There Are No Girls on the Internet - Banning TikTok would hurt marginalized communities

Episode Date: March 28, 2023

TikTok disinformation researcher Abbie Richards breaks down the recent TikTok Congressional hearings and why she says a ban on TikTok in the US would hurt marginalized communities the most. Hands off My TikTok. Banning It Would Hurt the Most Marginalized: https://www.newsweek.com/hands-off-my-tiktok-banning-it-would-hurt-most-marginalized-opinion-1789597See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform?

We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting. Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. Learn how podcasting can help your business. Call 844-844-I-Hart. Life is full of hurdles. So how do you keep going? On Hurtle with Emily Abadi,

we're talking with the most inspiring women in sports and wellness from professional athletes, and Olympic champions about the challenges that shape them and the mindset that keeps them moving forward. At our level, at this scale, being able to fail in front of the entire world, like, I can do anything. I can do anything. Listen to Hurtle with Emily Abadi on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Presented by Capital One, founding partner of IHeart Women's Sports. If you are against misinformation and hate speech, you know, you got to be against it on all. all platforms and not just on TikTok. There are No Girls on the Internet as a production of IHeart Radio and UnBossed Creative. I'm Bridget Todd, and this is There Are No Girls on the Internet. Let's talk about TikTok, the super popular social media app owned by ByteDance, a Chinese-based company.

Now, a growing collection of elected officials want TikTok banned in the United States because they say it represents a national security risk. The Biden administration demanded. that TikTok be sold or it could face a ban in the U.S. Congress has also rolled out a bipartisan bill allowing a nationwide TikTok ban called the Restrict Act, which would allow the Secretary of Commerce to ban apps that pose a risk to U.S. national security. Last week, members of Congress held a hearing where they grilled TikTok CEO Shozzy Chu.

Now, y'all know I love TikTok, but I also know that like any other social media app, it is not without its issues. TikTok disinformation researcher and friend of the show, Abby Richards, was one of the first people calling out TikTok for the way that myths and disinformation and hate speech spreads on the app. But for all of her criticisms of TikTok, Abby still says that banning the platform is not the right move. In a recent op-ed for Newsweek that you can read in the show notes, Abby explained why she thinks banning TikTok will ultimately hurt marginalized communities.

I caught up with Abby right after we both watched the hearing. Abby Richards, friend of the show, how are you? I am angry, Bridget. I am an infuriated girl right now. As someone who has really built a lot of your career, not just on TikTok, but like calling out TikTok for the ways that it can spread misinformation and hate speech, what has it been like to watch elected officials talk about banning it? It's been infuriating because they're got to get all wrong. Like, I have literally built my career criticizing TikTok. I will be the first to tell you about, like, the copious amounts of misinformation

and hate speech, extremism, harassment that happened on that app. But to then try and ban it without any evidence that it is a national security threat whatsoever. And just using, like, fearmongering and pointing to other pieces of misinformation that I have tried to debunk about TikTok. And this is like the types of misinformation that emerges off the platform. So if you were watching the hearing yesterday, you would have seen a lot of our congressmen and women

pointing to TikTok challenges that are causing children tons of harm. And I have spent so many like countless hours debunking these exact like moral panics around these challenges where essentially adults trying to. and blame the stupid things that kids do on the newest technology. We see it over and over and over again. But the fact that, you know, that's being used to justify the banning of this app too is infuriating. And I'm deeply concerned about what the consequences will be of banning an app that 150 million Americans use.

So you brought up something really interesting. I know that these like so-called like deadly challenges was a big part of the hearing. And something that, I mean, I almost hate to ask this question, but I feel like it's an important context of the conversation. That is like great news for Facebook. They're like, oh, our strategy is winning. Like our strategy to turn the public and of course, elected officials against TikTok and make them think that like,

it's this like place where all these deadly challenges emerge, even though at least some of those challenges actually emerged on Facebook, if you really want to like get into the nitty-gritty. Did you, so did you see in the hearings the ways that like, fear-mongering, just sort of writ large about technology, was taking center stage in these hearings? It's almost like they're placing this fear that they have of new and emerging technologies and how young people use them and just placing it on one singular app. So rather than actually dealing with the consequences of this rapidly changing society because of the expansion of technology on a monthly basis, we just want to like pin all of our anxiety on one app and cross our fingers that like if we just ban this one app it'll all go away

and so I think we see that a lot with the challenges and like the the steam that they pick up among people who are not on the platform in particular we know that it was the Washington Post that reported that there was like consulting there was the Washington Post that was the Washington Post that was the Washington Post that we're reported that there was a marketing group that was working with meta to place op-eds about, you know, fear-mongering about TikTok. So that's something that we have seen happen before, and it certainly seems like this is a big win for meta. If you are on TikTok at all, you are probably seeing this widespread popularity of almost conspiratorial language about where people are blaming the ban

on meta and saying that like meta is lobbying and Google too to some extent blaming it but yeah blaming it on meta and Google for lobbying Congress people and encouraging them to ban their biggest competition. I don't know how much truth there is to that because I think that there is a lot of geopolitics there too

and it seems like the U.S. government is you know very interested in like splitting the internet as much as possible right now. So it's hard to say if it's like one cause versus another, but this does definitely look like a big win for meta. And they used rhetoric that meta has also pushed before. Yeah.

So in terms of a TikTok ban, so in your piece, you write about how, you know, obviously you are the first one to admit that TikTok has its downfalls and the democratization of like media has its downfalls. But you also talk. about the ways that this could actually harm marginalized communities. How do you see that working? So let's, okay, well, we'll start here. When you consider a, like, institutional media, legacy media, so New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, CNN, they are top-down information systems, which means that these newsrooms essentially look at all of the news and then

decide what is newsworthy and then disseminate it to their audience. TikTok, is much more of a bottom-up information system, which means that anyone can post basically anything that they want, and then the algorithm is working with the users to determine what people are watching, and in that way, the users decide what is of importance to them. So we have two different information systems, and this top-down one tends to privilege white, richer,

more privileged people. tends to be composed of people who come from more privileged backgrounds. It speaks about their problems and things that they are interested in thinking about. They, in particular, like, they have to sell subscriptions or sell ads, so they have to run stories that they know that the wealthy audience that they pander to will be interested in the first place, because it's really not that profitable to tell. stories of marginalized people who can't afford to subscribe to their newspaper. So TikTok, being this much more bottom-up infrastructure, allowed for two major, like,

kind of newish forms of massive dissemination of news and information. The first would be seeing information from firsthand accounts. So that's like when, you know, this started the invasion of Ukraine, where we saw all of these videos of people fleeing the country or being in bomb shelters. So you're seeing people who are actually experiencing the events posting online and that garners attention without editors needing to push it out. And then the second is through trusted messengers. And these are people that can speak to specific communities and they have had a lot of success on TikTok. They have built up these communities where they are trusted sources of information and sometimes opinion, people

go to them to try and feel like they can understand certain problems. And, you know, this could range from a community of like 10,000 people to communities of millions of people. But this is particularly advantageous to marginalized groups who probably can't afford a subscription to the New York Times, or alternatively, they don't want one because they don't trust the New York Times. They've never seen themselves represented in the New York Times. Like, there are so many reasons why they might not turn to legacy media, but they will turn to, like, a trusted messenger who looks like them, who speaks their language, who they feel understands them in their communities.

And so if we dismantle that infrastructure, like suddenly, like flipping off a light switch, you'd be leaving all of these communities without their information infrastructure. And that could be leaving them in the dark. It could be really, really damaging for them. them. And they're very resilient. All of these marginalized communities, whether it's communities of color, queer communities, disabled communities. They're very resilient. They will rebuild. But keeping them in a state of like constantly rebuilding the information infrastructure stops them from being able to do things like organize and mobilize and gain power because they're constantly

rebuilding their information infrastructure. So yeah, I'm mad. I mean, that's such a good point. Like, I, where do I even start? I think that one of the reasons why we're even having this conversation is like a fundamental misunderstanding of the ways that platforms like TikTok have worked and what they have like been used to, like what movements they've been used to build, right? Like I still see people being like, oh, like, it's a kids dancing app, which like part of my soul dies every time I hear that. You know, looking at around like what was happening to women in Iran.

I have to say, I don't think I would have known what was happening. I don't think I would have known what was going on, if not for TikTok. If not for Iranian women saying, hey, this is what's going on. Here's how you can help. Here's what we need. I don't think I would have been able to be plugged into what was happening, if not for TikTok. And so I think that it's like the people who are legislating this don't necessarily have that visibility into the ways that it has functioned for communities who are marginalized.

And so I, if we're going to have any conversation about just an outright ban, they're not even including that in the conversation. And I feel like it kind of like what you said, like if we're going to do something about how these apps and platforms function in our lives and in our like media ecosystem, let's not have it be done hastily and badly, right? Where people are going to be, have the rug pulled out from under them. And their very real issues are not even being discussed or like, you know, brought to the table. Oh yeah, there's no nuance in this conversation whatsoever, and you would think that if we're going to have a conversation about pulling the plug on one of the biggest pieces of communications infrastructure in the world, that is a conversation that we should be very careful about. Dismantling infrastructure that large is not a decision that should be taken lightly, and yet it seems. like our representatives, like, truly have bought into this idea that TikTok is somehow simultaneously just a kid's dancing app and also spyware.

Like, it's really confusing how it can be both. And, like, saying, like, oh, well, you could push specific, you know, you could push specific misinformation campaigns and try and sway the American populace. But then also simultaneously ignoring the fact that, like, it is. a messaging center for a huge portion of the American populace. If you just remove it, there will be consequences. And then when I bring this up, I see some people just like, oh, well, you know, national security is more important. Or it's like everyone will just go to a new app. And like, yes, probably they will. But that doesn't mean that it won't cause a lot of harm in the process. It doesn't

mean that people will, you know, there's still going to be lots of creators who lose their jobs. There's going to be people, people who have built these large audiences who now have nothing. And a lot of people whose voices were empowered and suddenly were coming into a position of discursive power who will now not have access to that. And even if, like, yes, technically, if you look at like a very big picture level, people will migrate to new apps. Sure. But there's still going to be a lot of consequences and we can't really ignore that. Yeah.

I mean, even looking at what's going on with Twitter, there was a time where I was like, oh, everyone's going to be using Mastodon or this or that. It hasn't. I know that our communities, particularly marginalized communities, as you said, are really resilient. And we always find a way to make, we always make a way out of no way, right? Like, that is what we do. But it's watching, watching Twitter become a place where people spend less and less of their time, there hasn't been like one place where everybody is like setting up shop.

And so it takes longer. It's messier. It's more energy for these communities, many of whom, like if you look at the trans community and the queer community are up against quite a bit right now. And so maybe having to pick up and rebuild a new. communications infrastructure elsewhere is not what they need right now. It's maybe not going to be like great for those communities. It'll be horrible for them because now in addition to legislation that is threatening their

right to exist, they also don't have their communities that they can turn to for advice, for support, for information. And they don't have access to their broader communications network to like mobilize. and plan what they will do in response or try and have a place they can turn to to raise funds if they need surgery or if they need legal fees or if they need to get out of whichever state they're in. If you remove the communications infrastructure

and we're talking about a marginalized community that is undergoing a lot of legislative challenges right now, that's putting them in a position that just increases their marginalization. Let's take a quick break. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel,

help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHart's twice as large as the next two combined.

So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Let us show you at iHeartadvertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com. Last night, a blown call changed a game.

This morning, the internet lost its mind. Highlights are trending, opinions are flying, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened. That's where Sports Slice comes in. I'm Timbo. Every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the plays, the controversies, and the stories behind the headlines.

We go straight to the source, the athlete themselves. Their locker room stories, their reactions, the stuff nobody gets to hear. The laughs, the drama, the triumphs, the moments that never make the highlight real. From viral moments to historic games, from buzzer beaters to controversial calls,

we break it down, give you context, and ask the questions everybody wants answered. Sports Slice brings you closer to the action with stories told by the people who live them. Listen to Sports Slice on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slic Life 12 and the TikTok Podcast Network on TikTok.

And we're back. So let me zoom out a little bit and just make sure that I have this right. Lawmakers are saying that they want to ban TikTok because it's a national security risk. This is a little bit above my pay grade. I am no digital national security expert. And I want to make sure that my understanding of this aligns with your understanding. So it is true that TikTok is a Chinese-owned company. And it is true that potentially that could open the door.

for all kinds of national security risks. But what we don't have right now is a smoking gun that this is actually a problem. We're very much speaking in hypotheticals of what could happen or what potentially might happen. So lawmakers right now are trying to legislate TikTok because of this hypothetical threat that might be out there but is not yet revealed itself. Do I have that right? Yeah, I would say you nailed it. Okay.

they haven't provided any evidence of instances where China use TikTok in any sort of antagonistic way towards the U.S. It's only in the hypothetical of like they own it and they maybe could. And even if they could, it's kind of unclear how they would go about doing that. what we do know and like what feels like it's missing from this conversation so much is that even if we were to ban TikTok it would not stop the Chinese government or any government or any bad actor from just buying your data elsewhere. TikTok is roughly collecting about the same amount of data as any of the other major social media platforms and then they profit by selling it.

Well, it was in the hearing that he denied that they sold data, so maybe they're not even selling the data. But social media platforms in general collect your data and sell it. And it is not difficult for anyone with any sort of intention to just buy your data so that they can target you with specific advertisements and specific messages. So if we were actually concerned about the Chinese government or any other government manipulating Americans, you would be implementing like a comprehensive data privacy legislation rather than going after one singular app. Because even if you were to ban TikTok and even if TikTok were using its data in that way, which we still have no evidence that it does, they would still just be able to purchase your data anywhere else. So this is like applying a used gross infected band-aid to a wound that will really not fix the wound at all,

but will almost certainly add additional infections. Oh my God. I was just about to read your quote in the Newsweek piece back to you. But yeah, I mean, this is what like really gets me about this conversation is that like, I guess we have no meaningful. data privacy legislation in this country, right? And so like that the fact that we're even having this conversation indicates to me a complete failure of leadership, governing, and legislating, right? And so I feel like banning TikTok is this big flashy gesture of like, see, we did something, see, we got it

together and governed and made some kind of a gesture toward, you know, data privacy. But it actually does nothing. As you said, like, there's nothing keeping these companies or really anybody from buying our data. Like, there are so many other, the fact that our data is so misused and, like, that is the baseline. Shouldn't we be talking about that? So even if we were to ban TikTok, it would be totally possible for the Chinese government to access Americans data in all other kinds of ways that maybe they have. And so it's like, what does it really do? If the, if the real problem is our lack of data privacy infrastructure in this country, other than being a big flashy gesture, what does banning TikTok actually achieve? I mean, to answer your question,

nothing. On a political level, I think that it is a distraction that allows for the American public to feel like something was done to make them feel safer while simultaneously not passing the legislation that would actually protect the American public. And, like, we are a superpower and we demand that all of the major social media platforms be stemming from us. How dare the Chinese also have one? Yeah. I saw this great USA Today headline that was, like, how, like, how dare China try to get my

data from TikTok? Don't they know that that's for Google and Facebook? But I think, like, yeah, like, we have just, like, lost. the plot of doing anything to meaningfully address this. And yeah, I think like during the hearing, some of the things that came up around like content moderation and stuff, those are important conversations to have, but having them, having TikTok be the face of, you know,

a lack of content moderation or hate speech and harmful content proliferating on a platform, I'm, as someone who has worked in this space for a while, I'm deeply uncomfortable with that because I think it, It creates a scapegoat that lets these other, I would say, sometimes bad actors off the hook, right? Like, we're not having the conversation in a meaningful way to actually get results. We're just making an example out of this one big bad boogeyman, which is TikTok. Yeah, definitely.

And I mean, the examples that they were pointing to, aside from these like moral panic challenges, the examples of violent content on the app were really wilds that they were pointing to it in the first. place, because as far as removing, you know, really violent content, TikTok is better than most of the other platforms. I mean, I professionally criticize them. It's one of my favorite things to do is bullying TikTok, but they will generally be pretty good about removing anything that I flagged towards them. And they have a lot of, like, horrible things on their apps, like absolutely, but all social

media platforms do. And so what you really want to be looking at, too, is just how much reach are those things getting. So one of the videos that they pulled up during the hearing was an imagery of a gun, and I think it included one of the committee members' names. And it was, and they were railing on TikTok because the video had been up for, I believe, 41 days. And what they were failing to account for is that the video had like no likes. It was not a video that had been engaged with whatsoever. So arguably, it's actually TikTok, it's evidence

that TikTok was doing a decent job with its moderation, but that it had, like, siphoned this off and contained it, more than anything else. Like, yes, it shouldn't be on the platform at all, but if it's not getting any reach, really, then TikTok's moderation to an extent is working.

That's the whole point. It's like, you want these things contained. You want them, you want them, quarantined so that they don't spread. So being able to point towards that was like, it was such a strange choice. And then it was additionally strange because we love guns in this country, but apparently have problems with images of them. If you watch the hearing, there were actually some pretty good questions that came up.

Representative Yvette D. Clark asked whether or not TikTok suppresses marginalized creators. And Representative Lisa Blunt-Rochester asked about whether accurate information about abortion is being suppressed on TikTok. But what was much more abundant, sadly, were questions that weren't just silly, but also underscored how little some elected officials seem to know about the technology that they are responsible for legislating. Yeah, I mean, that example really brings me to something that, like, it pains me, but I can't not talk about it with you. How some of the questions and examples that these elected officials were raising were just embarrassing. like, you know, Representative Richard Hudson from North Carolina. Like, I'm sure you know what I'm going, what I'm getting at,

the like exchange about whether or not TikTok accesses users home Wi-Fi. Like, do you ever, like, do you ever feel like the people that we have elected to represent us and to advocate for us and our interests up against Big Tech just are making it clear that they're talking about legislating technology that they seem to not really understand or get? No, it was quite clear that no one on that committee had ever opened TikTok. Like, they had never used it before. They're just making wild statements and accusations and guesses about how it works. And if you go on TikTok now, in response to that committee, I mean, they're just being ridiculed.

Because the users can tell that these congressmen and women have never really actually used the app or know what they're talking about in any way, shape, or form. And it is mind-bogglingly infuriating to witness people who don't even understand how Wi-Fi works or, like, couldn't tell you the difference between a modem and a rotor, trying to legislate major social media policies, like, and major data privacy policies. Like, they don't understand any of it. So how are we expecting them to even know where to begin when it comes to those bigger legislative problems? It really goes back to what you said in the beginning of our conversation of like, if we're going to do it, let's not do it badly.

Let's not do it in a way that like we are talking about a pretty major communications platform. If we're going to do it, let's not have the people in charge make it clear time and time again that they have no idea what they're talking about. Maybe. Just maybe. Just maybe. That could maybe be a good place to start is like knowing that you need to use Wi-Fi to access TikTok. Like, I, oh my God. I really liked the exchange about whether you're not TikTok tracked how much your pupils dilated in response to certain videos. And it's like, no, they look at watch time. They're not like reading your pupils to see how big they get in response to each video. I don't know what Black Mirror episode you think we are in. We're in a different one.

We're still in one, but it's different. Just a different episode. Yeah, I don't think that TikTok is like logging your biometrics, dude. Like it just was some of those questions were concerning. And I also think they just like reveal how we just. need younger people, I think, like, younger folks, both in the, both in elected office and also being listened to, I think is really, really important. People who actually have real world experience with the technology that they're talking about, because it was, as you said,

it was just so clear that many of the folks in Congress had just had no idea what they were talking about. Yeah, no, we would absolutely need to have younger people or just more, you know, digitally literate people writing these laws. Because if you truly don't understand that, like, the app needs to track where your eyes are so that they can put sunglasses filters on you, like, that is just something that a younger person would need to explain and need to help them understand.

And if all of our legislators are, you know, I don't want to say dinosaurs, but, like, they're acting like dinosaurs right now, and I feel like it's called for, then we can't expect solid digital legislation from them. Like, they don't know what they're doing. They don't understand anything beyond email at this point. Yeah.

That is sad. I mean. It's really sad. It's really scary. Because if you want to talk about, like, the American people being vulnerable, our leaders not even understanding, like, the, you know, bare minimum that they need to understand about how the Internet works. Like, that leaves us quite vulnerable.

That's such a good point. That seems like a much bigger threat. Our leaders failing to understand anything about technology, it feels like a much bigger threat than this TikTok bogeyman scare. So what do you say to someone listening who is like, I am concerned about the national security threat that TikTok poses. Still, what would you say? say to that person? I would say that at this point in time, we have seen more evidence of Facebook

engaging in schemes to manipulate the American public than we have TikTok. I mean, we have evidence of Cambridge Analytica. We know that Meta was involved with this. We have no evidence of TikTok doing it. So at the moment, all of our fears are based around a hypothetical and that they are based around this like boogeyman of China. And that that might not be the best place to create legislation from. Like that mentality might not lend itself to the creation of like really strong digital privacy legislation. And that I mean also if you are personally concerned about TikTok, like there's no reason

why you have to have it on your phones. that's a decision that you can totally make. If you have national secrets on your phones, like maybe don't have TikTok on it, but then also like maybe don't use any other social media platforms because they are all gathering your data. More after a quick break. Another podcast from some SNL late night comedy guy,

not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. my guest, S&L's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an acapella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes.

Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large. is the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to,

they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Call 844-844-I-Hart to get started. That's 844-8-4-I-Hart.

Last night, a blown call changed a game. This morning, the internet lost its mind. Highlights are trending, opinions are flying, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened. That's where Sports Slice comes in. I'm Timbo. Every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the plays, the controversies, and the stories behind the headlines. We go straight to the source, the athlete themselves,

their locker room stories, their reactions, the stuff nobody gets to hear. The laughs, the drama, the triumphs, the moments that never make the highlight real. From viral moments to historic games, from buzzer beaters to controversial calls, we break it down, give you context and ask the questions everybody wants answered. Sports slice brings you closer to the action, with stories told by the people who live them. Listen to SportsSlic. On the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Sliced Life 12 in the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. Let's get right back into it.

Other platforms are also gathering your data and behaving badly and acting in ways that cause all kinds of harm, but this legislation is very much black and white. And it seems very much based in scaremongering about TikTok as this potential boogeyman. And I just don't think that fearmongering. is a place that will elicit good, meaningful, substantive legislation. You know, black and white thinking on a nuanced issue is bad enough. But black and white legislating, I don't know. I don't like it.

I don't like it either. I don't trust it. It's not coming from a smart place. It's coming from a fearful place. And that's not where we get good legislation. And if you want to have a much bigger conversation about social media and the future of social media and whether it's bad for us, whether it's good for us, what harms it does, but also, you know, what net positives it brings to the world. I am here for that conversation. It'll take us a few years to get to the bottom of it. It is not like a quick and easy conversation to have. But I do think that that's one we should be having.

And I've been trying to push for it. It's like, okay, well, there are all these issues with, like, misinformation and extremism on social media. And we know that these platforms benefit from the posting and sharing of content that is, that appeals to our emotions that is often false or is, you know, over simplifying really complex issues or is just like extremist and hateful in nature. We know that they benefit from that because that's the sort of content that keeps people on their platforms consuming content and therefore consuming ads. And I would like us to be working towards the creation of like digital communities that are better for our emotional and social well-being.

I could absolutely see that occurring in the future, is like creating these digital public spaces where people can go share information, but that aren't driven exclusively by profit and are built with the goal of creating a more well-informed and empathetic public. but that doesn't happen just because you ban one app you don't like. That is deep, deep infrastructural change that we need to make,

and I think is the only way really forward unless we want to drive ourselves insane. But that's not a light and easy task. It's certainly not going to be achieved by banning one app. Yeah, if you are against misinformation and hate speech, you know, you've got to be against it on all platforms and not just on TikTok because Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, they all have it. I mean, Twitter right now is also such a mess. Just as a, like, it is wild to watch all of this, this giant attack on TikTok. Meanwhile, Twitter is just falling apart, crumbling and has disintegrated as like this,

this reasonable public space. And the fact that, you know, we thought we would be losing TikTok and essentially be losing Twitter that would really leave Meadow with a lot of power. But I also think it's interesting that, like, one rich guy can just buy and ruin Twitter. But, like, God forbid, an app has just some Chinese ownership. If you had to say, do you think that TikTok is going to be banned in the United States? I'm pretty 50-50 right now. I don't like it.

If you had asked me before, I'd be like, probably not. Because I thought that the Dems were smarter than that. I don't know about that. I know. I know what I, in hindsight, what was I thinking? They love losing. But I was baffled that the Biden administration pushed for the sale versus ban

because I thought that they knew that if they lost TikTok they would not be able to mobilize voters in 2024 but apparently they don't know that and they just are down for political suicide I really it baffles me so I continue to be wrong and surprised by what they will do in the name of like this weird

singular bipartisanship over xenophobia. It's the one thing that they can relate to the Republicans on right now. Also, you know, you made the point about mobilizing younger voters. I said this on a panel and it got like a laugh and I was like, oh, I was actually serious. I think, and this might sound, it's going to sound how it sounds, but I truly believe this. I think if TikTok is banned in the United States, I see that going very poor for Biden and the Democrats. Not to make this like a horse race issue, but I think that some of the most interesting, meaningful organizing of young folks politically is happening on TikTok. If you look at the conversations that younger folks are leading on when it comes to things like climate justice, those conversations are happening on TikTok and they are mobilization conversations.

So I don't, I'm not saying that I think that young people will be like, oh, we love TikTok and we're not going to vote for Joe Biden just because he banned it and we love it. I think it's much deeper than that. I think that Gen Z uses it as a platform to do political and social mobilization and organizing. If you show that you don't, not just don't understand that, don't see it, don't value it, ignore it. That is going to be a problem. And so it's not an issue of like, oh, these whiny brats just want their dance videos. No, no, no, no, no. I think it's much deeper than that. And if you show that you aren't even able to see that, it is going to be a problem. A hundred percent. And people keep playing this off as like, oh, you're going to piss off Gen Z. And it's like, that's less what I'm worried about. I think a lot of Gen Z would still, you know, the ones who are going to vote anyways will still vote for the lesser of two evils. Like, that's going to continue. But what will you will, but what you will lose is all of this mobilization. where people are getting their news, where people are having lots of political discourse, what is helping young people to understand the world is the discourse on TikTok, is the trusted messengers that they turn to on TikTok.

And if you take that away, like, they're just going to not be as politically engaged. Because TikTok made it really easy for them to get politically engaged and get politically informed and deep dive into this discourse. Like, you know, people keep saying TikTok is this dancing app, and it's so, so wrong because, like, fundamentally it's a discourse app. It's where people are having conversations about the world. That's why, like, stitching was such a groundbreaking feature because you could take one video and respond to it, and you get this, like, built and constructed constant discourse about political and social issues. if you remove that, you know, they might still be left leaning and like some of them might vote, but they won't be as informed on certain issues. They won't necessarily know where to,

or like where to be putting their energy for certain political issues. Like they would just be losing so much of their infrastructure, and that will have severe costs, particularly for the Dems. And it's really mind-blowing to me that they don't recognize that. Yeah, I'm just, I'm completely shocked. I shouldn't be. I shouldn't be. I'm years into this. I shouldn't be. Well, here's, I mean, big question. Where will Abby Richards go if there's no TikTok? Like, I think of you as the person who is like made a platform. Like one of the first people who really made a platform from calling out and criticizing TikTok

and advocating for it to be better. Where do you personally see yourself showing up if it's banned? Here's the thing is like on one level, I think I experienced some panic where it's like if I lose my platform on TikTok, do I lose my power? Like, you know, will I still have work to do? Will people still see me as valuable? And then after, you know, a little bit of dwelling in that panic, I got over it because it's like, no, I'm privileged. I have a lot of like institutional power at this point. Like I can pivot to other platforms if I want. And fundamentally, I think that the deeper we go into a tech dystopia, the more job I actually have, which is dark, but I think it's true.

That was some dark, Abby. That was some dark shit. But I mean, you're right, right? Like, you call out TikTok, but really you're calling out, like, our media ecosystem, the way that it impacts our democracy. Like, it's so much more than one platform. Your voice is about so much more than one platform. I guess I'll put it that way. But that, but I agree with you that, like, you know, when I started this tech podcast, I never knew.

the like, I remember thinking like, oh, maybe I'll, what if I run out of content? What if I run out of like things to talk about? Nope, I sure never will. Never ever. I mean, my goal is to eventually put myself out of a job. I would really like if I could work hard enough and eradicate all of the misinformation and hate speech online. And then one day I get to retire and I don't need to do this job anymore. I don't see that happening. So I think, you know, TikTok is banned. I will go to other platforms, I will build out my presence on other platforms too. I'm far more concerned about the people who don't have the institutional backing and who don't have power outside of their TikTok presence. They will have their lives much more uprooted than I think I will.

We are in such uncharted waters. Yeah, no, truly what happens to the creators. Like, because Congress, I saw one congressman like went on Politico with like, no, they'll be able to switch to a different platform. As if they haven't spent last like two, three, four years building a platform so that now they can do brand deals or now they can make money from the creator fund. And now, oh, no, they can just start over. It'll be fine. Who cares? Like, it's, it's. Like, do you know how long that takes?

Like, yeah. But again, it's showing that the people who are meant to be legislating this just don't have a real, realistic understanding of what they're actually talking about. And when they make suggestions like that, it's like, have you taken a step back to ask what that actually looks like in practice? Yeah, I don't think that they have. I will say where there are marginalized creators on a platform facing some kind of something that they don't like, there's always really good. pushback. And so scrolling the platform after those hearings, got to give it up to the creators who are using their strengths, creating good content to, you know, educate people on those hearings and sort of what they thought about them. I've seen such hilarious TikToks coming out of that.

I saw one creator who was pretending to be a lawmaker in Congress who was like, I want to know and my wife wants to know why every time I open TikTok, all I see is these big-breasted women. making fun of how silly some of their questions were. So that's something I'll always have faith in is marginalized creators, being able to use social media platforms to poke fun at legislators and to spotlight and educate folks on something that they do not like. Oh, 100%. The TikTok's coming out of this have been phenomenal.

I was, like, getting a lot of comfort last night in just seeing the conversations that were being had. Even, did you say see any of the Chew edits, the edits of the CEO? People were making, like, spicy edits of him. Being like, save TikTok. Those were great. There were a lot of... I want to see if I can pull one.

I know I just screenshoted one this morning that was giving me life. Oh, it was the Capcut meme of Pedro Pascal eating a cracker sandwich. And then it says, me watching the CEO of TikTok defend the American people and our rights from the literal U.S. government, all while they mispronounce his name, have no knowledge about how Wi-Fi works, and are saying they are doing it for the children when there was yet another school shooting that I didn't see on the news, but I did see reported on TikTok. Doesn't that really say at all? That does. That sums it up, doesn't it?

So, like, TikTok is reading this stuff for shit, but, like, the rest of the internet, I don't know so much, because there was also that study that came out, or I don't know if it was a study. It was a report. Well, I want to say, no, I don't even remember which news organization ran it. That was the biggest determining factor of whether or not you support the TikTok band is whether or not you use TikTok. Yeah, so there you go. It's like people who don't have direct familiarity with the issue are the ones who are in favor of an outright ban. Yeah, it's much more, it is much easier to convince people who are not even using the.

that the app is dangerous because they are not exposed to it. They don't understand how it actually works. It's much easier to fearmonger about something that you're unfamiliar with. It's much easier to hijack people's feelings of fear and distrust if they don't even know the other group that they're dealing with. If they're completely unfamiliar with the topic, then you can just push fearmongering on them. But the people on TikTok who have their own experience with it,

you know, can read that. is bullshit. Yeah, totally in favor of some comprehensive sweeping data privacy legislation that would absolutely affect TikTok. Let's do that from a place of reason. And, you know, national security of the American people. Like, if we actually cared about that, let's go write that legislation. In the end, TikTok and its part in our larger digital media ecosystem is huge. So a potential ban would have major consequences, not just for the millions of people who use it, but for the way that information and discourse is spread. Oh, this was cut from my Newsweek article, but it was good.

It's, so like I'm a member of this coalition of TikTok members. I'm a member of this coalition of TikTokers, TikTok influencers, with, the coalition has over 500 members, and collectively they have over 500 million followers. And to put that in perspective, I believe that that is more than the collective monthly viewership of like Foxy and NMSN, and B.C., which is about $5 million. So not just more, it's like a hundred times more than their monthly viewership. And that's just like their following count. But I thought that that was, you know, really...

I thought that that was a good way to highlight just how... vast this infrastructure is and that we're not talking about cutting off like a couple million people or like a handful of people. We're talking about dismantling in a communications infrastructure that is so vast that it is like literally hundreds of times the reach of the biggest news networks that we can think of. That is not a decision that we should be taking lightly. I'm so glad you added that. I do think that for people who don't use TikTok, it's probably, it's probably easy to think of it as like, it's like that arrested development line. Like it's a, it's a TikTok, Michael. How many users could there be a hundred? Like, they might not necessarily know the gravity of

the way that it functions as a communications platform and its role in our larger ecosystem of digital communications, which is vast. It's huge. It's huge. And people don't understand that it's, it's not a dancing app and that it is, in fact, an information app that is a discourse app and that there is like so much existing infrastructure, which has been built over the course of the last few years to mobilize people, particularly for progressive causes. If you take that away, we're going to have to rebuild it. And rebuilding takes time. Rebuilding is a way of keeping people down, right? Like the reason why legacy news institutions are so powerful is that they don't have to rebuild every four to five years. It's like you build power by, you know, having stability in your

institution. And if you take all of these young people who have finally found a bit of power, and particularly marginalized young people who have finally found a bit of power, and then you force them to rebuild again, you're removing all of their access to power. And like, sure, they'll get it back in a few years, but a lot can happen in a few years. Yeah. And wouldn't it be, and I guess it would be to have to force these folks to have to rebuild for something that didn't even really achieve much, right? For something that, like, didn't even really achieve much meaningful action in terms of protecting digital national security, that is, like, to me, it's like the real cruelty of it, I guess. Yeah. I mean, for it to be done

for such a pointless cause, for which there is no evidence of harm in the first place, is deeply unsettling to be like, you know, really challenging our First Amendment rights in the way that they are threatening to with zero evidence. Again, we have more evidence against Facebook than we do against TikTok and to ban TikTok. I mean, it's such a concerning choice for the First Amendment.

And, like, usually I'm on the misinfo side of, like, having to be like, well, you know, free speech is not free reach. But, like, right now it's like, yes, no, free speech does matter. And like, this is a First Amendment issue. Yeah, this is the government regulating. Like, how many times are you in the comment section being like, well, this isn't the government regulating something? It's a private platform regulating something. So it's a little bit different. Maybe don't evoke the First Amendment.

This is actually the government regulating something. So, like, all those free speech people, like, mobilize. Like, let's hear from you. I know. It's like so quiet from the free speech absolutionist right now. Like they cared a lot when TikTok was censoring medical misinformation that TikTok had every right to be to be removing. But if the government is actually coming for a platform where 150 million people practice the utilization of their voices, is that seems like a free speech issue to me. That seems like a challenge on our First Amendment rights.

Really scary one, too. I was like, yeah, watching the hearing was quite scary to me. What scared you about it? I think that there was this strange element of like, okay, I did, I, when I learned about the Red Scare and history class, I didn't anticipate living through another one. that was like weird to watch in real time. I was like, oh, I thought that was like a historical event. I thought we didn't do that again. So it had that element to it where they were like asking the CEO of TikTok who,

I don't know his personal finances, but if he's not a billionaire, he is a multimillionaire. Just asking him if he's a communist had a wild tone to it. But on a much deeper level, the lengths that they will go to to take away our free speech in the name of just xenophobia, that was really scary to me. I don't think that that symbolized like massive steps towards a more progressive world. that felt like taking steps backwards towards, you know, stricter borders and more nationalism and stricter laws and just creating this divide between the West and the East and just trying to reimpose this iron curtain of sorts, this digital iron curtain. Like, that felt really dark to me.

I mean, when you put it that way, yeah, it's, I hadn't picked up on that vibe, but now that you say it, it is scary. And I don't think it's, I don't think, I don't think it's discourse that leads us to a more just progressive world. It seems like it leads us someplace else. Yeah, it seems like it shuts us down and puts us. deeper into isolationist thinking and that's not the type of thinking that I want to see our world's practicing. I would like to see, you know, the internet was always promised as this thing that would like bring global citizens together. I don't believe that we are in any sort of like technological utopia or that the internet is perfect. But I do see the internet's capacity for

connection and connection with people that you would otherwise, like, never have spoken to or heard their stories. So earlier, you were talking about, like, seeing women in Iran protesting and how you feel like you wouldn't have been exposed to that without TikTok. And I worry that if we continue down this path of implementing these strict bands and, like, insisting that we control all of these social media platforms that like it'll continue to cut us off and that's not what I want to see here fucking here Abby thank you so much for being here this was informative I'm really glad I everyone should read your Newsweek piece we're going to put it in the show notes but yeah this was great I feel like I learned a lot I'm glad that you let me come rant I wrote the piece

and I was like I know who I need to send this oh you have an open invite anytime you're like I'm annoyed about this you've been open invite. Well, you know, I love coming on your show. It's always fun. You were like one of the first ever podcast that I did and you were so nice to me. Oh my God. You were, I remember it very clearly. You were such a pro. I had no idea what I was doing. It was all I was faking it. Now you've got the mic. You've got the pop filter. Look at you. Now I know what we're doing. I know that I can like when I first started, I didn't know that I could like restart a sentence when I like the first time I ever did So the pressure was way higher.

But now I know I can restart. Oh, I love a restart. I restart like, I catch myself doing it in casual conversation or I'm like, nope, no one's going to come in and clean this up. Like, you know. You're like, there's no editor right now. Still, sometimes it's good to just restart because you're like, you know what? That sentence had a false, it was a faulty start.

And it doesn't even matter if I'm being recorded. It'll make more sense if you just let me scratch it and start over again. If you're looking for ways to support the show, check out our merch store at tangoody.com slash store. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech or just want to say hi? You can reach us at hello at tangooty.com. You can also find transcripts for today's episode at tangoody. There are no girls on the internet was created by me, Bridget Todd.

It's a production of IHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative. Edited by Joey Pat. Jonathan Strickland is our executive producer. Tarry Harrison is our producer and sound engineer. Michael Amato is our contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts from IHeartRadio,

check out the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. your group perform. We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever

you get your podcasts. Life is full of hurdles. So how do you keep going? On Hurtle with Emily Abadi, we're talking with the most inspiring women in sports and wellness from professional athletes, coaches, and Olympic champions about the challenges that shape them and the mindset that keeps them moving forward. At our level, at this scale, being able to fail in front of the entire. World. Like, I can do anything. I can do anything. Listen to Hurtle with Emily Abadi on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Presented by Capital One, founding partner of IHeart Women's Sports. Last night, a blown call changed a game. This morning, the internet lost its mind, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened. That's where Sports Slice

comes in. I'm Timbo. In every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the biggest moments in sports and giving you the real story behind the headline. and we're going straight to the source, the athletes themselves, their locker room stories, their reactions in the moment, and the stuff nobody gets to hear. Listen to SportsSlice on the IHeart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slicalife-12

in the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed human.