like partly cultural. I think that we have so many signals in society that suggest that this is the kind of quirky or romantic or like big grand gesture way to sort of show someone that you're taking the initiative to show romantic interest. Like how many movies do we have that suggest that, like, oh, just just go up and like do some big grand gesture,
They're gonna love it. And I think that like we have been training people that this is a romantic thing and that the person on the receiving end of it is going to be is going to like it. But you know, we're just trying to get take like get our delivery food and go back into our apartment, right Like, we're not trying to get a date. Everybody should have the right to use services and not feel like the person is going to be texting them after that because they have their number, you know.
No, that's so true. Though. I feel like I'm not a big rom com person. I feel like this is what I always say that that I'm of course, whenever I watch a rom com that I really like, I'm like, this is so cut. But I think that's the issue is there's so many where it's like this is a
little weird, like there's there's something a little off here. Yeah. No, I also like I could totally see that being something that would be like go viral on like Twitter, where it's like, oh my god, this person messaged me after dropping off my pizza and now we're marry, Like it's it's it's weird and it's weird like the kind of stories that we see as normal.
Yeah, I it's something it's something that I really I like rom coms, but it's something that I hate in rom coms, where it's like it's like in the romantic comedy universe boundaries, it's not a thing, like, you know,
I don't like that. I did once get into a long conversation that lasted after the fact with my insta cart shopper because I had ordered Tabasco sauce and rather than Tabasco sauce, the instacart shopper gave me liquid smoke and I was like, it wasn't a big deal, like whatever, but I was like, this person should know that, like Tabasco sauce and liquid smoke are not synonymous. And so I messaged back and I was like, hey, just so you know, like for your own cooking, this is not
a like synonymous thing. And it was a perfectly pleasant interaction, but it ended with, boy, you really have a lot of opinions about cooking like I should do.
That's accurate.
I love that. So that's like a nice interaction. Yeah, it was nice interactions. Yes, it was a nice plenty of really great conversations with the uber drivers. Yeah, that's always some thing too. I feel like, you know, the particular typographics that always responds to these sort of things with like, oh, so we can't be nice to do It's like, no, I've hat like lovely conversations with like white uber drivers about like I'm pretty young, I look
like I'm still in college. So usually it's like, you know, parents telling me about their kids are in college that kind of stuff. But it's always like it's super nice and cute, and I don't know, there's definitely a very clear line about what's what is too far and what is at least I think there is.
I think I agree.
I think if your proposition is for somebody propositioning somebody for sex or a date, that's probably on the other side of that line. And England is actually cracking down on this. The ICO is urging people who have been victims of this kind of thing to come forward and reminding companies of their data protection responsibilities that they are
bound to uphold by law. Companies who are violating data protection laws can be fined up to seventeen point five million pounds that's about twenty two point one million dollars, and so yeah, they're just reminding folks that like it is doing this getting someone's number because they did a service with you is against the law, and contacting them
after the fact is against the law. And I think there needs to be a cultural understanding that somebody who is doing service with you, just because you have their information that is not give you the green light to like text them after the fact for a date.
So I'm happy to.
See England cracking down on this. So let's move to the AI world, something we talk quite a bit about on the show. So this week we spoke to actor and producer Francesca Ramsey on the podcast about the Hollywood strikes and how writers and actors are demanding guardrails about how AI will be used in writers' rooms and on sets.
Hollywood studios have already put up.
Job listings for like very lucrative jobs for AI specialists amidst the strike, which kind of gives you a lens and to how they're thinking about the strike and how they're thinking about the culture of how content gets made already, and what writers really want to know is like how AI is going to impact their presence on set, Like are studios going to try to be funny with the math and sneak in AI and then use that to not pay human and writers?
You know, they want to know if AI is. The example that.
Francesca Ramsay used in this week's episode was if AI generates the first janki version of a script and then a human writer punches that script up, who gets credit for that script? Who gets paid for that script? Does the human writer get paid for it? I bet the studios would love it if they were to say, like, oh, no, you just get paid on making tweaks, even though you know the original script is probably super janky and did
need a heavy lift from a human hand. And so in Hollywood, writers and actors really want some guardrails around how studios plan to use AI. But this new ruling might throw revenge and studios plans around AI because a federal judge just ruled that a piece of art generated
by AI cannot be copyrighted. The lawsuit was brought by plaintiffs Stephen th Taylor, who wanted to list his own AI system as the sole creator of an artwork called a Recent Entrance to Paradise, and the courts basically said, nah, humans only. Copyright is for human work only. The judge said humans are an essential part of a valid copyright claim and that human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright.
Plaintiff can point to no case in which a court has recognized copyright and a work originating with a non human This is not a cut and drive ruling, I should say. The judge did suggest that cases in the future could be more complicated and quote will prompt challenging questions regarding how much human input is necessary to qualify the user of an AI system as an author of
a generated work. So if studios are not able to retain copyright of creative work created solely by AI, the whole you know, we'll just let AI write scripts instead of paying writers. Thing might not shake out in their favor.
This whole story is so funny. I mean obviously, okay, the like everything that has happened to do this let up to this with like the fact that you know, the writers and the actors have had to go on strike, which full solidarity with them of course lost by the picket line earlier today, etc. Some errands in Mintown and love it love seeing the Yeah it was it was great. But anyways, this whole I just.
This whole situation because especially watching like what the way that these big companies and these big production companies have used copyright to like screw over.
People in the past. I like, you know, I'm a big Marble fan, but like the way that the company runs is totally messed up. Like again, they use copyright to screw over a lot of their writers and to like kind of not give people credit for shit that we were doing in the past. And it's I don't know, it's just funny to see this now them being like, oh, nope, we can't use copyright for AI.
Yeah, I don't know.
I also have like the whole idea of like AI writing a script like that's not gonna work. It's not gonna be good.
No exactly.
So that was the question that I had for Francesca Ramsey in the episode. It was like, I believe the idea that AI would write a good script like a like like you know, good enough to be a show.
Is like a fantasy. And Francisca agrees.
She's like, right now, there has to be a human in the mix somewhere for a script to be good, and like we probably all I don't know if you ever did those parlor tricks where it's like, oh, we trained AI on a bunch of episodes of Seinfeld and then here's what they came up with, and the joke is that they're always janky and funny and don't make sense, Like the reason why we do those is because they're bad at it. But Francesca points out that while that might be the case now, that might not be the
case forever. And so like three years down the road, you know, is what if AI is can write a passable first draft, and so really looking to the future and sort of anticipating what's on the horizon, because you know, again she it's it's it's an inn. I keep referencing,
referencing the interview because it was a fascinating conversation. But she references how when in twenty twelve there the new contracts with the Writers' union talked about like content made solely for the Internet, but that was like in twenty twelve, there weren't really like shows on the internet like that, like maybe you had a web series, but it was
before streaming, and so people didn't know. People couldn't predict like how content made for the Internet would take off and like streaming would become a thing, and it kind of bit them in the ass, not being future forward, and so I think with the AI stuff, the writers and actors are trying to think, what's on the horizon, How will this be used to exploit my labor? How will this be used to like undercut me and underpay me?
Because that's unfortunately, that's how a lot of these executives think, like, how can we use this technology to like scam the people who make our jobs possible?
Exactly. Yeah, it's so there's so many scary things that could happen because this I feel like already wasn't there some movies they made that they like they like used CGI to like make like James Dean to be in it. It was some whole thing or like yeah, the most recent like Star Wars movie when they had like after Carrie Fisher died, they had like a CGI carry Fisher Like that was the whole thing where it's like it's
stealing people's likeness. How does that? That was weird? Like we already have that, and that's personally as somebody watching like watching those movies, it's kind of creepy, Like I don't know, I didn't like that when they did that in like Star Wars. I haven't seen any other movies where they've done it yet, but it's like it's a little weird, but yeah, it's it's it's scary to see that that's that's a possibility, and they definitely are like yeah, yeah.
So I've even I've heard of actors and musicians adding provisions into their contracts saying that like, don't use my likeness in AI, do not use technology to make AI, you know, fabricated versions of me. And I think we're gonna see more and more of that of creatives really getting particular about how their their usage and their likeness shows up even in death. Like there's just something very all to me personally about like Robin Williams is no
longer with us. Robin Williams died before AI took off. Using that fact that someone died before this technology was ubiquitous to be like, oh, we're gonna put them in, you know, after their death in a movie that they can't they can't agree to do, they can't say whether or not they do it.
That just feels really off to me.
Yeah, it is. It's it's really strange. It feels very like, I don't know, especially if you're an actor, like you're putting yourself in that role you are, you are putting your image, you're attaching your image to that movie or whatever. And it's these people aren't giving they're not giving their consent to be, you know, a part of whatever they're being put in now after their death. Yeah, it's it's
so weird. The music thing, too, I think is interesting because kind of going back to the tik tok and all this thing. One thing that I've been seeing lately
that has been annoying me. So there's all these like videos going around that are like have you ever wondered like this pop song but like we did a Frank Sinatra ay, and it's really like it's always presented as this like oh this is so cool, like mashing job, and it's like or you could have like found somebody to like do a cover of it in like a
jazz style or whatever like that. It's it's weird. I think, like I get the appeal of it, and I get the like especially like I've gotten a couple times where I've like seen on a re be like this is really cool and then been like huh, like maybe it is a little messed up that they're like having an ai do this when but yeah, it's it's strange and weird, and I think we should just let people be creative because that's part of being human and it's I don't know.
Yeah, I gotta take my cues from Prince on that one. Prince was notoriously against, like I'm a huge Prince Man by the way, I'm like obsessed with. Prince was notoriously against things like holograms or a digital likenesses of his image. And he has this line that says, that is the most demonic thing imaginable. Everything is as it is and as it should be. If I was meant to jam with Duke Ellington, we would have lived in the same age.
And that really speaks to me of like some things aren't and they weren't meant to be, and like some it can be like a cool parlor trick to be like, oh, this is what it would sound like if like Biggie Small's sang a Olivia Rodrigo song or whatever. Like I get it, I get it, I get it, But like some things are not because they were not meant to be.
I think some of those are good examples.
But yeah, now the question of the hour, bridget I'm on your show for the first time. I gotta know what's Elan done.
Now, glad you asked, Well, he's talking about wanting to remove all of the headlines, all of the text from news articles on Twitter, so that when you see a news article, all you would see is an image, no headline, no help or text. It's because he wants like journalists, this is what he says. He wants journalists to publish directly on Twitter, and like see that as a valuable thing to do. I think the outcome will be really obvious.
People already like barely click into the article to read what they're about, and I can only imagine that's going to happen even less with this move, further eroding the platform as a place to get accurate news and undermined news publishers as well. They don't have their name on them, that will undermine the ability for them to really get
their name out there. But I also think it's meant to sort of further blow up the division between journalists from reputable platforms and people who just like make content because Elon does not respect journalists or a free press.
That has been a notable thing about him. It's been a clear he has shown us that with his actions and behavior time and time again, and so I think that he wants internet personalities like you're Brian Cransnstein's and you're like, I don't know, right wing grievance s grifters
who use social media platforms. I think that by removing anything but the image, those people are going to be seen in the same way as like people from legit news platforms like Reuter's or something right, And so I think that, like, that's why he's doing it.
We hate it, hate to see it.
Yeah, that is weird. It is like it's a text based platform. People are mostly going for the you know. And also I guess again it is sort of frustrating that people just read the headlines. We'll repost things based on the headlines. But I don't know, this doesn't seem like the way to assault that this is a really weird move, weird to saying it.
Yeah, yeah, Oh, and he's maybe making his terrible jokes and like tweeting the word concerning with a thinking face emoji, which he loves to tweet to nobody because his followers might be fake. If that was true, there will be it will be very housewives of him to have fake followers, just saying going back to my point about how all of that our behavior can be understood to glens of housewives.
Mashable reports that a significant chunk of Elon Musk's more than one hundred and fifty three million followers on Twitter appear to be fake or at the very least inactive. Here's some stats. Forty two percent of Musk's followers have zero followers on their own account. Over seventy two percent of the users who follow Musk have less than ten followers on their accounts. More than sixty two point five
million of musk followers have zero tweets. More than one hundred million of Musk's followers have less than ten tweets. And another very interesting detail is the timing of his follow when he got followers, so he's currently the most followed person on Twitter, surprise surprise. When his followers created their accounts is pretty interesting. Musk completed his acquisition of
Twitter on October twenty seven, twenty twenty two. Out of all of Musk's current followers, more than twenty five percent, or thirty eight point nine million, were created on or
after that date. So that's suspicious, like, and I think it really, if we're to understand Mosqu's followers as a micropasm of Twitter itself and who's showing up there, it doesn't paint a very like this is a very damning report, and I think it's not just about his followers, but also about like who's using the platform, who's showing up on the platform in.
General, Like just very not good.
That's fun that's funny because I feel like recently, I just recently was like getting on Twitter again, mostly because I was affording TikTok because I was trying to avoid all this drama that was happening recently. But I like was on my Twitter again and like posted something for the first time in like a couple of months, and like the first account that liked it was some random like blue check mark account that I was like like with no Like, I was like, where did this person
come from? And then it was like going through it, there was just so many like blue check mark accounts that I was seeing and I was like, there's no way that this many people as many people sent to the like eight dollars or whatever. It's yeah, yeah, it adds up. It makes sense if that is the case.
Well, speaking of blue check marks. Apparently, in order to get blue check marks, Twitter is testing out a verification process for Twitter Blue to have your blue check that would involve submitting the front and back of your government ID along with the SELTE to verify your identity, to verify your account to get a blue check mark. So hopefully I don't need to say this, but please don't give Elon Musk a copy of your government ID. That is a terrible idea. Please don't do it.
Don't do it. Mistake more.
After a quick break, let's get right back into it.
Okay, So, speaking of Elon Musk, let's talk a little bit more about how unsafe autonomous vehicles can be. We talked about the dismal record on autonomous vehicles and crashes a few weeks ago. Well, the technology on those vehicles does a worse job of identifying people with darker skin and children as pedestrians, so pretty concerning. This is according to new research from doctor Jizong from the Department of Infomatics at King's College, who assessed eight artificial intelligence powered
pedestrian detection systems used in autonomous vehicle research. Their research found that detection accuracy for adults was almost twenty percent higher than it was for children, and just over seven point five percent more accurate for light skin pedestrians compared to their darker skin counterparts. The researchers also found that this bias toward darker skin pedestrians increases significantly under scenarios of low contrast and low brightness, posing increased issues for
night time driving. So basically, children and people with darker skin are less likely to be recognized as pedestrians by autonomous driving vehicles. Pretty scary to me, I think, especially the thing about kids is that if you spent any time at all around kids, they like, you really can't trust a little one to not dart out in an unexpected way.
And so if these vehicles are already less likely.
To recognize them as pedestrians, and then add on the fact that they're squirmy little six year olds or whatever, it paints a pretty terrifying picture. And you know, it should be said that black women technologists and researchers I'm thinking of doctor Sophia Noble and doctor Joe bol Lawini have been saying this for a really long time, and it actually points back to the reason why I was inspired to start this podcast.
In the first place.
Side note, there was a much must read Rolling Stone profile of how black women like them have been trying to sound the alarm about II for years, and it is just a really good reminder that inclusion in technology is not important because it's like the right thing to do or the nice thing to do. It is, but that's not the only reason it matters. It is because there are real consequences when the spaces that where technology
is made are not inclusive. Right, When the people who make technology like autonomous vehicles are too homogenous or they're not thinking enough about being inclusive and different kinds of people, they're not then testing them and training them on a diverse enough data set, right, And so it's this weird thing where the erasure or lack of inclusion means that we aren't just not represented in the rooms of the
technology is being made. In turn, that erasure can actually get us killed and have real world light or death consequences. As doctor Zong explains, fairness when it comes to AI is when an AI system treats privileged and underprivileged groups the same, which is not what is happening when it comes to autonomous vehicles. Car manufacturers don't release the details of the software they use for pedestrian to tech, but they are usually built upon the same open source systems
we used in our research. We can be quite sure that they are running into the same issues of bias. While the impact of unfair AI systems is already well documented, from AI recruitment software favoring male applicants to facial recognition software being less accurate for black women than for white men, the danger that self driving cars can pose is acute. Before minority individuals may have been denied vital services. Now they might face severe injury. And I think that is
exactly right. It is like one of the reasons why I will scream from the rooftops that this technology. It's so easy to think of technology like AI, like it's some kind of robot computer brain that is like acting on a different plane than we humans are. But in reality, that technology is trained and built and designed by humans, and so it's going to be replicating the very same
biases that we know that humans have. And so if that is the case, and these biases come into play where the technology is trained to not fully recognized children or people of color as human as pedestrians, that autonomous vehicles should not hit that is a problem.
Yeah, yeah, I think it's honestly, like all of this, it's not a coincidence that this is happening at the same time, Like we're having this conversation about like facial recognition and facial because you did that story last week about the woman who is like, you know, arrested for a crime she didn't commit. Because these facial recognition systems they are best of to begin with, I don't think
we should be having them to begin with. But that's another point would be it's like they're they're being designed a specific way, They're being designed with a specific type of person in mind, and oftentimes it's very exclusionary. And yeah, again this is this is another example that was that is going to lead to people being killed and that that's terrifying.
Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying.
I don't know, I don't know if you've ever been in a self driving car, but in a self driving tessela specifically, but I have this experience and it is not fun. It is very scary. That was my personal experience. I'm sure other people, but it is I don't think that that technology is anywhere near safe enough for people to be using a public.
But yeah, Joey, I never have, nor would I ever like this is it was. I don't need choice, Oh my god, I want to know everything, Like I don't. I'm sure people listening are like, actually it's safe for them.
I don't care. It's it is not for me.
I have.
It's a personal choice. What was it like?
This was from my experience. Okay, this is a couple of years ago, so it's a little but I just remember like it was super rocky. It was like very there were a lot of like clothes cop we were we weren't like we were in like a pretty empty kind of shriek, but it was just like very sharp turns. I it's just and again, this was a couple of years ago. This is my experience. I'm not saying this is I'm sure somebody is gonna be like, actually, it's really great. I'm sure whatever. This is not me trying
to slander Tasla. But I my personal experience from the one time that I was in a self driving car, from the time that I was in a Tesla and the person driving it went, hey, actually do turn on this self driving feature, and then did it was really scary, and I would not do that again, and I would not recommend that you could do that.
So yeah, yeah that I mean, I it's just not for me.
There are certain things I don't need to see the stats on the safety, like self driving cars not for me. Uh, small planes not for me. There are just certain things. It's like we've we've assessed it, we've made a call.
Not for us, just being in a car that is already so dangerous, like oh my god, Yes, we don't really think about that because we use cars for like everything. We live in a very car based kind of society. But it's it's it is like, it's very dangerous to be in a car, and I don't know, I don't really want to add another layer to that of another reason that I could get killed or somebody else could get killed because of a vehicle that I'm in.
Yeah, let's there are plenty of ways to die.
I don't need to add one to the I don't need to add pylon to already a high list.
More.
After a quick break, let's get right back into it.
Okay, So this might sound like kind of a niche story, but I promise you have a bigger point in why I'm mentioning it. Okay, So did you ever do you ever read auto Straddle the outlet?
I do, Yes, that was I think one of the first like queer publications I remember learning like hearing about Yeah.
Yes, okay, same. So it is an independent LGBTQ media outlet. It is very influential publish as some of the most thoughtful writing from queer voices and has for the last fourteen years. I would put it up there in terms of like foundational media outlets. I'd put it up there with like Bitch Magazine, The hair Pen, and Jazz Bell in terms of being foundational parts of the Internet of Internet discourse from marginalized perspectives and voices. The Hairpin and
Bitch Magazine have sadly closed their doors. Rip jess Bell still exists, but like as a shell of its former self. So, like many independent media outlets, it had a lot of economic ups and downs and struggles. It seemed like Autostraddle was either going to fold or be sold or something like. They've had a lot of issues and it turns out it's the latter.
Defector.
Media reports that auto Straddle is being acquired by the two year old queer wellness company for them. In an all equity deal, auto Straddle would maintain their editorial independence.
According to a press release from for Them, for Them plans to continue to build on Auto Strale's editorial work like podcasts and for what it's worth, it sounds like the staff at auto Straddle may be kind of cautiously optimistic because like, at least this move avoids a shutdown on the site, at least they get to still be paid to make their content. Totally sounds like it's something
that they're like cautiously optimistic about. And this is all happening at a time when independent media, let alone independent queer focus media, is really suffering, and so I think it's definitely good to be funding these vital voices and perspectives for them. I was not a company that I was really familiar with before this story. You know, they seem like a cool company. They have all the right branding, They use all the right like words and phrases in
their in their on their website. Their flagship product is a chessbinder, but they also offer a subscription and membership. So it sounds like for Them's plan was to bundle Auto Straddle's existing bonus subscription plan into their membership program, which includes access to a gender tracking app, which they describe as quote the first gender tracking app for real
time gender evolution using biometric data. So it sounds like this app was meant to be something where it was like you would put in in information about how you're feeling about your gender so that you can track your evolution of like where you're at with your own understanding of and relationship to your gender. But the use of the word biometric data to describe this process is like red flag city to me, and taking a look at the app, their privacy policy is like pretty minimal. It's
like pretty scant. As we discussed in our episode around Betterhelp, a lot of these apps that seem great on their face, and maybe are great on their face when you actually look down into them, what they're actually doing is taking pretty intimate information and data about us and selling it.
To be clear, this is not the kind of information that I would suggest anyone to share with an app that does not have a clear and robust privacy policy, And even then it's not I wouldn't suggest that people share this kind of information with an app.
Yeah, I so I have heard it for them before this because I because of the way data works, I'm somebody, I'm non binary, I'm transmit esclin. I do buind on occasion. I actually was considering buying a binder from them. I still might, we'll see, but I've heard good things. Again, I've heard good things about their binders. I'm sure that's great.
But I get targeted ads from them a lot, and I get a lot of like these companies that are like targeted for queer people, for trans people, for non binary people, and yeah, that that really the whole Like having an app to track your gender journey that seems really nice. But also, like I said this in this Spincy episode that I was on, I said this before, like we're living at a time when there's like this
active attack on trans people. Like I think any sort of situation where you are, and again, like I'm again, I'm somebody who's I'm trans. I talk a lot about being transce I talk a lot about being queer. I'm very open about that. But like, you don't necessarily want people to like be tracking that, Like you don't necessarily want these like third party companies to be tracking that there's so many ways that could go wrong that to
sound like I don't know. I feel like when I say that, people are like, it's a little conspiracy theorist, but.
I'm like, no, it's just being paucious.
If you haven't martialized identity, there's a very good chant Like, yeah, no, I kind of want to keep that under apps much I can, because like I could be targeted for that. Yeah, that is so weird, especially but it's like you can journal. I journal, I'm a journaling I'm I draw a lot. And again, like I I deal with gender dysphoria and and all that, all the things that come up being you know, a trans person. There's a lot of outlets that are that are not you putting more information into
some random company. But yeah, I get And this is the thing that I think is so frustrating. And there's all there's always these kind of things that pop up where it's like a you know, company that is for queer people by queer people, and it seems good and theory, but it's like, what are they gonna do with that data?
Again?
Yeah, Like going back to Better Help, it's like a similar thing where it seems like a great idea, but I yeah, and again I think like having a company that those binders that is run by queer people and is run by transmask people in particular, Like that's really important because there are people who are going to understand what's needed and how like how different ways it's gonna
affect you. But it's like, yeah, that that seems concerning any sort of like it's also having like a publication attached to some sort of like corporation or capitalist structure seems you know, concerning. But that's a whole other conversation.
Yeah, well that's definitely part of it.
And I think I think that's probably why the one of the reasons why the gender tracking app hit me wrong is that what you said does not sound.
Conspiratorial to me.
It's just unfortunately the reality that like marginalized people are under attack in this country and abroad globally as well, and so having a company that again it's like like this is no shade to them, like they seem like
a cool company by all accounts. I'm not trying to to apply nefarious intent here, but I'm just keeping it real, which is that like if you are asking trans people and non binary people and clear people to put intimate information about their gender and their identity into an app, you better you need a really robust privacy policy, And if you don't have one, to me, that sounds like you're not really attuned to the realities of what people what the community is up against right now.
Because yeah, I just so like that's one two.
I think that, you know, I don't want to make this about for them or auto staddle specifically, because I do think it seems like a genuine partnership with possibility.
But our communities really do deserve.
Better than to only be able to get thoughtful stories that really center our perspectives if also our complex understandings and relationships to gender and sexuality and identity are turned into a product commodified mind and taken from us to make someone else money. Like and that is what that gender tracking app sounded like to me when I first heard it, Like our experiences are so much more thoughtful and complex and complicated and hard and fucked up and
beautiful and joys. It's like there's so much there, and there ares there. They don't belong to some third party app or they don't exist, like we're not grappling with them. Just to have them taken from us so that someone else can profit. And I feel like that relationship, I feel like I really take issue with like that being presented to us as liberation, as something that is good.
Yeah, no, I totally agree. I mean it's I feel like we have this conversation every pride about like corporations being involved in pride, and it's the whole idea of like rainbow capitalism and all of that. It's it's definitely that the end kind of end game of all of this is making somebody a lot of money. Again, It's it's nice to it's nice to have resource. It's nice to have you know, resources for talking about gender identity and sexuality and all that that are you know, run
by queer people aimed towards queer people. But yeah, I don't want somebody to be like capitalizing off of my experience just existing as somebody like who is not cis gender, who is not straight like that that it's very weird. Yeah, because then yeah, because how much of a how much of a obviously not in this situation because they are like a queer company, but like other companies that are
like positioning themselves as like allies. But then if you're putting people in danger because you're not protecting their data, how much of an ally are you or how much of like an activist for your community are you If you're actively putting people in danger. This whole situation just seems very shady to me.
Yeah, allies, active allyship, this is gonna sound nerdy as hell, but it's what I believe. Like, you can't be an active allyship is protecting my I have see and protecting my data as a marginalized person.
Right, Active allyship is do not track.
Active allyship is like when we're talking about tech, like it's not just like, yeah, give us your information. We'll probably keep it safe. We don't really have a policy about it, but we'll do our best. Like that is not allyship And that's not That is not like a community of safety that I want to be part of. And I think that we are both in good company.
Because after some outcry for them did change the wording on their site, Defector Reports for them has removed the phrase biometric data from its gender tracking apps ad copy. In an Instagram comment addressing the concerns, they characterize the app as more of a reflective journal and said biometric data is likely the wrong word to be used here, and we will course correct to not raise false alarms. So I get that, Like, I'm glad that they're backing
away from that. I feel like the word biometric data has such a specific like.
Journal every morning I do my morning pages, I can't.
I'm not like writing biometric data like that has such a specific definition and connotation that I have to imagine that someone somewhere thought that was going to be like a buzzy phrase to get to make these like venture capital funders happy or.
Excited, and that's how it got in there.
But it's why it's wild to me that they could be like, oh, we didn't really mean biometric data. We really met more like feelings like a journal, because like biometric data is like a very specific thing.
Yeah, that's so weird, especially like gender and sexuality. They're such complicated experiences and there's such personal experiences for people like I don't know, that's not necessarily something I want on like an Allienka, that's the thing I keep in my journal. That's for me, don't. I don't want anybody like it is a Yeah, that is a weird way
of putting it. It also is zero I got it, especially in the middle of this whole like anti trans backlash, so much of which revolves around sort of of these weird you know, the thing that keep coming up to people being like, oh, it's just biology, is just science, and none of these people have actually, you know, studied
biology and whatever. But that being said, like, it's it's such a like it also is almost kind of like a buzzword for like the other side too, where it's like, why are you focusing so much on like the biologic I'm never I'm not waking up and being like, hm, thinking about my gender identity right now, Like I'm not like how does this work biochemically? Or that's such a weird way of like putting it.
It's very weird.
Yeah.
So here's one other reason why I think this story is important because I think it says something about the state of media more generally right now, say, the media is like very sad and very scary to me, Like I don't know anybody who works in media or journalism who is not kind of having a tough time of it right now. You know, for a while, I feel like we were told that the path forward was venture capital funding, you know VC, a rich funder come by and pump's a media brand full of cash and then
profit right. Well, not if you're BuzzFeed News or Vice or etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, like any any number of the different media outlets that got fat VC funding and then
shut down. The journalists at Vice who were all laid off recently, like Samantha Cole, who's one of my favorite journalists who writes about the intersection of sex on the Internet, started their own independent media brand called for for Media recently, and I know that a lot of folks are pivoting to things like that, like like worker and writer owned media collaboratives or independent you know, media entities, and they're privoting toward things like substack, which I have my issues
with but I get it, and Patreon myself included. And so I think that we're coming to see that if you want to be making media and like telling stories not just but also about marginalized voices, that center marginalized voices, and you want to do it independently, I think that the way forward seems to be not attaching yourself to an outlet that is going to financially mismanage things or like be beholden to VC expectations because they took that big VC funding.
I think that this is like a.
Larger story about the precarity of independent media right now. And I think more and more folks like writers and creators and podcasters and journalists that you love are going to start doing their own things. And what's funny to me about that is like, as I'm kind of taking that journey myself, it feels very like precarious and unstable, trying to pin your livelihood on Patreon or substack, subscriptions or whatever.
But here's the thing, the.
Alternative of being at like a big VC backed media company right now also feels unstable and uncertain and precarious. So like, you may as well if it's going to be precarious regardless, you may as well be like fuck it. I'll at least be the person who's in charge of my precarious feeling destiny and like the sort of my
own ship. And so I don't know all the auto straddle thing, it signals to me that we are really experimenting with paths forward of how we have a media climate that is sustainable, And I don't know maybe like I don't want to be all doom and gloom. Maybe this reshapes the space for the better.
Yeah, I mean, as somebody who's in like the early parts of their career is like a media person, it is. It is. I mean when I was getting Get Too and it was gonna be best, but it's it's scary. And I mean I always say, like the things that I really was watching when I was in high school in college that really like inspired me were things that were coming from like Vice and BuzzFeed and teen Vogue was a big one. I remember, like with the big teen Vogue sort of shift happened. That was like a
big thing. And it's it's it's so weird to see now like a lot of these sites coming down are like these kind of yeah, like BuzzFeed and Vice sort of falling apart. And also yeah, like a lot of my mentors, a lot of my journalism like mentors have come from these companies too, and I'm like, I don't know, I'm super grateful for like them and everything they sort
of taught me and everything I've learned from them. But it's it's it is sort of like interesting to be like seeing people that have gone through that and now being somebody who's getting into the media industry. And yeah, I sort of straddled the line between like production and journalism too, where like again I work at iHeart. I am an iHeart employee, so like I do work for a big media company. But yeah, it is is definitely
a strange time for media, when is it not? But it's yeah, and yeah, I guess we'll see.
Yeah, it's funny that you talk about where your mentors were when before you got into the media game, because I might be a little bit older than you. My mentors all came from an era that, like I was like too young to have been in any kind of
meaningful profession. But the era of like the late nineties early aughts were like it seemed like being in media was like the fucking best where it was like, yeah, you get like a dollar per word, and you like get to go to all these swinky parties, like the like the era.
Of like City, Yeah, yeah, yeah, who was that?
Was it?
G Magazine?
Who was the Kennedy that had his own like vanity magazine? Okay, it was so John F. Kennedy Junior before he died had a vanity magazine. Called George, and like it was just the time of like glossy magazines and like big parties and like all the magazines seemed really cool.
It was like if you ever watched a movie.
Like I feel like, Also, it's no coincidence that that coincided with the aughts, where the cool career in like movies was I'm a journalist, like The Devil Wears Prada and How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days. That was that was an era that we will probably never see again in media where that you know, it just was flush with cash and it was like the coolest time, and it's a time that like most people, it's like a it's like a bygone era, Like what you would make for a story then and what you would make
for a story now is like night and day. Like I was watching Almost Famous the other day, and that kid is getting a cover like a feature in Rolling Stone and they're gonna pay him like seven thousand dollars or something, which like today he paid three hundred dollars. Like that was supposed to be the seventies, you know. So it's it is a very weird field and always has been.
And yeah, it's just.
I'm I don't know the answer. Maybe it is Patreon and substack. Maybe it is starting your own media brands. Maybe it is you know, queer binder companies acquiring your brand. Like we'll see, it's just everyone's doing what they.
Can real Oh man, it's so funny because like, yeah, I also grew up like watching yea like Devil's Words, Prada and a bit Young for Sex in the City. I sort of missed that, but like that whole era of like yeah, I was always the you know, the New York journalist kind of thing, and I just it's
like it's just such a different world. Like I that never like crossed my mind that that would be me, like that that would be my life, because yeah, I got like what I was starting to get interested in journalism. In the media, it was always like yep, you're gonna have to freelance, You're gonna have to like you're gonna be like starving artists kind of thing from all and I don't know, it was it was very bleak. Yeah,
I guess, I guess we'll see. Oh yeah, almost famous is always the one that pisses me off because I'm like I that would never happen it's.
Never none of it like not yeah. Okay.
So one last thing, which is that I am celebrating today a little bit. I think slash hope question mark maybe that people probably think of me as like a pretty thoughtful, measured person and not someone who is really headyuh not someone who would revel in the downfall of her enemies. Luckily, that means if you think that way, I have fooled you into thinking that's the kind of
person that I am. Because I am celebrating a little bit today because enemy of the pod, Walter Weeks and Myron Gains of the podcast Fresh in Fit were demonetized on YouTube this week. That does not mean that their content is going away, don't I wish. It just means that they will not be able to earn money from it on YouTube. Fresh and Fit is one plank of
what is sometimes called the manosphere. Basically, just like the misogynistic man who should not have podcast brigade, think of them that way anytime you've ever thought to yourself, like, why does this man have a podcast that is them?
Like they are in that group.
When they got the news that their YouTube was going to be demonetized, they made a very tearful video about how hard it was to be demonetized and how it wasn't about the money for them, it was about wanting to have a platform to help people. Yeah, if by help people you mean stoke their worst instincts for personal gain, because that is what the guys at Fresh and Fit
podcast do. They have said that they believe they were demonetized because of their quote controversial takes, but my years of platform accountability work urging platforms like YouTube the takedown content that breaks community guidelines tells me that that is probably not likely. I just do not think that that is the reason why they were removed. Joey, it is
your first time recording with me. I had written out a whole thing and that I was showing it to producer Mike, and Michael was like, this might be a little much for their first recording with you, Like, you don't want to make Joey fully think that, like they
are recording with a crazy person, a petty betty. So I have a lot more to say about Fresh and Fit if you want to hear my full, full, uncensored take on why Fresh and Fit is a boil on the ass of the Internet and why I believe they were actually demonetized from YouTube and why this is something that we should all be celebrating. Please check out the Patriot. I have a lot to say. I've written about it for the Nation. I will throw the link to my Nation piece about fresh and Fit in the in the
show notes. But yeah, this is personal for me. If you can't tell, I haven't there. I try really hard to when we cover unsavory characters, I try very hard to just make it about like what they say, what they do, and not reveal my personal thoughts on them. But this is different. I have a real personal distaste for these two. So if you want to know more about how I feel, check out the Patreon.
I yeah, no, I am. I'm I will admit that I am a very petty yeah there, And I would be like, I open our conversation being like, do you want to hear my tiktokter on?
I had to gauge it.
I was like, I don't know how petty they are, Like, let's well have to Like now that I know I can, I can like, Okay, this is good to know, but.
It's good to know. Joey, thank you so much for being here. Where can folks, keep up with what you're doing for sure.
You can find me on Twitter for who knows how long and Instagram at Pat not Pratt. That is p A T T not n O T p r a T T Pratt. My last name is Pat and people often misspell it as Pratt.
So that was that was how I did the same mistake.
Okay, I don't think I've ever had like an employer get it right on the PIRG.
What is it? Like?
Why did why is it? Why? Why does this happen?
I don't know. I think it's just because it's such a like people are so used to saying Pratt. They're like they just look over it. It's okay. There was there was a brief period of time where I kept getting asked if I was related to Chris Pratt, and then once he once it kind of fell out of favor. People stopped doing that, which was nice. But who's weird anyways, Yeah, you can find me on Twitter and Instagram. I'm also
occasionally on stuff. Mom never told you of a new show that's coming out in a couple of months that I don't think I could talk about yet, but I probably will at some point.
Anyways, yeah, and as always, thanks to you for listening. Please keep in touch.
You can check us out on Pagereon, find me on social, and please be well. If you're looking for ways to support the show, check out our merch store at tangodi dot com slash store. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech, or just want to say hi, You can reach us at Hello at tegody dot com. You can also find transcripts for today's episode at tenggody dot com. There Are No Girls on the Internet was created by.
Me Bridget Tod.
It's a production of iHeartRadio and Unboss Creative, edited by Joey pat Jonathan Strickland is our executive producer. Tari Harrison is our producer and sound engineer. Michael Almada is our contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.