There Are No Girls on the Internet - DISINFORMED: Is kicking Trump off Twitter censorship? (Spoiler: IT’S NOT)

Episode Date: February 9, 2021

It's the first day of Trump’s second impeachment trial. And no matter what happens, it’s clear he used social media to threaten our democracy with disinformation. Nora Benavidez, civil rights attorney and director of Pen America’s US Free Expression Programs, explains how so many are getting it wrong when it comes to platforms and free speech and how we could all benefit from just slowing down online.Follow Nora: https://twitter.com/AttorneyNoraCheck out Pen’s how-to guide on talking to your family about misinformation: https://pen.org/how-to-talk-to-friends-and-family-who-share-misinformation/Questions? Comments? Just wanna say jambo? Hit us up at [e-mail] Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee 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 adds 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 IHart 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, and 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 Sports Slice on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slices Life 12 in the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. You're listening to This Informed, a mini-season. from there are no girls on the internet. I'm Bridget Todd. Today marks the start of Trump's second impeachment trial for his role in the insurrection on January 6th. Here's Maryland Representative Jamie Raskin

earlier today at the trial. If that's not an impeachable offense, then there is no such thing. On the day Congress met to finalize the presidential election, he would have you believe there is absolutely nothing the Senate can do about it.

Now, it's clear that Trump continuously used social media to spread disinformation, including the repeated baseless lie that he won the 2020 election and that it was being stolen from him. That lie, as we know, culminated in his supporters attacking the Capitol. But even before that, Trump has always used social media to incite violence, stoke tensions, and spread distortions and baseless claims. That is, until January 8th, when Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms finally gave Trump the boot. But don't give tech leaders too much credit. They only did. this after years of pressure from platform accountability advocates who warned that failure to act

could lead to the kind of violence that we saw on January 6th. And even now, Facebook's oversight board is weighing whether they made the right decision by kicking Trump off the platform. So it's possible that we haven't even heard the last of Trump on social media. A lot of people were questioning by banning Trump from social media, his free speech was being threatened. But Nora Benivides, free speech attorney and the director of U.S. free expression programs at Panamerican A nonprofit that protects and promotes free expression, says that when it comes to understanding free speech on social media platforms, a lot of us are asking the wrong questions. I remember when the insurrection happened, it felt for me like total whiplash.

There was still a kind of hesitancy and a concern like what was going to happen in the lead up to the inauguration. And so that January 6th just somehow felt not too surprising, but still very, very jarring. And in, you know, the weeks that have followed, we've just tried to, you know, be responsive to people. You know, people have questions like, were the people storming the Capitol exercising their First Amendment rights? Did Trump have a right to be on Twitter and on Facebook? And so a lot of questions have emerged that we've just tried to be ready to answer and to talk with people about what's really happening because they're really, really complex issues. So full disclosure, like I have worked, as you know, work with organizations that have tried to pressure social media platforms to take disinformation seriously. And so a big part of that has been asking them to remove Trump when he, you know, tweets things that are incidiary or like inciting violence. And truly, I don't think I ever thought I would see Trump be banned from platforms. Like I remember when that happened, I was fully kind of surprised because I think I was quite used to the idea.

that, oh, he's just above consequences or accountability. There will never be any of it. So, you know, I was quite surprised. What did you think when you saw Trump being banned from these platforms? The insurrection happened on, I think, Wednesday. And then the cascade of first, you know, there were labels placed on a video of his. There were, then he was banned, you know, permanently suspended from Twitter. And it just sort of felt like this jaw-dropping cascade, where I was like, this is really happening. And immediately, though, you know, I was watching on my own Twitter people saying, this violates the First Amendment, this is like an egregious assault on free speech.

There was so much hate and confusion and frankly, miseducation. And part of what, you know, is important to keep in mind is that Twitter, Facebook, those are private companies. And you know I am a First Amendment lawyer. I firmly believe in the ability for all of us to engage in open discourse, to hear what other people think. But Trump has absolutely contributed to, if not been the biggest super spreader of dangerous misinformation. That I think is absolutely disinformation, you know, with the goal of kind of dividing us and making people believe these false narratives. Deplatforming is actually pretty effective.

booting Trump from social media almost immediately slowed the spread of false information on those platforms. Zignal Labs found that false claims about election rigging drop from 2.5 million mentions to 688,000 mentions across platforms and hashtags commonly used to spread election rigging claims like hashtag March for Trump

dropped by 94.3%. And it's not just Trump. A study conducted by the Election Integrity Partnership found that just a few dozen pro-Trump Twitter accounts, including Trump's own account, were the original sources for about a fifth of misleading election claims around the 2020 election. It really goes to show you how just a small handful of accounts can be responsible for major chaos on platforms. I was actually very much in favor of his being removed.

I think what was necessary and really good was that data immediately emerged from a couple of researchers that found about 73% of the misinformation that had been on Twitter was no longer there. thanks to his removal, along with the removal of about 37 others, who were sort of the biggest influencers and spreaders of misinformation. And I think that we need data like that to be able to make the case again to platforms in the future. Because, you know, the big criticism was this just didn't happen soon enough. And I'm all here for the criticism, but I also think we need to lay the foundation for like, what are solid policy and community guideline standards that the platforms are implementing that

then have data to back up that when they do that, it benefits the health of the internet? People were able to say, like, here was the measurable impact of banning Trump and other accounts who were responsible for spreading this kind of thing. Here was the measurable impact. And truly, what has been the downside? Less noise, less lies, you know, spreading like wildfire on these platforms. It's been interesting to see how there was such a quick benefit, like a quick and obvious benefit with like very few in my book, if any, downsides.

I think there may be the downside of people who supported Trump feeling somehow more, quote unquote, like in air quotes, I'm doing this, censored. And that somehow their censorship, right, makes them emotional, driving them potentially to be more upset. And you know my work on sort of the psychology side of misinformation and that I think we have to, you know, stay vigilant to the ways that people will be emotional to information, the way we are all emotional to news. I mean, our relationship to news is emotional. We've seen the way, you know, platforms hinge our interactions on our likes or dislikes. And so it's, I think, important to make sure we don't completely marginalize people that may actually be movable.

Maybe not today, but down the line. And so I just, I kind of have this like lingering concern about how we engage those that continue to believe alternate realities, you know, that continue to want to see Trump. And it's really hard to reach those people. So I just, it's like a sort of weird gut instinct where I kind of wonder, what are they thinking about? How can we sort of call them in and talk with them about these issues in ways where, you know, if they had been unmovable before, slowly, slowly some of these Trump supporters are starting to see the cracks in that reality. I hadn't even thought about that, sort of the kind of emotional response that someone might have to feeling the shame of, you know,

a platform saying your ideas, what you have to say is not acceptable here. I hadn't even really thought about that. And I think it really highlights to me that at the heart of a lot of your work with Penn America and just generally is empathy and sort of trying to remember that deep down, we're talking about people, people are all complex. We are all, all humans are like driven by a complex series of feelings and motivations internally. And so remembering that these are not just users, quote unquote, but they're people who have these complex emotional responses. I think that empathy can get lost in conversations about disinformation and how it spreads and what motivates people to spread it. But I am grateful that that idea seems to be at the heart

of so much of the work that you do to create off-ramps for folks like this. Bridget, I have to say I never thought I would play even close to like the therapist role that I feel like I do sometimes. You know, being a lawyer, thinking about the law, thinking about legality on Twitter or Facebook, and yet being faced with people who ask questions and actually want to engage somehow. And I think that the problem the Internet has bred is that, as we all know, we're siloed. we seek out our own and difference of any sort, whether it's something we can accept and listen to or something we find so offensive and egregious. We simply want to shut it down and not hear it. And Trump, I think, went so far as to then when he heard things he didn't like, he called those lies.

And the tendency, of course, is to shut people out, to disengage. And that is not getting us anywhere. In fact, I think the idea that we never, engage with people who are radicalizing or that we never seek out others has led to things like the insurrection where we need to engage. We need to find entry points. And I think we need to have a kind of expectation setting where we're not all going to agree, but we can exist in disagreement and be civil and believe in each other's humanity. Of course, if our disagreement is grounded in someone believing you or I shouldn't exist or have the same rights, that's different. But the level of empathy that I hope we can bring sometimes to our online discourse is something that can

try to create space for understanding. And I'm really glad that you see and talk about empathy in this way, that you see the value of those things, that as someone who is a storyteller, you know, you focus in media and stories, like it's so critical to remember that even if we find it somehow offensive, like we have to find ways to engage and find each other's humanity, even if it sounds corny. It doesn't sound corny. I mean, I often, it's, it's, you said that you feel like a therapist. And when I have these conversations about tech platforms, it's funny how often they turn, they turn to sort of things that sound a bit corny, like empathy or, you know, remembering there's a human on the other end of the screen, things like that. And I think you, you really hit on something

that is one of the reasons why I'm so interested in disinformation and making the show is that I feel that the thing that you just described of silos and sort of people being closed off and all of that, I feel like we've gotten to a place where you can no longer assume, it's no longer easy to assume good faith when you're having discussions on the internet, right? When I first got online, the reason why I found such a freedom and love of talking on the internet was because it felt like I was able to reach so many different people, get so many different perspectives, and it felt relatively safe. I feel that that safety is gone, right? Like when I have a conversation with somebody on Twitter, I'm not sure if there's someone who we can have a good faith disagreement or a good faith dialogue.

It just feels like we're no longer able to assume good faith in all of our discourse online because the temperature has been turned up so high in part by things like disinformation and, you know, lies and violent rhetoric online. I'm going to like make it really personal. Sometimes I get retweeted. on Twitter by people who then have a comment about my tweet. And often the assumptions, often wild assumptions people will make about more of me and who I am really stress me out.

And I totally, totally know what you're saying where it feels like you may not be able to trust someone. And so I often try to then engage with the people that retweet me, whether it is someone on frankly any side of the political spectrum making these assumptions. And in no way to defend myself, but just to open conversation, I've had really wonderful learning experiences where people will kind of turn down their temperature when I respond in ways that engage them with open-ended questions, which is hard to do. I mean, you can't do that at scale every day. And that's one of the questions that I think about all the time is how we scale.

empathy. But in the meantime, those like little one-offs that can help change or slowly, you know, bring people together and help their attitudes kind of move at a slower pace where they're assuming less about me or you. I think is a great thing. And the internet has changed. I mean, I remember when something like Section 230, you know, not to get technical, but when that was an exciting regulation to actually help people feel safer on the internet, to be able to like, have conversations on blogs. And the, you know, the internet is just such a different place now that it feels so, you're always like just about to have a complete crisis on Twitter.

That's how I always feel. I'm like, oh, this could really go badly. And we can't all spend all of our days, you know, having those meaningful, slow conversations. So I guess I just sort of wonder, like, how do we scale empathy? Let's take a quick break. other podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman,

help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel, help an acapella band with their between songs banter. There's that worst singer in the group? The worst? Yeah. Me. Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, uh,

you only got in because your parents made a huge. huge donation. The group. The yard herds, right? That's the name. The Harvard Yard. They're open. Do you have a name suggestion?

We're open. Since you guys are middle age, one erection. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Humor me. I need some jokes to make me seem funny. Run a business and not.

Thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad-supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as 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.

Let us show you at iHeartadvertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com. and grew up in an isolated polygamous sect. We were God's chosen kingdom on earth. He felt destined for greatness. So when a swaggering Armenian businessman catapults Jacob into an extraordinary world, he doesn't look back. Ferraris and Lamborghinis, private jets,

meeting the president of Turkey. I'm Michelle McPhee, and this is one of the most shocking criminal conspiracies I've ever come across. When Jacob met Levant this plant, too, a billion dollar fraud. But with two kings from entirely different worlds, just how long can their empire survive? The largest tax investigation in American history.

You need to tell me what you know. Is somebody coming after me? Jacob told Levan, you're ruining my life. Listen to Kingdom of Fraud on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. 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 athletes 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. SportsSlice brings you closer to the action with stories told by the people who live them. Listen to SportsSlice on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slicelife-Life 12 and the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. And we're back. I say this a lot. We need to completely reimagine how we think of the internet. And that means rethinking so much of the infrastructure around technology.

It means creating a tech. that centers and valorizes empathy, not scale. It means building platforms that center people, not, quote, users, or clicks or how much time we spend with our faces at a screen. Now, what I'm describing is a radical reimagining, and it might sound as big or as complicated as, like, smashing the patriarchy or ending white supremacy. But I believe that it's possible. I think there are enough people out there like you and me who truly believe in the power

and possibility of the Internet and the power of expression. And I believe that when we come together, big, radical things really are possible. And I know that we have the power to radically rethink the Internet so that it's safer and more accessible and so that it works for more people. I totally agree. I mean, and smashing the patriarchy and ending white supremacy are also, you know, valid and worthwhile endeavors is how I feel. I'm like, all of it, just yes and to everything. You know, the best tech emphasis, like the people who are working on innovation that I think are doing the best work, understand that these are not tech issues. They're human issues. And we're never going to solve everything by sort of abdicating control or brainstorming to what can be automated, what, you know, AI can do, what the platforms can do better somehow to basically game our way out of what. what humans are fundamentally now doing, which is why are we hateful sometimes?

Like, why are we bigoted? Why do people have an interest in trolling others? And so I think that, you know, a lot of the solutions have to be human-centered, where we, instead of just saying, oh, well, the platforms can do X, Y, Z, or the government can do all these other things. Like, well, what can we do? You know, like, what can everyday people do to feel more empowered? Like, maybe they can build, imagine this, like build an ecosystem

of users and other people they enjoy connecting with. I mean, can you imagine the joy of actually thinking that your Twitter feed is an interesting place to learn things instead of just who has the best like breaking news 140 character tweet? That would be really exciting, I think. So I love the idea and I think there just need to be more of us doing this, like more of us committed to talking about humans and how humans fit into what we're doing as users. because it really should go the other way around. Users don't come first.

It should be people coming first. You're actually doing a lot of that work in terms of building more people who see things like that. At Penn, you have this weekly series where you are joined by other journalists and other thinkers to help people understand the role that we all play in making the internet a better place. Can you talk about some of the steps

that anyone listening could take to help make the internet a safer and better place? Oh, Bridget, that's like my favorite. question. You just, you got me at the sweet spot. I'm like, here we go. Well, you know, we've, we've looked at disinformation for years and everyone always asks, what's the solution? And so kind of to, you know, my last point, I think a lot of it, we have to focus on humans and give people power to, you know, take control of what they're seeing online. So I always think it's best to, frankly, just start with understanding what you do when you're online. You know, like, how are you consuming

information, Bridget, is it on Twitter? Are you, let's be honest, are you going to Facebook and are you clicking on links or are you maybe privately just reading the headline that I shared or your other friend shared? Like, let's be real, you know? Like sometimes that's all I do. I'm like, oh, I can make a wild assumption based on what Bridget shared and I'm not even clicking the link. So just sort of like taking a pulse, being honest with yourself, are you going to Fox News? Are you going to the New York Times, or you're going to, you know, news websites, how are you doing things? Are you listening to podcasts like this? I think it's good to know how you consume information. And then I also think with that, we should all start asking ourselves how we feel when we're

online. Like, are you feeling anxious? When you read things, are you angry? A lot of times, disinformation will thrive because we're emotional and we often want to share things. We want to engage with people quickly. And so we'll accept something without fact-checking it, without thinking about or asking ourselves, you know, who wrote this? Where did it come from? Why am I seeing it? So if you can just sort of pause, like that is my number one recommendation. Pause to ask a number of things, but just pause. And from slowing down, I think we actually could all benefit. You know, we could potentially share less misinformation. We could also then think more carefully about what our own attitudes are based on what we're

seeing. A whole host of, I mean, frankly, empathy could arise out of just slowing down and getting to a place where we're not just liking, disliking, loving, laughing at things, but maybe where we're in a place of, huh, I want to learn more about that. Yeah. If you could see my, if you were in my kitchen right now where I am, I have a Post-it note on my laptop that just says slow down. And it's just a reminder for me just in all the ways, because I can sometimes move too quickly just in life. But I think that the idea of just

taking a breath, taking a beat has been so helpful. It sounds so, it sounds so basic. But, you know, I, before I started really thinking critically about the way that I felt when I was online, I would be moving so quickly. And then when I started to slow down a bit, I actually can, kept a little journal. So if I saw something that made me feel anxious, I would write that down. If I saw something that made me my heart race, I would write that down. If I saw something that made me laugh, I would write that down. And from doing that, I really saw the ways that I, it's just like my brain chemistry was just firing so quickly and I wasn't even stopping to think. And I find that, you know, when you have those moments where somebody tweets something and

they like really wish they had it and it's going viral, like, oh, God. I always wonder, Were they in that moment where they've just been seeing so many different takes and different jokes and different tweets, their brain is no longer processing what they're doing, that they're just putting a tweet into the world without even really thinking about it. And so I really find so much value in almost thinking about using the internet as a kind of meditative practice and an opportunity to really be mindful of how you're doing, how you're feeling. Are you anxious? Are you emotional? Like what's going on? as opposed to something where you're just mindlessly scrolling and not really,

not really being in charge of your, you know, of your physiological, like your emotions and your brain and all of that. If I could do away with one term this year especially, it would be doom scrolling. Because one, I mean, when are we not doom scrolling nowadays? You know, like news is never inspiring. But also, it's so passive. And part of what I think is really great about what you're explaining is that you're explaining is that you have literally taken control of what you're doing, you know, to say, I'm going to proactively

write things down. I'm going to question and reflect on what I'm feeling. You know, sometimes just the sheer act of feeling like you're in the driver's seat, whatever it is then that you end up doing, if it's writing your feelings down, if it's deciding not to tweet. But just thinking of yourself as the one that's in control instead of doom scrolling, I think is so exciting for people. And it's a weird, it's almost like a mind shift where people, once I say it sometimes in our trainings, people will say, I didn't even think that I could curate my newsfeed that way.

And I'm like, yes, like we can choose. And it would be so exciting to be stimulated, not just totally freaked out by what we're seeing. Exactly. And I think that's something that I think that everybody can take away. You might not be able. So just this week, we might not be able to, you know, topple the stranglehold that some of these platforms seem to have on our democracy, on our discourse. But individually, you can control how you consume social media.

You can, you know, delete Facebook from your phone and say, like, I'm only going to go on from my browser twice a day or something like that. Like, we might not be able to control how these things show up in a larger way, but we can control how they show up to us personally, how they show up in our head. household, like whether you take your phone to bed to doomscroll Twitter before sleep or not. Like those are choices that we have control over, not anybody else. And so, you know, really trying to internalize that we do have some control, even though sometimes it feels like we don't. You're not going to be great at this overnight. You know, it won't be like suddenly you feel more excited or eager to be online and to find this healthier. internet. But I think that it can slowly lead to other practices. And if you can start with slowing down,

so let's say just questioning yourself, you know, scrolling at a slower pace, finding then interesting articles and pieces of content and people to follow and connect with, then you may frankly start wondering other things. You know, you can maybe get better at spotting when a headline lacks context. You know, I've gotten to the point where it doesn't happen overnight, but, you know, you can sort of be scrolling and you read a piece of content and you're like, huh, I would normally be really upset by that. Why would I be upset?

Like, could I explore what the underlying reason would be? And when you slow down like that to ask deeper questions, not just about my own reaction, but about the piece of content you're seeing, I actually think we all are trying to training ourselves to have a kind of media literacy and digital literacy that everyone's going to need in the future. I mean, the internet isn't going away. So we need that eventually. The other thing is disinformation is a service for hire. It's an industry. And disinformation is not going away. Online hate is not going away. So we all, if we just a little tiny bit chipped away at and built up better and better practices, we could truly help create the ecosystems we enjoy that have less of that.

And at scale, you know, it isn't perfect, but it's at least one piece of how we can help create something that's healthier and, frankly, less hateful. More after a quick break. Another podcast from some SNL late night comedy guide, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends, me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Bodenker to David Letterman, help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and headwriter, Streeter Seidel, help an acapella band with their between songs banter.

There's the worst singer in the group. The worst? Yeah. Me. Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, you only got in because your parents made a huge donation. The group. The yard birds, right?

That's the name. The Harvard yard, but they're open. Do you have a name suggestion? We're open. Since you guys are middle-aged, one erection. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Human me. I need some jokes to make me seem funny.

Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad-supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as 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 IHart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting.

Call 844-844-I-Hart to get started. That's 844-8-4-I-Hart. Jacob Kingston grew up in an isolated polygamous sect. We were God's chosen, kingdom on earth. He felt destined. for greatness. So when a swaggering Armenian businessman catapults Jacob into an extraordinary world, he doesn't look back. Ferraris and Lamborghinis, private jets, meeting the president of Turkey. I'm Michelle McPhee, and this is one of the most shocking criminal conspiracies I've ever come across.

When Jacob met Levin this plant to a billion dollar fraud. But with two kings from entirely different worlds, just how long can their empire survive? The largest tax investigation in American history. You need to tell me what you know. Is somebody coming after me? Jacob told Levan, you're ruining my life. Listen to Kingdom of Fraud on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. 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 Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slic Life 12 and the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. Let's get right back into it.

I believe that the only way that some of these platforms will meaningfully, you know, rethink the role they've had in spreading misinformation and hate is if we make it unprofitable, right? And so like if it hurts your bottom line to traffic in hate and violent rhetoric and disinformation, that's the only way that I think that some of these companies will stop trafficking in it, I guess. And I think that the way to do that can be so individual. Like I'm not going to engage with it. I'm not going to amplify it.

I'm not going to support it. If I see that kind of thing online, I'm not going to, you know, I'm going to kind of divest from it. I think a lot of that can be driven by individuals. I'm thinking of the headline, divesting from disinformation. Yes. We should all be doing that, I think. I think they'll go a long way. That's your article, Bridget.

I mean, I think the other, I don't want to seem too corny in that, like, you know, humans are going to solve all of it because I think the platforms have so much responsibility. And I think the future of minimizing how toxic the internet can be, in part, is that the platforms have to, begin informing users in better ways. And I don't know if you and I have ever talked about it, but I think that Twitter's very first step into putting labels on content

really saw a horrible moment from the media's perspective when people started calling these warning labels because I think that that has such a negative connotation. And I think that labels and the platform mechanisms to slow people down are actually a fantastic measure that we should be encouraging and learning about. It's the stuff that absent me teaching millions of Americans, let's say, about media literacy, platforms can help slow people down. So I think there's like this other piece also that can happen in

tandem to you and me taking control that the platforms try to find ways to very, you know, in a nonpartisan, careful, educative manner, slow people down and just do the thing that we're already doing a little bit. You know, question what we're seeing. wonder if there are ways that we want to explore or learn more about something, if we know that it's misleading. Yeah, even, so you mentioned like when you share something based on a headline, that thing that Twitter has now, which I think is a great tool, but sometimes I feel kind of dragged by it where it's like, do you want to read the article before you retweet it? How many times have you not read it, Bridget? Be honest, because I every time haven't read it.

Yes, and it's, it honestly is a good reminder. And when I get it, I'm like, oh, come on. I'm retweeting an article by somebody that I know, like, I trust them. But it is a good reminder to just, like, what's the hurry? Why don't you just read it? You know, and it really, sometimes I'm like, oh, drag me, Twitter functionality. So I want to switch gears a little bit. As we're seeing right now, elected officials are being held accountable for their role

on either supporting or inciting the insurrection. Trump was obviously kicked off social media platforms. Senator Josh Hawley's book was briefly dropped by its publisher. And kind of along the same lines of free speech online, I've seen a lot of people asking questions about what is commonly known as, quote, cancel culture. So what are your thoughts on so-called cancel culture as a free speech attorney? Are these free speech issues? You know, I'm going to give you the short answer, which is it's really hard. Lawyers will often say it depends. And part of what I think is difficult is that cancel culture often seems to imply that you're going to be in a way, canceled from an existing platform, you know, like from your base, which also then to me

suggest that you have a base to be canceled from. You know, you don't talk about canceling someone who isn't very well known. And I think there's this interesting power dynamic within the like paradigm of thinking that there's a cancel culture. I think it's more interesting to weigh what's at stake here. You know, when we think about someone like Donald Trump, was he canceled? I honestly think that he was legitimately taken off the internet because of the real world harm his words online have. And that is not cancel culture. That is like a very deep, difficult balance where all of us, whether it is regulators, policymakers, platform people, everyday users like you and me, like what are his words doing to our world? it is a drastically dangerous step when he spreads lies, when he soes discord, when he promotes hate,

all of the different ways that I think the platforms may be in being late, somehow if I had to guess, were thinking that it would not be that bad, not be that bad. And somehow the insurrection was that crack, that like breaking point where people realized, oh, online issues have real world harms, which has happened before. We've seen it when there are mass shootings. We've seen it when there are acts of terrorism, you know, and like other types of bombings. And what's fascinating in that moment is that I'm like, is that cancel culture? Like, I don't think that is.

I think that that is a private company taking necessary actions to limit or triage the type of real-world harm that's happening. I think it was absolutely too late. And I always think that it was too late. At the same time, Donald Trump is a public figure. and was an elected official who was leading this country. And so there is also this interest in hearing, you know, sort of unedited what he says. And so from a free expression perspective,

I always wonder, what is the most speech we can have with the least harm? I think we passed the harm point, frankly, some time ago. But there is definitely, I think we have to stay committed to having access all of us to various forms of expression. Because free expression rights aren't just Donald Trump's right

to say what he wants. We all have free expression rights to access what various people are saying. I have the right to then hear what you are saying. You have the right to hear what I am saying. And in some parts of the world, part of what we have to keep in mind is Facebook, Twitter,

that's all the internet. That's all people have. That's the only connection they have to what's happening politically. We are seeing right now in Myanmar with the internet being shut down. that is a political tactic to silence dissidents and dissent. And so it's a difficult question to answer

when there are questions implicated in that larger one around who is speaking, what is the effect offline, is it damaging when in total it seems to tip the scales towards violence and hate? I have to say, in general, I hate conversations about, quote, cancel culture because the concept just seems so disingenuous. When people talk about the importance of being willing to engage ideas one might not agree with,

it always somehow seems like marginalized people are the ones expected to be doing the engaging. And arguing with people who are hell-bent on misunderstanding you is exhausting. And if you aren't even able to talk about something with a shared set of guiding facts, the sky is blue, two plus two is four, Trump lost the election, then it can really get thorny. When the election happened in November and Biden won, there was, I think, rightly, a kind of exhaustion. You know, people were so tired of fighting and eager to disengage completely from what might be different. And I'm with a lot of those people.

I think it's really exhausting work to try to engage with people who disagree. And you have to always know that ultimately, you know, a lot of conversations will not be productive. and it isn't on you or me to do the labor of teaching someone. Like someone else's teachable moment isn't necessarily my job. At the same time, I think like the crisis and the basic human crisis we're in of how divided we are merits a very serious examination that we all need to sit with. Of like what is it where we are interested in disengaging all the time with anything different? And that permeates all of us.

And so I think the thesis is, you know, why are we driven to do things that divide us? And then how can we overcome our own instincts to actually broker conversation, to find an entry point, even if it's little, and even if it only happens for a couple of minutes. Like, that is the beginning of being able to find what I think is the antidote to disinformation, where we have a shared basis of facts. Even if you and I disagree on policies, like we can both look at a set of facts and say, yeah, that's what we're basing our opinion on. And we may differ than on what we think needs to happen, but we can agree on certain things. And we have absolutely not reached that point of being able to agree on basic facts.

Yeah, that's exactly where I want to get us to. You know, we can disagree, but we are all on the same page about some basic facts. You know, two plus two is four. The sky is blue. We have a shared understanding of reality. And it's sad to me that we're not there. Pugh found that among Trump voters, 40% say that he definitely won the election. Another 36% say that he probably won the election. And this week, Reuters polled members of Congress. Now, about 90% of them wouldn't say one way or the other whether or not they agreed with Trump that the election had been stolen from him. And two of them still say the election was stolen from Trump. So it's like we're not even speaking in the same language. We do not have a shared reality.

And it seems like such a low bar, but that's where I want to get us to, a place where we have a shared reality. I mean, it should be a low bar, but honestly, there's also just like so much bigotry and hate that a lot of those kinds of civil discussions are not grounded in mutual humanity. So, you know, my civil rights background is like, how do we have the most for the most people and how do we maintain and protect basic rights for people who have traditionally and historically been marginalized in every institution? So there's this other piece that informs the work I do and how I think about miss and disinformation because I know that it affects different communities differently. Black and brown people are targeted with disinformation so that they are disenfranchised

and believe their voice doesn't matter. So sort of in the middle of all of it, I'm like, I still very much have eyes wide open that some of us will be affected, targeted, and marginalized in more specific and acute ways that have massive effects on democracy. So I don't want to sit here like Pollyanna, you know, oh, it's all going to be great if we could just find moments of like factual shared belief because some of that assumes that other people will believe you and I matter as much as anyone else. And the reality is a lot of people don't think that. But some are movable. Some are people where you engage and they are not like hateful people interested in less for certain people. And that.

That's the moment where I'm hoping to reach, at least some pockets of the United States. So you sound pretty hopeful. Oh, Bridget. I actually have a lot of hope. I mean, you know, when I was younger, I don't want to get too misty-eyed. But like, you know, I would work in the South with people like John Lewis and civil rights figures. And they always said that change takes a lifetime. It takes many lifetimes.

And this intractable issue of how we connect is one of the. the biggest issues, I think, of our lifetime. And it's very slow. So I am hopeful in the sense that I see every day more and more people interested in doing this work. I see movement lawyers. I see amazing researchers finding data, you know, and trying to find ways to triage the way the internet

is making us all bleed. And I'm very hopeful. It just, it takes a long time. And for every step forward, there will be three steps back, and then maybe two steps forward, maybe another step forward. So it's really just sort of like a dance with democracy. Where can folks keep up with you? And can you tell us more about the weekly trainings that Penn America is running? So people can always follow me at Attorney Nora. I'm Attorney Nora on

every platform. And then Penn America has trainings around media literacy and disinformation defense almost weekly. And that all is on Penn.org. Our next series is going to focus on black and Latino mistrust around the vaccination process and try to help walk people through why hesitancy is okay, why it's okay to question, you know, is the vaccine good, should I get it? And so we'll be doing a series around like disinformation and COVID later this month. And then we're also going to be doing work on how community organizers can embed messaging in their work with communities. We really want to empower people to feel like they know how to talk about these issues when someone comes to them.

So more to come, penn.org. You can check it all out. If you enjoyed this podcast, please help us grow by subscribing. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech or just want to say hi. We'd love to hear from you at hello at tangoity.com. Disinformed is brought to you by there are no girls on the internet. It's a production of IHeartRadio and Unbossed Creative. Jonathan Strickland is our executive producer. Tari Harrison is our supervising producer.

engineer. Michael Amato is our contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. For more great podcasts, 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. 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. 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. And every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the biggest moments in sports and giving you the real story behind the headlines.

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 Slicalif 12 in the TikTok Podcast Network on TikTok. I'm Michelle McPhee, and I've been unraveling the strangest criminal alliance I've ever reported on,

a Mormon polygamous and an Armenian businessman. multi-million dollar house, Ferraris and Lamborghinis, private jets, a billion dollar fraud. But how long can this alliance last? Tell me what you know. Is somebody coming after me?

Listen to Kingdom of Fraud on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed human.