262: Unraveling Internet Culture: A Conversation with Taylor Lorenz

Ah, the digital playground of social media, filled with endless choices and endless debates. Are you more of a curated Instagram person or flexing your kids on Facebook? Are you a Threads person? What number did you have? Did you even know that they removed the numbers? Mine was in the three millions, which sounds like a high number, but it was actually quite low. I jumped in early on Threads and I haven't been there since. Or do you prefer the chaos of Twitter? Do not get me started on the name X. Perhaps you're a seasoned Tumblr aficionado. Or maybe you're someone like me who grew annoyed with Clubhouse's invite only doors. And of course, there's the age old debate. Is it blue or is it gold? Personally, I was in the blue camp. Whether you can answer these questions or not, I promise you this episode is going to be an engaging exploration into the ever evolving social media landscape. I promise you, you will learn something and you will find it fascinating. Welcome to the Indestructible PR podcast. I'm Molly McPherson, your crisis communication strategist, here to turn crises bad news and scand lessons in resilient reputation building. So each week I go beyond the buzz to find trending news stories and those fun pop culture moments. But this week, oh, if you are fascinated or terrified or curious about the Internet and social media culture, then this is your episode. I'm speaking with acclaimed Washington Post reporter and authority on Internet culture, Taylor Lorenz. And let me tell you, she is everywhere. Taylor Lorenz is a TEC columnist for the Washington Post business section covering online culture and the content creator industry. She previously served as a tech reporter for the New York Times. She also worked at the Atlantic and the Daily Beast, and she spent time telling me about the back end of working at the Daily Mail. You're interested now, aren't you? So was I. Join my conversation with Taylor Lorenz starting now. Taylor, of all the people I've talked to on this podcast, you are one of the most anticipated guests I've ever had. I'm so excited to talk to you about your book and also about your work. So welcome to the podcast.

Thanks for having me.

Okay, your book, extremely the Untold Story of Fame, Influence and Power on the Internet. It's published. I mean, it's coming out now. Really, this week. So tell me, before we even get into your past, I do want to know, just briefly, where did the idea of this book come from?

Yeah, I decided to write this book. I mean, basically in 2020, I wanted to write a book. You know, I'VE covered the social media landscape for over a decade, since 2009. I started blogging about all this stuff and I wanted to write a history of the rise of social media, not through the lens of these corporate tech narratives, because I think when a lot of people think of the rise of social media, they think of, like, the social network. And they sort of like these books that are sort of, like, told. They tell the rise of social media through the lens of specific companies. And I wanted to zoom out and tell the user side and talk about the content creator side because social products are so unique in the tech world because the value that comes from them is not really the software. It's the users on them, it's the community. And so you can create a Twitter clone, like Donald Trump did, for instance, with Truth Social, but unless you have that network, you don't have the value. So I think I wanted to write about the users of the social platforms and how that contributed to this whole world, because I think we only hear the tech company side usually.

Okay, well, speaking of sides that we're going to hear, we are going to come back and talk about your book more extensively. But before we get there, we have to talk about you, because you are a unique byproduct almost of what you cover, which is Internet culture. So right now you are. Do you consider yourself a technology columnist?

That is my job title at the Washington Post.

Okay, so that's your job. Okay, so that's your job title. What would you call yourself then?

Just overall, I think I have a lot of things. I mean, I'm obviously, I started as a blogger and a content creator, and I'll always be a content creator and a blogger at heart. I don't really blog as much anymore because I write for the Post. But I mean, I'm also a journalist and that's definitely like my day job. But I think, like a lot of people, I have my day job and my passion, but I also use the Internet and I have built an audience, you know, route the things that I care about online.

I think two descriptions about you, the Bob woodward of the TikTok generation, and then also you were named Tech and Media Influencer of the Year by the World Influencers and Bloggers Association. I think really that those are two descriptions that pretty much capture you, wouldn't you say?

Yeah, yeah, I'm really honored by that stuff. I always just joke that I'm the oldest person on my beat, so they have to give me the accolades.

My gosh, the oldest person on your Beat. Oh, my goodness. I feel old even just hearing that. But so talk about. Let's just go back in time for a bit. So share with me and the listeners what initially sparked your interest in Internet culture, and particularly I noticed your connection to Tumblr. That was a network that you used to use.

Yeah, Tumblr gave me literally everything in life. I mean, I graduated like a lot of millennials into the recession back in 2008. There was no jobs. And so, yeah, in 2009, I was working temp jobs, I was working retail, trying to figure out what to do with my life. And then I got on Tumblr, and when it was like night and day, suddenly I felt like, oh, my God, there's this whole wide world out there on the Internet and the blog world, and I could publish on it. And that just felt so liberating. I was like, well, I have some opinions.

So where did you go to school and what was your major?

Oh, my God. I went to a couple different schools. I went to University of Colorado for three years, and then I ended up transferring to Hobart and William Smith, which I graduated from. And then I also did a short time at American University in D.C. in between. Okay, I had a really hard time in school. I'm going to real. I was failing a lot.

Okay, so you're originally from. Is it Connecticut you're originally from?

Yeah, I lived in Connecticut, then my family moved to Colorado.

But, okay, that was my first question. How do you go from Connecticut to University of Colorado? So I think this is important because I do have a lot of younger people, college students, people just out of college, who are always asking me questions, you know, about my job. But you admitting right now a very kind of vulnerable part of your past is that you struggled in college. What was it that you struggled with?

So I'm severely dyslexic, and I have also severe adhd, which I don't take medication for anything. And so school was very, very hard for me. I transferred a lot. I really had a hard time in school. And growing up in the 90s, now, there's an understanding of a lot of these things. In the 90s, it was like, okay, you're just an idiot, and you're going to be put in these sort of classes with sometimes developmentally disabled people. And just. So it was a hard situation, and I felt very bored all the time because I was, I think, smart enough and. But I just wasn't very good at reading and the stuff that came along with. Yeah, school. Anyway, I never did well, in school. So what I did is worked. And I started working at age 11. I've had. I think I made a list. I have almost 50 jobs in my life. Like I had nine internships in college. The one thing I've always done is I'm a worker and not in the school context. But yeah, that's what got me all my. I mean, that's what got me. I think it helped me a lot when I started to get traction with my blogging career because I had worked a lot of places and I had interned a lot of places and I had a lot of like, sort of knowledge from things like that. I tried to be in pr. Molly, you would appreciate that.

Well, I see. This is what I had to ask because sitting in front of me is a book of almost 300 pages of the most well researched articles and points in time. I mean, this book is incredible in the fact that you're a columnist. I mean, you're writing the amount of content. You have a newsletter and you're telling me that you're dyslexic and you have ADHD and that you struggle with. That's so interesting. So are you telling me that it's really just like hard work and focus and passion? So what is it that got you through it?

I think it's alternative learning and I think a lot of kids with learning disabilities are in. I went to public school my whole life I was in public school and I think public school is great, but it's not set up for alternative learning methods. You're very much like, especially in the 90s when I was a kid, it was like, you learn this way and if you don't learn that way too bad, you must be an idiot. And I'm a big believer in sort of like self directed learning and other sort of just all the different. I mean, I'm not an expert in education by any means, but I think there's a lot more ways to teach people things that they need to know. And so a lot of it was people outside of work that I interned for that mentored me or that taught me things. I've always had a really good relationship with almost every boss that I've ever worked for and they've helped me so much.

What type of internships were you drawn to? Was it anything with content, writing, journalism?

No, never journalism. I didn't really consider that until I started blogging and then I met journalists. But I always wanted to be in sort of like culture and media. I did a bunch of fashion internships I did an internship, a couple internships at, like, political consulting firms that did advertising for political candidates. I interned for an artist, a local artist in town. It was always like, creative fields. I think I was. I knew I would be in a creative field. I just didn't know, like, what creative.

See, this makes sense to me. And I'm just like you. I mean, I've been a newsy my whole life, but I wanted to split myself into two, 10 different pieces because I wanted to work in television programming, television advertising, television sales, journalism. I wanted to be at an ad agency. I want, you know, I just loved media and culture, just like you. And when you discovered Tumblr, it sounds like it's the same time that I just started adjuncting as a professor at a school and I was using Tumblr for the students. And so, yeah, so I was new to it myself. But one thing that I remember about it, it was just so open. I mean, there were no rules. It was just, you could do whatever you could do. So I'm not surprised to hear that that's really the starting point for your creativity and probably confidence, too, correct?

Yeah. Well, also because there was no judgment, and I think it was a lot of other young women, too, that were on Tumblr at that time. And I could write and I didn't feel like I, you know, there was some sort of thing. I could just be myself and have my own voice and develop my own sort of sense of humor and.

Oh, yeah. And Tumblr to me will always be the. Is it a blue dress or a gold dress? Like that was.

That was Tumblr to me. That's in my book.

Oh, yes, I know. So now let's move over now. I'm dying to know about this. So you. We'd say that you have a diverse career in journalism. I mean, from the outside, a broader look. That's what it is to me right now. You spent time at the Daily Mail?

Yes, that was my first media job.

Yes. So tell me how you got the job and what job did you have in particular?

There's. Yeah, so I had. Because of my success on Tumblr, I had brands asking me to do things. This was before, like, this was a real industry. Facebook had just launched Facebook pages in 2009. And, like, people wanted branded tumblers, but there. So I got a job at an ad agency doing branded social media for brands, mainly Verizon. But I love the Daily Mail. I'm the same as you. I love news. I've always been a Huge. I love just information. And I would sit down every day and read the Daily Mail homepage, top to bottom every morning. And I was like, I noticed that they didn't have a Facebook page. They didn't have a Facebook page. They didn't really have social media. Yeah. I ended up my. This guy Rob that I knew, knew the publisher. He connected me with the publisher. And I met the publisher, Martin Clark, and I convinced him to hire me. I was like, I made this whole PowerPoint presentation, and I was like, you don't understand. I found it recently. I was like, the Internet, you are missing things. Because the Daily Mail could go crazy. Just let me set up a Facebook page and I promise you. So he let me set up the Facebook page first. He was like, just for the US you just do a little thing. I'll hire you in New York just for the US and then within a couple months, he was like, okay, you're taking over the global social strategy. You can hire a team of 12 all over the world. I managed. I mean, I did everything. I built that whole brand on the Internet. And it was. I love tabloid news. It was a great brand to build.

Okay, first, so tell me. I mean, I was just like you. There was a time I read it. It was the first thing I read every morning. Though I would never admit that I know a tabloid. First. First was in New York Post, and then all of a sudden, Daily Mail. Who owns the Daily Mail?

It's owned by DMG Media Group. It's a British conglomerate. They also own a bunch of other, like Metro UK and a bunch of ones. Okay, it's not Murdoch.

Yes. Okay, so then what is it? So were you just running the social media or were you doing any of the reporting?

Oh, yeah, I started reporting. So, I mean, everything I learned about journalism, unfortunately, I learned at the Daily Mail, which is not necessarily a lot.

About, like, the ethics of journalism.

The ethics of journalism. It was more about how to tell a story and how to get people into a story. I'll never forget Martin Clark. One time we were in this meeting not long after I started, and there was a whale that came from the Hudson River. And the headline was, it said, whale seen for the second time on the Hudson River. And he had this. And he started yelling at the reporter, and he was like, it's not that. It's the whale that can't stay away. The whale that's fallen in love with New York and it can't stay away. And he was so good at things like that. He would See things. And he would see the story and, like, put characters. Anyway, I learned everything from Martin. And there's this editor, Katherine Thompson there, too, who's just incredible. There are a lot of really amazing editors, and I learned.

Okay, but so that storytelling, that, to me, that sounds like a great anecdote for writing fiction.

Yeah. But it's not. It's true for journalism, too, because what you want to do is. It's the truth. You're telling the truth, but you're telling it in a compelling way. In that sense, obviously, you're giving like an animal that's clearly probably just lost twice. Like, you're telling this narrative, but that's what you're doing with media all the time. Like, every journalist knows that you have to make a compelling narrative, otherwise people aren't going to read your story. And that narrative does need to be truthful, ideally. Right. Although a lot of journalism is not, unfortunately, truthful. But journalists. It's storytelling at the end of the day. And so I think that's what tabloid news does very well. The problem is they sacrifice accuracy.

Yeah, okay. Yeah, exactly. But so. So tell me some of the secrets, though, in terms of the Daily Mail. I mean, it's incredibly, incredibly popular. I will admit, I don't go to it anymore. I mean, just was. There's so many other social media apps that, you know, kind of scratch that itch. But what was the magic for formula at the Daily Mail that made it so successful back then?

Yeah, especially back then, because it was sort of this perfect marriage of the type of news that performed really well online. And if you could format it really well online, it would just go crazy. And I got very good. You know, they're famous for these long headlines, but I only had 70 characters to write the Facebook headline. And so I got very good at distilling drama stories, like, into these really quick Facebook headlines. I would say what they do is they're very democratic. Like, they're very. This is something I've always appreciated about tabloid news. They're not, like, too highbrow to cover something. They recognize a good story and they'll go after. Trained me very well in the sense that there's so much elitism in media, especially even just about, like, who we cover. And I don't love the, like, political leanings of the Daily Mail at all. And they do a lot of really predatory coverage. But I always tried to share the best of it on Facebook. And the stories that I wrote were mostly about Internet stuff. Early. It was early virality. I Started writing about basically early content creator stuff.

Okay, so one more question about it and then I'll move on. We could spend the entire interview about that. I notice when I would read the Daily Mail, to me it appeared that the writers or the reporters behind it, they were just mining US news. I mean, so what, were you reading the wires or were you going to all these different news sites?

Yeah, the goal is basically to, like, aggregate the Internet. And that was like. The whole thing is like, you'd scroll around on local news on. I used to have this thing called Feedly that I would check to see if there were viral stories popping. Because when there were viral stories popping, I would always flag them to editors to cover so that I could get the link to share on Facebook. Or sometimes I would cover it myself. I mean, that was back when, like, Google Reader was around. I mean, there was. It was a different. It was really easy to kind of, like, scan publications. And then I would get a lot from the Internet, too. That was the era. And I talk about this in my book, actually, about the early 2010s. Digital media was this intermediary for the Internet. Actually, the dress is a perfect example. You, as a digital media worker would go on the Internet. You would take something viral from the Internet, but people weren't really online enough yet to consume it natively on the platform. It was posted, so you had to, like, post it on a website. So a lot of it was just, you know, arbitrage content arbitrage, where you sort of like, ooh, that's viral. That would go really crazy. Or, like, ooh, that Reddit thread would be really good. I could. I just need somebody to quickly aggregate it in 90 minutes and get it up on the website.

Then tell me about the hierarchy or really of authority and news. You went from the Daily Mail, but now you end up at the New York Times.

Yeah, it was very senior. I had, like, very senior management companies in media. I mean, I was the youngest woman in senior management at the Daily Mail at the time. And then I went on to be director of emerging platforms for the Hill, where I launched. I helped do content strategy for this brand under People magazine. And I thought I would work in biz dev. I was like, I'm going to launch my own media company. Because I always wanted to have my own media company. And, like, I thought I would work in business and strategy. But then I felt like, people don't take you seriously in journalism unless you've been a reporter. And I wanted to write the stories. It was really hard to get people. Even when I was senior, I would have my own little content people. It was really hard to get people to care about the Internet and see it as a meaningful place to write critically and really examine this stuff and not just write up the cheap viral Facebook stuff, but zoom out and write about this whole industry that's emerging. And so I started doing more and more of that writing. I was always writing, but I started really writing sort of critically about the Internet more and more. Yeah, I actually. I filled in as a social media editor for the Atlantic for a week once over the holidays. This was back in the day when, I don't know, we were in these social media Facebook groups, and they were like, I need some. Someone to run the Atlantic. And they let me in the slack. And once I got in the slack, yeah, I was like, by the way, I'm a writer. Can I pitch some stories? And they were like, this girl that we hired to do the Twitter account for a week, like, wants to pitch stories about the Internet, but I gave you one. I wrote a feature. They assigned me a feature. One of the editors there assigned me a feature about. It was back in 2016 or 2017. It was about what happens when your child blows up online. And I interviewed all these parents about how they were navigating the sort of shifting power dynamics of their children having online fame. And it was a feature that did very well for the Atlantic. The Atlantic couldn't hire me full time at that time because I hadn't been a reporter. So I got the Daily Beast to hire me. I took a massive. I took a 75% pay cut, and I moved in with a bunch of friends in Crown Heights. And I was like, whatever. I'm just gonna be a reporter for a year and make nothing. I'll make an entry level salary again for a year, but at least I'll have some clips under my belt. And then within six months, the Atlantic hired me. And then from the Atlantic, I went to the New York Times, and then from the Times, I went to the Post.

Oh, it's incredible. Okay, so now I know that we're just going to weave in and out in terms of where you were, where you were writing at the time, and what happened to. But I get a sense. How do you navigate being a journalist and writing a fair and balanced account of what happened without imposing your opinion? Because, I mean, you are an authority in Internet culture. So how do you balance that when you're writing stories for the Post, for instance?

Yeah, I mean, I think the core is to tell the truth of the situation. And I do add analysis in my story. I think it's fine to add analysis or opinion as long as you're explicit that this is just your opinion. Sometimes I write stories that do include my own sort of take on things. I think what's disingenuous is just when reporters include that and don't make it clear that this is just their sort of take. So, I mean, especially at the Atlantic, I was writing a lot of reported takes. That's really what the Atlantic is known for. But I was always very open with, like, this is my opinion on it. I mean, look, I think journalism is a very subjective field. And I think that even just how you cover a story, who you interview, every single little choice you make, is subjective. And so I think good journalists don't mind busting their preconceived notions. The bad journalists are the ones that have the preconceived notions, do the reporting, and then just use that to validate their preconceived notions. I think a good journalist. I'm a very curious person. There's so many stories that I set out to do that I had one idea about the story. And then you report and you talk to people, and you realize it's a different story, and you need to be, like, open and willing to accept that.

What are the boundaries at the Washington Post when it comes to reporting, and are they different for reporters?

Yeah, I mean, every media company is really different, and I think they kind of have different editorial standards. I will say the Post and the Times in the Atlantic all have, like, very high editorial standards compared to places that I worked at earlier in my career that didn't have those restrictions of things. You know, you can't go on free trips to Tahiti and then write about it or something, you know? Yes, but I mean, I cover Internet culture, so I guess the main thing is, like, I try to be fair about the Internet landscape.

It seems like from reading your coverage, they give you some leeway there. They know you're an authority. They know that you have to push the envelope just a little.

Well, I usually make. Yeah, I mean, I usually am making a point with my story. So it's usually like, this matters. Why does this matter? Because XYZ and I would say that's. That's based on reporting. I mean, for instance, with the Libs of TikTok story that people were so mad at me about, you know, because I revealed the woman behind libs of TikTok, I will defend that story forever. I mean, is it an ideological choice to write about her? Maybe. But the point is, is that Ron DeSantis, press secretary, said that her account directly impacted the legislation that he wrote in Florida. Also, that account was basically an assignment editor for all of Fox News. This is a hugely influential account in media. And by the way, she was doing interviews anonymously. So she had a role in the press. She was a public figure. And so, yeah, I mean, I made the decision to do that and I totally stand by it. But I think we all make those types of sort of like choices as reporters. It's just about being honest and open and clear about it.

What was the conversation like in the newsroom with your editors around that whole story?

I was like, I'm going to find out who this woman is. People didn't have her identity publicly.

Could you do a backstory on it real quick for anyone not familiar with it?

So this woman, Haya Raichek, started this account, Libs of TikTok. It's a Twitter account that was doxing LGBTQ teachers. It has called for LGBTQ people to be run out of schools, for gay parents to be criminalized. She doesn't believe that gay, you know, gay parents should be able to have children. She became this hugely influential figure because she's been cited on Joe Rogan and a lot of other sort of actually like the Fox News universe, like right wing. Basically every time she would tweet something, I mean, there were bomb threats against hospitals that she talked about that were providing gender affirming therapy. So she had become this pivotal figure in the right wing media and they were really taking direction from her for a while. Like she was popular. Tucker Carlson, which she would tweet something, it would be on Tucker Carlson the next night. And then Ron Desantis of course, as well. And these political leaders on the right were also looking to her account while they're writing anti gay legislation. I think somebody like that, that's that level of a public figure that's shaping our media environment, that's shaping the laws in our country. We need to know who that person is. And they have millions of followers online by the way as well. So my feeling was I am going to report on this person's identity. I didn't dox her, I didn't expose any personal information, nothing related to her address, nothing related to anything. It's actually, her name is actually quite common in the Jewish community. So there was really nothing that, that I reported that would allow you to expose any kind of Personal information about her, which is what doxing is. However, did I report on her identity? Yes, I did. I think it's very important, and I would argue in the public interest to know who this person is, because when we don't know who these people are that are shaping these things, she could have, who knows what her background is if she had taken money from someone. This is in the public interest.

Yes.

That obviously caused a lot of controversy because people were very mad. And I stand by that reporting. I think I did the right thing.

So tell me about the backlash. What was that like having almost an entire segment? I mean, we have the left and the right, and now they're all coming after you. What was that experience like for you?

Well, so one thing people were really angry at is that I went to her door. And I went to her door because I had tried to call her several times and she. She was hanging up on me. And so I wasn't able to confirm that she didn't want to give comment. It's really important if you were writing about the subject. This was a profile piece about her and about her account. So I really wanted to make sure that I gave her every single opportunity to say that she didn't want to comment. Totally fine if you don't want to comment. But I didn't want to just try to call. And she hung up thinking, I'm a spam call. She lived a mile from me. I found her address and I thought, I'm going to knock on her door and just triple make sure that she doesn't want to give comment. What did she do? She tweets a picture of me at her doorstep. She says, you know, Taylor Lorenz is showing up at my house. I'm like, yes, I politely asked for comment. She declined comment, and I left. That's all it was. But it led to, unfortunately, a lot of backlash for me, because I think people don't understand the process of reporting. And they think, oh, well, you show up at her house, we'll show up at your house, you know? And so it led to a lot of threats and scary stuff.

Yeah, I can imagine. And the weaponization of what happened to you. But really, when you just look at journalism and beat reporting, look at all the movies where they have a journalist, what do they do? They knock on the door to get the quote. They want to get the quote.

Exactly.

You were not only doing your job, you were doing it well. You were letting her know you were going through all the paces there to make sure that she did have A chance to go on the record. And that's.

And that she was prepared. Yeah. Also she knew everything that I would talk about. You know, I wanted to give her a chance to really respond to everything. So.

So I have to ask you about a question and I didn't tell you about this in advance and you can tell me you don't want to talk about it, but involving the controversy, if you will, with a colleague. With Dave Portnoy and recording. Yes.

Oh, yeah. You know, it's so funny, Molly, because I did a podcast with Dave Portnoy recently.

You did?

Dave has not posted it. Dave has not posted it. So, Dave, if you're listening, where's the podcast episode with me? I think I did a very good job and held my own on that.

Okay, so. So it's Emily Heil. Is that who the reporter is?

Yes. I felt very bad for her because here's the thing I will say about all of that and I, I know Emily and I know them to be very good reporters. Not everybody covers the Internet, you know, these are food reporters and so they're reaching out. And not everybody knows the type of person that Dave is. I cover the content creator world. I call people for comment. They're often live streaming on Twitch or something. It's just, it's going to be turned into content. So I'm aware of that. I think a lot of other reporters, it's hard to kind of navigate that type of a thing because they aren't used to dealing with a person like that. But.

Okay, so here's the question. We don't want to spend too much time on this, but this really is interesting because so many people have tagged me on this story and I have, I have opinions on Dave Portnoy, certainly. First there was how he turned the whole pizza. It's almost like he's getting a taste of his own medicine. And then a reporter comes asking questions. What do you think, though? Like, he's trying to expose her showing bias in her reporting and he recorded her and just, just to give a little background. So he's hosting a one bite pizza festival or he hosted it in Brooklyn. And the Washington Post reporter. So Emily Hyla. So are you saying that she's typically just a restaurant critic or a writer?

I believe she's a food writer. I will just say these are phenomenal reporters. Yeah. These are not just some off the street, random 22 year olds. These are really good reporters. One snippet of an email that's taken out of context is not representative of the reporting process that I know that our reporters go through. And she is a very good reporter. I think what Dave does very well is leverage things for attention.

Absolutely.

That is his prerogative. Like, that's what I'm saying of like, reporters need to be prepared these days to deal with somebody like that because they are going to take. I mean, it's happened to me all the time. Yes, they take one email, they ignore the larger context. Sometimes they only read part of the email and it's used to discredit you.

Well, and that story, when I read it and followed it, it reminded me of you. It was someone doing their job. And to me that's a news angle. I don't know how I pronounced it. What did he say? Misogist or something? He kept mispronouncing.

He couldn't pronounce misogyny.

But historically he's done that in the past. And so her story about asking the sponsors there, I think that's a valid story. And he leveraged it. And I also think not only is it lever, but it's also a distraction from what's really going on at Barstool. But that's just my opinion, 100%.

Also, let's be clear, again, you do not know the reporting process and journalists will often sort of say things privately directly to a source because again, you want to get a certain response or you want to sort of get them to respond to you. And it's just, it's very misrepresentative to take one thing that said, we all know it's going to happen. I know it's going to happen. I mean, it's. I just feel bad for sort of the reporter. And I believe that media companies should allow their journalists to, to talk about these things because the one big mistake that I've noticed when I've been through these cycles before, and trust me, I've been in this situation so many times before. You have to respond, you have to get on there. You have to be like, actually, here's what's really going on. Let me tell you what's. And let me tell you about my reporting process and let me answer your concerns and sort of just be, be more of an open book. I think media companies tend to retreat and lock up because they don't want to make it worse. And that actually unfortunately, usually exacerbates it.

Yes. Because they don't want to expose how they get to the sour course and.

Get to the next 100.

So where in the past do you feel in. In your coverage or where there's been blowback in the coverage, where did the newspaper fall behind or what did they do wrong in terms of the response? It sounds like you touched on it right now that they didn't speak so many times.

I mean, I think it's like. I mean, one thing I've learned from working in legacy media, and again, I don't know, Emily, by the way, I don't know the other reporters of the Post. I just know people's reputations. And so I just want to say that, like, these are really well respected reporters that everyone in the newsroom really respects and loves. These are not some, like, fringe reporters going after whatever. But. Okay, so here's what I would say. One thing I've learned is you respond early and very directly and clearly. So, for instance, you know, I've had a lot of things happen where people, maybe they take one little thing in your story. They'll take a little. Who knows what I mean? Some. Sometimes they'll just fixate on a line or they'll take an email that you sent somebody, or they'll take, you know, whatever, and then it's used to kind of discredit you. And if you don't squash that narrative soon, that becomes the dominant narrative. And then often media reporters will pick it up. Because media reporters, I have to say, I think, are like some of the. There's good ones and there's bad ones, but the bad ones are really bad. They're just little trolls that sit on Twitter looking for media drama. You have to respond early because when you clam up, there is a presumption.

Of guilt, without a doubt. So what do you think is happening at the Washington Post? So obviously they're eliminating.

I have absolutely no idea. I have no idea. And I'm totally not involved in any of that. I am just living my life in la. I just have to say, as somebody that deals with influencers 24 7, I have so much empathy for any reporter that gets caught in these type of cycles. Yes, it's a meat grinder and unless you handle it well, it can really be exhausting. But I trust that they are.

I felt for her and what I assume is that she's not allowed to speak out. But if it were me, if I were an editor there, I would sit her down. I've been to that newsroom. They have the cameras right in the middle of the newsroom. Do an interview, talk about the journalism process, like how to build a story, what she did. I think a lot of people can read between the lines and know exactly what's going on. But there's a lot of people in this culture who's not getting it. And it gives a guy like Portnoy.

The leg up generally, I think, on a broad. And I definitely can't comment on sort of like the specifics because I don't know, I don't even work in the newsroom. But I will say, I think generally we need to be more open and transparent about our journalistic process and answer our readers questions. That's what I try to do on social media every day because it actually builds trust. And look, I've fucked up before for sure. Like I've made a mistake here and there or something. But I'm open about it and I respond to it and I acknowledge it and answer questions because that's how you build trust. You don't build trust by sort of just retreating. And I think that's what a lot of companies do because they don't know how to operate on the Internet.

Absolutely. And that's why you and I are so busy, both of our. Both of our perspectives. So then let's now on that topic, pick. Let's discuss Depp versus Heard and the trial, which I felt just kind of created a new watermark when it's the intersection of legal court cases with Internet culture, opinion mixed in with technology, algorithm and bots. So talk about your involvement in that trial, your coverage from that trial, and just your thoughts on it.

Yeah, so I didn't cover the trial itself. I watched it and I sort of watched the Internet around it. And I talked to a lot of big content creators. And one thing I noticed is sort of that they. They kept saying is like they're incentivized to post anti Amber Heard content. That that was what was performing really well was Anti Amber and Pro Johnny content. I think this is really interesting because they were able to gain a huge amount of audience and a huge amount of money. And so I interviewed several content creators with millions and millions of followers that actually didn't have any real opinions on the trial at all. But they were putting out 24.7pro Johnny Depp content because it was performing really well on their pages. And so I talked about the incentive structures at play and how the Internet, especially with misogyny, like, I think a lot of the stuff that they were putting out. Some of these people are my longtime sources and I respect them, but they're putting out extremely misogynistic stuff about Amber Heard. And those videos were just doing really well because they played into this misogynistic hate.

Absolutely.

And by the way.

Yeah, go ahead.

I have to say one other thing. Adam Waldman, definitely depp's old lawyer, recognized this very early and actually was feeding information to content creators throughout the trial as well, which he had.

Okay, so that's where I wanted to get into. So when you talk about when there's an incentivization of, you know, content, it's advertising. It's watch hour, watch time, you know, connected advertising, you, YouTube, whatever it is. But what about intentional. We are going to give you money to cover this or to have this perspective pro Dep. What have you found about that in any of your reporting?

Yeah, I mean, there were a lot. It wasn't, it wasn't necessarily like, people. It wasn't the DEP team giving people money necessarily, although maybe they did. I don't know. I was just more interested in these sort of like, neutral creators that were like, I don't actually care. I just want my engagement to go through the roof so I can sell more ads next month. And that's just. That seemed to be the majority of people that I talked to. Yes, there's these trolls. Yes, there's these people affiliated with Gamergate and comicsgate that are the true misogynistic trolls. And by the way, those were the ones that of course, wanted to come after me. The article. Those are minor characters. They actually don't have very big followings. They're kind of these, like, niche troll Internet people. The real notable thing that I was concerned with in my story was these big content creators that, again, were agnostic about the trial, but just noticed that this specific type of content did well, and that really shaped the narrative, I think, the public's narrative about it.

Oh, absolutely. And in your book, and I had it out and now I've lost the part of it, but I, I guess I know where it is because I covered this as an adjunct in one of my, you know, teaching one of my college classes. Is the prevalence of alt right, just content. But really how far it goes back. Like, it's, it's actually a format. It's a framework that is designed around making money on the Internet. So it's not new to the Depp Heard trial. It goes back many, many years. So in your book, you do talk about alt right trolls and what happened around Trump's campaign. Could you touch on that for a bit?

Yeah, I mean, I covered the 2016 election when I was at the Hill, and I think one thing that Trump did very early is leverage the Internet and specifically leverage these Internet communities to mainstream his campaign and generate grassroots support and stuff. I mean, I'll never forget it was, I think it was Trump's inauguration weekend. Even he had. There was this event called the Deplora Ball and it was literally just a big party of all of the most right wing content creators I've ever seen. I was looking around the room like, like, wow. Every major YouTuber content creator on the alt right is basically in this room. And I think those people played a key role in the rise of Trump and they've played a key role in the rise of other people like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Matt Gaetz or a lot of these sort of more extreme right political figures. The right wing media ecosystem is so different than sort of the traditional media ecosystem in that they embraced the Internet and content creator world very early. And that's always, there's always been that energy on the right. You know, like even with, with right wing talk radio, a lot of those people got into podcasting early. They've always really understood the power of the Internet and the power of this new media ecosystem. And that has not been replicated elsewhere on the political spectrum. Yeah.

And for people who have been around a while, like myself, like I remembered the earlier iterations of Donald Trump, you know, media Donald Trump, moderate Donald Trump, and it's as if he figured out that money is so tied into and connected to the alt right that that is what drove him to it. It's not the ideology behind it, it's just the dollar signs and the base and building it. Yeah, it really profit it is. That's really what it comes down to and building that base. So I just noticed that there is someone following that Donald Trump playbook as of last week, Russell Brand, you and I didn't talk about this or I didn't even prep you with this at all. But tell me about what Russell so his first video that he dropped from these accusations, you know, from reporting over in London, you know, a joint investigation about him that was coming out on a Sunday, but on Friday he drops a video. So talk about what you believe his strategy is right now based also on your research, just on this type of topic.

Yeah, I mean, Russell is doing exactly the playbook that's been sort of well tried before. It's like declare cancel culture. First of all, he writes, recognized that these allegations were coming. He spent years building up his audience in anticipation and kind of positioning himself as this anti media sort of person. Of course, he's backed by the same billionaires as everyone else. He's on rumble, Peter Thiel's YouTube alternative. It's so funny how like all these people are just like funded by right wing billionaires, but then try to act like they're the independent media. But yeah, I mean, you see him sort of railing against the media and saying that this is all a coordinated campaign to like take him down because he's outside the mainstream. And it's this positioning yourself as the underdog that I think that they do a lot, despite the fact that they have so much political power, so much economic power. It's this root for me because I'm getting taken down. These women are coming after me when it's obviously not the case.

And also the difference is certainly former President Trump, he is the one that created the playbook, I'll give him that. You know, built off of other playbooks, previous playbooks. But he has significant legal challenges ahead of him. So for Russell Brand to follow that same playbook, he has this. That's the one thing about their playbooks. There isn't a chapter in there about how to deal with the legal consequence of what they're dealing with. So what do you think is going to happen with Russell Brand?

I don't know. I think it'll be really interesting to see how it plays out. I do think that there's this like resurgence of pretty virulent misogyny on the Internet that the Amber Heard sort of trial ushered in. I mean, if you looked at the conversation around like Marilyn Manson and those accusations against him and just there's been a lot of kind of backlash since the MeToo movement against women that come forward on the Internet. I mean, I talk in my book about Gamergate as this playbook and it's notable that a lot of people actually involved in these campaigns to this day were birthed out of that Gamergate. Gamergate was this sort of harassment movement against women in gaming. But again, it's that weaponizing the media and using the Internet to drive outrage and playing into these kind of, you know, people have no media literacy in this country and so they play into people's kind of worst instincts about the media.

Well, many people think they do have it, when they don't.

Well, they believe, everyone believes they have media literacy. Meanwhile, they can't even tell when a tiktoker is lying to them.

No, exactly, exactly. Okay, so let's transition into TikTok. You know, in your book you say TikTok dominates and it. And I certainly believe it does as well, so tell me about TikTok right now, fall of 2023, where are we with the platform?

Yeah, I think the platform's finally matured. I mean, I think 2019, 2020, it was growing. 2022, I think it came into its own. I think 2023, it's very saturated now. It's very hard to grow, obviously, for that reason, but it really is kind of the home of pop culture. It's where these pop culture, these narratives emerge. It's where I always say it's like YouTube combined. It's like that real time kind of news focus of Twitter with the format of YouTube, but packaged in short form content. I think commentary culture has become huge. There's so much analysis videos on everything under the sun on TikTok. It's really shaping a lot of people's sort of worldview and thoughts on things as they're consuming that type of stuff rather than, you know, reading opinion columns.

Yeah. And certainly on the one hand too, it's become a search platform just for information.

Hugely.

Yeah. So, I mean, I know we're talking about a lot of the scary parts of, of Internet culture and social media, but there's a lot to be said about the benefits of using it as well. I was happy to see that you touched on this. When you see the dominance of a TikTok, where does TikTok succeed? Where clubhouse failed.

Yeah. Oh, God, so many things. The main thing, and I talk about this a lot in my book, is how you view your user base. TikTok has always been very much for the users. Like they don't try and force, force feed people down their throats. I know, but there's all these conspiracies. Oh, they force fed, Charlie. No, it's pretty engagement. It's very tailored to your own interests, your own engagement and what people engage with to an insane degree. And based off data, based off a lot of interactions. Clubhouse made this mistake where they tried to like force feed content to their users. It's the same mistake that Elon is making now. It's a doomed. Same with Vine. They all try to do this and it's always doomed. With Clubhouse, they made their whole suggested user list, Andreessen Horowitz partners and people adjacent to their own investors. No one wants to hear from these people. I'm sorry, that is not a mass pop culture platform. And instead of really leaning into the content creators and building up the content creators, building protections for the content creators, which is what a lot of the biggest women content creators on that platform wanted was just, like, basic safety protections. The founder Paul, was like, screw that. No way. We're making Marc Andreessen the biggest thing on the ad app. Nobody cares what that man has to say. He's just some rich guy in Silicon Valley. He's not relevant at all to pop culture or mainstream culture. So I think that really hindered the app's growth at a critical time.

Where do you think audio came into play, just in terms of dominance?

Yeah, well, I think Another thing that TikTok did, I mean, what. TikTok has nailed this discovery too, and it's discovering new content, especially through audio tracks and music and stuff. Clubhouse was so weird because it was like, theoretically this audio platform, but didn't really allow for audio discovery very well. And it wasn't tied in with music or anything that you'd want to, like, listen to. It was just like a lot of, like, chatter. Yes, yes, chatter from, like, a lot of scammers. It ended up being like the last few rooms I was in there before I deleted the app were like, basically selling MLM schemes.

Oh, no kidding. Oh, I got off before that. Oh, that's interesting.

You got out at the right time. Oh, yeah, yeah. So I think. I mean, TikTok is such a sophisticated product and they optimize everything to the. To most insane degree. But I think it's. I think it's going to be dominant for the coming years, and it's not going away.

There will be no legislation that kills Tick Tock. In your opinion?

It would be so insane for that to happen. I was telling this to one of my colleagues, and my colleagues, like Taylor, they roll out bad legislation literally all the time. But it would be pretty unprecedented because we are not China and we are not India, and we're not some of these other platforms where, like, the government controls our tech ecosystem. So I think it would be pretty worrying also. So TikTok's not remotely the only popular Chinese app. And if you want to worry about Chinese influence in entertainment, let's talk about all the Chinese money in gaming and the data that they're harvesting from gaming platforms and all this other stuff. Like, there's just a lot. Those are. It's just so disingenuous. It's just. It's a lot of Facebook and Google lobbying.

Yes, I agree with you 100% on that. Okay, so you touched on it. We have to go here, especially with you. Let's talk about Twitter, or formerly known as Now X. What are your feelings? Rip Twitter. Twitter. Tell me about your thoughts. On Twitter.

I stopped using it after I got banned. Elon suspended me for ask after I asked him for comment on a story in December. And ever since I got back on, people couldn't find my name, I couldn't find my stuff. It was. My app was really broken and glitchy and I just made the decision that I'm not going to use it for news anymore. So I use it. I tried to push as many people as possible to my Instagram and TikTok, but I mostly only use it now to keep up with like Covid information because I am high risk and like it's kind of this only place where you can keep up with that stuff. But honestly, if it wasn't. If that wasn't on there, I just wouldn't even use it at all. But I kind of just use it for that because there's nothing else. I can't find it. But I don't use it for news or information at all. My feed is worthless.

Agree. Mine is the same. Absolutely worthless. How often do you post on Twitter at all?

Yeah, but I like mostly just share other like Covid news related things like, oh, we're in a surge. Or like, oh, I wrote this article related to. I wrote an article last week about threads blocking the word vaccine in the middle of the booster campaign. So sometimes I'll share things like that. I share a lot of information with other kind of. Of medically vulnerable people. But no, I talked about my book a couple times on there. But like I get more engagement on Threads and Mastodon than I do on Twitter.

So before we go there, because that's where I wanted to go next. How did you know that you were banned by Elon Musk?

I was at a Christmas party. I was at my friend's house actually. She was having a few friends over because I'm high risk and I couldn't go to like this bigger Christmas party. So she was having a few friends over for drinks. I was having some wine with Ryan Mack from the New York Times and Tyler Kincaid from NBC. And I think it was Ryan or Tyler looked up and said, taylor, I think you're banned from Twitter. I can't find it find you. I'm trying to tag you or something. And I was like, what? And I just asked Elon for comment. Like a couple hours I asked Elon for comment. And then I left for the party and I was like. And then I realized that I was banned. And then I just started laughing so hard. It was. I'll be honest, I had a Glass of wine at that point. And I was just thought it was hilarious.

So I. I mean, I remember when this happened, but I don't remember. What did you do next? Like, where did I see you?

I made a TikTok. Oh, I. Are you kidding me? I. I immediately made a TikTok. I immediately went on Instagram Live and did an Instagram Live.

I did a TikTok live.

I was like, let's talk about this. Let's talk about why I'm banned. And then I dropped my story, which exposed Elon's lies. And then Elon was forced to add me back on because he had tried to ban me under this stupid rule, saying that I was promoting my Instagram account too much. Do you remember that weekend that he made the rule, like, you can't promote yourself on other platforms? At the time, my Instagram account was wiped, and the only tweets that I had up were promoting my Instagram account account.

Yes. Okay. Yes. Now let's talk about, like, just Instagram into Threads. You are very active on threads. And when I think of, like, who is the first most prominent person on threads? I think I was pretty early adopter to it. It was just you. To me, it was like, taylor. Threads is Taylor. So tell me what you think about Threads. What did they do right in the launch? What did they still need to do? I'm noticing that you're dropping a lot of tips in there. Talk to me about Threads.

Oh, yeah. I'm always, like, yelling about something. I want to. To give feedback on the product. I think what they've done well is roll out a relatively competitive product to Twitter that sort of, like, allows people to do short, easy text posts, which I love, and share links, which is very rare these days to have a social platform that you can share links on. And as a journalist, I value that. Now, what have they done wrong? A lot. Because Adam Asari has a very contentious relationship, and I'm sympathetic. You know, Adam Asari ran News Feed during the height of the backlash against Facebook. He's very nervous about news. So he posted this thing right after Threads launches. I don't know if you remember, that was like, we don't want to be a place for news. We want to be a place for, like, fun and entertainment. And that's such a misguided notion. And again, as I wrote this story just last week about them blocking, for instance, the word vaccine in the middle of a booster rollout. They overly moderate too heavily to the point that you can't actually talk about News. And that's a huge problem because you know, there's this delusion that pop culture, entertainment or fashion or sports is somehow non political or not adjacent to like hard news and controversy. That is not true. There's nothing that's not shaped by politics these days, of course, more than anything. And so you know what you end up doing when you block search terms, which I think is an insane, horrible precedent to set, is you cut off really important communication and specifically people speaking truth to power, like journalists ability to report on powerful people telling lies and things like that.

How did you know that they couldn't use vaccine on threads as a word?

Oh, I got a tip from public health officials, public health officials actually, because the CDC had not updated their website or guidance and stuff. Unfortunately, the CDC lags behind. It's a government website. It is not meant to be a real time news source. It is a government website. And so linking to the CDC is blocking all searches of COVID Long. Covid. All these, it was all this like Covid related stuff. However, when I talk to them on the phone, that's not the only words they blocked. They blocked a lot more words. Words. Some of them are like porn and things like that that you would expect. But some of them, it's like we need to be able to talk. You, you need to be able to say the word porn sometimes on the Internet.

Right.

That doesn't mean that you should be allowed to share porn or that they shouldn't moderate that. But again, this goes back to like news and talking about things. You should be able to talk about things. And that's what really worries me about threads is that they're censoring conversation. You're never going to be a place for news. And I was bringing up the war in Ukraine, sorry, with the PR person. And it's like I have a feeling, and I haven't confirmed this because it didn't happen, but the way that they were talking, it sounded like they would have banned the word Ukraine during the when that stuff. They just want to avoid, quote, unquote controversial terms.

Interesting. So you're saying you spoke. Was this the PR person from Meta?

Yeah.

And so they see that's an interesting business plan. But I'm with you on this. And from my perspective of working in public relations, specifically, you know, issues management, crisis management, Twitter as it once was, was the place to go for primary information because that was immediate. That's where it receives so much clout. And that's where. And that's why journalists also receive so Much clout as well. I'm with you. It was born from, like, information and threads. For me, I find it just the goofy Twitter. It's just people's opinions and thoughts, and I don't care about half the stuff they talk about on that app. I want to love it. I want to love it.

Me too. And I think they have a real opportunity and I think they're squandering it because they're so afraid. And to be fair, I was talking to another source at Meta who was. Saw my posts and was reaching out to me. Like, you're being too hard on the company. I think from the company's perspective, they're under a huge fire from legislators. Facebook has a horrible record of misinformation. They're almost too scared now, where it's like they recognize this opportunity that's created with Twitter's downfall, but they're too scared to really go for it. So they sort of like, go through this, like, halfway thing. But then they're banning all these terms and it's like, guys, let us talk about what we want. Moderates a little bit. Look, I'm not saying shouldn't have any moderation. These are newsworthy terms. You can't just block all, quote, unquote controversial terms that are newsworthy. That's. What are people going to be posting about ice cream that they ate yesterday? It's boring.

Yeah. And you're absolutely right about pop culture and any type of Internet culture. It is tied so tightly with current events. And because that's what you know, it's news, current events. That's what popular culture is. That's exactly what it is. So every time I go to threads and honestly, I forget that it exists. It's only because when I see the squiggle and it comes up every time I go there, it's just people chatting about nonsense. I mean, you're really the only person who might come in and go, bam, you know, with something. But other than that, yeah, I'm. I'm absolutely with you on that. So now just moving forward, looking. Looking forward for your book, Extremely Online. What's the takeaway? What's the gist of the book?

Well, I really want people to see this, like, user side of social media. I want them to understand the rise of social media not just through the lens of these tech narratives and not just through the lens of, like, the social network and things like that. Like, I really wanted to present this sort of alternative history of the social media, the rise of social media and the social Web and also tell the story of this half a trillion dollar content creator industry that's emerged by, with zero oversight, zero regulation. Like it's kind of the wild west still and people don't take it seriously. I understand how we got here. So yeah, I wanted to kind of set the record straight on stuff and obviously talk about a lot of stuff that I reported over the years that I think at the time people weren't paying attention to these things as much. There's a lot of lessons I think we can take from looking at the events of the past 20 years on the Internet.

If I were teaching this semester, your book would be in the syllabus.

Seriously, that means so much. Oh my God, thank you.

Absolutely. Because here's the thing that really that I loved about it, like when I opened it up, the fact that you started, well, chapter two with mommy bloggers. Because that is a lifetime ago. And so much of the social media network that we see right now is based on that start for so many people who found success so quickly and then they were able to monetize the audience so quickly. And a lot of those people are still here, but they haven't been able to continue and optimize it because everything has changed. And I love how you kind of plot and show the change and what happened there. I thought it was fascinating.

Oh my God, thank you. That means so much. And yeah, they literally mothered the whole industry. So I think it was incredible what they did.

They mothered the whole industry. I love that. Okay, so now, but what's next for you? You have so much. In your young years, you have done so much. Are you going to keep doing the same thing for a while or is there any other type of new life, next life for you?

Yeah, I love media, so I'm going to stay in media in some way or form. I don't necessarily feel like I have to be a writer forever. I used to feel like I just needed this to be a beat and if I didn't write the story, no one would write it. Now there are more reporters on my beat, which I love and I try to like keep them all. I feel very protective of all of them. But yeah, I mean, I love writing. I love, I love other formats too. Like I think because I'm not. I write all day, but I'm a very visual audio person. I wanted. I had a Snapchat show for a while years ago and I think I could do another thing like that. Maybe not on Snapchat, but like, who knows what I Don't know. I'll just keep talking on the Internet and I'll see what happens.

Yeah, that's. I think I'm a lot like you too. Like, sometimes it's just you take what you know and your knowledge and your passion, and then when it moves, I mean, there's constant turns and twists that are happening there. So that's why I love following you. I love your content. Content. I love how you think and I love that you're, you know, you're a badass, too. You're not gonna, like, just let someone get the best of you and roll over you. You have a passion.

Oh, thank you. Thank you.

So in every episode, I always like to include an indestructible PR tip. This is usually one practical takeaway that I drop to help people build an indestructible reputation. But, oh, my goodness, I can't think of a better guest. Someone listening right now. They are on the Internet, you know, they're on social media. Media. You've been there, done that. What do you think would be a good tip for just the average person online right now? How to navigate it in a way to keep their reputation safe, clean and solid?

Such a good question. I'm trying to think for an average person because journalists are a little bit different.

Okay, how about this then? We'll move it from someone who's average, but let's say it's like an influencer, okay? So someone could be verified, maybe not, but they have a following. They're in the couple hundred thousand thousands. What should they worry about?

I would say be careful before you insert yourself into controversy. Be careful. Not everyone needs to weigh in on everything. I mean, you would because you, that's your job is to weigh in on like, crisis or whatever. I see so many people, just they're somewhat notable. And I've made this mistake too, by the way. I've commented on things that I don't know about that I'm sort of unrelated to, that I just see on the Internet. And then suddenly your name is in these news articles and suddenly people are angry at you or you. You've issued an opinion or whatever. And so I just think if you see drama happening, save it for the group chat. You don't need to say something because if you have a slightly notable name, your name is going to end up in the articles and you're going to be on team so and so and cleaning up the mess. And it's just like, I love you don't need to wait.

That is the Best tip, because you're absolutely right. I've done the same thing and I have made the decision to move away from opinion as much as I can and just be. Become more of a subject matter expert to teach. And I have noticed the amount of hate that has been reduced in the comments because you're absolutely right that people will drag you in. And I mean me, my bugaboo is are the social media vigilantes out there who love to bring people down just for the sake of bringing people down. You must be a target for that, right?

All the time. I hate that. I hate that energy.

Do you just ignore it? Like, what do you do when people are taking you like crazy and they want to just like drag you into a drop?

Oh, people are so mad. I mean, somebody did a tweet the other day and I got so mad about it. It was like someone with not that many followers, but they're like, oh, Taylor Lorenz is following XYZ problematic people, including one person that's a source for mine that actually was been a source for mine on some really major stories. And I'm just like, who is this? The follow police? Who gives a shit? I'm a journalist. I follow tons of people that I don't ideologically agree with often, by the way, some of those people are the best leakers ever. You don't know what these people are saying. So I was like so annoyed by that. And I anyway, I try to ignore it generally, but there's always those people that are like nipping or. Oh my God. I accidentally liked a Drew Barrymore post when she was in the midst of her chaos. I think it just came up on my feed and immediately someone's in the comment. Oh, Taylor Lorenz, you support this? And I was like, no, I'm a member of a union. I don't support any strike breaking.

Yes.

Oh my gosh, errantly liked this post.

I'm with you. I'm with you. Okay, so Taylor, you are everywhere and there. Where can people. First of all, where can they. So your book is going to be. By the time this comes out, your book will already be published. So I assume it's. It's going to be.

It's everywhere. Get the book. It's Amazon, Barnes and Noble, your local bookshop. You can request it from your library. It's extremelyonlinebook.com also, follow me on TikTok and Instagram and YouTube, I guess. Threads.

Threads. And you have a newsletter. You're on substack as well.

And I do, Taylor, lorenz.subsack.com Yes.

Oh Taylor, it was so great talking to you. I could talk to you for forever. And honestly, I think every student should get this too. It will help them in a million classes. I think so. I love it. I really. This is now going to be like a resource book for me. I'm always going to have it here. Taylor, thank you so much for joining me. I loved having this conversation. It's so fun being in the same space with you here but also on social media.

Thank you. You too, Molly. I'm such a fan. So this is awesome.

Mutuals, mutuals. All right. Thanks Taylor.

Thanks.

That's all for this week on the podcast. My thanks to Taylor. Her book extremely the Untold Story of Fame, Influence and Power on the Internet is out now and I promise you it's good. All my students out there, this is a good book even if your teacher doesn't put it in the syllabus. I think this is going to help you in school. So be sure to chime in with your takes on this interview across my social media accounts or hop into print are confidential 5me/molly McPherson. I'll also post my conversation with Taylor in the group. Thanks so much for listening. Bye for now.