Does Social Media Need Regulation? | Panel (Ep38) - StreamLeader Report with Ross Brand

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Does social media need regulation and ifso, what kind of regulation is needed?
We'll talk about it next on Thestream Leader Report Live Panel. Let's
do a show. It's The streamLeader Report Live panel. Creators talking to
creators, raw, real and unscripted, and sometimes they say the quiet part

(00:22):
out loud. Here're your hosts,Claudia Santiago, Rebecca Gunter, Rob Greenley,
and Ross Brand. Hey Gang,Welcome to the stream Leader Report.
I'm Ross Brand. My show isThe stream Leader Report. This is our
live panel edition. And joining meas always Rebecca Gunter from Business in the
Raw, Rob Greenley, the hostof podcast Tips with Rob Greenley, and

(00:47):
Claudia Santiago, musician, singer,live streamer, bandleader from Claudia Santiago dot
com. And with that nice introduction, I can say, Claudia, what
the heck is happening now in Canada? Oh my, oh Canada. Yes,

(01:08):
here's my blank hat that I oftentake on stage with me because as
a as a Chilean immigrant to Canada, I've always been very proud to be
Canadian. But what the heck isgoing on in Canada? Yeah? What
is what is happening? Your PrimeMinister is trying to push a legislation regarding

(01:37):
social media that had failed a coupleof years ago, and he's back at
it again. Tell us a littlebit about what's what's going on there.
Well, it's very real. It'snot it's not some sort of fluffy thing
going on out there. It's reallybeen positioned. And I say that positioned.

(01:57):
It's kind of to be honest withyou, it's kind of freaky getting
on camera today and talking about thisbecause they've even the new thing they've added
to this is they would criminalize andput you in prison for speaking out on
certain things. Now, initially myunderstanding is it was put out to protect

(02:22):
children, particular from being exploited anykind of bullying, but also perversion,
that kind of thing, you knowwhat I'm talking about. I'm trying to
be careful with my words here becauseof what we can say here. But
it was really put out to protectthem, which I'm totally for. But

(02:46):
they're adding things as we go along, and that's where it gets a little
bit dicey, and you know,I'm gonna pull out the old Canada hat
again. The thing is is whereagainst dicey, It's like, Okay,
these other things that are being atit. It's like they want to criminalize

(03:10):
and I get it hate speech andthings like that, which we kind of
do need. But then it's like, well, what is considered hate speech?
What is considered just because we don'tagree with the reigning prime minister or
whatever? Is that then all ofa sudden, and so it takes me

(03:31):
back to, you know, thecoup, and it takes me back to
if you did not agree with thosethat took power, then off to prison
you went and tortured and killed andeverything else. So anyways, I'm trying
to be careful of my language becauseI am the only Canadian on the panel,

(03:53):
and it's like, Okay, isthis going to come back and bite
me now? Yeah, we dowant to keep you out of jail.
Well, it's it's definitely a redflag to me that we're even concerned about
that right that that just saying,you know, facts about what's actually happening

(04:15):
could get you in trouble, right. So you know, though, though
I don't believe that Canada does Canadahave a constitution like in the US.
I don't believe what they do aroundthe right to free speech right. Nobody
really has a First Amendment like theUS does I do think of the major
sort of Western there there are thingsthough in a certain chart, but there

(04:41):
are things that are put in placethat are you know, some some bills
and constitution type things. So forexample, and you know, I'm not
getting going to get into the debatehere, but whichever way you swing here.
But you know, during during ourstepid days and then some people were
like, yeah, there's a bunchof bs, We're gonna protest against it,

(05:03):
which is public protest, but rightaway it got deemed as this is
violent, this is this, thisis that, and to the point where
they shut down people's bank accounts.Yes, so this is where it does
get concerning. I'm all for let'sprotect the younger ones. Let's protect this

(05:26):
next generation. There's too much crapon the internet, and it's becoming more
and more prevalent. I mean,Rebecca, what do you think. Well,
as a mother of a sixteen yearold, I had a very interesting
conversation with my kids last week aboutsocial media, and I was surprised to

(05:47):
hear them say I don't think anykids should be on the internet before thirteen.
There's a lot of stuff out there, and I was surprised to hear
them say that, because so farit's been like this kind of campaign,
like you know, open access andconnecting with the world outside, particularly around
the pandemic where that's where the onlysocial relationships were really happening for school age

(06:12):
kids. And to have somebody wholike pretty much had a lot of freedom
around that say, I don't makeit's a good idea. I was surprised
by that, certainly, Like theaccess to everything is just unbelievably immediate.
And while I'm generally like a lasa fair kind of not not like benign

(06:33):
neglect, but I don't get wrappedup too tightly or about helicoptering my kids
exposure to things I think are toogrown up for them. I'd rather have
a conversation about it. But eventhat one was like, no, right.
And I think also the whole issueof access is is not something that's

(06:55):
being talked about as part of thisdebate. You know. I think that
there was a law that was passed. I think it was COPA, I
think was the acronym for it,that limited children's access. And this was
a legal thing that limited children's accessto the internet until they reached the age
of thirteen. But I don't knowif that law is being enforced anymore,

(07:18):
or if people even know about itanymore. I know that a lot of
the early technology companies had to adhereto this COPA law and create pathways for
children over the age of thirteen,and then more limited pathways for children under
the age of thirteen. But I'mnot sure that this is what this whole

(07:41):
issue is all about. Is aroundaccess. I think that the powers that
be want to continue access for children, and that is almost like it's a
right, but it's also a pathwayfor the government to monitor and surveill conversations

(08:03):
from that generation as well. Soyou know, that's the real danger of
this is is is this hate designationthat it's happening here in the US too,
has been expanding to mean a lotof different things than what I remember
hate speech to mean, you know, even five years ago. You know,

(08:24):
now it's like, if there's anythingthat somebody disagrees around health outcomes or
health solutions that's considered hate speech,or if it's talking about gender, or
if it's talking about sexual orientation,it's like, I mean, those have
never been considered to be hate speechin the past, But all of a

(08:45):
sudden now they are, so Ihave to wonder. I think I'm never
a fan of when bills try andstuff everything into one package, right,
And is the motivation to protect childrenor is the motivation propaganda, misinformation and

(09:09):
so forth, which seems to bethe real agenda, given you know the
way things are going in our westerncountries. Sadly that's that's the way things
are going. And clearly the onlymisinformation you should be able to be you

(09:31):
should be able to access is thatwhich the government wants you to access.
They get, you can get theyou can get the government's lies, which
you can't how dare you get achallenge to those lies, whether that's truthful
or not. And I don't remembergrowing up ever there being such a fear
about propaganda and misinformation. It wassort of like the idea was that there's

(09:54):
an open market here, and ifyou don't like one idea, go find
another one, or go speak anotherone, or go educate yourself, or
let's prove this wrong. And nowthe attempt to prove something wrong is being
as claudius as you know, it'skind of being deemed as as hatred or

(10:15):
as propaganda misinformation, when in factyou know, the government doesn't have such
a great track record, right,and this is what separates us from autocracies
and you know, totalitarian governments andso forth. As far as the children's
issue goes, I agree with yourdaughter, Rebecca. If it was up

(10:41):
to me, I think nobody undersixteen would be allowed on social media period.
I think there's so much momentum andsocial pressure amongst young people go I'm
just gonna say, the only waythat this works is if schools, parents

(11:07):
or government lay down in restrictions.Otherwise, nobody's going to be the only
parent that keeps their kid from beingable to socialize in the way every other
kid is socialized and connected. You'rebasically telling your kid you're you're gonna be
out of it. Right. Itwas so but we all know that this

(11:33):
that it would be better for kidsto form relationships with each other in person,
not online. And if there areissues and problems, bullying, whatever,
you get to leave school at theend of the day. You get
to retreat back into your safe homewith your family. You have some time
in your own mind to develop yourimagination. I can't tell you like I

(12:01):
had a long drive, I hadto go out to Pennsylvania at about two
and a half plus hour drive bothways. Right, it was nice to
have all that time to like justthink about things that had nothing to do
with what was on social media orwork. Explore some different I explored some
different radio stations. It was justit was nice. And kids are being

(12:26):
robbed to that. I mean,remember all the games we would make up
and make up in our head andyou know, things like that. I
think there's so many dangers, butthe only the dangers are not just crazy
predators or misinformation. The danger ishow their brains develop and how their socialization

(12:48):
develops. And you know, sixteenyear olds are too young for some below
sixteen at least. I mean,I think we would never get it pasted
at eighteen or say up to eighteen, but certainly not before sixteen. And
basically, these apps are grooming peopleto grooming children to become life long you

(13:11):
know, the pusher wants to startyoung. Right, so you get people
addicted to social media and thinking thatthis is where they have to be and
how many likes they get and allthis stuff is important. Well, now
you've got an adult who's hooked forlife because it's the only way they know
how to communicate and experience interactions withother people, how to validate themselves.

(13:35):
So I think that would be thestart if somebody really cares about the dangers
of social media, it would bethe start to say, why don't we
take it away from children for now? Because until we feel that it's a
safe place for adults, it clearlyisn't a safe place for children. Well,

(13:56):
but ross the slippery slip of thatis is making it's safe also means
more regulation and controls and moderation ofdiscussion and topics, and that's that's where
the challenge comes in, is youknow, if we're looking to government to
dictate what can or cannot be saidon these public platforms. But also the

(14:22):
other issue with children is is thatyou know, as you look to the
future, technology and information communications areskills that these children are going to need
to have to be successful in theworld. So it's it's a it's a
slippery slope going both ways, rightat the end of the day, Yeah,

(14:45):
at the end of the day,it gets back to what our values
are right, And I think froma high level perspective, that's the battle,
that's the struggle that's going on inthis country right now. It's it's
the struggle between more conservative values andmore liberal values, right and that's where
the fundamental struggle is. And andit's it's it's going on all around the

(15:07):
world. It's not just in theUS. It's going up in Canada.
It's going on. You know.I talked to a friend of mine in
the UK this morning and they're they'regoing through the same exact things that we're
going through. And I'm sure mostof most of Europe is going through that.
Though I would say that some ofthe Scandinavian countries are pushing back on
some of these things, and notbecause it's a different culture up in Scandinavia.

(15:30):
They they kind of have their ownideology in their own ways of doing
things, and and that doesn't necessarilyalign with how things are done typically in
the West. So yeah, sothis is a much much bigger issue than
just children. This is an issueof how this how we as a society

(15:52):
move forward, right and with AItechnology and with these new platforms. I
mean, if you look at theApple Vision pro that's a glimpse into the
future too. That is a littlebit you know, you start thinking about
the context of what we're talking aboutin the context of children living in augmented
realities and virtual realities more and theselines are going to just completely blur to

(16:18):
oblivion right around reality and artificial reality. And I think that's where a lot
of this concern around topics and discussion. But it is a little bit of
a hate to say, but thereis some element of mind control going on
here around people feeling like self censoringthemselves. I'm seeing it happen more and

(16:44):
more and more all the time,the self censoring saying well, I can't
say this, and I can't saythat, and I can't talk about this,
and I can't talk about that.It's increasingly happening in the podcasting space,
it's increasingly happening online. And it'sbeen around longer than people think because
when I joined When I joined Facebook, it was the end of twenty twelve

(17:07):
beginning of twenty thirteen, and Imade a commitment that I wasn't going to
do anything political on Facebook, andI had not done anything political on Twitter
and LinkedIn, which I had alreadybeen on for six months to a year,
and basically other than what we discussedin this show, I've kept to

(17:33):
that for you know twelve years andso I was feeling like in twenty thirteen,
people didn't really want to hear viewsthat were different from their own right,
and that that could cost you customers, friends, opportunities. And there

(17:53):
may be there's a time for speakingup, but I don't think the way
I wanted to do that was ina random Facebook post or because I felt
like venting for a moment and thatwould feel good and then you know,
damn the consequences. Except two hourslater, I'm sort of like, well,
good, Ross, you made yourselffeel really good with that comment.

(18:15):
Now you know you had something tosay it. Yeah, yeah, go
ahead, as it shows as itshows up to Haunty Ross. Like twenty
five years later, I still thinkthere's a disconnect that people don't understand how
much their digital footprint can really affectthe decisions in their future, like a

(18:37):
job interview at the least housing.Yeah, Like I know, people I
know jan Exters always say like,God, Internet wasn't around when I was
coming up, Like that's that's seriousfor sure. I mean, that's a
big, big, big reason whyI talk on this topic. I talk

(18:59):
really high level. I don't getspecific into certain sides or issues that would
be considered to be hateful to anyone. I think it's more taking a position
that is really inclusive of everyone's thoughtsand opinions. But also, like what's
being talked about here, this recognitionthat there are harms being done to especially

(19:23):
young people that haven't had the opportunityto develop their mental abilities to be able
to make their own choices and maketheir own decisions based on their own values.
And that's what's really under threat hereis individuals with their own values are
being weaponized against them that they can'thave those values. They have to have

(19:45):
someone else's values or thoughts and nottheir own thoughts, even though it may
be contrary to what other people think. Which is really the whole point of
a free speech world is is thatall of us are free to think independently,
not think is a collective, andthat's that leads us into a whole

(20:07):
other concern But that's you know,and as we get more connected electronically,
you know that group think starts toreally take hold. And if certain thoughts
get weaponized or pushed to the sidebecause they're considered to be hate speech,
then we all start moving towards thisconcept of we all think the same way.

(20:32):
But you know is that if weall thought the same way, would
that make a better world. That'sthat's the question that I think we all
have to think because you have powerdynamics, right, So thinking all the
same way then just supports whatever thosewho are in charge, those with the

(20:52):
biggest stick, those with the biggestbusiness want. Yeah, right, because
they're going to be they're going toenforce that. That was the brilliance of
the First Amendment. And but theydidn't. They didn't picture time coming along
when there'd be a cancel culture.And yeah, I probably also don't think

(21:12):
they probably could have imagined the diversityof views and different ways of communication that
we all have we all have today. I think on the the issue of
kids, like there is the concernRebecca mentioned like and you mentioned or Rebecca

(21:33):
or not her head. I forgetwhether you brought it up or not,
but I know you're there with withRob on this that you know, kids
need access to these tools because welive in a digital world and you can't.
But I think I think you canhave computers at school, let's say
that have access to chat, GPTand access to do online research and such

(21:56):
but that can be separate from havinga Facebook account or an Instagram account,
or you know, being on TikTokor whatever. And while we don't want
the government to get overly involved inregulating things, I think this could be
sort of how government works in thebest way if parents and even teenagers there

(22:22):
was a groundswell that you know,came from the people and moved up through
their representatives pushing them to do something. Because we're all in agreement that you
can't have a world in which somekids have access to there's and other kids
don't, because it's always going tobe an unfair playing field. I think

(22:48):
for it's just gonna be like,but kids don't have guns, right,
I mean some of them do.Yeah, but I'm just saying no,
no, no, no, ButI'm talking about like kids living in different
like you can't. You can't havea class where three quarters of the kids

(23:10):
are living on or socializing on TikTokor whatever and then another third have no
access to it whatsoever. Because it'sjust parental. Eventually, those parents are
gonna wear down and go I don'twant my kid to be a complete outsider
if that's the place where their peersare socializing, it's important for them.

(23:32):
So only if the parents come togetheras an overwhelming group and say, look,
we all agree that it would bebetter for our kids if they weren't
on these platforms until they were sixteenor seventeen, or whatever the age we
determine. I mean, I'm notsaying it's gonna make a perfect world,

(23:56):
but I don't know. I mean, Rebecca, you've probably seen more than
I have the impact that it hasgood, bad, and neutral. I
guess, right, well, Iguess I'll say I'm not asking you to
bring your personal touch. I'm justsaying, like, no, I'm just
general Yeah, I think that there'sa piece of raising kids that's about protecting

(24:23):
them from things and also like amitigated exposure. I can only imagine that
if I had not let my kidget on any social media platform into eighteen,
and then the day that eighteen comesaround, and then they have no
idea what grooming looks like, theydon't know, they're obsessed. Like,

(24:45):
I think that there is a littlebit of a contextualization that can help.
Not to the point of my kidssaying like, I think thirteen is too
young. I mean, the thingsthat they were exposed to just from taking
Grandpa's phone eight years old, likehardcore stuff and then having to explain that

(25:06):
it was traumatizing, but also youknow, to the point of it being
the tools of our time, andlike what happens when you do turn eighteen?
Do you have a very interesting addto your point of like imagination and
being having time to think. WhenSaturn was like between ages of second grade

(25:30):
to almost high school, we werein a it's called Subbury Valley model.
It's an open campus, no teachers, called free range chickens, no teachers,
no testing, no classes. Youwere all just to go out on
this twelve acre campus and get boredand then start collaborating together on small projects.
With the introduction of technology into theSubbury value model, no one gets

(25:53):
bored. So like that isn't happeningbecause they have phones and iPads and devices
and switches, and so the socialexperiment of let's put a bunch of kids
together in a safe environment and seehow they start, like building you know,
villages in the woods and stuff isn'thappening anymore, and that is a

(26:18):
loss, I think. So that'sa long winded way of addressing kind of
all of those things was saying,it's complicated. Yeah, I just want
to bring something up with you know, when the movie Sound of Freedom came
out, a lot of us wereexposed to how you know, growing,
but also you know, all thecriminal activity, if I can word it

(26:41):
that way to do with children washappening and has been happening for so long.
And now this is this is whereI go. Okay, the government
is trying to control social media andall of that. I get that to

(27:02):
protect the children. But here's thething. The porn industry has been going
on forever and most of those kidsthat we saw in the in that movie
are ones that are on those sites. They just dress them up, put
on the makeup and make them looklike they're of age. Most of those
girls are underage. So the pornindustry thrives on that and the trafficking,

(27:30):
and that's how they make their money. What most people don't realize and those
that are consumers of the in theporn industry, they don't realize that they're
engaging in the very activity that thegovernment's trying to censor social media. Okay,
so we've got a dilemma there,and it isn't the answer isn't to

(27:53):
censor the social media as much asactually helping people overcome addiction, whether they're
porn addicted or other types of addiction. It's like it's like a band aid
to me than rather getting to theroot issue. So it's not just you

(28:15):
know, people posting things about kidsor whatever. It's the consumers. It's
the addiction thing with people. Sothere's one issue. Another issue is like,
as I was researching all this,I actually heard on one of the
interviews on I can't remember was CTVor whatever. It was a news outlet
and it was a mom. Itwas a woman whose child was raped molested

(28:41):
in as a toddler. Okay,now this young girl is now a bit
older, but all those pictures areonline. These predators not only violated her,
but they've now are making money offof her use and pictures they took
of her. So now you've gotthis young, beautiful little girl growing up

(29:06):
as a woman and they can't takethat stuff off. So this girl is
highly traumatized, you know. Sothat's where I go. Okay, that's
where if a country wants to protectthe kids in that way, I can
see that. I can see that, But this whole other thing where you

(29:27):
know, consumers in the important industryabsolutely turn a blind eye to the fact
that most of those women are menin in the things they consume are all
children. So that's a reality andI think that's where the help needs to

(29:47):
come to the root issue rather well, it's a combination, I think.
And then I think what kind offloors me about this is that it's really
interesting how all the systems on socialFacebook hires a new group of people to

(30:11):
censor hate speech or whatever. Itall comes around close to the elections.
Hello, is that I think there? I mean, I know that what
the whole protecting our children thing isa real thing, but I think there's
a bigger agenda to this. Ireally think that this is a lot more

(30:33):
politically driven. And you know,it really smells like what was happening during
the coup where they censored things andif you spoke against anything, you are
oft and so Canada. Is nowthe fact that they're saying we can criminalize,

(30:55):
put you in jail and get this. I don't know if you guys
read this, but as into it, but whoever files a complaint can remain
completely anonymous. You don't you can'texcuser, and you also can't verify if

(31:17):
that's legit. Hello, it opensthe door to really kind of any kind
of lifetime imprisonment. Who's the judgeon the throne to judge that? Who
is going to be? You know? Again, it takes me back to

(31:37):
communism where the people put in place. We're all working under the new communist
regime. So again there where's theagendas here? And really was this bill
put in place just to protect thekids and and the prostitution industry or are
they setting up Canada up for somethingcompletely different? Oh and the fact that

(32:01):
they can change whenever they want.What constitute hate speech? What constitutes Jennison?
What constitutes you know? I wantto say quick hello, Comic Crusaders
is here, Brian Shulman. Goodto see you both. And I'm bringing

(32:22):
a comment here from Blackboard Rules onthe Netflix documentary Social Dilemma, And I
had next Netflix for a month justto watch that documentary. The CEOs interviewed
said they wouldn't let their children haveaccounts on social media because they know how
it works, right. I sawthat that as well. Yeah, and

(32:45):
that's exactly how it works. It'sall algorithm and algorithm focused. Right,
there's it's designed to keep you comingback to it repeatedly and repeatedly. It's
mentally it's kind of like mentally stimulating, or they use this term dopamine.
It's a dopamine response in the brain. And that's what's happening with TikTok too.

(33:08):
So good drag. Yeah, andthen how AI has made it so
very easy to take one person,a human being who's completely innocent and create
AI versions of them without clothing onwith and compromising positions. So I understand

(33:29):
where there needs to be some Internetpolicing here, but it's concerning what you
know they're doing. Yeah, I'mnot sure where this ends up, but
you know, it's it's a it'sa significant shift in what's happening. And

(33:50):
I think the proper term to describeit is we're we're moving into an era
that would be defined as a technocracy, and and it's something it's somewhat new,
but some of the principles of itdo have historical reference behind it,
and some of the principles behind itare solely starting to be realized by increasing

(34:16):
numbers of people that this is hasa historical reference to it, but it
also has something new in it,and that's this technology layer, right that
enables people to communicate with each otheron a global scale, but it also
enables the people in power to monitorthat and control that. So we're kind

(34:38):
of in a new era and it'shard somewhat. I hear a lot of
people talk about, you know,you know, like a historical reference to
well, we've seen this in thepast. I don't know that we've really
seen this in the past. Ithink what the changes that are happening in
our society in the West especially,but also are happening in the East as

(35:00):
well, are really you know,a lot of the things that people have
wanted to do haven't been possible untilthe technology reached a certain level of you
know, integration in our society.And I think a lot of our governments
have wanted to enforce laws in agreater degree, and so if they can

(35:23):
expand the laws to cover more thingswhere they feel like there's risk in the
society. But it seems like it'shaving the opposite effect. It's driving people
apart and angering people against each other, and I don't know that that's really
is that really what our government wantsis everybody at each other's throats to sell

(35:47):
advertising. Well. Also, youknow, this concept of fear and this
concept of polarization plays into the handsof you know, that's just you know,
I'm not taking a side here,I'm just saying that polarization plays into
power dynamics, and oftentimes the sidesare are fighting over power and control over

(36:13):
the other side that doesn't agree withthem. So we're creating a potential environment
of real world conflict. That's thereal danger that I'm worried about, and
I'm increasingly hearing that from others,is that we're fomenting violence in our society
against each other on all these linesof understanding and divide. I know,

(36:38):
good people and bad people. Eachside thinks the other side is bad,
and once that happens, you know, violence is not far behind. So
are they wrong or are they evil? And you know people can be wrong
with that being evil and we canthat was the idea behind things, right,
we can disagree and then so it'sbe one of consensus or what have

(37:02):
you. Well, Rebecca, youhad a video it deals with from social
media from the creator side, right, I do. If you're ready for
some merph, Yeah, let's let'slet's go to it. Okay, this
one, I got there. Wego all right, everyone's a creator.

(37:23):
It seems like everyone has a followingand everything is hashtag content. Social media
companies that maybe these acts more addictivethan ever. By letting everyone go viral
all the time and making every personfeel like they're famous, it essentially outsourced
their labor to millions of people withoutany financial compensation. It's all an illusion
to fame and influence with none ofthe monetary benefits. I have almost six

(37:44):
hundred thousand followers across TikTok and Instagram, and I still have to work a
totally separate career that has nothing todo with comedy. I'm not trying to
complain. I just think it's genuinelyindicative of the state of social media.
You can buy your way to amillion followers and no one will know.
If you stop creating, someone younger, hotter, and more entertaining will replace
you. I'm one of at leastone hundred corporate comedians just with the same

(38:07):
stupid haircut, rehashing the same tiredwork topics over and over again. I'm
falling into their trap. Right now, we're totally saturated and there's no indication
that we're ever going back. Alot of children only want to be influencers
when they grow up. Everyone describesthemselves these days as a hashtag digital creator,
writer, producer, editor and director, podcaster, and also a realtor.

(38:30):
Well, I'm to stop creating contentand start creating some value for shareholders.
Everyone. That was very good.So are we also right, the
adults that we are? We alsovictims of algorithms and social media mind control

(38:52):
and the rewards and promises of abusiness model that it doesn't actually reward us
in the way. And that's alsothe other side of it is also us
pushed to be creators. I mean, I think his point of like,
they've outsourced their labor for millions ofdollars and no one's getting paid for it.

(39:15):
Shout out to Tom Fell, bythe way, who I think produces
incredible TikTok humor. For sure aboutbeing a creator, but without that funnel.
You need that funnel in order tomake the supernova equation of you know,
the our children being damaged by socialmedia, et cetera, our adults

(39:37):
being damaged. Should it be regular? Should it not be the push for
people to constantly enroll themselves in intheir role is pretty relentless. We're all
here. Creativity is such a gift. And in during the coup and everything

(40:00):
got shut down, people got pulledout of buildings and taken a torture camps,
Families did not have food, Electricitywas shut down, whenever the heck
they wanted to running water. Allof that. Really a resilience was built
up in people because they had thecreativity, They had one another, they

(40:23):
had creativity. So I think we'dbe foolish, and I don't say this
in any degrading way. I thinkwe'd be foolish not to continue creating,
using the tools in our hands,learning new technology. And I'm saying learning
it, not being afraid of it. I think we'd be foolish to do

(40:46):
that because the reality is just likehere in Canada. You know, bank
accounts were shopped from one day tothe next in Argentina and they had the
bankruptcies three times and people lost alltheir life savings and Chili where they all
of a sudden all the borders wereclosed. So what I say is creativity

(41:09):
is such a gift. It's aGod given gift to all of us,
and we have that power and choice. So even though somebody may take the
power from us, we have thiswithin us. And that's what I encourage
everybody to is don't live in fear, you know, don't don't try to

(41:30):
hide or run from technology. Lookat the good in it, look at
what you can do with it.And whatever the governments decided to do or
not to do, I think thatwe can rise above. Yes, Like
through the war and the coup,there were things we couldn't do. There
were we if that if those sirenswent off, we had to run for

(41:53):
cover. If we did not runfor cover, it didn't matter where.
I remember holding my mom's hand andrun into homes where we did not know
people. Okay, but those thatwere on the streets you could hear the
gun, the machine guns going,and then when you were outside the house,
you saw bodies everywhere. Okay.So that's what that's what coups do,

(42:15):
that's what military coups do, that'swhat overthrows do, that's what communism
does. So but this is thething is in in my own country,
their resiliency and their creativity, there'ssuch a creative people has gotten their economy
back up and they they I remembermy uncles today, They'll hold two or
three jobs and they've created work forthemselves. So I just want to throw

(42:42):
that as an encouragement because all thatwe're talking about, and I mean,
I'm the only Canadian in the panel, and and honestly, I had to
look at like, Okay, arethey gonna like sensor our panel because I've
got something to bring to the table. Is there going to be someone knocking
out my door and hauling me away? Like what's gonna happen here? So

(43:04):
but I can't live in fear ofthat, you know anyways. And it's
not you know, and it's notan isolated like you could just say,
well that's Canada, because it couldbe something I say or something Rebecca rob
says that gets you in trouble,and it's like, you know, well
what okay. So now it's notjust infringing on free speech of Canadians,

(43:29):
but it's making Americans and people inother countries who are engaging with people from
Canada reluctant to cross certain lines,just like we're reluctant to say for certain
things on YouTube because we don't wantthe channel to get shut down. So
there's a there's a whole dance thatgoes on in terms of how we're self

(43:52):
censoring and so forth. And Idon't know that anything's being lost, but
there's gonna come a time where there'llbe a topic that we want to cover
and we're between government, between popularopinion, between the platforms and self interest,

(44:14):
you know, our day job andwhat have you, that we're just
gonna go, eh, maybe maybethis is this is a tough one.
Maybe this is one we we wedon't want to we don't want to cover
in exactly. And you know,I'm just gonna say this too for Canadians,
Like how many Canadians are going tolose work because let's say a media

(44:36):
company wants to bring them on boardas a brand ambassador or as a panelist
or whatever. You know, they'regonna think twice if we bring that Canadian.
And you know, how how restrictedare we going to be? Do
you see what I'm saying? Likethis puts jobs and jeopardizes opportunities for Canadians.
Uh? And then also I havefriends who are Jewish. Some people

(44:58):
were born in Israel and they're scaredfor their lives sometimes to even go out.
And so even if I bring thatup, you know, is that
going to be constituted that I havea role in in in some kind of
gene. So I think you seewhat I'm saying, like where are the
lines and this is where we go? Okay, And then the fact that

(45:20):
they can make up the roles wheneverthey want. Yeah, I feel like
I'm back in Chile. Well,you know it's all keyed on fear.
You know, that's if if fearcan be fomented in a society, people
will be much more willing to,you know, conform because they feel threatened
or their safety is. Just likewe just said, if people are fearful

(45:43):
to go outside of their houses,guess what, They're going to stay in
their house and order things on Amazonand get Uber eats and take quiet,
spend money, stay in a box, stay quiet, go build a shelter,
and spend more time on their ontheir iPhones or their computers or in
the Apple Vision pro. I mean, I could very much see a future

(46:07):
where there will be a certain segmentof the population that will choose to live
their lives in virtual reality then livein the real world because the real world
will be not as pleasant a placeto be as the virtual world, and
I think that's that may be whatthe future looks like, because we're kind

(46:30):
of seeing that a little bit today, right, people spend I mean,
what's their screen time today? Right? It's it's oftentimes humiliating to get that
number on that app, like yourscreen time is up twenty percent, you
watch seven hours a day, andI'm like, please please tell me it's
for work, right, right,right? And then and then you got

(46:52):
the whole segment that are like,well, you know, real relationships aren't
built online, and I'm just likecutting it up a lot and I'll go
work my nine to five. I'mfine, I'll come home, cook my
dinner and put my feet up.Okay, while that's all good, like
whatever. You know, my experienceswhen when when communism rolls in is you

(47:15):
don't have a nine to five jobanymore, baby, and if you don't
have tools under your belt, hello, good luck. You know. That's
why I say we can't live infear. And I will say this that
because of my investing, I chooseto invest my time online in the things

(47:37):
that I do. That's to me, that is not just Claudia going,
oh, I'm addicted to scrolling.It No, I actually choose choose to
learn and invest my time online,invest my time in people. Guess what,
when we do meet face to face, we have a better relationship than

(47:59):
any anything I try to conjure upwith meeting someone face to face for the
first time. So there's validity,you know. I don't buy into that
camp that just turns a blind eyeand says as social media is just like
whatever. You know what, whenyou choose you actually choosing your intentional about

(48:21):
and building your relationships in any way, shape or form, it's a win.
I can see that. Yeah,definitely. I mean I've chosen to
by default, right, I wouldalways if I just had some time to
waste or you needed a distraction,by default, I would always open up

(48:45):
Instagram or Twitter. And I madea decision, conscious decision, and it's
changed a lot for me that nowI'm going to open up LinkedIn, and
if I'm going to scroll content,I'm gonna scroll content on LinkedIn. If
I'm going to comment somewhere on somebodyelse's content, it's gonna be on LinkedIn.

(49:07):
And if I only have ten minutesto post, you know, or
I'm only gonna post once today ona topic or something. I'm thinking LinkedIn
first and then okay, maybe I'llget to the other ones. Whereas in
the past it's like, if it'sa picture, it goes to Instagram,
if it's a text based update,that goes to Twitter, and then you

(49:29):
know, maybe if I'm promoting something, I'll throw up a post on LinkedIn
to cover all bases. But I'mlike, you know, I've never really
given LinkedIn other than that short periodwhen LinkedIn Live was hot, I've never
really given LinkedIn a fair chance whereI've thought in terms of, hey,
these are real people in a realcommunity, and like, am I like

(49:52):
I know how to tailor a postfor Twitter for Instagram, But have I
ever really thought about what I'm puttingon on LinkedIn? Not really. It's
it's like, let's do a promotionalpost and just hit LinkedIn as all the
bases. Or it's like, wellthis was really good, so I'll add
it to my profile or I'll postit on LinkedIn because it's like a resume

(50:15):
and here, you know. Butno, Like, I'm thinking about it
differently, and I think, like, it isn't we should disappear from social
media, but how do we useit in a way that helps us achieve
our goals, or or in away that keeps us from getting addicted by
changing our patterns up. And thatwas That's been a major pattern break for

(50:38):
me. I'm not scrolling photos onInstagram very much anymore. And if I
start to, it's like, ohwait, you committed to LinkedIn first,
and then you can check out theother. You know, by the time
I'm done with whatever I'm doing onLinkedIn, I'm usually back to doing something
else exactly purpose. It's a legacy, and that's what I'm talking about.

(51:02):
And you know, I had aninterview with Joey Garrity, which I know
Rebecca you did too, and Igot to check that out. But you
know, like I talked about beingyou and celebrating the you, and this
isn't a narcissistic thing, because it'sactually a lot of work to figure out
who you are, what you haveto bring to the table, to solve
problems, to pour into people.And you see, that's a legacy for

(51:25):
me that I cared about people.The things that I did developed were intentional
to pour into people's lives, tobring value. One of my mentors always
said to me, you know,Claudia, I have a network, but
you know, don't you ever treatpeople like number There are people like our

(51:45):
investment time here with one another.When I get to meet miss Rebecca Gunter
face to face, this girlfriend isgold. I know that we are going
to be able to dive deep intothat palm and go, hey girl,
you know why because we've intentionally investedtime in one another and found the goal

(52:07):
there and found that that thing thatwe can celebrate. So yes, I
just say, you know, thisis where this whole thing comes back around
to knowing who you are, tobeing intentional and what is your legacy?
What are you leaving behind? Well, I'll just say this, I was
never scared attack. And the reasonI wasn't scared attack is because I cared

(52:30):
enough about the people out there thatI wanted to communicate with and I wanted
to pour in and invest in andlet that be part of my legacy.
Right, Let's let's close up ona constructive note. As I mentioned my
LinkedIn first approach, what's something youcould share that that you're doing or that

(52:54):
you'd like to do, that youthink would allow you to man and it's
social better versus being managed by thealgorithms or by by social media. Whoever
wants to go just jump in.Yeah, I can talk about how I
use social media, and it's definitelyevolved. I mean, I started using

(53:15):
this stuff a long long time ago, and I've I've kind of pulled back
from treating it as any social mediaright now as a as a personal kind
of public distribution pathway. Right It'sit's been really more focused on kind of
career and business activities, but alsojust just trying to do things and connect

(53:42):
with people in an individual way,but also in a in a larger way
as well around some of the thingsthat I'm doing with media just in general.
So I'm not so in some waysmaybe I'm I'm not doing what I
should be doing, which is reallykind of fostering community more, which is

(54:04):
I think a big trend right now. I think that increasingly if you're involved
in social media or creating content now, I think you need to start changing
your way of thinking away from buildingaudiences to building community. And I think
that is that is a powerful transitionin your mind about how you build one

(54:30):
to one connections with others through mediaand then also communicate positive and reinforcing ideas
and concepts to that community and bereachable and to be open to other people
and their desires and their wishes andtheir own careers and their own path and

(54:54):
being a resource to help in that. Now, granted, it's not easy
to do that. If you havea lot of people that are part of
your community, it's hard to fulfilleveryone's needs. But that's the that's the
challenge that I think that we allhave as creators is to better build community

(55:15):
and better build individual connections with peoplethat are connecting with you on these platforms.
Question just to keep in mind fora future show is whether the major
social media platforms are the best placesto build those communities or whether there are

(55:36):
other lesser known platforms. I thinkthere are might have advantages to building community,
and I think that's a whole showenough itself, but it's an interesting
topic. Rebecca, did you havea final thought on this? Oh my
god, I'm following your lead.I still find social media so performative.

(56:00):
I just there's just something so hardto find achieve authenticity on LinkedIn, even
though I really try, and Iwork in that space, and I make
over people's profiles on personal in theirpersonal brand it just feels like I have
to do it and that's the wayyou are in business. So I'm looking

(56:21):
to you, I'm looking at youall on this panel to help me develop
a relationship with it where I justdon't feel like it's so performative. I
just it's a concern that like aftera year, you know, at the
end of the year, I mightjust say, hey, I gave it
all I could. And you know, I don't know if I gave it
all I could, but I atleast made an effort to show up regularly

(56:42):
and it didn't. It didn't workfor me, or maybe it will.
You know, I'm too new toit, to to this to be able
to judge yet, Claudia, Well, we wouldn't be together. I don't
think if it wasn't for Social righton this panel would not have formed either,
if Ross hadn't pursued putting together aproduct on Social. So that's number

(57:07):
two. Number three is there areways we can distribute content, which we
know, we can use all kindsof distribution systems so that we don't personally
have to be in there all thetime because we're not superhuman. And we've
got to remember that now when wedo distribute content, there is a responsibility

(57:30):
to respond if and so what Ipersonally do is sometimes I'm in a season
where I feel like I don't wantto use my distribution systems nor you know,
the help that I get that Iwant to personally go in there and
invest my time. Okay, Anddo you know, if I see Ross,

(57:52):
I'll go in there and support apost if I see her back at
saying okay. But there's a season, you know, where maybe I'm touring
more or really honestly, I'm havingsocial burnout and I want to take time
off. So that's when those systemskick in, or warn that my helpers
kick in. It's like you handlea lot, you know, for a
while. So I think because wegot to remember we're still human guys.

(58:15):
Is showing up doesn't mean we haveto be on every platform and hands on.
There's seasons for that. But Ido think that we would not know
one another and the richness and goldthat's in one another and celebrate and laugh
and do all the things that wedo had had social media and op been

(58:36):
a part of our lives. Allright, Well, this is very very
interesting conversation. There's so many layersthrough social media, whether it's the government
side and control, whether it's kids, whether it's how creators use it.
Obviously a lot more to talk about, and that's why you come back for

(58:58):
the Stream Leader Report panel on Thursdaysat one thirty pm Eastern for Claudia Santiago,
Rob Greenley and Rebecca Gunter. I'mross Brand and this has been the
Stream Leader Report. Take care,everybody,

All Episodes

Does Social Media Need Regulation? | Panel (Ep38)

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Does Social Media Need Regulation? | Panel (Ep38)