Lovett or Leave It - Retweet to Impeach

Episode Date: May 11, 2018

Facebook and Twitter are transforming our politics. Marginalized voices can find an audience, but so can extremists. We've given up privacy while also taking down barriers that divide people and protect the powerful. This week, in a special episode that combines the best moments from our live shows in Baltimore and Columbus, Jon is joined by experts, activists, journalists, and comedians to talk about social media and how it is totally perfect and making everything better, no exceptions. Special guests: Dr. Jennifer Golbeck, Ashley Feinberg, and Deray Mckesson in Baltimore and Dr. Robert Bond, Ana Marie Cox, and Ziwe Fumudoh in Columbus. Like, fave, rate, poke, survive.

Welcome to Love It or Leave It. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm here with Jon and Tommy. We're in the studio. Hi, Jon. Hi, Jon. He's the only one. Tommy's the only one who could say hi, Jon, twice. Hi, Jon. Hi, Jon. There you go. We're here because we have a very special Love It or Leave It this week. We did live shows in Baltimore and Columbus. It'd be easier to release just one, but we thought, why not combine them and give you a super cut of the best of both of those shows? It's really awesome. We focused on social media.

Which is perfect. And the ways it's influencing our politics 100% for the better. It was just an hour and a half of everyone being like, it's wonderful. I can't believe how people are brought together by this medium. And no one is a toxic monster. We definitely are not in a fever swamp of human beings' worst impulses. But before we get to the show, we also wanted to talk about something we're doing right now. We launched the Crooked Eight a while back to focus on eight House races in California that could tip the balance in taking back the House of Representatives.

The 2018 election is the most important midterm elections in our lifetimes. It's a chance to stop the Trump agenda and hold this administration accountable. Something I think John's in favor of. Yeah. Tommy's on the fence. Yeah. Well, you know, let me know. So we need to flip.

It could be the most important election of our lifetime. Yeah, we won't. It could be more important than a president. It might be more important than other presidentials because, you know, we have another two years of unfettered Trump. I don't know. I don't know if we're going to make it. I'm sick of you people spouting off this talk. You don't know how long you're going to live. That's true.

Also, I feel like we will only realize it was the most important election in American history if we lose. That's true. So let's not get there. Let's not find out. We need to flip 24 seats to win the House. Eight of the best districts at Target are right here where Crooked Media lives.

The golden state. Surrounding our environs. We're surrounded by these districts. Right? The golden state. Right where we live. Surrounding our environments. We're surrounded by these districts. We are surrounded by these districts. They're in Orange County. They're north of Los Angeles. They're in the Central Valley. Get them out of here. Get those Republicans out of here.

In seven of these races, Republicans are vulnerable because they represent districts that supported Clinton over Trump in 2016. We also added Devin Nunes. Why? Because he's a fucking monster. Because someone that dumb shouldn't win an election ever. Because Devin Nunes always looks like he was just visited by the ghost of Christmas future. But he learned nothing from it.

He's a terrible lackey. He's attacking the rule of law. And Devin Nunes has got to go. So that district's a little bit tougher, but we're targeting him too. The California primary is less than a month away on June 5th. So we're asking all friends of the pod out there to help us back up the eventual Democratic challengers and build a ground game

that will kick the Crooked Eight out of office. Yes. So you go to crooked.com slash crooked eight. Thanks for everything you're doing. Can I just add one more thing? Please. Primary is June 5th. Registration deadline to vote in the primary is May 21st.

It is incredibly important that you vote in the California primary because some of these primaries have so many Democratic candidates. And because there's a top two primary system in California, there's a possibility that in some of these races, we end up with the top two candidates as Republicans because Democrats split all the votes. The best way to avoid this is to have as many fucking Democrats voting in the primary as possible. It is so important if you live in California to register by the May 21st and to vote in the primary. I would say this is definitely the most important primary you can vote in a

midterm in our lifetimes. And look, there's a lot of we've talked about how this primary system could mean Democrats get shut out and we want the best candidates to stay in the race and people who maybe don't have a shot to get out. That's that's politics of it. But what you can do, you can vote in the primary and your vote can help make sure that doesn't happen, no matter what the politicians do, no matter who stays in and who doesn't. Your vote helps. I have an idea for you. What?

What if every Love It or Leave It listener called, texted, or emailed 10 friends to say, hey, are you registered to vote? And if they're not, get them registered, and then get them to the polls. So we've got to get a Democrat on the ballot in every district, and then we have to make sure that in every district we are ready to hit the ground running after this primary is over so that we can win these districts. We need 24 seats, eight of them in California. That's why we're doing the Crooked Eight.

Crooked.com slash Crooked Eight. Let's win the fucking house. Yeah. Woo. All right. Let's start the show. We're going to start in Baltimore, then head over to Columbus. It's great.

So let's get into it. Start the show. Start it. Let's start the show. We're going to start in Baltimore, then head over to Columbus. It's great. So let's get into it. Start the show. Start it. Let's go. What is up, Baltimore? Charm City. What does it mean? I know one thing about Cal Ripken Jr. And I'm going to tell you what it is. Here's what I know about Cal Ripken Jr. And I'm gonna tell you what it is.

Here's what I know about Cal Ripken Jr. I know that nobody has gotten more good press for doing something that millions of people do all the time, which is not skip work for no reason. Oh, wow. Roll out the red carpet, shut the city down, this guy kept going to work. My god, he kept working into his 40s. So usually every week we break down the news as it happens, but tonight we're gonna step back and focus on a specific

topic that has changed our entire political landscape in just a decade. It gave us Obama, it gave us Trump, it gave us Me Too, it gave us has Justine landed yet? It has lifted up marginalized voices. It has lifted up the worst human beings in our society. Of course, I am talking about social media. So look, we have always had fake news and demagogues and partisan media and racist memes and angry conversations. But then we decided, what if we concentrated it into a device we carried around all the time? All day, every day. Injecting ourselves with political meth every 20 minutes forever.

It's a big experiment, and I would say so far the results are mixed. So tonight we are going to crack open the double blind study just to check on the patients midway through and we're going to talk about the way social media has changed our politics in this era in which we are all drowning in it. Shit. So tonight in Baltimore, just like we did last night in Columbus, we are going to talk about social media, and then we're going to cut it together into one episode extravaganza. So let me bring out our panelists.

We have a fantastic panel to help us break down that issue. She is a pioneer in social media research and science communication. She began studying social media from the moment it emerged on the web a decade ago and is one of the foremost experts in the field. Please welcome Dr. Jennifer Golbeck. How are you? I'm great. Glad to be here. When was the last time you checked Twitter?

Right before I came on stage. Yeah. It checks out. All right. She is a former writer at Gawker and now a senior writer at the Huffington Post. Please welcome Ashley Feinberg. Hi, Ashley. How you doing?

I'm doing all right. How are you? I'm good. Good to hear. When was the last time you were on Twitter? Seven seconds ago. Good to hear. When was the last time you were on Twitter? Seven seconds ago. Perfect. Yeah.

And he is a renowned activist, friend of the pod, host of Pod Save the People, DeRay McKesson. Baltimore's own. Hi, DeRay. All right. Let's get into it. What a series of tubes. The Internet. It's like screaming at your television, but it screams back and it follows you everywhere. So it's a big topic, but I wanted to start off by talking about how the internet has put more power into people's hands.

Because I think ultimately, and social media, because I think ultimately that is both the positive and negative rolled into one, and the consequence we're all dealing with all the time. You know, we've seen the rise of social movements from the Arab Spring to Black Lives Matter to the March for Our Lives, but we've also seen the elevation of some of the most heinous voices in American history. You know, Reddit and 4chan are a bit like South America in 1950. A great place to hide Nazis. Dr. Goldbeck, Jen, so you've been studying social media from the beginning. We obviously all are on it all the time. We talk about it all the time. What do you think people don't understand about the impact of social media on politics?

It's so interesting. Like, I was just taking my class back. We were looking at Obama's 2008 campaign. And, like, these great videos that he posts, I still get all, like, tingly when I watch his videos from 2008. that he posts, I still get all like tingly when I watch his videos from 2008. It's hard to imagine though, like how disconnected we were before that. And Trump really seems to me as the outcome of social media on politics, because it gave us this way to get closer to politicians, to let them speak to us. And we felt like we could speak to them. And Trump was, I mean, he was around running for president back. How many times has he run for president? Somebody probably knows, a bunch,

right? And he was- Or at least like flirted with it. Yeah. I mean, he's been given speeches about it and he really found Twitter. And I think he's a very effective Twitter user, whatever you want to say about him, and found a way to speak to an audience that he wouldn't have had without social media. And I think that's the outcome of where things have progressed over the last 10 years. Now you've got him saying exactly what people want to hear. The media wouldn't have covered that normally, right? They would have been like, this dude's crazy. Like we're not printing any of that, but now he can talk to people like that. And it worked. DeRay, so on the flip side of that, you're somebody who's helped organize

people online through Facebook, through Twitter somebody who's helped organize people online through Facebook, through Twitter. It's where a lot of marches have been organized. It's the way a lot of people who have been marginalized have been able to connect and share their stories. But at the same time, I know that you have seen a lot of hate directed at you. All in all, do you feel as though the kind of toxic voices that we all see every day are just the price of admission for what's ultimately positive?

Or do you think that it's been doing more harm than good? I believe in the platforms. And I take it seriously. You think about Twitter. The first person ever permanently banned from Twitter was banned for raising money to try and get me killed. So I like, you know, platforms have problems. But there are a lot of bad people who are coming. There are a lot of bad

people coming to the platforms. I'm not convinced the platforms are like making people bad. So maybe you disagree. But so I think that's it. And we were just talking about the NRA at the NRA convention this year. They put my picture up at the convention right before Trump and Pence spoke. And like, because we put that on Twitter, and we're able to now just figure out like why that happened and bring attention to it in ways that like, if not for those platforms, we'd be screwed. And you think about Missouri in the beginning, in 2014, if we had not had Twitter, Missouri would have tried to convince you that we didn't exist. Like they were like, those people aren't really there. And it's like, no, we're here and we're pushing back. And Twitter was was big for that so I'm mindful of the safety part of it and mindful that like

the platforms I don't think are making people bad I think that some not great people are coming to the platforms Ashley you tweeted a video on the anniversary of Ted Cruz elbowing his wife accidentally in the face three times. It's a wonderful piece of found footage. In it, it's a very awkward hug. He's trying to hug his father, someone Donald Trump accused of killing John F. Kennedy, an accusation for which Trump has never apologized. Put that aside.

And in it, he goes to hug his father and then boom catches the wife. Boom catches her again. And then catches her a third time. Ashley, how did you know it was the anniversary of that event? And what can it tell us about how you make the most of being online? First, I have two issues with the way you presented the question. The first is that I don't think if you elbow your wife three times in the face, you can qualify it as an accident. I'm not saying that Ted Cruz is actively trying to harm Heidi, but he knew she was there after

the first time. And then second, I mean, I don't know if you're familiar with Time Hop. It is the ever since Trump got elected, it's the worst possible thing to look at first thing in the morning, which I always immediately do. And so on this day last year, had tweeted on the anniversary of this event so I knew it was round two that's how I knew it's funny it's like two different ways of being in the past I feel like Jen is watching old videos of Obama like

Tom Cruise watch videos of his son in Minority Report. You know? Like just trying to feel whatever that was. And Ashley you're playing a different game. It still brings me inner peace in the same way I think. So Jen, you wrote a book called Trust on the World Wide Web. It was four pages. No, it was longer. It was a real book. I'm just kidding.

So, you know, DeRay is talking about the ways in which people have organized and been able to call attention to things at the same time there are people issuing these threats. You don't know whether they're real or not. You never know what's real or not anymore. What was your thesis? I mean, what did you come to discover when you were talking about the way people interact and the way people try to trust each other on social media? So everything's crazy now. Let me just, two years ago, everything I said made sense

and now none of it makes sense anymore. So just like preferencing that. The internet was a place... I know, I know, I still like I wake up in the middle of the night and kind of have palpitations and need to take a drink and go back to bed. Yeah, you know the internet was a place where like all these conspiracy theories, right, I mean they've been around for a long time. We've seen them a lot more in the last year, but they were out there, right? All this stuff was out there. In my dissertation, right, 2005, so very early days, there was a website out there that said,

how many cows are in Texas? There are no cows. Aliens have abducted all the cows and replaced them with alien cow doppelgangers that eventually will rise up, right? And my dissertation was like, how do we prove that this stuff is not true? And you could do that by dissertation was like how do we prove that this stuff is not true and you could do that by Leveraging the power of the internet and who you trusted and these social networks that we were starting to build it all seemed like and And continued out of that to seem like a place where we were going to be able to debunk these Conspiracies to crowdsource the truth and then it all went really wrong Like why what went wrong?

So I have to figure it out because it's all it's um it's having offline implications. We're working really hard on that. Oh God we're working on it. Well you know I think it's a combination of things I think part of it is the platforms and I agree I don't think platforms make people evil I don't think it makes people crazy of things. I think part of it is the platforms. And I agree, I don't think platforms make people evil. I don't think it makes people crazy. But it allows you to find a bunch of people who are gonna reinforce what you're gonna say. And for the people who believe in crazy stuff,

and this is on the liberal side and the conservative side, you are less likely, especially if it's like a conspiracy theory, if people give you evidence to show that it's wrong, you're more likely to believe the conspiracy after that, right? Like, evidence pushes you in the wrong direction, whether it's vaccines, if you're an anti-vaxxer, or if it's Ted Cruz, we got a lot of conspiracy theories about him.

If someone gives you evidence, his dad, or him, right? I mean, he's supposed to be the Zodiac Killer. Yeah. So far, I don't know how much we're helping. But if you find a whole bunch of people who agree with you and add more evidence, that helps, right? And that bleeds into what's now a very polarized politics, right? And so if I'm super left-wing or super right-wing, I find my people there. My voice gets elevated among those people, and it's easy for me to shut the rest out.

It's easy for me to find people to shut the rest out. So we took this turn from we are working to build the truth and to find more information to I'm going to find my truth and my more information and push the rest away. So I think it's a combination of social media and this general polarization of American society that have kind of played together to make it a really terrible place some of the time. Ashley, you are someone who I love to follow on Twitter in part because you keep track of the extremes

and the people who swim in the extremes and then come back to the non-extreme part and just say, hey, I'm here. I'm part of the real world, but I dabble in the crazy. You know, you follow, we can talk about it later, but you keep a good eye on Donald Trump Jr. Yes, I do. And you see, and you watch him kind of play in the fever swamps of the right and then come back.

Do you think that people that get steeped in that world, is it just representing what they think? Or does participating in that conversation, the far right, conspiracy-minded conversation, does it change people? Does it make them worse? I mean, I think if you're susceptible to it, as Don Jr. is, because he's an idiot, you're going to be more likely to believe that Rob Schneider, when he says that antidepressants cause school shootings or any of the number of other things he faves or whatever.

But, I mean, I think the bigger issue, too, is just it creates this sense that any group of... one group of people is larger than it is necessarily. I mean, Gamergate bigger issue too is just it creates the sense that any group of, one group of people is larger than it is necessarily. I mean, Gamergate, like when that happened in 2015, it was covered and companies respond to them like they were this overwhelming force and it was not even, it was maybe a fraction of a percentage of the country and it makes you unable to see what actually is and is not a significant contingent of people, I think. Dre, you've met with Facebook.

I don't know if you've met with Twitter, but you meet with these people to talk about these issues. What is one change you think would help make the social media, make Twitter, make Facebook a healthier place for people to kind of deal with some of the more extremes and toxicity that we see? I met with all of the big groups. And, you know, it's interesting. We met with Cheryl, and Cheryl was like, this is before the whole, like, you know, Russia's ruining the world confirmed. And Cheryl was like, you know what? Facebook had no impact on the election and we were like really Cheryl and she was like you know but we did register more people than either political party and we're like that sort

of seems like an impact Cheryl and she was like no and we were saying to her they're like what's interesting is that there are private Facebook accounts or Facebook groups and their private Instagram accounts that are like white supremacist groups that are like radicalizing young people like on the internet. And we said to her like, you know, can you shut these down? And like, I think that actually be really powerful. Can you shut down the like white supremacist Instagram account with 200,000 followers, but it's private and their model is predicated on like you reporting it. But like, I can't report a private post because like it's private.

And she said, she was like, DeRay, we're gonna make AI and AI is gonna fix it all. And we were like, yeah. Win Cheryl, win. So like Facebook worries me because they're putting all these eggs in the AI bucket to like actually sort of fix the problems. Whereas they could just deactivate these accounts

because like they know they exist. So I think that'd be it. With Twitter, I think Twitter, and I'm biased. I love Twitter. Twitter's great. I love Twitter too, by the way. I just feel like if I didn't love it, why would I spend all my time there, you know? Oh, you know what?

Let's not examine that. Continue. I apologize. No, I think that Twitter is doing a better job at some of it. The thing that I think could change Twitter is that the people who inform their safety and security are like organizations. And I think they just need to talk to users. I think that they need to get people impacted, people who have experienced death threats and those sort of things to be the people influencing and not these groups sort of representing. I think that that is where Twitter is a little off.

And Instagram is sort of Instagram. I don't think of, and is anybody using Snapchat? I guess kids are using Snapchat. I just want to chime in there. I build artificial intelligence and you are completely correct. AI is not going to solve these problems. Like we are so far from that.

But she doubled down. She was like, DeRay, AI. And we're like, but until you build that AI thing, can you just delete the accounts? And she's like, AI. And we're like, that's just not it, you know? Well, as we wait for the robots to solve racism and misogyny, I like the idea that it's like the first truly artificially intelligent computer wakes up and he's like, Okay, what do you need me to do?

Wow. All right. When we come back, Okay, stop. Don't go anywhere. This is Love It or Leave It, and there's more on the way. Now we're going to head over to Columbus to talk Facebook privacy with Assistant Professor of Communication and Sociology at The Ohio State University,

focusing on political communication and behavior, Dr. Robert M. Bond, the host of With Friends Like These, Friend of the Pod, Cricket's own, Anna Marie Cox, and the host of Baited with Z-W Ziwe and a writer on The Rundown with Robin Thede, we have Ziwe Fumido. So that's our Columbus panel, and you're going to hear them right now. And we're back. Now for a segment we call OK Stop. We're back in Columbus, Ohio, with Dr. Robert Bond, Anna Marie Cox, and Ziwe

Fumido. Hi. We'll roll a clip and the panel can say okay stop at any time and comment, discuss, be angry, be confused, be funny, you know, whatever you want. There's been a lot of conversation over the last few months about the role of big data and targeted ads in influencing the 2016 election. Cambridge Analytica scandal opened the doors to a larger conversation about privacy, not only about data breaches, but the danger of how our data is being harvested when it's going according to plan. So we wanted to go back to 2011 and watch a clip from Charlie Rose. Okay, stop. Charlie. I did put an exclamation point next to it just to stop and note that things change fast.

Yeah. But the clip still exists, you know? And it's a good clip. In 2011, Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg discussed their airtight privacy policy. Ugh. Let's take a look. 11, Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg discussed their airtight privacy policy. Ugh. Let's take a look. I think it is the case that people talk about Facebook and privacy a lot and I think it will continue to be the case

but it's because we lead in this area, meaning that we are the most privacy focused place for anyone to share anything. Okay, stop. Perfect. Just a good reminder that Facebook has been putting this out there in the exact same way. Basically, they've been declaring themselves

the protectors of privacy and then apologizing for their transgressions. I'm sure that there are many things that Facebook was engaging in during this time in which they were declaring how private they were that they later had to apologize for. It's because you have more information about everybody else elliot traig has this great story he tells he works here among a good chunk of the company he says there's this old joke where you know the man loses his keys and he's looking for the keys under the lamppost

and someone says well why are you looking under the light they're clearly not here he's like well this is the only place I can see. If I go over there, we are focused on privacy. Okay, stop. That metaphor made no sense. No, it's a great metaphor, but I don't understand how it applies here. It doesn't apply. We're looking for privacy under the light.

What does that mean? What are the keys? What's the light? In a way, it's kind of perfect because that's exactly what they were doing with this whole discussion was like, we're looking under the light. We're doing privacy.

It was more that they were rattling the keys in front of our faces like we're cats. Or babies tend to be more receptive to the key thing. Oh. Yeah, I know. I'm unclear about babies too. Who do we shake? We shake the keys in front of babies, not cats?

Yeah, cats don't care. They don't? Privacy. Our business model is by far the most privacy friendly to consumers. Okay, stop. That is just utter bullshit because their business model was based on selling your data and it always has been.

Well, it's just that our business model is private right even if they claim like oh well we don't we let advertisers target people using our data we don't give the data we use the data their business model is based on harvesting as much information as they can about each of us and using that to target us with advertisements that is not a privacy oriented build business model and we know that because their conduct over the past decade has been to treat privacy like an afterthought except when caught. ...about it the most, and I think we're the light.

We're the light. We are the transparent place where people can understand. Okay, stop. What is the opposite of transparency? Opaque. Opaque book! Hard to see. Opaque.

Opaque book. Also, what a long journey it was to discover that I thought she was looking for her keys, but it turns out she was the light. Yes. Yes. Yes. Are we the keys? We're the keys.

We're the keys to believe in dollars. And we're actually not under the light. We're over somewhere else being waved in front of a baby. Yes. But the baby is your data or data. And the cat just walked out of the room. Mmm. Continue to see conversations about Facebook and privacy, but it's because we lead and we care so much about it.

I think it's worth explaining this a bit more, though. I mean... Okay, stop. You guys are wearing... Bond and Zuck are wearing the same shirt. Maybe they're in cahoots. Maybe he's the keys. It's a nice shirt.

It's a nice shirt. You're the baby. You're saying that. Love it is definitely the baby. Sure, people have a lot of information on Facebook, but that's information that they've put into the service. If you look at companies, whether it's Google or Yahoo or Microsoft, or that have search engines and, and ad networks, um, they also have a huge amount of information about you. It's just that they're

collecting that about you behind your back. Okay, stop. I feel like that analogy works better if he's stealing from your house. Like, like it sounds if he's stealing from your house. Like, it sounds like he's, like, in your house putting stuff in his pockets. Like, you have no idea what these other people are doing when you're not paying attention. Exactly. All of a sudden, he's, like, he, like, jangles. You know what I mean? As he's walking out.

Because he has your keys. Yeah, he has your keys. He has the keys to your Ford Fiesta. What knows about you are things you've done and told us. It is self-reported. But the genius of Facebook is that it has the possibility of sending it out like nothing else to more places. Okay, stop.

And also, just do all... That's also not true. Because they do share tons of stuff we didn't explicitly tell them to share. They're not just sharing your profile information. They keep records of, for a while, they were keeping records of everyone you texted. They were keeping evidence of everywhere you visited, everything you liked, everything you did. Yeah, technically you're giving that information to Facebook.

But come on, Rob. What do you think? To be fair, there are ups and downs for this. I think that there are real opportunities for collecting this amount of data about people. And that doing it in an ethical way and doing it in a way that respects people's privacy is incredibly important. And that that's something that they need to do and that they're hopefully going to be working on more and more.

I think that there is also, though, we have to keep in mind there's a tremendous opportunity to learn about our society in a way that we wouldn't otherwise be able to. And that's something that I think Facebook and Twitter are actually committed to and that's something that I think is really important as well. I think that's totally fair. I think it's about, because we are learning a lot about the way people behave online, and that is important, and it does have value. ...ever sends any information out about anyone.

I understand that, but it goes out because Facebook has a system that allows that. Yeah, because Facebook allows other people to share. Allows other people to share. Exactly right. Yeah. That's right. It's cool, it's cool, it's cool, it's cool. Can I add something to the, maybe there's some, maybe it's not all Facebook's fault

idea, Dr. Bond pointed out, which is that we have some agency in this, too, and we have some responsibility. Thank you, yes. You know, most of us just traded away everything there is to know about us to be able to play Farmville, right? I mean, like, we're just like, okay, yeah, you know, so I think that, you know, and that's the exact model that most people in Silicon Valley were actually counting on, was this assumption that people would trade data for, like, dumb shit,

and we did. Like, we did exactly that. There's one model that, like, some libertarians put forward for trying to adjust this market that I like, although I'm not sure how it would work, which is that we get a piece of the profit that people make off of our data, like some micropayment. Every time Cambridge Analytica does some consulting, we get some 25 cents. Who gets 25 cents? You do. You. Where? I didn't see the shit. Give me my check mark. And it would be less about the amount of money

than more about seeing how often your data gets used. You've heard of this. Absolutely. Many people, you'll see stories about this where somebody has requested all of their data from, say, Facebook or Twitter. And what comes back is pretty incredible. You get back, let's say back 400 pages of information about what

you've done online over the past 10 years and it's it's a lot of information that they're storing and that they have available to them and I think the idea is that we should be able to profit off it not other people it's our fucking data yeah I mean I think I think one thing um uh Zainab Tufekci who's been on Podsave America um talks about the fact that we aren't really Facebook's customers Facebook's customers are the advertisers and that a better model for us as consumers is one that treats us more like the customer. There was a story a few weeks ago about

Grindr selling information about people and including information about HIV status and it was pretty galling, but as Ana points out, we've all agreed to terms of service all the time. We've kind of all gotten really complacent about our own information. The deal we've made is one where we give away our data and we just sort of accept that it's not really safe and not really ours. But I think the breaches with Cambridge Analytica

makes clear that in a lot of ways, it's not when Facebook is breaking the rules that we should be concerned. It's when they're following the rules because we've all acceded to this system of surveillance ultimately. It's massive and would be the envy of any totalitarian system. And I think a lot of times we're protected not by the rules and not by the government,

but simply by the fact that human beings themselves are not able to maximize the use of this much data that's being collected at all times. We're sort of protected by, like, the greed that led us to this place is also protecting us because the flaws of people mean it's hard to exploit this massive trove of information on each of us. And that's not exactly a good thing to rely on. And it's also, we can't, we literally, like, can't comprehend the amount of data there is about us and how people are using it. It's funny. So I actually also write a column for the Sci-Fi Network. I'm a political columnist for the Sci-Fi Network, which is, like, the most awesome resume line I've ever had. And what I do is I like

look at science fiction for like political analogs of things that are happening. And one of the things I've been looking at lately is science fiction stories about big data. And the thing is like

science fiction has been telling us for decades about how awful this is. And if you look at like all the different stories that we've had, popular science fiction, popular movies, like top ten movies

of all time, like go back to The Net before you were born. 1999. With Sandra Bullock. Or Minority Report. These are all dystopian, horrifying visions, and we just keep clicking yes to terms of service. And that's okay. Stop.

When we come back, we're going to play a game. Hey, don't go anywhere. There's more of love it or leave it coming up. And we're back. We're here in Columbus with Dr. Robert Bond, Anna Marie Cox, and Ziwe Fumido. For decades, we got our news from the same few places. TV channels, couple of newspapers, but more and more we get our news from the stories friends share on social media and from the algorithm companies like Facebook use to show us what we want to see. And that has meant a liberal engages with the news online differently than a conservative does.

And studies show that we like it that way, rarely clicking on articles that don't comport with our worldview. So tonight we want to play a game that explores this idea. It's called Echo Chamber. We tested this online. I'm sorry, we tested this during soundcheck, and it's super fun. Can I do it again? Here we go.

Rudy Giuliani should be disbarred. Paul Ryan lost a political battle with a priest. Would anybody out there like to play echo chamber? Hi, what's your name? Emily. Emily. Emily. Yes.

I'm going to read you questions about the echo chambers in which we all live. And you'll answer them. The panel each have a card with them to help. They about the echo chambers in which we all live. You'll answer them. The panel each have a card with them to help. They got the clues on them. You get it. Okay. Question number one. You guys good?

You all have your cards? They do. Good, good, good, good. What's your badge say? Oh, it's my name badge. I work for this company and I keep it on so I could go in my other office when I leave here. So, yeah, it's exciting. Yeah.

Scintillating small talk from Lovett. Have you seen Infinity War? You haven't. No, I'm sorry. I work for the company that owns this theater, though. Ooh, name drop. Great theater. Name drop, drop top.

It's a cool theater. Yeah, pretty cool. I like it here. It was built in 1928. Built in 1928. We're on kind of, this is actually, this is not bad. Can you give us one more fact about the theater? We're in the middle of a capital campaign,

and we're raising money to restore it. Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. That is not a fact. That's an ad. Oh, it's a fact. She's good. I respect that. Wigs off.

Unbelievable. I think she already won a round. Question number one, Emily. In the last few weeks, one of the most shared stories about an immigrant held in federal custody I think she already won a round. Question number one, Emily. In the last few weeks, one of the most shared stories about an immigrant held in federal custody is about Melania Trump. Jokes aside, this was one of the most widely shared stories

on the liberal internet. The headline was, Melania just humiliated Trump when he tried to hold her hand in front of the French president, Melania just humiliated Trump when he tried to hold her hand in front of the French president. Which was wild. Which of these headlines is one of the most shared stories from the conservative internet about the exact same moment? Was it A?

Fashion notes. Melania Trump steals the show in Hervé Pierre hat suit. Was it B? Who's the boss? Melania's quiet and powerful conservative feminism. Or was it C? A quiet stand against PDA. Melania refuses to participate in performative romance for the cameras. Despite demands of left-wing social justice warriors.

Wow, that's a long headline. What do you think, Emily? I feel like it's A. It is! Question two. According to BuzzFeed, the most shared legitimate news article of the 2016 election was an anti-Trump piece from the Washington Post titled,

Trump's history of corruption is Mind-Boggling, "'so why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one?' Which one of these was a top fake news article during the 2016 election? Was it A? Pope Francis shocks world, endorses Donald Trump for president. Was it B?

WikiLeaks confirms Hillary sold weapons to ISIS, then drops another bombshell. Or was it C? President Obama confirms he will refuse to leave office if Trump is elected. I think it was A.

It was all of the above. Huh? And you'll notice that the fake news stories in this study look overwhelmingly right-wing, and the stories from actual outlets in this study tended to skew anti-Trump. However, I will say that the headline, President Obama confirms he will refuse to leave his office

if Trump is elected, feels less like fake news and more of a tease at this point. Yeah. Obama. Question three. refuse to leave office if Trump is elected feels less like fake news and more of a tease at this point yeah Obama question three last year the Guardian ran an experiment where liberals and conservatives had to swap news feeds and only consume news from Facebook which of the following was a response from a participant was it a one conservative said honestly I hated it I'm seeing a psychiatrist trying to get over the shock and the hate from the left. Was it B? One conservative said, the needle moved. I was kind of more undecided as I looked at it. I was persuaded to think Trump's a really bad choice. Or was it C? One liberal said, you might as well have been waterboarding a brother. Emily, what do you think?

I'm going to go with A again. All of the above. Lots of trick questions tonight. Only one participant in this study was influenced at all to rethink their position, but the majority of participants were shocked and confused at what the other side was talking about. Wow.

Meanwhile, Emily's Twitter feed is just fundraising for this theater. It's left, right, and center. Everybody's welcome. Support the arts. As long as you donate money to the Palace Theater. Is that the gist? And retweeting pictures of pundits never enough

pictures of your dog the angel Emily come on guys give it up for Emily she still has one more question question four I can assume most of the people here lean left

so I can assume most of the people here lean left. So I can assume most of you here lean left. Let's see how well you know the alt-right internet. Which of these is a real ongoing phenomenon in conservative social media? Is it A? A blurry photo being passed around that supposedly shows Hillary Clinton and Bob Mueller hiking in the woods of upstate New York. Are we allowed to want that? Of all the woods in all the world, why did I pick this one?

Was it B? An anonymous deep state whistleblower named Q is secretly posting high-level intel drops on 4chan and other comment sections informing the public of a violent coup orchestrated by Trump to overthrow the deep state. Or was it C? Kanye West's recent conservative turn is actually a false flag operation to get him close to Trump so he could turn him into a liberal or a homosexual or both!

Emily, what do you think? Is it B? It is B. The internet is a crazy place. So I just want to close. Emily, you won the game. You've won a parachute gift card. Though you could use it to get sheets for yourself,

I'm sure you will use it to buy pillows for this very theater. The theater you breathe and bleed for. Give it up for Emily. Before we wrap up, Rob, you study these echo chambers. What do you think people, I mean, we touched on it briefly, but what do you think people don't understand about the phenomenon? Yeah, absolutely. So I think that, as I mentioned previously, we are pretty sure that people are getting diversity in their online social media diet. But the way in which they react to those stories is really different. So when it's

agreeable stories, we're much more likely to click on those stories, to like those stories, to comment on those stories, to basically engage with that information in a healthy way. When we run into information that is counter-attitudinal, we're very likely to dismiss that information or maybe to denigrate that information. And when we do that, then we're not necessarily sort of enacting democratic ideals in the way that we would want. We're exposed to a broad set of information, but we're not really giving both of those sides a fair shake, if you will.

And that's a lot harder for us to think that that's the type of information that we should be getting out of social media, is this instance in which we're only engaging with information that we are likely to already believe in or already think is good. All right, when we come back, we're going to play a game about mobs online. Don't go anywhere. This is Love It or Leave It, and there's more on the way. And we're back!

We're in Baltimore with Dr. Jen Goldbeck, Ashley Feinberg, and DeRay McKesson. Back in the day when you wanted mom justice, it was kind of a hassle. You had to get all your buddies together, get them angry, make sure everyone was physically fit and good and drunk. You had to find some horses. And you had to go find Marty McFly.

Now you can just type a few words, get a few retweets, and Brett Ratner's career is over. So we already see people writing about a return for men who have faced serious allegations, and there's been some lamenting that Me Too and all the rest has gone too far. People say that there's a mob mentality online that goes after the deserving and the undeserving and that attacks people in a way that's disproportionate. And I think there's a lot of people talking about that and giving it a lot of attention. But I also think it's a privileged position not just from where they're sitting but also not reflecting on just how quiet things used to be. And so I wanted to do a twist on this conversation

about online mobs in a game we call Thanks for the Mobberies. We want to highlight some things that if Twitter was around for, we might have handled differently. Here's how it works. I'm going to explain a real scenario. And if you think it happened in the idyllic America that existed before the social justice warriors and PC police ruined everything, you're going to say before Twitter. And if you think it was during the era of public shaming online, you're going to say after Twitter. Would someone out there like to play the game? Hi.

Hi, how are you? Good, how are you? What's your name? Patty. Patty. So here's how it works. I'm going to read you a scenario, and you have to tell us if it was before Twitter or after Twitter. All right, you ready?

Ready. When a famous white comedic actor portrayed an ethnic stereotype in a beloved cultural institution, the New York Times said, quote, the actor's buck-toothed myopic Japanese is broadly exotic. Before. Correct. That was a description of Mickey Rooney's character in the 1961 review of Breakfast at Tiffany's when he played a Japanese person in Yellowface. Yeah. When a famous white comedic actor portrayed an ethnic stereotype in a beloved cultural institution, the outcry that spread on social

media led by a comedian of color forced the actor to confront the charge and call for inclusion of people of color in the writing process and a new direction for that character. After. Correct. Harry Kondabalu recently led a campaign to force The Simpsons to confront the legacy of the character Apu Nahasa Pima Petalon.

A fugitive child rapist appears in a cute little cameo in an action movie. Before. Yeah. That was Roman Polanski who made an appearance in the film Rush Hour 3. Yeah. Yeah. Things change fast. For the better.

When this actor was awarded the prestigious Mark Twain Prize, he was described as follows, quote, a crusader throughout his career for a better world, his great success in the world of entertainment is complimented by his involvement with a host of charity organizations. After. Before. That was Bill Cosby.

Four years after, multiple allegations of sexual assault were chronicled by People, The Today Show, and elsewhere. This giant of cinema had a secret door installed between his office and Tippi Hedren's dressing room, even though she repeatedly turned down his advances. Before. Correct. That's Alfred Hitchcock.

This giant of television had a button under his desk to lock the door in his office and recently was forced out of his job after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct surfaced against him. Matt Lauer is terrible after. Correct. This smash hit comedy show had an episode where a woman spends too much money on clothes and then fakes a sunburn to avoid being hit in the face by her husband. Before. Correct. That was an episode of I Love Lucy that they don't syndicate anymore. This mega-famous celebrity made a soda ad where they equate drinking the soda as the thing that could bring together the black community and police officers.

That's Kylie Jenner after. Correct. Kendall Jenner and Patsy ran this U-roll ad and was shamed on the internet for days until they pulled the ad and apologized. Next, Supreme Court Justice confirmed 52 to 48. Before. Yes, that's Clarence Thomas, even though a leaked FBI report revealed Anita Hill's really detailed and credible account of sexual harassment. At a White House press briefing, a reporter asked the press secretary about AIDS.

The press secretary asked in response, what's AIDS? The reporter replied, it's known as the gay plague. The press secretary responded, I don't have it. Do you? And everyone laughed. Before. Before. Correct.

That was reporter Lester Cain solving, and press secretary Larry Speaks in the White House briefing room in 1982. As Mark Joseph Stern noted in Slate, Reagan did not mention AIDS for three more years, and the U.S. death toll reached into the tens of thousands. Yeah. Patty, you've won. Thanks for the U.S. death toll reached into the tens of thousands. Yeah. Patty, you've won. Thanks for the mobberies.

Ashley, you got your start at Gawker. Thank you. Rest in peace. Rest in peace. Fuck Peter Thiel. Mm-hmm. Thank you. Rest in peace. Rest in peace. Fuck Peter Thiel.

And, you know, there were a lot of people who cheered the decline of Gawker, and I do think that it was a shaming of Gawker that in part, I think people rejoiced in the defeat of Gawker, and there was a kind of mob mentality about bringing Gawker down before we knew who was responsible and then once it turned out that there was this nefarious plot by a billionaire with a vendetta I think there were a lot of people who were still pretty excited still pretty excited about do you think that the cult that there is a culture of online shaming that has gone too far I think it can't go too far I think that in the case of people who have not chosen to be in the public sphere, that everyone should be held accountable, but they should not be held accountable in the same way that someone impossible before, and they're being forced to confront their terrible ideas and actions

in ways that are uncomfortable, which I think is good. And I think shame is a very powerful thing in those situations, and I support shaming bad public figures as much as possible. What do you think, Jariah? I really want to ask her a question question but i don't want to throw you off is that you are famous for you you discovered comey's twitter account did you like did you do that because you wanted to bring force him into the public conversation like his tweets and what was happening uh no i, he was at a dinner talking about how much he valued privacy

and then he dropped all these hints or vague hints about his Instagram and Twitter and it was more of a challenge than anything. If I could take a back after all of his tweets that I have seen, I would do it in a heartbeat. I would never have published that in a million years. So just, if you didn't follow the story, Ashley did some pretty incredible sleuthing

involving accounts a private or an anonymous account was following and who those people were to figure out that James Comey had an anonymous Twitter handle where he went by Reinhold Niebuhr, his philosophical idol.

Right. And it was pretty cool. Yeah, I did not anticipate his terrible tweets that would come from it. It haunts me every day. But at the time, it was fine. That's right. You are responsible for James Comey tweeting pictures of his stream and biblical verses. And his own quotes. And his own quotes. Attributed to himself, yes. Attributed to James Comey tweeting pictures of a stream and biblical verses. And his own quotes.

And his own quotes. Attributed to himself, yes. Attributed to James Comey. He tweets, I didn't know he tweets his own quotes. Oh yeah, he does. I do know that in the book, this is completely random, but he talks about singing a Beyonce song at a meeting.

In the book. Honestly. This is completely random. I've said it before, I'll say it again. We need to start holding the tall accountable. These people think that they are literally above the law and it has to stop. When we come back,

the rant wheel. Hey, don't go anywhere. There's more of Love It or Leave It coming up. And we're back. Now for the rant wheel. Here's how it works. We spin the wheel and wherever it lands, we talk about the topic.

Let's spin the wheel. It has landed on Don Jr. Online. We scratched the very surface of it. But Ashley, you are someone who has chronicled and studied Donald John Trump Jr.'s online journey. I have. His eat, pray, tweet. Tell us about it.

Everything I know about Don Jr. I have learned from his online activity of watching his Instagram faves, the things he comments. The biggest driving factor in everything he does is a desperate desire for

his father to love him even a fraction of the amount he does is a desperate desire for his father to love him even a fraction of the amount he does Ivanka it is uh one of the most I personally satisfying things to watch is him posting photos of him in the Oval Office and Trump has a blank look on his face I'm not sure he knows who was staying next to him but Don Jr's like I'm here with the big guy at the White House. Love this. And I'm not sure they've ever spoken, but Don Jr., they're all terrible people. Don Jr. is the most toxic and depraved of them all. He has, like, gone to the alt-right corners of the internet in a way Eric and Ivanka have not. He will fave conspiracy theories. He follows a lot of white supremacist accounts. He just faves. I don't know if he

knows that we can see what he's doing. Because if anyone did, I can't imagine they would keep doing the deeply embarrassing things that he does. What platform is he most effective on? Oh, a lot of them. He's on Twitter and Instagram the most. I would say Instagram has really been great since the divorce because he likes to post a lot of selfies at CrossFit. Actually, you really do know a lot about him.

Oh, no. This is a lot of my time. What? You really do know a lot about him. Oh, no. This is a lot of my time. What? I actually spoke to someone who goes to his CrossFit gym in New York, and he will ask people there to take pictures of him lifting weights,

doing squats. They all can't say anything about it because there's secret service everywhere, but they commiserate about it over drinks that he does not attend. I love that. Let's spin it again. It has landed on Facebook reaction buttons which comes to us by way of Professor Rob Bond. Yeah. All right.

So as you are very likely aware, maybe roughly two years ago, we went from just having a single like button to having these multiple options for how we can react to a post, right? So now instead of just being able to like a post, we can say it's sad or laugh or get angry or whatever it is. And in some ways, I guess that's good. We're going from just having one ability to react to things to maybe multiple. But at least for me, sometimes I'm confused about which of those buttons is the right one for the post. So in particular, say I have a friend who, the dog passed away, it's very sad, they write a post and it starts with a tribute to the dog,

and I feel like that's sad, so sad button. But then it's a tribute, and I think, oh, maybe this is the heart button. And then at the end, they've got a video of the dog doing something really silly, and it's like, oh, that's a funny one. So which do I click? And if i click the

wrong one will that person think that i'm wrong and if i click the wrong one will the algorithm think that i'm a horrible person start giving me the horrible person stuff yeah meanwhile rob rob's got a friend out there who's like, my dog died and Rob laughed. What a fuck. Always click the heart button. Thank you. All right, let's spin it again.

It has landed on Twitter narcs. Let's talk about it. Let's talk about what people do on Twitter now. I am so sick of making a comment about a public figure and then someone looping them in. What kind of teacher you forgot to assign a homework shit is that? If I wanted to loop in Sean Spicer, I'm aware that he's online. And he's aware that I'm online. I assume. It also is of a piece with the kind of person who responds to a tweet and says, not I disagree, not here's something you should read, not you're wrong, but do better. Or I'm disappointed or rethink this. Because that's just a way of saying I disagree

with just like a layer of smug pedantic icing on it. You know, to say do better or rethink this is to say, I'm not just sure you're wrong. I'm sure you're wrong because no one like me has explained it to you yet. And I'm fucking sick of it. Do better. You do better. This happened to me today.

Today. Today. The show went up. There was a technical glitch, we took it down for a little bit, and I tweeted, you know, I didn't say sorry, I said, oh, it's down for a bit, it'll be back shortly. And somebody replied to me saying, don't you believe you owe us an apology? And I thought, that's a little obnoxious.

And jokingly I said, you're right, I apologize to everyone but you. Light as light could be. Light as a feather. Light as a feather. And someone responded, do you really want to punch down like this? Do better. No.

I'm not going to do better. I'm going to do exactly this. I'm gonna be exactly this level of good. I'm not gonna be better and I'm not gonna be worse but I'm certainly not gonna be better because you didn't like my joke which was so fucking mild and my resolution is I'm not gonna do better. Not for you. There are places where I will learn and grow, and I will be confronted offline about places where I can change and be a better person.

They happen all the time. I am a work in progress. But I make this solemn pledge to you, a pledge to you now that I will honor. I will never get better because somebody replied to me in a tweet. Ever. If anything, I will dig in and get worse. Let's spin it one more time. All right. It has landed on terms of service, which I think is a good place to end it. Because I actually think terms of service, the end user license agreements, the things we all just click, are actually central to all of these crises. out of laziness or a lack of options or a sense that we weren't in control

seeded so much of our power of who we are of our voices of our privacy of our information to a group of giants feckless corporations that built something incredible that give us incredible services that have changed the world for the better, but don't have our interests at heart because that's not what they exist to do. They exist to perform a function, to make money for their shareholders, to make money for their investors. And that's okay. That's their job.

That's Facebook's job. That's Google's job. That's Twitter's job. But we have to decide what our job is. And I think too much of the time we spend, we talk about Twitter as their platform, Facebook as their platform. And yeah, they own it, but it's ours. You know, we live online. We live online. And I think a lot of times we treat people badly and we treat ourselves badly because we don't think of the internet as our home. We think of it as like a Motel 6 or like an Airbnb that didn't live up to the promise

where we kind of just, we know it's a bachelor party weekend and we're not going to get our deposit back anyway, so fuck the rug. And we need to start treating the neighborhood online with the care that we treat the neighborhood offline because we are all going to spend the rest of our lives there. And that means treating people, that means individually treating people better, reading things we disagree with, you know, getting outside of our echo chambers, actually clicking on things that might challenge us.

But it also means demanding safer streets online, things that might challenge us, but it also means demanding safer streets online, demanding that the stores we visit and the streets we walk on are safe for us, and it also means demanding accountability from the mayor of the internet, Chrissy Teigen. Because I think one of the reasons we're in this situation is we all are too passive. And when we say that what's wrong with social media is ruining what's good about it, is really another way of saying we're allowing what makes human beings flawed to make it harder to take advantage of all the ways human beings are wonderful and all the weird and great things that the internet has made possible

and all the marginalized voices and just voices that wouldn't have been able to get to us because of all the gatekeepers and structural issues and racism and misogyny and all the rest and anti-gay bigotry and all the rest that stood in our way for such a long time. So that's all I wanted to say about that. Facebook may belong to Mark Zuckerberg,

but it's not a place because of him. It's a place because of us. And we should be active participants in it and we should own our role in it because we all live online now. And I don't think I'm going to be able to stop. I don't think anyone on this stage is going to be able to stop. And none of you animals are going to be able to stop I don't think anyone on this stage is going to be able to stop and none of you animals are going to be able to stop this woman in the front rows she'll pass out for a while but when she wakes up she'll be back on her phone in no time so I want to thank

our incredible panel for being here thank you to Dr. Jen Golbeck thank you to Ashley Feinberg thank you to DeRay McKesson thank you to Baltimore for coming out and have a great night. That was awesome. Combining two shows into one is great. It's twice as much work. But other than that, it was fantastic. Joking aside, one more time, I want to thank everybody who came out to the show in Columbus and Baltimore and all six of our awesome guests.

Dr. Robert Bond, Anna Marie Cox, Ziwe Fumido, Dr. Jennifer Goldbeck, Ashley Feinberg and DeRay McKesson. What a bunch of love it or leave it all stars. What a great episode. I don't know. Follow me on Twitter. What do I do now? End the show. Is there music?

There should be.