← There Are No Girls on the Internet
There Are No Girls on the Internet
Chris Pratt Is Hawking an Anti-Abortion Prayer App; Elon's Grok Is Doxxing Women; DOGE Bros Let ChatGPT Do Their Job; Trump’s Big DEI Loss – NEWS ROUNDUP
01:07:04
Loading summary
Transcript134 lines
- [00:00]
Bridget Todd
This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.
- [00:04]
Malcolm Glaubel
Hello, Malcolm Glaubel here. We're here in New York City with T Mobile for business recording another episode of Revisionist history about how 5G network slicing strengthens trust and connections across worldwide industries.
- [00:17]
T Mobile Representative
Slicing can be used for so many different things. We're here with our friends from CNN from Siemens Energy. The ways that it can be used, frankly, are limitless and are really, really built to think through. How can T Mobile understand the pain points that our customers have? Smash those pain points and help you deliver very specific outcomes?
- [00:41]
Mike
This is Matt Rogers from Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang. This is Bowen Yang from Los Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang. Hey, so what if you could boost the WiFi to one of your devices when you need it most? Because Xfinity WI Fi can. And what if your WI fi could fix itself before there's even really a problem? Xfinity is so reliable. It does that too. What if your WI fi had parental instincts? Xfinity WI Fi is part nanny, part ninja, protecting your kids while they're online. And finally, what if your WiFi was like the smartest Wi Fi? Yeah, it's Wi Fi that is so smart it makes everything work better together. Bottom line, Xfinity is smart and reliable. You deserve the peace of mind of having WI fi that's got your back. Xfinity Imagine that support for the show
- [01:25]
Public Podcast Sponsor
comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI, it all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor. Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete Disclosures available at public.comdisclosures Pro Drivers
- [02:26]
Lenovo Podcast Sponsor
Live for race day, but for small business owners, every day is race day. That's why going pro with Lenovo Pro matters. One on one advice. IT solutions and customized hardware powered by Intel Core Ultra processors. Keep your business on the right track. Business goes pro with Lenovo Pro. Sign up for free at lenovo. Com Pro Lenovo Lenovo.
- [02:59]
Bridget Todd
There are no girls on the Internet. It's a production of iHeartRadio and unbossed creative. I'm Bridget Todd and this is There are no girls on the Internet.
- [03:13]
Mike
Yeah, this is just like the banter between Chris Pratt and Mark Wahlberg on the Hallow app.
- [03:19]
Bridget Todd
The Hallow app is wild to me. So it is a prayer app. Celebrities like Mark Wahlberg, like Chris Pratt, is the newest one. This week, Gwen Stefani are basically hawking it is a prayer app for Catholics. I, I knew about Gwen Stefani because I had seen that a while ago. I did not know about Mark Wahlberg, although that totally tracks. Is he also a celebrity affiliated with this Catholic prayer app?
- [03:47]
Mike
He's in there, yeah. He's actually a major investor and partner.
- [03:52]
Bridget Todd
Oh, that makes so much sense. I was actually watching for some reason him on the View on Wednesday morning, which was Ash Wednesday. Obviously he had to book an interview to talk about any random thing just to show off his ashes. I went to Catholic school. I have had my fair share of Ash Wednesday ashes smudged on my forehead. Back when I would get it, it would just be like a little smudge that would be gone. You would get it during mass and it'd be gone by lunchtime. Mark Wahlberg's ashes look like somebody put grease paint on his forehead. I think that they're doing the ashes more intense so that notable Catholics can go on TV and have their faith be this big, large badge on their forehead. I think he booked an interview to talk about any random thing just so that he would have an opportunity to show off these ashes. So, yeah, not surprising that Mark Wahlberg is pulling out the big guns to promote the Hallow.
- [04:48]
Mike
Apparently I was curious, so I created an account, logged in, and it was a pretty long onboarding. Asked me a bunch of questions about myself, had a couple choice quotes from various saints and disciples, and then it asked, it invited me to select the what was a celebrity guide that I wanted to hear from? Mark Wahlberg was like top left guide to choose. Did you choose him number one position? Of course I did. I mean, I knew you would be interested and want me to report back about your Boyfriend.
- [05:25]
Bridget Todd
Oh, shut up. I was a kid. Okay, listeners, Mike is teasing me because he knows a shameful secret of mine, which I will reveal, but please don't tell anybody. This is just between me, Mike, Joey, who edits this, and I guess whoever is listening, which is that when I, when I was young, I had such the hots for Mark Wahlberg. I had a Marky Mark. You, you might be too young to know this. Mark Wahlberg used to be Marky Mark with the Funky Bunch. That was his group, which was awful. But I had one of his Calvin Klein posters on my wall when I was a kid. I used to write him letters. I was so obsessed with him. I thought he was so hot. This is when I was a child, by the way. So not, not currently. Not now.
- [06:10]
Mike
I know exactly the poster that you're talking about. I feel like I knew a lot of girls who had that poster on their walls.
- [06:20]
Bridget Todd
There was a movie that Mark Wahlberg was in that. It's called Fear. There is a specific scene from the movie Fear that, let's just say it really made an impression on me when I saw it when I was like 11. And it, I, I, what can I say? I have terrible taste. What can I say? But I guess it doesn't surprise me now. Like Mark Wahlberg is a scumbag for so many reasons. We could talk so much about all the of the scumbag stuff. I know that he is a famous Catholic Hallow. This app, this faith based prayer app for Catholics. Fun fact. Funded by Trump, supporting evil gay billionaire Peter Thiel and also JD Vance are backers of this app. Here is how them described it. Though prayer is famously free, the app is a subscription based Service that charges $70 per year for an annual plan or $11 a month for a monthly option. That is a lot of money to pray. They better, they better have some, some primo voice talent on there for those prices.
- [07:24]
Mike
Yeah, and I had to buy the subscription to get in there, which I did immediately cancel. But it was going to be, you know, I think 69.99 for the year was what they were going to bill me if I didn't cancel. Which is, it's a lot to, to pray. I don't know how much of that makes its way to God, how much
- [07:42]
Bridget Todd
of it makes its way to God, how much of it makes its way to Mark Wahlberg, Chris Pratt and Gwen Stefani. Even on the Catholic subreddit on Reddit, a place where Catholics gather, people are very skeptical about this app that is charging that amount of money just to pray. And basically they're also kind of skeptical about what they call these influential Catholics being used as a marketing opportunity. The general consensus over there is this. The whole thing just feels like turning people's legitimate faith into a cash grab. And Mashable reports that the CEO, Alex Jones. No, not that Alex Jones. A different Alex Jones is on the record saying that they're courting famous religious celebrities. So that is part of their thing. They've done partnerships with Wahlberg, as you said. Chris Pratt, newly. This week he released a video about this app, Hollywood icon Mario Lopez, which again, I don't know that I should say that I am shocked to hear some of these names. But the founder says that he's doing this as a way to reach fallen away Catholics or those who are not particularly religious on the social media platforms they frequent most. They're just incredible Christians. They're great people of faith. Joan said, that actually is interesting to me that they're not going after people who might consider themselves as, like, deeply religious. They're just, you know, if you're just scrolling social media and you have a particular fondness for Mark Wahlberg, unfortunately, like me, you might say, oh, what is this app? Maybe I'll pay $100 a year to pray. One of the other celebrities they talked about reaching out to work with is Kevin James. Paul Blart, Mall Cop.
- [09:26]
Mike
Oh, man.
- [09:27]
Bridget Todd
Mike's boyfriend. Yeah.
- [09:29]
Mike
But I can see how that might pull me in. I, I had never considered Paul Blart Malcop's views about theology and the divine. You know, I might be curious to hear what he had to say, but I probably wouldn't pay for it. You know, like, I, I do feel like there's something a little sus about putting up a paywall between people and the divine. Right. Like, and it just seems like a bit of a red flag.
- [09:56]
Bridget Todd
Oh, Jesus notably loved a pay wall. You know, that was like one of his famous sayings in the Bible is, that'll be $11 a month, please.
- [10:05]
Mike
Right? Yeah, yeah. That's why he went into the, the temple and the money Changers and was like, make sure you have a good system for only allowing people with money to get in here because we don't want those, those riff raff.
- [10:22]
Bridget Todd
Make sure this whole thing is backed by Peter Thiel's capital. That's that, that is. That is in the Bible. So when Gwen Stefani last year was hawking this app, one of my favorite people, or not that I know this person, but one of My favorite parasocial podcasters, Matt Bernstein from the podcast A Little Bit Fruity, pointed out that the app is not just prayers. They also have, I guess I would describe them as almost sort of mean prayers specifically targeted at people who have gotten abortions. These prayers are read by people like anti abortion activist Lila Rose. One of the prayers is Jesus. We pray for every woman who is considering abortion and in a special way for those who are pregnant from acts of rape or incest by every woman know the goodness, gift and beauty of her own life and so be able to receive the gift of her child's life. What I find interesting about this is that Alex Jones, the CEO of the app, was like, oh, we're not even targeting people who are religious. This is just like content. It's, it's interesting to me how when convenient, this is able to sort of be couched as non political, not even necessarily overtly religious. But then you get into the app and it's like these abortion having women to just have the baby. Am I right people?
- [11:45]
Mike
Yeah. Funny how they always just like kind of sneak that in.
- [11:49]
Bridget Todd
This is me revealing how Pollyanna I am. I'm a little bit, I was a little bit surprised about Gwen Stevani on this one based purely on the girl power songs that she was making when I was in sixth grade. I think maybe adulthood is about, is like learning who people actually are. You know, when you're a kid, you just, you decide who somebody is, you project who they are and then you're like, oh, this is who they actually are. I also remember not that long ago, I don't know if this is true or not, but reading that Gwen Stefani had put out a holiday album that was available to buy exclusively at Cracker Barrel, which I feel said a lot
- [12:22]
Mike
that was true, but I don't remember it being a holiday album. I guess it wasn't her solo album, but she's featured on Blake Shelton's 2016 album if I'm Honest, which was sold at Cracker Barrel locations.
- [12:38]
Bridget Todd
Blake Shelton is her husband. What is this? Cracker Barrel Collab couple a ccc.
- [12:45]
Mike
This is back before Cracker Barrel went woke too.
- [12:47]
Bridget Todd
So that's right.
- [12:48]
Mike
It was acceptable for them to be
- [12:49]
Bridget Todd
there pre logo change Cracker Barrel, you know, so I, I'm, I'm a little disappointed to find that Gwen Stefani is missed up and mixed up in this. I shouldn't be, but you know, she was somebody who I liked as a youth quite a bit. But Chris Pratt, nobody is surprised this week to find that Chris Pratt made an ad for this prayer app. You know, I was really having a big think about it, about what it is about Chris Pratt, why it is that I. That not just me, but, like, people dislike him. Also, I do love that our super producer, Joey. Their last name is Patrick. The first time that Joey and I spoke, I was like, oh, Joey Pratt. And they were like, actually, it's a pat. Actually, my whole social media vibe is pat, not Pratt, to distinguish from Chris Pratt, which I respect immensely. But that's how much people don't want to be associated with Chris Pratt. And I don't know, I was thinking what the deal is. Obviously, Chris Pratt really hangs out a lot with rfk, so it's in this sort of, like, MAHA universe. So there are definitely reasons to not like him and not trust him. But for me, it is not even necessarily really his politics or his ideology that I find so annoying. One, I feel that he disarmed us. When he was on Parks and Recreation, he was sort of goofy, lovable Andy Dwyer. People liked him. He was generally inoffensive. Then after that role, remember, he got jacked. His whole thing was like, oh, hey, I'm Chris Pratt, and I'm jacked now. I feel that there's something that happens there where it. It just. There's like an ego thing that happens there when you go from being lovable and goofy to then being jacked that you really got to keep an eye on with men. I'll just put it that way.
- [14:41]
Mike
Yes, we saw Jim from the Office do the same thing, right? Where he rose to stardom as kind of like a. A gentle, sweet everyman, but apparently lurking within was, like, a desire to be the lead of an action movie.
- [14:58]
Bridget Todd
Don't even get me started. Aren't his movies. This is. I. I'm speaking off the cuff, so I don't know, and I actually would love to be educated on this. Aren't his movies basically just propaganda for US Imperialism and the war machine? Basically, you've got Jim Halpert in those movies. Is he also doing the Jim Halpert where he looks at the camera and makes that little ass smile like, oh, my work in imperialism. What are you going to do? Do you know what I'm talking about?
- [15:26]
Mike
While wearing body armor? Yeah, that would be pretty good.
- [15:30]
Bridget Todd
So the thing with Chris Pratt is that I feel that he does this thing that I can't stand, where. Okay, we get it. You are religious, you are Catholic. You don't want to be too open about your politics, but your Politics are very clear. I don't think anybody is confused. I'm not confused. You align yourself with kind of conservative or traditional values, but you're also in Hollywood. Fine. Got it. Totally fine. The thing that gets me is I have to be a victim about it. Right? It can't just be. Yes, I align myself with all of these traditional, conservative values. I also need to be talking about it as if I'm a victim for these stances. That's what I don't like. And also, I don't like how he is everywhere. Like, he is really overrepresented in media. When you compare to the actual talent and charisma and the kind of roles that he gets. Like, I don't understand why he is everywhere. But could you. Other than the Avengers or whatever, could you name a role or a movie that he's in right now that he's. That he's in and, like, really crushing?
- [16:47]
Mike
I mean, I couldn't. But I don't know anything about movies. It was notable when I selected him in the Hallow app as a guide that I wanted to hear from, that they did not mention Parks and recognition. They listed Guardians of the Galaxy and some other movie that I didn't know but probably should, but it seemed like a notable omission.
- [17:05]
Bridget Todd
Yeah. I just feel like if you are an actor and you're not really that charismatic and you're not really that talented and you're not really getting, like, great role after great role after great role, why do I have to be hearing about you so much? Why do I have to know so much about your faith? You know, there are plenty of entertainers or performers that I don't personally like, but if I'm like, oh, well, they're in the conversation, I'll give you a great example. Sydney Sweeney. I don't personally enjoy her work. I did really like her in the movie Reality, which, if you've not seen that on hbo, she actually does a great job with that. She was great in Euphoria, but that was a pretty minimal role. She is someone that. I'll say, I don't like that I'm hearing from her often, but also, like, she's in the conversation. She is in a lot of movies. I'll concede that she is being interviewed a ton because she is, like, in the conversation. I don't have to like it, but there she is. I'll tolerate it. I don't get the deal with Chris Pratt. I don't get why I'm hearing about him constantly. I think I might cut this, but this just so that you are aware of how I feel about Chris Pratt.
- [18:12]
Mike
Sure. Well, I mean, I think we could put Marky Mark in that same category.
- [18:15]
Bridget Todd
Don't make me. I hate.
- [18:18]
Mike
Oh, you know, I do know.
- [18:20]
Bridget Todd
I do know. Listen, Mark Wahlberg, he is a scumbag. He has a history of violence toward minoritized people from his youth. Look it up. It's, like, horrifying. I hate. I. I hate and cannot help how much I was obsessed with him when I was young. He stars in my favorite movie of all time, Boogie Nights. I don't know. I don't. We do hear about. We do hear from him too much. I will say that we do hear from him a lot. Compared to. It's not commiserate with his. At. With the actual, like, his. The footprint that he picks up at Hollywood. I guess I'll put it that way. Does that make sense?
- [19:00]
Mike
It does make sense. And if you want to compare acting skill, I mean, I guess he's. He's been.
- [19:05]
Bridget Todd
He's.
- [19:06]
Mike
He's a pretty good actor. But in the. The reading that him and Chris were doing in the Hallow app, he was really phoning it in, like, was clear that Chris was giving it his all. Mark was definitely reading from a script. I think he was doing, like, a. Like a big batch of clits that were going to be used for a bunch of things, you know, like, they were not in conversation. They were recording separately, was being edited together. He was really phone in that one,
- [19:35]
Bridget Todd
and you can hear the notes, like, is that good?
- [19:41]
Mike
Good enough.
- [19:42]
Bridget Todd
God is love. Is that good? I was trying to do a Boston accent because he's from Boston. Yeah. Fun fact about Mark Wahlberg. So you know that I think PT Anderson's Boogie Nights is the best movie of all time. It's a masterpiece. Mark Wahlberg basically never brings up that he was in that movie. He has said in interviews that he regrets doing Boogie Nights and said that he actually has prayed to God for forgiveness for having done Boogie Nights. Now, mind you, this is somebody who went to prison for a hate crime when they were young. I hope that he also asked for forgiveness for that behavior, but because it's like a movie that is about sex and debaucherous behavior, comma, things that Mark Wahlberg in real life is definitely associated with these. Now, I don't know why he's like a. Like, makes it seem like he's above these things. He certainly is not. But imagine being part of a masterpiece and distancing yourself from It. I don't even know why, because it's like not Christian enough or whatever.
- [20:45]
Mike
I mean, I guess he does like a lot of Disney stuff, right? So maybe, maybe he's trying to protect the Wahlberg brand for the sanitized Disney audience. Yeah, I don't know. Because Boogie Nights is an excellent movie. If I was in it, I'd tell
- [21:02]
Bridget Todd
people, oh, it mean I never shut up about it.
- [21:05]
Mike
Yeah, you weren't even in it and you never shut up about it.
- [21:08]
Bridget Todd
I wasn't even in it. Don't get me started on Boogie Nights. Fun fact about Boogie Nights, it has the best DVD commentary of any DVD commentary. Because I, I love, I live for a DVD commentary. You know, this the best DVD commentary I've ever heard. P.T. anderson Definitely, in my opinion, sounds like he had been doing some partying while recording that DVD commentary. Let's put it that way. They don't make DVD commentaries like that anymore. If you have the dvd, if you, if you've seen this, if you're one of the handful of people that know what I'm talking about, there are a few specific moments where you're like, wow, just a different time in the entertainment industry, I guess, on that DVD commentary. Anyway, I've really gone off track here.
- [21:54]
Mike
Yeah, let's. Let's bring it back around to the Halo app.
- [21:57]
Bridget Todd
Well, fun fact about the Halo app is that it was actually banned from EU markets a few months ago. Many suspected that the reason that regulators shut it down in the EU was due to data privacy concerns and things like sensitive data being used for ad targeting, including religious affiliation, which all that stuff is obviously highly regulated under the EU's Digital Services Act. Yeah, just like Jesus intended for your deepest, most intimate religious thoughts and connections. Being used to target you, to sell you more crap.
- [22:31]
Mike
Yeah, totally fine. Here in the US though, like, no problem. Go for it. Make that money. Target, target on religious ideology, whatever you want to do. Have at it.
- [22:43]
Bridget Todd
Have at it, y' all in the US live free. Let's take a quick break.
- [22:58]
Public Podcast Sponsor
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI, it all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers, growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index, and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's good. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures available at public.com disclosures there's
- [23:59]
Lenovo Podcast Sponsor
no championship league for small business owners, but if there was, you'd be at the top of the standings because going pro with Lenovo Pro means you've got the winning formation. One on one advice IT solutions and customized hardware powered by Intel Core Ultra processors help you stay ahead of the competition. Business Goes pro with Lenovo Pro Sign up for free@lenovo.com Pro Lenovo Lenovo
- [24:30]
Cindy Crawford
hi, I'm Cindy Crawford and I'm the founder of meaningful beauty. When Dr. Sabah and I decided to do a skincare line together, he said to me, we are going to give women meaningful beauty. And I said, that's exactly right. We want to give women meaningful beauty. Which means each and every product is meaningful. It has a reason to exist. It's efficacious. You're going to get results and then you just go out and live your life. Meaningful beauty Confidence is beautiful. Learn more@meaning beauty.com
- [25:02]
Malcolm Glaubel
hello, Malcolm Glauble here. We're here in New York City with T Mobile for Business recording another episode of Revisionist history about how 5G network slicing strengthens trust and connections across worldwide industries.
- [25:15]
T Mobile Representative
Slicing can be used for so many different things. We're here with our friends from CNN from Siemens Energy. The ways that it can be used, frankly, are limitless and are really, really built to think through. How can T Mobile understand the pain points that our customers have? Smash those pain points and help you deliver very specific outcomes?
- [25:45]
Bridget Todd
And we're back. Speaking of stuff that should be cracked down on in the U.S. but weirdly is not, let's talk about Grok because 404 Media has this new report that Grok is being used to uncover private information about porn performers. So we talked about how Grok was being used to undress women and minors, according to the European Commission, in ways that are illegal. That's not me saying that that's them saying that. Well, it just gets worse from there. Because porn performer Siri Dahl basically has spent over a decade and lots and lots of money trying to protect her legal identity from the Internet. And Grok basically just destroyed that. When a user on X tagged Grok asking, oh, who is this person? In this clip, Grok wasn't just like, oh, here is Siri Doll, here is this porn. Porn performers like performance identity. Grok volunteered Siri Doll's full legal name and birthday. Mind you, this person was not asking for this information. The user just asked, who is this performer? Because they wanted to find more of this performer's work, public facing work. So what you might have expected is for Grok to generate this person's stage name. What was actually generated was their full legal name and birthday, which happens to be information that this performer has been trying to keep from the Internet for many years. As soon as this happened, harasser started opening Facebook accounts in her real name. Porn leak site started posting her content using her legal name instead of her stage name. And people started asking Grok for her car, her address and her location. Scary stuff. And what makes this particularly kind of scary and painful is the collateral damage, because she says that the reason why she is trying to guard her legal name is to protect her family, which, you know, it's probably no surprise to anybody that it is common practice for harassers to find somebody's parents phone numbers and call them or email somebody's family and friends. And so now she has to warn her family and put all of these defensive plans in place to, thanks to X's chatbot, volunteering this information about her unprompted. It is ostensibly against X's own terms of service, which explicitly prohibit doxxing, calling it a serious safety risk. But here it is X's own chatbot, Grok actually volunteering this information about somebody
- [28:30]
Mike
that is really scary, like how terrible for this performer. And you have to wonder, how does Grok know her name and her birthday? Is it just that good at facial recognition is like what percentage of Americans would Grok be able to identify? That's kind of a scary thing to think about.
- [28:56]
Bridget Todd
Yeah. And I think it fits into a broader pattern of Grok related abuses and harms which we're going to continue talking about both in this episode and just generally, as long as I'm fucking alive and I have a beating heart, I'm going to continue talking about it because I genuinely cannot believe that not more is being done in the United States federally. Nothing is being Done zero, nothing. We have a collection of state attorneys generals trying to do something, but there is no federal regulating body in the United States that is taking any action whatsoever against this. And mind you, we're talking about sex crimes against minors here. We're talking about, like, crimes against kids. Regulators from other countries are stepping in because federally, in the United States, essentially nothing is being done. And as the 404 piece really points out, well, in all the debate about Internet safety and all these conversations that we have about the need to regulate and censor the Internet to protect kids, it is worth asking who is actually being protected and who keeps being left exposed to harm. I think stories like this one really illustrate what's going on here.
- [30:13]
Mike
Totally agree. And I think something that's becoming clear over this past year is that the, the types of answers to those questions, who's being protected and who's being harmed, I think are really changing. You know, over the years, as we've been doing this show, we've talked about categories of people who were not being protected.
- [30:36]
Public Podcast Sponsor
Right.
- [30:36]
Mike
We talk about the ways in which black women face multiple threats, challenges, you know, are disproportionately harmed by a lot of the abuses that happen online. We talk about how trans people are being disproportionately and unfairly targeted. And so we're used to talking about categories of people who are left out. But with the Trump administration, it really feels like it's specific people who are being protected. Right. You can look at Elon Musk. He's a big supporter of Trump. He's donating to Republicans. I, I, I don't know, but I truly suspect and believe that a big part of the reason the administration is not doing anything about any of these egregious crimes that his platform is doing is because he's like part of their crew. You know, we can look at the Epstein files for other examples where it's not even like categories of people anymore. It's specific people who are in power protecting themselves. Uh, and everybody else can just, you know, get bed.
- [31:51]
Bridget Todd
Pretty much, that's really how it feels. 404 also reported on a site called Cam Girl Finder, which has been quietly operating for years, that uses facial recognition technology to let anybody search a database of over 2 billion faces scraped from adult streaming platforms. The premise and the threat is very obvious. You just take a photo of a woman from her personal Instagram or social media, upload it, and you can use that to find out if she does sex work, and if so, where 404 tested this and it actually works. Results will show a person's username, the probability of a face match when they were last online, and links to other profiles across platforms. The site will even sell you all of the images it has of a given person for $1. This database includes women who stopped streaming or doing cam work years ago, meaning there is really no expiration date on the exposure risk. So if you did streaming or cam work once years ago, it can still be used to find you across the Internet and it will still allow whoever to buy your image. Now. 404 talked to the creator of this site about privacy concerns. And their, their point is basically like, hey, if you stream publicly, you are a public figure. Deal with it. He compared people who do sex work to politicians or youtubers. Never really talked about what I think is like the obvious difference, which is that people who perform in adult content might want to keep their actual like legal names and identities separate from their personal lives for safety reasons. Because people are creeps. You know, you don't. It doesn't take a genius to imagine why it might not be good to have your actual legal identity and family and name attached to the work that you do professionally because it's not safe for you. So there is an opt out option, but that option only works if the women know the site exists in the first place. And I wanted to sort of put these two stories, the one about Siri Dahl having her real name be exposed on X and this story, I wanted to sort of put them in conversation with each other because I do think that they're sort of the same accelerating problem, that these tools can be used to very easily, cheaply and quickly strip away the separation that a sex worker might put between their personal and their professional identity. And, and that has real meaningful consequences for their safety, for their lives, for their families. And I think it's really two stories about the same thing. That we have a tech infrastructure that treats people's safety and privacy as like a public resource to be dismantled, not a right to be protected. And that it's kind of fun or a fun challenge to dismantle and erase whatever boundaries somebody might have put up between their personal and their professional lives. It's kind of a quote, fun challenge to see how you can trample those. And I think it just goes back to something that we talk about on the show all the time. It's just how much of the Internet is about exploiting and consuming women. And I think the fact that these folks are targeting women who do sex work is not a coincidence because, you know, it's not enough that you could pay to have access to these performers, professional work and call that the end of it. It's like, no, I cannot have them control the means by which they. They present themselves to the world and to me. I need to be in control of that. Like, it's very. It's very much about control to me and profit.
- [35:50]
Mike
Right. Like, they're charging a dollar for these images that they have stolen.
- [35:54]
Public Podcast Sponsor
Yeah.
- [35:55]
Bridget Todd
And I also, I don't think that it works that, oh, the information is public, so anything goes. There are plenty of, like, if I started an Only Fans Tomorrow, that is technically public, but Only Fans still has rules that you can't screenshot it and share it elsewhere because it's my ip. Right. Like that. I feel like we have this logic, particularly when it comes to women and our bodies, particularly when women have found a way to have agency and economic control over how they want to use their own bodies. That says, like, oh, well, if it's public, it belongs to everybody. Right. I. I have the right to, to quote, expose or unmask this person as if they're doing something that means that they don't have a right to privacy anymore. It's. It's. It's a. It's a very toxic, exploitative dynamic that I think is baked into so much of our culture and not even really a tech problem necessarily. A cultural rot problem.
- [36:57]
Mike
Totally. And this Cam Girl Finder is like, specifically built for this purpose. Right. Like, there's, there's not, as far as I can tell, there's not a legitimate use of this tool. And people are. Have just found a way to use it for this nefarious purpose. Like, this is it. This is the sole reason that the creators of this app built it, which is just really gross.
- [37:26]
Bridget Todd
Yeah. And I'm just so sick of it. Because it just doesn't feel. As you were saying. It doesn't feel that we have a system that is invested meaningfully in whether or not people get hurt. The creator of Cam Girlfinder says that if privacy is a concern, this kind of job is not for you. And gets to dictate how and who shows up to this work as opposed to the performer dictating how they show up to that work. Right. Elon Musk's platform has a terms of service that explicitly bans doxing, but also has a chatbot that it volunteers people's private personal information that they don't want on the Internet. And I just feel that until we have some sort of real accountability. And right now in the United States, we don't really have that. The burden is going to continue falling on women. Right? It's our responsibility to opt out of this website that some creep design. It's our responsibility to report, to warn families to spend all of this money like this porn performer did on data removal services that I can undo in like one single reply. I'm just really sick of that. I'm sick of living in a world where we are made to shoulder this burden. As bad as I find all of this, I do think the tides are turning because, you know, as we talked about on X, Grok was being used to generate what the European Commission deemed illegal images of women and minors at a rate of 6,000 requests per hour. While no US federal agency or body did anything at all about this, other countries were and are taking it more seriously. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is calling non consensual intimate images, both real and AI, generated a national emergency and is actually backing that up with new legislation. So under proposed amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill, tech companies like X would have just 48 hours to remove deep fake news and revenge porn after those images have been flagged, or they would face fines up to 10% of their global revenue or an outright block in the uk. Talking to the Guardian, Starmer said the burden of tackling abuse must no longer fall on victims, it must fall on perpetrators and on the companies that enable harm. So I have a lot of gripes about Starmer's government, but in this case I really think that that is well said. The idea that we need to stop blaming victims, stop putting the onus and the responsibility on people who are targeted, and move that onus and responsibility to tech companies and tech platforms is one of the core reasons that I started this podcast. The Prime Minister went on to say that institutional misogyny being quote, woven into the fabric of our institutions means the problem has not been taken seriously enough. Too often misogyny is excused, minimized or ignored. The arguments of women are dismissed as exaggerated or one offs. That culture creates permission, Starmer wrote. So under these new rules, victims and survivors could report images once either to the platform or to the media regulator in the uk Ofcom, and that would trigger removal requests across multiple platforms simultaneously. Ofcom is also being asked to explore digital watermarking so that abusive images can be automatically detected every time that they're reposted. Creating or sharing non consensual digital images would become a quote, priority offense under the online Safety act, putting it in the same category as child abuse, material or terrorism. OFCOM would then be responsible for enforcing the ban on the images with the aim to remove that burden or onus from the person targeted to need to report the same image potentially thousands of times as it just keeps continually getting reposted. And that was one of the points that I made when talking about what was happening with GROK here in the states is that we actually do have legislation to take it down act, which ostensibly you might be thinking, well why, why is that not being triggered? And one of the reasons is, is that the person targeted has to make a complaint before anything happens. And so if nobody makes that complaint, nothing happens. And that really the burden really is on the person targeted to do something to have it taken down.
- [41:57]
Mike
So is 48 hours feasible? Are companies going to be able to to do this even if they want to comply with this new rule?
- [42:05]
Bridget Todd
That is a great question. The Guardian spoke to the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, which I should say I did a bunch of work with in my former job. They spoke to Ann Krannon who researches online misogyny for ISD, who said, I think that 48 hours is certainly possible. To be honest with you. The problem is it may not necessarily incentivize a quicker response rate from companies, but 48 hours is longer than the time frame for removal of other types of content, such as terrorist content in the eu. She added that there are already existing initiatives to use hash matching to protect victims of intimate abuse, although it can be challenging to get different tech platforms to coordinate among themselves so that an abusive video uploaded to say Facebook for example, is automatically then detected on Reddit. She's really careful to talk about the ways that hash matching is not perfect technology and can be circumvented. Terrorist groups, for example, often add small alterations to videos that have already been hashed as terroristic content or like they'll add an emoji and that will then make them unrecognizable to hatch mashing systems. There's also the problem of AI tools and AI deepfakes that just make everything worse, allowing non consensual intimate images and other content to be altered really quickly and then spread across different pockets of the Internet, which makes it a lot easier to evade attempts to detect it quickly with tools like hatch matching.
- [43:34]
Mike
I really think that that is a big part of why it seems like things are becoming so bad so rapidly is just AI allowing these pre existing structural harms to happen so much faster and on such a wider scale so quickly.
- [43:51]
Bridget Todd
Exactly. And then you add to that the fact that you've got platforms that are private or encrypted, like Signal or WhatsApp, where content is able to be traded and passed around in ways that are harder to get a get a sense of. And then the fact that you've got rogue websites or fringe platforms that fall outside of the reach of legislation like the Online Safety Act. There's just, it's just tough. And I think that a lot of what people like me and advocates have been warning about it's here. You know, this is what it, this is what hap. This is what that looks like when you have a climate where platforms are not being held accountable. This is what it looks like. The people who are harmed are women and young people, and the people who get to just do whatever they want are billionaires like Elon Musk who are getting rich off of it. So I really, I really think you're right. More after a quick break.
- [44:53]
Public Podcast Sponsor
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds or options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETF with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member finra NSIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures available at public.com disclosures there's
- [45:54]
Lenovo Podcast Sponsor
no championship league for small business owners, but if there was, you'd be at the top of the standings. Because going pro with Lenovo Pro means you've got the winning formation. One on one advice. IT solutions and customized hardware powered by Intel Core Ultra processors help you stay ahead of the competition. Business Goes Pro with Lenovo Pro Sign up for free@lenovo.com Pro.
- [46:25]
Cindy Crawford
Hi, I'M Cindy Crawford and I'm the founder of meaningful beauty. When Dr. Sabah and I decided to do a skincare line together, he said to me, we are going to give women meaningful beauty. And I said, that's exactly right. We want to give women meaningful beauty, which means each and every product is meaningful. It has a reason to exist. It's efficacious. You're going to get results and then you just go out and live your life. Meaningful beauty confidence is beautiful. Learn more@meaningbeauty.com
- [46:57]
Malcolm Glaubel
hello, Malcolm Glabel here. We're here in New York City with T Mobile for Business, recording another episode of Revisionist history about how 5G network slicing strengthens trust and connections across worldwide industries.
- [47:10]
T Mobile Representative
Slicing can be used for so many different things. We're here with our friends from CNN from Siemens Energy. The ways that it can be used, frankly, are limitless and are really, really built to think through. How can T Mobile understand the pain points that our customers have? Smash those pain points and help you deliver very specific outcome.
- [47:40]
Bridget Todd
Get right back into it. So speaking of stuff that I hate on the Internet, I have to quickly talk about this frankly absurd. It would almost be funny if it wasn't so enraging insight into how DOGE decided what humanities programs were DEI and thus needed to be cut. And it was being done by two totally unqualified bros who literally just asked Chat GPT I this is one of those stories created in a lab to make me angry and piss me off. Mission accomplished. Now bear in mind that we are talking about federal grants that were already approved after the full rigorous application and review process. So if you're doing some interesting, important work in the humanities, you write a vigorous grant application. It's submitted to the federal government. The federal government. It's no joke. I've done it and I've never gotten one of these grants. It is no joke. It takes a long time. They really there's very rigorous your application is approved. The money is approved. It just takes two bozos using ChatGPT to say up. We're taking it back. So these grants were terminated by these two random, inexperienced doged bros based on whether or not ChatGPT could explain in under 120 characters that they were quote, related to DEI. We know this thanks to a newly released complaint from the Authors Guild against the government, which reveals how DOGE actually decided which National Endowments for the Humanities grants to kill after those grants had already been awarded. So, Tech Dirt reports, two young DOGE operatives, Nate Kavanaugh comma, a College dropout. Love that little ad tech dirt. Great detail. And Justin Fox, a junior private equity associate, were given access to the National Endowment for the Humanities and tasked with cutting grants. Their method. Fox built a keyword detection list with words like lgbtq, tribal, bipoc, and immigrants. Notably absent were words like white, Caucasian, or heterosexual. Then they fed the grant descriptions into ChatGPT, asking whether or not they were, quote, related to DEI requiring answers in under 120 characters. Side note, they couldn't even read more. Like 120 characters is so few characters.
- [50:28]
Mike
So I'm guessing that there's a field like when you submit for one of these grants. Because I've, I've never applied for a National Endowment for the Humanities grant, but I've applied to other federal agencies and, you know, it's a whole automated system with different fields where you have to paste stuff in. And I'm guessing that there was like a description field that was limited to 120 characters, which is just the absolute shortest you could imagine because that's, that's what, like 10 words, maybe 15 words?
- [50:58]
Bridget Todd
It's like a sentence.
- [51:00]
Mike
So I have two bones to pick with this methodology, which is like so stupid, but it's like extra, extra stupid for two reasons. One, they created a list of words and then needed chat GPT to tell them whether one of those words was present in a text string. Like, you don't need chatgpt for that. So that's one thing. And then the second is. Yeah, why would they use the shortest, what I assume has to be the shortest field, this 120 character description? Why not use the abstract, which was probably, you know, maybe like 500 characters or something. Just really dumb execution of a dumb strategy.
- [51:45]
Bridget Todd
Well, I think it's on. It's, it's purposeful. Right, because then you would actually have to consider the merit of these grants. And they don't want to consider the merit of these grants. They want to cut the grants. And so if you did it that way, you might actually get a clear or full picture of what these. The purpose of these grants and the merit of these grants. They're not interested in that. And so I think it being so stupid and sloppy and blunt is the point. They probably put their stupidest on it on purpose.
- [52:18]
Mike
Yeah, these were probably like the dumbest guys on Team Doge. Yeah, they're like, oh, yeah, we want you to match some text strings, see if you can figure out how to do it with an LLM.
- [52:30]
Bridget Todd
Like the, like the stupidity is the point. I think and so the grants that were flagged by ChatGPT were then canceled, even though the grants were already awarded. Experts at NEH who could have provided any kind of context were blocked from pushing back the acting director whose signature appeared on 1,400 termination emails sent from a private server.
- [52:54]
Mike
You know, you would really expect an email like this coming from an agency director to come from an official agency server. In fact, I'm pretty sure there are laws requiring that for like records retention reasons. So just one more dumb piece of the execution here, sending it from a private server.
- [53:17]
Bridget Todd
Well, that acting NEH head later admitted they had no idea which grants were cut and why. Basically, I don't know. Couldn't even tell you. Among the grant casualties were grants on the Colfax massacre that happened in 1873 in Colfax, Louisiana, wherein a group of 62 to 153 black men were murdered while surrendering to a mob of former Confederate soldiers and members of the kkk, Jewish women, slave labor during the Holocaust, Native American boarding schools, and the women pilots of World War II who were denied entry because of their race. So this discovery came through a lawsuit by the Authors Guild and the details are as bad as you would imagine. Just like two guys with absolutely no humanities experience and just a culture war key list that somebody cooked up, asking Chad GPT to make funding decisions that actual experts had spent months reviewing. And again, this money had already been awarded. So taking away money that had already already been, they'd gone through this rigorous process that had already been doled out.
- [54:30]
Mike
You know, it's as comically stupid as these two guys's execution was it. The consequences are quite real. Right? Like those grants were canceled and these important, if uncomfortable histories are not being studied or told or whatever. The purpose of these grants was right. It, I think it connects with what we talked about last week, the Save Our Signs campaign, because this is right in lockstep with the administration's larger efforts to erase all of these aspects of American history that they don't like that paint white people in anything other than the most flattering picture that they give any sort of pause to the idea that America is like the best and pure and has never made any mistakes. And it's such a dangerous thing to, to try to do, to erase that history rather than try to learn from it and move forward.
- [55:45]
Bridget Todd
That is a good reminder. Shout out to one of our listeners, Deb. We will put Deb's call to document signs that you see for the Save Our Science project in the show Notes, it's very important to preserve our history. Even the history that is uncomfortable or heaven forbid, paints white people in an unflattering light, despite being absolutely historically accurate and truthful. I have a related story, which is that the eeoc, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which is the federal civil rights agency that is supposed to sort of represent workers who have been legitimately discriminated against, has filed its first DEI related lawsuit of the Trump era and that is against a Coca Cola bottler in New England. So if you listen to this show, we've definitely talked about shocking cases of discrimination where people have been genuinely harmed. Hold onto your hat, you're not going to believe the harm that happened in this case. So this is the allegation. Coca Cola hosted a two day networking event for about 250 female employees at a Connecticut casino. Get this, the men were not invited.
- [57:06]
Mike
Just perpetuating that girls club smoking cigars.
- [57:11]
Bridget Todd
For too long women have had their boot on the neck of the white American male worker and it's high time we did something about it. So y' all might remember that back in December, the EEOC chair, Andrea Lucas posted this video really explicitly asking white men, do you feel you have been discriminated against at your job? Let us know, we will file a lawsuit. So the kind of cases that the EEOC typically takes on involve people who have been measurably, clearly harmed by their employers because of discrimination. Right. We've covered things like pregnant women being fired for being pregnant right before giving birth or nursing parents being let go because they need to pump on the job workers with cancer or Ms. Or diabetes who lost their jobs and subsequently their health insurance because their employer would not make reasonable accommodations.
- [58:12]
Mike
They're also the agency that sued Tesla for racial discrimination in its factories that was found to be widespread.
- [58:21]
Bridget Todd
Yeah, they in 2015, they sued BMW and BMW had to pay back $1.6 million to black workers who were screened out by a background check policy the EEOC successfully argued had a racially disparate impact. Right. And so historically this is what the EEOC has been used for, cases where there has been a clear measurable harm. It is not typical for the EEOC to sue because men were not invited explicitly to a networking event. More after a quick break.
- [59:04]
Public Podcast Sponsor
Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI, it all starts with your prompt from renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to SaaS semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year. You can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures available at public.com disclosures there's
- [60:05]
Lenovo Podcast Sponsor
no championship league for small business owners, but if there was, you'd be at the top of the standings. Because going pro with Lenovo Pro means you've got got the winning formation. One on one advice IT solutions and customized hardware powered by Intel Core Ultra processors help you stay ahead of the competition. Business goes pro with Lenovo Pro Sign up for free@lenovo.com Pro Lenovo Lenovo
- [60:36]
Cindy Crawford
hi, I'm Cindy Crawford and I'm the founder of meaningful beauty. When Dr. Saba and I decided to do a skincare line tip together, he said to me, we are going to give women meaningful beauty. And I said, that's exactly right. We want to give women meaningful beauty, which means each and every product is meaningful. It has a a reason to exist. It's efficacious. You're going to get results and then you just go out and live your life. Meaningful Beauty confidence is beautiful. Learn more@meaningful beauty.com
- [61:09]
Malcolm Glaubel
hello, Malcolm Glauble here. We're here in New York City with T Mobile for Business recording another episode of Revisionist history about how 5G network slicing strengthens trust and connections across worldwide industries.
- [61:21]
T Mobile Representative
Slicing can be used for so many different things. We're here with our friends from CNN from Siemens Energy. The ways that it can be used, frankly, are limitless and are really, really built to think through. How can T Mobile understand the pain points that our customers have, smash those pain points and help you deliver very specific outcomes?
- [61:51]
Bridget Todd
Let's get right back into it. So this first lawsuit under the Trump administration's sort of new focus around this is claiming that a diversity focused workplace program is itself Unlawful. They're also investigating Nike and Northwest Mutual for allegedly discriminating against white workers. And of course, we talked about it on the show, but also demanded DEI policy information from about 20 major law firms. This Koch case is kind of being seen as a test for how far the Trump administration is. Is willing to push DEI when it comes to the private sector. We talked about this on the show before, but when Trump was reelected, a lot of companies just. Trump administration did not ask them to do this yet, but they just immediately pulled their DEI initiatives. Companies like Target, meanwhile, Costco was asked to do the same thing. Costco basically said, kick Rock, we'll do what we want. Diversity and inclusion is making us money. So where we're going to continue making money, they are not suffering the same kind of economic woes that Target is experiencing. I almost wonder how much of this is the Trump administration saying, hey, companies, wouldn't it be great if you abandoned all the people who are making you money by publicly backing away from DEI initiatives. Don't you want the opportunity to be as financially and economically uncertain as Target right now? Don't you? Don't you look at the CEO of Target and think, that should be me? We'll get in line and do what we say.
- [63:28]
Mike
Yeah, it's gotta be a pretty tough sell. Which, yeah, maybe you're right. Maybe that's why they're just coming out and suing these companies to. To get them to do it. Because clearly, as Target has learned, it's not a very financially rewarding way to go.
- [63:44]
Bridget Todd
So this employment attorney, Daphne Delvo, that I follow on threads put it very well. She writes, women hold roughly 10% of Fortune 500 CEO positions, earn less in virtually every occupation, and face a wage penalty for having children. While fathers get a bonus, white men are not a systematically excluded group. Individual discomfort is not structural discrimination.
- [64:08]
Mike
I think that's such a good point to make that the reason the EEOC exists is to address structural discrimination, right? It came out of the civil rights era as a way to address some of these entrenched structural factors and forces that were systematically disadvantaging certain groups of people. And a lot of those disadvantages still exist. You know? You know, you just mentioned leadership positions. We could also look at wages, right? Like, there is still a big pay gap. That is why the EEOC is supposed to exist. So to eliminate practices that are perpetuating that wage gap. And the Trump administration just fundamentally acts as if things like the wage gap or the leadership gap at the top of Fortune 500 companies doesn't exist, and that the only thing that matters is the personal comfort of white men working in a Coca Cola factory in Connecticut. It's. So it's tempting to say it's short sighted, but they know exactly what they're doing.
- [65:26]
Bridget Todd
Right.
- [65:26]
Mike
Like they are interested in actively perpetuating white supremacy and patriarchy.
- [65:32]
Bridget Todd
Yes. And that employment attorney, I think she's so right, she exactly put it that way. She says this is about discouraging women from gathering. Because when women gather, we compare notes, we identify patterns, we realize our collective power of everything this administration could have chosen to prosecute. Wage theft, pregnancy discrimination, mass layoffs, they chose this. That tells you exactly who they consider a priority and who they consider a threat. They're so scared of our stories that they're suing to stop them Cavity from accounting. Missed some appetizers. And that is what the federal government decided was worth its litigation power. And it's actually kind of funny because I saw this piece in Bloomberg called White Men Learn the Hidden Costs of Suing for Discrimination. All about these white men who kind of had their grievances, their professional grievances nursed by the Trump administration and decided to sue their employers for what they felt was discrimination against them as white men. They talked to this newscaster named Vaughn who said that, you know, he had been a newscaster and that when they made, when the news outlet made their video of all the newscasters, he was not featured in it. He didn't get a billboard. And then they did a diversity initiative, and then they hired a black newscaster, and that black newscaster got a billboard. Now the news outlet is quoted as saying, oh, no, this person was fired for cause, for documented performance issues. The article reads, if the Trump administration has its way, more suits like Von's will come before the courts as the government seeks to redress or what it sees as discrimination against white men. In December, the EEOC urged white men to come forward with complaints about their treatment by employers looking to diversify their workforces. However, many of the white men doing so are confronting the same blunt reality as countless employees of other genders, races, or sexual orientations who have stood up to corporate HR over perceived wrongdoing. Bringing a lawsuit against your employer may well damage your career. And so basically, this person, Vaughn, says that he cannot find a steady, stable job that pays what his old job paid after suing his former employer. And, you know, he's a, he's in his 60s now and, like, it's a lot harder to find employment. And having this he says he does not regret doing the lawsuit, but the lawsuit is part of, he says, why he is having trouble replacing that work. And basically, these white men who are suing their employers are finding out the hard way what women and queer folks and trans folks and people of color and pregnant people and other minoritized populations have been known that standing up for yourself and suing can hurt your career. Now, it is complicated because I do think that just across the board, we need better protections for people who speak up around real workplace harm and people who blow the whistle on things like abuse and discrimination. But it's like these guys want to play the part of being a marginalized, oppressed class without actually having realized that, oh, being a marginalized, oppressed person comes with real economic disadvantages that we've known about for a really long time. Women and people who sue their employers for discrimination, they have talked about this kind of thing. But these white men are like, oh, I want to say I'm the victim without having to incur the actual real costs that we know that victims just have to eat when they speak up. But that said, in my opinion, that is not what is going on with these cases, because the piece points out, rightly, men still make up 90% of chief executive officers at S&P 500 companies, as well as about three quarters of all C suite employees. And the proportion of black men or women who have held the top job is extremely small, currently hovering at about 1%. And these white men were like, we would like that 1% too, because equal. Right. If I don't get that 1% as well, that's discrimination against me. Actually.
- [69:54]
Mike
Actually, I heard they have mini quiches at that mixer. I don't get any mini quiches.
- [69:59]
Bridget Todd
Yeah, like you missed the happy hour, dude. Calm down. The article also talked to this guy who sued Meta because Meta at the time had an apprenticeship program for minority applicants, and that ever since he sued Meta, he has had a hard time finding work ever since. The article says the program offered ethnic minority workers opportunities to shadow professionals and learn new skills. And this guy said that while working on a contract job for Meta, one of those apprentices was given a title and a role superior to him, even though, in his view, that person had less experience. So Meta and other defendants said in a legal filing that this person actually never even applied for the role in question and was simply not eligible for that program and also lacked the legal standing to sue over it. His case was dismissed in 2024 and now is pending appeal. So I think so Much of this is exactly what you were just talking about. Because I am seeing a lot of white men being told, anytime somebody gets something that they want, it is an injustice. Anytime something doesn't go their way, it is an injustice. And I think that's really the crux of the problem, that nobody could ever be just more qualified for you or better positioned for a role. Especially if the person that gets something that you want is black or trans or queer or otherwise. A minoritized person, that is an injustice. And we now have a dynamic where that kind of white male grievance is being codified into a kind of legitimate public policy. You will have the federal government deciding that it's legal authority and ability to sue. Companies and individuals will come down on protecting that very fragile white male need to get what they feel they deserve. And I think that's exactly what we're seeing play out here. I see the same thing playing out in conversations about who gets into college. You can just blame all of your problems or shortcomings or maybe, maybe they're not even shortcomings because maybe there are just things that didn't go your way on this hypothetical, mythical, unqualified, minoritized person who got something that you saw was as rightfully yours and now you want to sue about it. And again, I mean, we've talked about this on the show so often. They don't give us shit. If a black, if a. Let me tell you something, if a black woman gets into a C suite, people are pissed about it. And it's. She got there because she earned it because she was like better than everybody. They don't, they would not, they would not allow people into these positions willy nilly if we were not qualified. And so, yeah, I just, I just hate how our current government is allowing for these feelings of grievance. We all, we all have to experience not getting things that we want in life. That's life as an adult. But telling people no, anytime you experience, experience having to watch somebody get something that you wanted, it's not just that things didn't go your way. You are being discriminated against. That's what I think is so insidious.
- [73:20]
Mike
And that's their whole campaign just encouraging grievance, nursing grievances.
- [73:26]
Bridget Todd
Yes, it is all about grievance with these people. And you know, last week I was talking about how I took a break from the news roundup because it was just getting me down. I'm going to try to be intentional about including a win or a positive story in every episode. And we actually do have a positive story as it pertains to the Trump administration and DEI initiatives, because this week the Trump administration agreed to drop its ban on DEI initiatives in public schools nationally, which is great news. A federal judge dismissed a case in New Hampshire this week, which then triggered the administration to dropping the ban nationwide. We covered a little bit of the fallout of the administration's attacks on anything even remotely related to dei. So this is very positive news. So New Hampshire's largest teachers union, four school districts, and civil rights groups like the ACLU sued the Trump administration last year, arguing that the ban violated free speech and equal protection. This was pretty serious. Schools risked losing federal funding if they did not comply. The administration then told the court that it would not withhold federal funding from schools that maintained DEI programs. Didn't really give an explanation for why they were. They were pulling this. But a similar challenge in Maryland got the same result. Teachers at this point were saying that this ban had them afraid to teach basic American history because they were worried that lessons on things like racism or discrimination could trigger an investigation and potentially cost schools their funding. According to the ACLU's Giles Bissonnet, the lawsuit forced the government to prove the necessity for why they're doing what they're doing. And here they certainly could not do that. This is a case where teachers and civil rights groups really pushed back and held the line and won. And in the process, protected classrooms nationwide without the need to have a single trial. Two separate New Hampshire state level laws restricting DEI and limiting teaching around racism are still being challenged in court. So, like, I don't want to give the impression that the fight is entirely over, but I'm going to take this as a win. Giving all. Given all that we talked about in this episode, absolutely.
- [75:45]
Mike
It's a win. I saw on. I was on Blue sky when this happened. And it was so interesting to me that so many people seem to want to, like, diminish the importance of this win and be like, oh, well, they're just gonna find some other way to do it. And like, yeah, no kidding. The Trump administration is gonna, like, keep looking for ways to push their white supremacy agenda. But, like, this is still a win, right? Like, the, the fight is going on, but this is a big win about something very important. So what a nice thing to end on here.
- [76:23]
Bridget Todd
And especially in this climate. Let's learn to take a W when we get a W, huh? Let's. Let's not. We don't need. There is so much to be discouraged about. I don't know. I'm I'm taking my wins when I get them.
- [76:37]
Mike
Hell yeah.
- [76:37]
Bridget Todd
Well Mike, thank you so much for being here. Where can folks stay in touch with all the stuff that we're doing on the show?
- [76:44]
Mike
Thanks for having me here, Bridget. People can leave us comments on Spotify. A lot of people have been doing that and it's been great to get that feedback. Please keep it coming. You can send us an email@helloangote.com you can follow Bridget on Instagram or TikTok BridgetMarie in D.C. and you can follow the show on YouTube or Blue sky at There are no Girls on the Internet.
- [77:10]
Bridget Todd
Thanks so much for listening y'.
- [77:11]
Mike
All.
- [77:11]
Bridget Todd
I will see you on the Internet. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech or just want to say hi. You can reach us@helloangodi.com youm can also find transcripts for today's episode@tangodi.com There are no girls on the Internet was created by me, Bridget Todd. It's a production of iHeartRadio and unbossed creative. Jonathan Strickland is our Executive producer, Tari Harrison is our producer and Sound Engineer Michael Amato is our contributing producer. Edited by Joey Pat I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [78:03]
Lenovo Podcast Sponsor
Pro drivers live for race day, but for small business owners, every day is race day. That's why going pro with Lenovo Pro matters one on one advice, IT solutions and customized hardware powered by Intel Core Ultra processors. Keep your business on the right track. Business goes pro with Lenovo Pro Sign up for free@lenovo.com Pro.
- [78:34]
Public Podcast Sponsor
If you're the purchasing manager at a manufacturing plant, you know having a trusted partner makes all the difference. That's why hands down, you count on Grainger for auto reordering. With on time restocks. Your team will have the cut resistant gloves they need at the start of their shift and you can end your day knowing they've got safety well in hand. Call 1-800-GRAINGER clickgrainger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.
- [79:03]
Mike
Hey Donald, we really flyin on that treadmill?
- [79:06]
Bridget Todd
I'm trying to run as fast AS T mobile 5G home Internet.
- [79:08]
Mike
Zach well you better pick it up because now and now T Mobile has the fastest 5G home Internet according to Ookla Speed Test.
- [79:14]
Bridget Todd
Really?
- [79:14]
Mike
How's this No, T Mobile's faster than that and it's still just 35 bucks a month. Come on, faster.
- [79:20]
Bridget Todd
Whoa, that's too fast.
- [79:22]
Mike
You'll be all right. Just walk it off. Get on the fast track.
- [79:25]
Bridget Todd
T Mobile now has the fastest 5G
- [79:27]
T Mobile Representative
home Internet and it still starts at
- [79:28]
Bridget Todd
just 35 bucks a month. With autopay and a voice line plus a five year price guarantee.
- [79:33]
Public Podcast Sponsor
Owning a home is full of surprises. Some wonderful, some not so much. And when something breaks, it can feel like the whole day unravels. That's why HomeServe exists. For as little as $4.99 a month. You'll always have someone to call a trusted professional ready to help, bringing peace of mind to four and a half million homeowners nationwide. For plans starting at just $4.99 a month, go to homeserve.com that's homeserve.com not available everywhere. Most plans range between $4.99 to $11.99 a month. Your first year terms apply on covered repairs.
- [80:03]
Bridget Todd
This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.