Offline with Jon Favreau - Taylor Lorenz on Why All Culture is Internet Culture

Episode Date: March 20, 2022

This week, Jon is joined by the technology reporter Taylor Lorenz. Covering what she calls “communication and connection,” Taylor has written extensively about the content creator economy, changing media ecosystems, TikTok, and more. The two talk about some of Taylor’s recent stories, break down why she left the New York Times for the Washington Post, and discuss what journalism in our internet-first age requires of writers and media publications.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast.

Yeah, so first of all, I cover YouTubers for a living. So you're familiar with that. If I cared about mean Twitter replies, I wouldn't have my beat. I have Jake Paulers telling me to kill myself every day. I don't care. It's just part of the territory. It doesn't affect me. I always say, I'm like, death threats, who cares?

I'm Jon Favreau. Welcome to Offline. Hey, everyone. My guest today is Taylor Lorenz, a tech reporter who's worked at The Atlantic, The New York Times, and now The Washington Post. But because Taylor is good at what she does, her reporting isn't just confined to writing at these prestigious institutions. She's everywhere. She's on just about every platform, reaching all kinds of different audiences with journalism that covers what she calls the communication and connection beat. Basically, what this podcast is about.

Except Taylor's been doing it for 13 years now, so she's seen it all. She's covered how the creator economy is swiftly changing, profiled some of the internet's biggest names, and written about how young people are fighting wild conspiracy theories with even wilder conspiracy theories. More on that later. Right now, she's working on a book called Extremely Online, Gen Z, the Rise of Influencers, and the Creation of a New American Dream. Again, right in the offline wheelhouse. We sat down in studio earlier this week, and I asked her to walk us through some of her stories, including a recent piece on the White House's Russia-Ukraine TikTok briefing that became the cold open on Saturday Night Live. But we also talked about what being a journalist means in our extremely online era, how she's handled smear campaigns

from the likes of Tucker Carlson and Logan Paul, and what media companies need to do to better support and protect their journalists. It was one of the best conversations I've had about the way the internet is changing our media landscape, and I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did. As always, if you have questions, comments, or complaints about the show, feel free to email us at offline at crooked dot com. Here's Taylor Lorenz. Taylor Lorenz, welcome to Offline.

Thanks for having me. Of course. So my favorite thing to do on the show is talk to people who've covered this beat longer and better than I have. And you're one of the best in the business. I recently heard you describe your beat as covering communication and connection, which I thought was perfect. Like I've been having trouble finding the exact words for what Off offline is about. And I feel like that's a really great description. Could you talk about why you described the beat that way? Yeah, definitely. I think it's really hard for people to get a grasp of my beat and they often associate it with kind of like

certain technologies or platforms. So like Vine, when I was covering tons of Vine news or now TikTok. But it's really not about that. I mean, I wrote a lot about Zoom, for instance, when the pandemic came or like how teens are chatting in Google Docs. So it's kind of platform agnostic. It's just all about communication technology and how people are kind of connecting. Obviously, social media is built for that. So I mostly cover social media stuff. But it can also mean, you know, an influencer connecting with millions of fans or, you know know somebody using a weird new product to like reach their grandma um yeah no it's sort of it's sort of why i started the show because

i think we don't examine sort of the way that technology changes the way that we communicate changes the quality of communication how we get along how we interact with each other sort of a lot of the tech reporting. I know it's like some of it's called tech reporting, some of it's called like internet culture. I wrote a whole thing about that. You did? I think it's like, to me, the phrase internet culture just sounds like webmaster or something. Like, it's 2022. Like internet culture is just culture. It's just life at this point. How did you become interested in the beat? So I got, do you remember Tumblr?

Were you into Tumblr? I know Tumblr. I never understood what was going on in Tumblr. Okay, that's totally fair. That's totally fair. Honestly, I barely understood what was going on and I was spending 16 hours a day on it. But in 2009, I graduated into the recession like many

millennials. I was working a bunch of temp jobs. I was working at a call center. And anyway, this girl at one of my temp jobs introduced me to Tumblr and that was kind of a very life-changing moment because I got obsessed with Tumblr and I was on Tumblr 24-7 basically. I ended up getting a little bit of an audience on Tumblr. A lot of media people followed me. That led me to do more like that was the beginning of social media brand world. So I did a bunch of brand stuff for like a year at an ad agency. And then I started running social media for media companies.

So my first job was at the Daily Mail. And I was writing about that stuff too. But you remember like writing about the internet in 2011. Like no one really – they were like those weirdos on there. Like who wants to read about that? I wrote this like defense of furries because people were so rude to these internet communities. Yeah, that's right. And I just was like I'm on Tumblr all day and like these people actually know what's up. And like the media is writing this like scolding way.

I remember people used to call me. I remember too like a digital journalist or like you know it's like so funny i come at it from the like i was in political campaigns in 8 and 12 and then in the white house between that and it was like there was the new media section of the campaign that's that was our thing well 2012 i remember so well because my friend made Binders Full of Women, the Tumblr. Oh, right. Which was this like viral Tumblr. 2012, I feel like, was the first year that Twitter sort of had taken hold of a campaign. Yeah.

More than anything else. What's the most common and probably most annoying misconception of your beat and what you cover? I know. I know exactly what I want to say. Nice. All right. Perfect. My biggest frustration is people thinking that I write about teenagers.

Oh, yeah. Which I do, by the way, a lot. You know, young people use technology in really interesting ways. But, you know, I was just talking to a friend about this recently, like the idea that like post-January 6th and like all of these Ukraine war. I was going to say, yeah, Ukraine. That like social media is this thing that only shapes like the life of teenagers is just like insane.

And, you know, I write a ton about everything. I mean, I write a lot about like mom groups or yeah, social media. I covered Parkland shooting and sort of the role that the internet played in that and Christchurch and a lot of shootings and a lot of extremism as well. So yeah, I don't know. It's not a kid's thing. It's not. It's a like global society way that we primarily interact with one another at this point on different platforms, different age groups use different platforms for sure. A hundred percent. way that we primarily interact with one another at this point. On different platforms, different age groups use different platforms for sure. A hundred percent.

And like, I love writing about young people and taking them seriously. I think it's so important, but it's just crazy. People dismiss, you know, this beat as that because it's not. So you were at the New York Times for a while. You recently moved to the Washington Post. What was it about the offer from the Post that made it more intriguing than the Times? I had a Snapchat show. I've done tons of – I used to run a video team. You know, and I wanted to do – like I'm a writer, but I'm not just a writer. I kind of like consider myself more of a multimedia journalist. So I wanted to do a podcast. There you go.

And some other stuff that I felt like – you know, New York Times is amazing and it's giant. But I felt like I was kind of in a role there where I couldn't do all these other things that I wanted to do. So that was the only thing. So only writing all the time. It gets to be a lot. As a former writer, I will tell you, when I left the White House and I didn't speech writing for that long, I was like, I got to do something else than just lock myself in a room by myself and write and stare at a screen all day.

Totally. I got to talk to people. I love it. And I just love, like, you know, I got really into TikTok early. I have definitely like following on the internet and I love like. And I just love like, you know, I got really into TikTok early. I have definitely like following on the internet and I love like creating content in different ways and kind of telling stories in different ways. And that's how people are getting their information these days. And of course, the main reason you went to the post was to build your brand, right?

Oh, my God. For people who may not know the backstory here, you made what I thought was a relatively obvious point to Business Insider a few weeks ago that the future of media is more distributed, more about journalists building their own brand and audience. And the longer you stay at a job that restricts you from outside opportunities, as institutions like the New York Times sometimes do, the less relevant your brand becomes. Some of your colleagues said, you know, they objected to the use of the word brand because they thought that was cringey. I saw others complain that media used to be about the journalism and not the journalists, and it was this whole Twitter thing.

I don't want to, like, have to rehash the personal drama here. There is zero personal drama. Not on your side, but, like, you know, you open Twitter and it's just like, hey, Haberman and Twitter, our ends are fighting. I'm like, what's going on? No one's fighting. DC people. This is, look, I was a DC journalist for two years.

You know, I ran Social for the Hill along with Nitsan Zimmerman. DC is like nine years behind everyone else. And the idea that this is even a controversial thing in DC after Trump was our president for four years is so funny to me. Yeah. The ultimate brand. But yeah. I mean, I was going to say like, what's, what's your response to the argument that, that journalism somehow suffers when journalists are focused on building their own audiences, which is what the attention economy requires. I didn't think it was like necessarily an opinion that you offered. It just Just like that's the way journalism is. It's funny because if you've read like anything I've ever written, I've like not only have I written so much on this and I wrote a white paper for the American Press Institute in 2016 that touches on all of this is the crux of my beat is individual content creators.

I was a visiting Nieman fellow and this was also the focus of my project. I wrote a piece for Nieman Lab in this was also the focus of my project. I wrote a piece for Nieman Lab in 2018, actually about the pressure that journalists feel. And then two years ago, I wrote another piece for Nieman Lab about the downsides of having to have this individual sort of thing. So all that to say, it's just funny that this was the thing that triggered people. But I think it's a twofold thing. Obviously, when I think of brand, I think of reputation. Heroes of mine are Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg being a tech reporter. And I gravitated towards them because of the reputation. When they went to all things D,

I was obsessed with that site because of who they are. I think it's really important to establish trust with an audience. The idea that famous news anchors of the past didn't have brands is absurd. It's just that now the internet has democratized all of it. So you can sort of build that reputation and that trust with your readers or your followers directly. And I think that's overwhelmingly a good thing because we're getting a lot of voices that have been traditionally excluded from the media able to get heard. And that's changing media, I think, in very positive ways. Obviously, the downsides are also great, you know, having to like feel that pressure and like, you know, do independent stuff. But I follow so many amazing independent journalists and podcasters. And I think it's a much richer, more diverse media ecosystem. And so, you know.

I spend a lot of time complaining about media ecosystem. And so, you know. I spend a lot of time complaining about Twitter. I'm sure you do too. I do think that Twitter at its best is finding a lot of journalists and experts that you wouldn't have found just sort of reading a paper or watching CNN, right? Like there's just such a diversity of opinion on there. A lot of the opinions are just expressed in a tough way. But no, I do think that's a benefit. It was a weird thing looking through that fight because I'm like, I think this could also be based

on like a simple misunderstanding or miscommunication. So I am fully in agreement with your take on this. I also think the word brand is sort of cringy oh totally you know like which i'm sure it's like and so it's like content create all that stuff is cringy to me yeah i get it i i mean to me i'm writing a defense of cringe soon because i think that word gets you know thrown around i i guess everyone has always um dismissed my i like this kind of thing has been i think i have a bigger audience now, so like more media people pay attention to it. But for years and years, like no one would refer to me as a tech reporter because I covered these – oh, these silly influencers, these cringe things.

It wasn't until 2016. You were supposed to be covering like what, like VCs? Yeah. Yeah. Like what's going on with the executives at Facebook, you know? Right. Okay. Okay. Yeah, like what's going on with the executives at Facebook, you know? Right, okay, okay. And so I think, you know, now as my beat has kind of permeated more into media, I think media is going through that same thing that tech was going through in the early 2010s.

Because I saw now the VCs are all like creator economy, like da-da-da-da-da. Yeah. But media, I think there's this preciousness around a lot of people, especially in legacy media. And it's just – Yeah, well, it's this sort of – this like wistful notion of people, especially in legacy media. And it's just. Yeah, well, it's this sort of this like wistful notion of what it was like when there were three networks and, you know, voices of authority. But again, like you said, those voices of authority back then were brands of their own, even though people weren't calling them brands, maybe. Absolutely. And let me be clear, like, I mean, not to toot my own horn, but I'm a good journalist.

Like I break a ton of news. Like, if I have a brand, it's being an authoritative source on my beat and knowing that I'm going to deliver consistent scoops and good stories. I think that's a valuable thing, just the way that I know if I'm going to listen to a podcast. You know, I know that that person is going to give me the content that I deserve. So, I know. We need a better word, but at the same time, there kind of isn't one. You know, reputation isn't quite it, but it's kind of the best corollary. Yeah. One of your first stories for The Post was the premise for last week's cold open on SNL. So congrats. It was about how the White House held a briefing for TikTok creators on the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

First of all, what did you think of the skit? I thought it was hilarious. I mean, I love Bowen Yang. So when he came out, I was like, oh my God. It was very funny. I also emailed Jen Psaki. I was like, oh my God, Kate McKinnon played you on SNL. And it was a funny, favorable impression. I know. It kind of was. Yeah. I know you listened to the briefing. What was your take on the actual, on the briefing? Like, how did the White House handle it? How were the questions and how did you think it was different than a typical briefing with White House reporters?

Well, there's a couple things. One, I thought it was much more similar to a traditional press briefing than I would imagine. Cool. You know, I've been to a lot of the traditional press briefings and they get – you know, someone's up there, some comms person from the NSC or whatever. They talk for a while and then they're going to answer a couple questions. You know, they definitely seem to be like keeping on message, like we want to de-escalate, da-da-da. It was way more friendly, like when Rob Flaherty is in the beginning, like, we, you know, we want you here. I'm like, I never heard that, you know, as a member of the press.

That's funny. And then in terms of the questions, I thought they were all good, but of course not quite as antagonistic as, you know, I think a journalist might have been in terms of like asking follow-ups. Like they didn't really ask follow-ups. Yeah. But, you know, Jules threw in a question about inflation. I thought Jen Psaki kind of dodged it. But, you know, it was a little bit more of a back and forth i feel like it's a good the closer it is to a normal white house briefing is probably a good thing yeah i did

see one of the creators in your story say that it uh the white house handled it with like a little bit of a kindergarten class yes yeah was it a little like hey you internet kids yes yeah like a little bit of that energy but at the same, like kind of being effusive and recognizing them as well, I think, which is so important. I mean, they're right to recognize these creators. I know it sounds like a punchline. It's so funny that that was the, like, I really was trying to use that story to be like, see, you guys, this is what I'm talking about in terms of the media changing. Yeah. So, you know, and I thought the mix of creators was a little bit random. Okay. But, you know, I'm sure it's just the beginning and, you know, and I thought the mix of creators was a little bit random. Okay.

But, you know, I'm sure it's just the beginning. And, you know, they've been doing a lot. They did a live, wrote a big story for The Times about the efforts to work with creators to get out the message about vaccines. Why do you think so many people are getting their news about this war from TikTok? Is it because so many people get their news about everything from TikTok? Is there something about this war that makes the platform especially useful for sharing news? Yeah. I mean, I think this has been the breakout moment in terms of news on TikTok, although it's been a huge news platform for a long time, especially even pre-COVID.

That's where a lot of people were seeing those first videos of lockdowns or viral things. I think it's the For You page. So, you know, TikTok is so unique. Well, one, video, short video is an incredibly compelling and engaging format. And then two, it's a platform where it's extremely accessible, right? Because the primary mechanism of delivering content on TikTok is through this algorithmically generated For You page. So you can get on TikTok and never follow a single person and just click a few things and it will deliver like viral engaging content to you.

Whereas you get on Twitter, it's not really clear who you have to follow. Like you're kind of trying to find people. It's more – it puts a lot more burden on the user. And Instagram is such a closed system. So – There's this weird dynamic where Twitter's user base is tiny compared to TikTok, YouTube, Instagram. But because the user base includes nearly every journalist and political figure in the world, it drives media coverage more than any other platform.

Like as someone who's on both platforms, who's reported on both platforms, like how do you feel about that? I mean, I think that Twitter is, well, I mean, I'd love to see every tech company get the coverage that Twitter gets in terms of like attention. You know, there's just this disdain for other platforms.

And it's like that's to the journalist's detriment. I mean, I covered YouTube. I also still cover a lot on YouTube and stuff, too. And that was always seen as, oh, funny cat videos. And it's like, no, guys, this is like the birthplace of extremism on the Internet. You know, we should actually pay attention to it. And I think TikTok's having that moment. People are starting to realize,

I mean, I've made a bunch of TikTok videos about this myself, massive misinformation problem on TikTok. Like it is the wild west. And unlike Twitter, where there's these academics and journalists that can really fact check things in real time, those figures are not on TikTok.

So things can run just crazy. Circus without a tent vibe. Yeah. And not to say like, oh, we need the journalists to come in and fact check. But like it's truly like it's – I've never seen a platform, maybe Facebook, where the user base is so primed to kind of believe what they see. You know, I was at fault for this too for a long time. And then when I started doing this show, i've tried to become more aware of it that there's just like if all you do is get your news from twitter and you think that the whole world is on twitter like i know that there's a lot of problems with like twitter isn't real

life because it's not like you know defined well but there really is this bubble if you're only on twitter and then everyone's scratching their heads like what's with the disinformation problem and then they're like oh are you getting it on it on TikTok just to reach the kids? John, this is what I tell myself every time I'm getting canceled on Twitter for saying something dumb or, you know, silly, nothing serious, of course. But like, you know, anytime there's kind of Twitter drama, especially media Twitter drama, I just I'm like, you guys don't even know. You guys are in your little corner. It's so provincial. Like, and it's like there's this whole other internet out there that's largely ignored. I mean, there's more business reporters covering Facebook than there are total internet culture reporters.

So it's just – Yeah, Facebook's the one that – because Facebook's, like, you know, been in the business of sort of destroying democracy, everyone's like, oh, let's pay attention to that. But there's still, like, not a lot of YouTube coverage, not a lot of TikTok coverage. It's not the only platform destroying democracy is the thing. Yeah, no, no, I hear that. Another story you wrote a few months ago when you were still at the Times that's been getting a lot of attention lately is about the Birds Aren't Real movement, which recently placed a curse on you. I want to get to that. But for people who might not be familiar with the movement, could you give us a primer on Birds Aren't Real?

Sure. So Birds Aren't Real is this movement that cropped up a couple years ago. It's founded by this guy, Peter McIndoe, who is a, I think he's 22 or 23, young guy, college dropout. And it's a parody conspiracy movement, which it kind of reminds me of, do you remember like Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? No. Oh, okay.

It was this thing. Oh, it was this like Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? No. Oh, okay. It was this thing, oh, it was this like old, old, old internet thing. But it's basically like a, it's kind of a, it's an online community where people kind of cosplay conspiracy theorists. Right. That sounds dangerous. It's not. The main crux of the conspiracy is that birds are not real. They were replaced by drones. And it's kind of this place that's become this bonding thing for young people. Like they have thousands and thousands of members. Yeah. And a lot of kids that grew up in houses that have been sort of touched by extremism. So parents that believe in QAnon or they were homeschooled.

Which is a fascinating part of this, that the people who started it experienced this in their own lives. A lot of it's a lot of young people that grew up sort of marinating in this messed up world. But it's a joke movement. But the main guy, Peter McIndoe, performs a character where he performs this. He pretends to be an ardent conspiracy theorist online. And he maintains that character on the internet. How did you get him to break character for your Times interview, which I think ran in December?

Yeah. Well, I was like, if there's anyone he's going to talk to for an article, I want to be that person. I had seen him do other interviews in character for years. And I was like, no, I don't want that. I want the real story. And so I got in touch with him i met with him and had dinner with him off the record first okay same thing you do as a journalist you know like be like trust me because and and i mean he like i'm one of the few people that has covered this in in the way that i cover it in a long time knowing that like i just want internet creators to know that they can trust me and i get it and i'm not going to be

the legacy journalist that comes and it's like oh these kids you know what are they i first came in contact with it from that now viral video where he's on a local news channel and starts talking about birds aren't real and then starts vomiting yes yes and i was like wait what about birds aren't real and then starts vomiting. Yes. During the interview. Yes. And I was like, wait, what's birds aren't real? And I started like, so it works. Yeah. One of the organizers in your piece of birds aren't real said that this is about, their favorite way to describe the organization is fighting lunacy with lunacy.

What do you think about lunacy as a strategy to fight disinformation? I think it's powerful. I think it's not as a strategy to fight disinformation? I think it's powerful. I think it's not the only way to fight disinformation. But, I mean, during 2020 and 2021, this is also how I started paying attention to Birds Aren't Real is because Birds Aren't Real movement, they call themselves the Bird Brigade, was showing up at like the White Lives Matter rally or, you know, these sort of standing beside these anti-abortion activists and kind of holding signs that say birds aren't real, which kind of just makes whoever they're standing next

to look insane. And I think that's a good strategy. I think pointing out how absurd a lot of this stuff is on its face from the sort of more, you know, far right extremists, like it is a helpful de-escalation technique. And it's good for activists as well as, you know, I think activism is such a grueling kind of task that when you can add some levity to it, it helps. I thought about this from a political standpoint for a long time, both in the effort to fight disinformation, the effort to fight extremism, authoritarianism.

Like, I don't think there was enough or is enough mockery of people like Trump. When I say that, obviously, there's a lot of mockery of Trump, but not like the Donald Trump hashtag bullshit. But just when you start poking fun at what these people are doing, as opposed to just taking up the outrage meter to like 10 or 11 all the time, you sort of undercut the fear that they're trying to instill in people. Yeah. And if you show how absurd they are and you're constantly making fun of them, it doesn't help them because their main goal is fear.

Yes. And like you, by getting outragedged which of course we should get outrageous certain policies and stuff but a lot of times that outrage can actually sort of validate that side as a legitimate opinion and in certain situations like white lives matter things like that it's like that's not a legitimate thing like it's it's a movement aimed at kind of um destroying something that's about equality. So and I think in your piece, you said that when they showed up to shut down sort of the anti-abortion activists, they ended up forcing the anti-abortion activists to leave.

Yeah. They just decided to leave because the birds aren't real. People were there. Yeah, they got frustrated. And then it just everyone started chanting birds aren't real. And their message seemed seemed like a joke. Yeah. I know you've reported their message seemed seemed like a joke. Yeah. I know you've reported on disinformation and misinformation a lot.

What other strategies do you think are effective or you've seen be effective in fighting misinformation? That's a really good question. I mean, educating people on how these things spread. Obviously, strategies like deplatforming work undeniably. I think these platforms, it's so funny to see them act so quickly in Ukraine because they've said for years that that's not something they would do. So hopefully that sets the precedent for action going forward. And then I think that we just need to educate people more about how these things spread. There's such a dismissiveness, especially by the

media, when you come to people that kind of like believe a lot of really bad stuff, especially anti-vax stuff. You know, Ben Collins and Brandi Zardrosny are two of my favorite reporters. Ben's my old boss. They're excellent. But they treat people with respect and they kind of dismantle these ideas, but without sort of punching down. And I mean, to me, I get so frustrated seeing kind of the way the media treats people like unvaccinated people. It's like if you have millions and millions of people in America falling victim to conspiracies and believing disinformation about the vaccine during a pandemic, that's a systemic problem that needs to be addressed. It's not enough to just say, well, just let those people die or those people are idiots, right? For sure. And I also think like those of us who talk a lot about misinformation and disinformation, it's like we could all be victims to it. Absolutely. No one is so smart

that they're above it. And so therefore, you shouldn't think that people who fall victim to it are necessarily like they're dumb or they're weak or something's wrong with them. Like it's a systemic issue, which means it can affect anyone. And we need to fix the root causes of what is causing all of this. It's not it's the tech platforms, 100 percent, a lot of it. But also it's record inequality and people feeling anxious about the world and feeling instability and kind of grasping onto a narrative that makes sense for them. That's actually something Peter from Birds Aren't Real talked a lot about, about this

like the hero's narrative and how a lot of people that believe in QAnon, like they want to believe that they're righteous and fixing the world because that's a compelling narrative to a lot of people. I have wondered if the sort of physical social isolation of the last several years because of the pandemic has made it worse because it's pushed people to these online worlds where the socialization they have is very different than the kind that you'd have in the physical world. Yeah. Oh, 100%.

I mean, I think that's undeniable. Like people, I mean, we saw 2020, just the rise of so much extremism. Also, obviously, our political system is hyper-partisan. So it's kind of all of these factors, and I think we need to address all of them. Yeah. Another terrible part of online life you're all too familiar with is harassment. You've been targeted by trolls, you've been doxxed. You've been threatened. You've been harassed by Tucker Carlson just for calling out online harassment. For people who think this is just about like mean Twitter replies, can you talk about what it's been like to go through this? Yeah. So first of all, I cover YouTubers for a living. So you're familiar with that. If I cared about mean Twitter replies, like I wouldn't have

my beat. Like I have Jake Paulers, you know know telling me to kill myself every day i don't care it's just part of the territory it doesn't affect me i always say i'm like death threats who cares um i mean people should care and it shouldn't be normalized but at the same time i think my bar is extremely high for this stuff yeah um but i think it an online online harassment is such a misnomer. I think it's a huge problem because, you know, harassment is a tool to silence people, especially women and people of color or people from marginalized identities, for speaking out. And there's a very intentional, like, goal behind it. Obviously, it's death threats and all of that and rape threats on the daily. And it's not just Twitter.

It's like every single surface, right? Like, you know, my cell phone number getting out there, people calling, people harassing my family members, stalking me. Like all of that is incredibly terrifying and invasive. And it's bled out into the physical world, too, which is even more terrifying. Right. out into the physical world too, which is even more terrifying, right? But to me, I think what especially the media needs to understand about this in terms of protecting their own reporters is this is just a tool, like harassment is a tool to kind of discredit and silence journalists. And the right-wing media plays along with it, right? You mentioned Tucker Carlson.

There's a Fox News story about me last week. I feel like almost every week there's some Fox News story about me. I don't care, but it's used to drive this narrative where suddenly, John, after covering this beat for like 13 years, I'm seen as controversial. It's like, what? And if you look up the controversies, I spoke out about International Women's Day, right? I've spoken out on behalf of sort of disabled people in terms of some COVID safety precautions, like things that really have nothing to do with what I cover and are just a way to kind of frame me in a certain political light to an audience that's susceptible to it and will attack, you know? What do you wish the Times had done more to

protect you in that circumstance? And again, I don't want to just pick on the Times here. What do you think media companies should do in general to protect their reporters from this kind of harassment? Well, I mean, the Times, I don't want to signal them out because like you said, I think this is probably true of every legacy media organization. But the problem is, is that they buy into this narrative. They believe they're like, oh, we're so sorry to hear that Tucker Carlson's targeting you. But ultimately, we're not really going to do anything to help protect your online reputation. And by the way, why are you being so controversial that Tucker Carlson's so mad at you? Yeah. and we've seen this play out. I mean, Wes Lowry has talked a lot about this.

These media companies need to stop buying into these bad faith narratives. Nilay and The Verge actually wrote this great statement when Sarah Jong was being attacked for saying, you know, tweets about white people or something. They were like, look, this is a bad faith campaign. We are not buying into it. You know, this is bullshit, and this is what's happening. And explaining, this is the bad faith campaign. We are not buying into it. You know, this is bullshit.

And this is what's happening. And explaining, this is the key thing that media organizations refuse to do. Explain to readers what's happening, right? I wish there was a link that the New York Times had put out that was like, hey, Taylor's been the victim of this multi-platform smear campaign, which is what it is. And here's what this is, right? Let's what this is right this let's explain this so when you see that crazy thing or when you see some vc saying this let's call it what it is because it's a smear campaign it's not legitimate i think it is it speaks to the obsession with equating or defining fairness as

objectivity and balance which i think you can be a fair news organization that's not partisan. Of course. Without just trying to say that everything, you know, both sides. I mean, we've talked about the both sides stuff a million times. But like, and so somehow it would be out of character for them to take a stand against Fox News because then they would be seen as the liberal New York Times. When you're right, if you just explain, look, we know exactly what he's doing right now. This is the motivation and we're not going to buy it. Yeah, exactly. And it's and it's so overt and intentional. And when you don't explain that to readers and when consumers don't

understand this and when you don't allow your own reporters to talk about that to their audience. Yeah, that's a problem because then people say they didn't want you to like tweet about it. No, no. And then, you know, of course, I can't say doxing is bad because that's an opinion and I couldn't give an opinion online. Doxing is bad. That's, yeah, that's a controversial opinion. That's an opinion. And I think this goes back to the same thing, right?

Of like, well, what is an opinion? And what, like, I mean, that's just a fact. Right. And also, you know, me speaking up about this, I just want to reiterate this so much because people say, oh, that's attention seeking or your attention. And just the way that women that speak up against sexual assault, right, are told, oh, that's attention seeking. No, I have suffered a lot in my career because of this. I've missed out speaking opportunities. I was supposed to be on another big podcast. They didn't want to deal with the controversy around me that getting rude comments, you know, like I've lost out on career opportunities because of this. I've missed out speaking opportunities. I was supposed to be on another big podcast. They didn't want to deal with the controversy around me that getting rude comments, you know, like

I've lost out on career opportunities because of this. And other people at the New York Times, at so many other media organizations, they don't have the platform that I have. So I want to use my platform to educate people about this, because if you have 5,000 Twitter followers, you're basically at the mercy of this media company to do something. You don't, I have enough, I mean, my followers know what's up. Like, I would say it's just like, no one has like, you know, been showered with positive attention just because they spoke up against harassment.

Exactly. It's not something you do that's like, oh, now I'm just going to sit back and watch the likes pile up and the speaking opportunities. Like, it's a tough thing. And let me say one other thing. Sorry, this is my favorite topic to rant on because I just think media companies need to do so much better. You know, there's this one journalist, a former colleague, that replied to me, oh, and, you know, there's people getting shot in Ukraine. So why should we take harassment seriously?

We should take this stuff because it's all interconnected. I have been physically assaulted on the job before, right? But I was covering Charlottesville. That is part and parcel with this harassment campaign and this extremist forces and all of this like radicalization that's happening. It's all one and it's all the same. And we need to protect journalists in the field, online, everywhere. And we need to just... And people, not just journalists. It's okay to draw lines and we need to draw And people, not just journalists. It's okay to draw lines and we need to draw lines between people

who just have different opinions and are arguing vigorously over some political topic or some issue. It's fine to be on both sides even if the other opinion is odious.

Yes. And then there is harassment, extremism, violence. Then there's trying to get my relatives fired from their job or crazy stuff.

It's so much worse than what people imagine it to be. So I haven't experienced anything like you have, and I still find myself feeling more exhausted and beaten down by social media. Like as every day goes on, especially Twitter, everyone's always mad. Everyone's always outraged. There's very little empathy or grace. You were on the internet all day long on multiple platforms dealing with all kinds of harassment and all this other bullshit we've been talking about. How do you, how do you do it? How do you deal with it? Oh my God. I have a complete mental breakdown. Um, even like, like I have been, I still read

Twitter. I've been tweeting less. I don't get into my mentions as much. I don't try to tweet anything even remotely controversial now. And like prepping for this interview, I was like going through your Twitter feed and I'm just like, oh, how does she do it? I started feeling more anxious just reading your Twitter feed. You should watch my TikToks. Oh, God. No, I mean, I'm a fighter, and I've fought for so long for people to take my beat seriously and to care about, like, I care. I think I built this platform for myself, and I work in media because I want people

to see the world how I kind of see it and care about the things that I care about. And I think that having a platform allows you to do that. Yes, it's exhausting all day, but what's the alternative kind of, I don't know. I'm just like, I don't care if I make people mad. I did have a complete, you know, when I was going through the worst of it at the Times, Ben Collins, who is like such a mentor to me, like literally saved my life. Like, I was in such a low point. And he's, he's so strong. And just like, I think honestly, working for him, like, changed my life. Because I'm just like, wow, I want to be like that. He covers really dark stuff. I cover some dark stuff. And I don't know, I don't really have people always like, Oh, do you take time in nature, you know, in the woods?

I'm like, not really. I mean, sometimes I guess. But you're just – that's your beat. Yeah, but you have to have a strong sense of identity. That's the other thing. And you can get through anything. You can get through the worst thing in life, right, if you have people around you that get it. That's very true.

I definitely have that. Do you think the internet has gotten worse or the world has gotten worse or both? I was actually just last night, I was listening to some 70s playlist on Spotify and I was like, I want to call my mom and ask her if it was better in the 70s.

Was the world better? I don't think so. I think we're just seeing how screwed up everything is now so there's an awareness but I think it was actually worse um before yeah I I think about that period I think about 68 right and the assassinations and the tail end of the civil rights movement and the violence and so I was like I know things have been bad before. I wonder if the Internet is just particularly social media is just showing us all of the bad stuff because there's always been a conflict bias with with media forever. But now media is in our face every second of the day. And so if you open Twitter or any a lot of these platforms, you're not seeing a lot of good news. No, and I think people also want to read the worst news. There's this human tendency to kind of look at all of that.

I think it's good for people to be more informed, but I don't know that people are super much more. They're sort of broadly more informed about the world, but I think we're in this inflection point. Social media is so new. The internet is so new. And I think we're going through this like really hard time. I'm such a believer in technology and I'm definitely a techno-optimist.

I was just going to ask you, why are you a techno-optimist? Because I would love to know. I know. And, you know, I really think I know how much Tumblr, you know, changed my life for the better. I grew up in Connecticut and New York City, but mostly Connecticut for a lot of my formative years in this like stupid preppy town that was really repressive. And I- Greenwich or New Canaan? In Greenwich. In Greenwich. I knew it was one of the two.

And my parents were not bankers or anything like that, but it was this really like, I never felt like I had my people or could fit in. And I always felt so ostracized. And I just, you know, Tumblr and the internet and everything I think allows so many people that have felt so alone to feel connected to others. We're just in a bad part of it right now. It's like the problem isn't technology and human connection. The problem is like these corporations that are warping it and kind of screwing it over. So I think if we can build a better system and recognize the problems and push these tech companies to do better, we will ultimately live in a better, more connected world. Yeah. I know you're working on a book titled Extremely Online, Gen Z, The Rise of Online Creators and the Selling of a New American Dream.

Do you see the rise of online creators and the creator economy as a positive trend? Yeah. I mean, I think it's like the internet, right? There's positive and negatives. Overwhelmingly, I do think it's a good thing because I think that traditional media was so heavily sort of showing only one viewpoint and kind of really catering to the interests of the big, the 1%, as they say, or whatever. I hate to say the words elites because I think it's just the worst. But, you know, there wasn't this diversity, right? I mean, I grew up as a woman in the early 2000s with women's magazines. And just the toxicity, like there's this account on Instagram that shows you, you know, like how much stuff was pushed towards you and how to lose weight, how to please a guy, right?

Yeah. I was like sitting there in a grocery store at the aisle when you're checking out. I remember that as a kid. Yeah. That was just like what you saw all the time. And that media was so much, you know, incredibly toxic. So, you know, is the media we consume now toxic? Sure.

It's toxic in different ways, but it's a lot more diverse. And I think when you look at the media ecosystem and content creators, people are getting voices and being able to develop and speak to audiences, you know, whether it's South Asian Pacific moms, right? Like you can build a whole media company just speaking to that audience. And that's, that's good. That representation matters. Yeah, for sure. No, and that because, you know, there's gatekeepers in the media. And even on Twitter, you see that too, which is like Twitter is whiter, more liberal, more educated. Like there's just, there's certain, there's still some gatekeeping going on.

And so when there's platforms like TikTok and YouTube, it just, it's- And I'm not the tech person that's like, destroy all institutions. We're going to live in a decentralized world. No, that would be very bad. But I think that like, there's a lot of change

that needed to happen. And, you know. If I were to do an episode on creators and the creator economy, who'd be most interesting for me to talk to? Oh, that's such a good question.

Any good TikTok folks that I have? I've talked, I talked to Abby Richards about disinformation. She was fantastic. It's so funny you mentioned her. I was literally,

I was thinking of her. Well, I thought about her when you were talking, because she said the same thing you did about when you're trying to fight misinformation, talking down to people is bad.

Like you've got to have some kind of empathy even with people who bought into these, which I think I've now heard from a couple of people, which I think is right. Yeah, definitely.

I got to think on that because I think when I think of big content creators, a lot of them are the most toxic people in the world I mean PewDiePie is your PewDiePie is not even

as bad as you know the Jake Paul Mr. Beast you know Casey Neistat recently came out with this documentary

which I'm just in full disclosure it's called Under the Influence it's about David Dobrik and the rise and fall although he's still rich and fine at South by Southwest which is phenomenal and he it's called Under the Influence it's about David Dobrik and the rise and fall although he's still rich and fine

at South by Southwest which is phenomenal and he it's so rare to see a content creator really critique that whole system and

that's cool that's very cool so I'll ask the last question that for you now will be very tough maybe the toughest question that I ask every guest

favorite way to unplug how often do you get to do it is the answer just no? No, no, no. I do. I'm not a complete lunatic. So I have tons and tons of hummingbirds. I'm a bird.

I run a bird meme page. Oh, amazing. I love birds. Okay. Ventura Hummingbird Rescue does amazing work. And I have a lot of hummingbird feeders in my yard and deck. And so that's my like, every morning I make them fresh. I've had a couple bird answers now.

Really? Yeah. And then I talked to Jenny O'Dell. Yeah. Oh, yeah. And so she obviously, she's a huge bird person. And then there was a couple other people who said birds was a good way to unplug. It's honestly, I think because birds are so beautiful and peaceful, it gets you out in

nature. Yeah. My brother-in-law has like all the apps now, the bird watching apps. And he's like, you can get like an alert that there's a bird near you. And he's like, run outside and find it. Oh, yeah. I'm like recording their calls. Like, which one is that? It's awesome. I mean, I love hiking too. I went to college in Colorado and grew up partially in Colorado as well. And so I love the mountains. And you cover your beat from primarily out here in Los Angeles, right? Yeah, I live here. This is where it is. And do you think that's like, I mean, is it because you love living here? Or do you think it's just a better place to cover this beat?

Well, I'm a New Yorker. I was born in New York, grew up, most of my family's from there. I lived there half my life, over half my life. And I love New York. But I think that the center of gravity for what I cover is actually much more in LA.A. When you think of the modern Internet, I think L.A. is such a manifestation of that. TikTok's here. Snapchat. You know, the YouTube people that I deal with are here. Content creator ecosystem is here. I know.

Every time I talk to people back on the East Coast, they're always like, how's Hollywood? Is it all like actors and entertainment? I'm like, no, there's an entire tech industry here now. Yes. Tech industry. And it's like, it's so funny to me that there's no, it's like the media is so heavily weighted towards the East Coast still. And I never really understood that until I moved out. Me neither. I moved out here in 2014.

Yeah. And I have now been fully radicalized by the like. Your LA pill. Well, because especially like you're on Twitter and if anything is happening in New York, it's got to be happening everywhere in the world. That's the only thing that matters is something happening. Or D.C. New York or D.C., and then the rest of the country is like, whatever. Well, I just have to say, this is why I worked for this editor, Corey Sika, at the New York Times.

And I loved him as an editor because when I grew up, and I read the New York Times growing up, and it was always kind of about New York. They do so much great coverage now all over the country. But Corey was always really good to talk about the internet, but not just a New York. They do so much great coverage now all over the country. But Corey was always really good to like talk about the internet, but not just like a New York internet. Like he was really good at assigning stories that were like actually interesting. Totally.

It's a big world out there. Taylor Lorenz, thank you for joining Offline. Thank you for having me. Yeah, this is so fun. Offline is a Crooked Media production. It's written and hosted by me, John Favreau. It's produced by Austin Fisher. Andrew Chadwick is our audio editor.

Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis, sound engineer of the show. Jordan Katz and Kenny Siegel take care of our music. Thanks to Tanya Somenator, Michael Martinez, Andy Gardner-Bernstein, Ari Schwartz, Andy Taft, and Sandy Gerard for production support. And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Nar Melkonian, and Amelia Montooth, who film and share our episodes as videos every week.