Joe Tidy
speaker
77 appearances
9 recordings
2 series
first heard Dec 2024
last heard 8 Jul
Joe Tidy’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsRecordings per month over the last 12 months — 2 in all, peaking in Jul 2026 with 1.
Appearances
I'm looking at the Melania coin, and it's shot into the top 100 cryptocurrency coins out there, closing in. on number 59, which is Fartcoin. So that kind of gives you an idea of the kind of industry that we're operating in here.
In his previous term as president, Donald Trump said that cryptocurrency seems like a scam to me. He has since come round to the idea of cryptocurrencies. During the campaign, he became the first campaigning potential president to offer cryptocurrency as a potential donation method. And he got lots of money from crypto people.
And he went to a crypto conference and said that he wanted to make America... a crypto hub. He wants to buy a reserve of Bitcoin for the American purse. And he wants to decrease the regulation to encourage industry. So I suppose releasing a coin is just the next step in that, in a sense. And let's be honest as well, a way to potentially make a quick buck.
He's not president yet. And also he has kind of rewritten the rules on what is able to be done in office. So when he was in charge of his businesses, obviously giant hotel chain with Trump, golf courses, all that kind of thing. He did the presidency and he kept that business running, taking a step back and letting his family do it.
And now he's got this cryptocurrency company, which will obviously benefit from policies he puts in place. Now he's got a crypto coin, which will obviously benefit from him pumping it and making the value go up and up. But he hasn't taken the oath yet. So if he wants to release a coin, I imagine that that's perfectly legitimate thing to do. Celebrities do it all the time.
This year, they found nearly 250 images. If you count all the web pages they found with this illegal abuse material, that's 250,000 web pages. So it is a very, very small amount. But it was only 51 last year. So there's the trend they're seeing. And they did warn of this. I went to
visit them last year and they said that this is going to be a big problem and it's going to come fast because it's just so easy to make these images and that's certainly what we're seeing.
The problem is, of course, the law hasn't caught up with just how easy it is to create these images and how fast they are and also how realistic they are because the issue the RDOF are having, and this is the same with
other charities around the world like netmec in the us as well for example they're tasked with not only taking these images offline but sometimes you know safeguarding some of these children in the images and if they're chasing their tails looking for children that don't exist that adds a whole another layer of complexity to the law and to the authorities because when they're finding these images they have to work out is this real is this is this child actually in a situation where we need to protect them is the child real
So the difficulty is very, very complex for these organisations.
We know now that these accusations that have been thrown around social media for the last six months to a year about shadow banning, there may be some truth behind it because, of course, as you say, we looked at the engagement, the metrics that we can count across 20 different news organisations based in Palestinian territories versus 20 in Israeli and 20 in Arabic-speaking and surrounding areas.
And we found a big disparity between the engagement that each one got. On the Palestinian pages, there was a 77% drop in engagement. So that's likes, comments, shares, reactions. after October 7th, compared to 37% increase for Israeli pages and 100% increase for Arabic.
Well, it's this idea that you can still post things, you can still say what you want on social media, but you're not getting the views, you're not getting the clicks on your videos, that kind of thing. And that's been the accusation against Meta for the last year or so. And it looks like this is another data point potentially pointing that way.
But Meta has said very strongly that they have not done this deliberately to silence any particular voice.
Exactly that. That's what they've been saying, that we had to bring in what they're calling emergency policy changes to stop a spike in graphic or hateful content. We didn't find any that was particularly different on those 20 Palestinian organisations compared to others.
They also said that it's very difficult for them to balance safety on the platform when you've got Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organisation by US, UK and their own policies. But again, we didn't find any overt praising of Hamas on those Palestinian pages.
Interestingly, though, one of the things they did say is that if a page posted most about the war or only about the war, they will be demoted in the algorithms of the platform. Because, of course, Facebook doesn't want too much bad news or even news on their platform.
Showing 61–77 of 77 · page 4 of 4
← Previous