Taylor Lorenz’s Power User

Democrats just handed ICE exactly what ICE asked for.
[FREE SPEECH FRIDAY]
If you value my reporting, please, please support my work 👇👇👇
Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz      
Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co   
Body cameras were supposed to hold police accountable. So why is police violence still rising? Why are cops almost never convicted using body cam footage? And why are Democrats (the same politicians who just tripled the ICE budget) now demanding that ICE agents wear body cameras?
In this episode of Free Speech Friday, I sit down with Alec Karakatsanis, lawyer and author of the fantastic book Copaganda, to uncover the hidden history of police body cameras. While body cams are presented as a technological fix to deeply rooted institutional problems, they actually have the opposite effect.
We talk about how the multi-billion dollar police surveillance industry originally struggled to get funding for these cameras, how Steven Spielberg donated money to put cameras on cops, how the narrative completely shifted, and how Big Tech is cashing in.
Big Tech interest groups and reactionary non-profits are spending millions to push mass surveillance and censorship laws. My work is 100% self-funded. This series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. 
If you value my reporting, please, please support my work 👇👇👇
Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz      
Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co   
Follow me:
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz         
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0        
https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz  
https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social    
https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 
We break down:
How the police surveillance industry lobbied for body cameras for years before Ferguson, and why they desperately wanted them

The brilliant marketing switch that rebranded body cams from a police surveillance tool into an "accountability and transparency" reform

Why body camera footage is used every single day to prosecute poor people in courtrooms across America, but almost never used against the police

How Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and the Democratic Party helped sell this surveillance expansion to liberals

Why the DOJ's own research shows body cameras do NOT reduce police misconduct or violence

How ICE agents who killed Alex Preti and René Good were already filming themselves and were celebrated by their bosses

The AI, facial recognition, and predictive policing data being harvested from body cam footage right now

Why demanding body cams on ICE is a distraction from real accountability and actually gives ICE more money and power

How Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and Kristi Noem all ended up on the same side of this debate

The parallel between body cam propaganda and Democrat-backed internet surveillance laws

Are dumb phones actually the solution to our anxieties, or are they a $400 scam built on a moral panic?
~~~~~~~~~~
My work is 100% self-funded and this series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. If you value my reporting, please, please support my channel: 
Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz     
Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co  
~~~~~~~~~~~~

Over the past few years, a massive industry has emerged around dumb phones and the concept of logging off. From $400 minimalist dumb phones to influencers selling digital detox courses, logging off has become big business. Schools are banning phones. Politicians are blaming screen time. Media outlets are calling Gen Z “addicted.”But is ditching your smartphone actually the answer? In this video, I sat down with WIRED journalist Elana Klein to unpack the rise of the logging-off movement. We discuss how reasonable concerns over screen time have metastasized into a consumer movement selling $400 minimalist dumb phones for millions in profit. We also dive deep into the anti-smartphone moral panic , which is heavily pushed by reactionary politicians and legacy media. We explore the history of our relationship with the internet, from the tech optimism of the early 2010s and the algorithmic shift in 2016 , to the dangerous reality of school phone bans that are leading to AI surveillance and increased police interactions for students.We also talk about the concept of "smartphone addiction," what it really means, and why your issues with technology are often manifestations of much larger societal problems.
Elana's piece: https://www.wired.com/story/dumbphone-owners-have-literally-lost-their-minds
MORE READING:
https://www.wired.com/story/the-wired-guide-to-protecting-yourself-from-government-surveillance
https://www.wired.com/story/guide-protect-data-from-hackers-corporations

Follow me:
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz        
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0       
https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz   
https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social   
https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz   
We cover:
The history of smartphones and how our relationship to them changed
Why dumb phones are being marketed as luxury wellness products
The moral panic around teen mental health and smartphones (and why the data is messier than you think)
How figures like Tristan Harris and Jonathan Haidt shaped the anti-tech, pro-surveillance narrative
Why "phone addiction" isn't a real clinical concept, and what you're actually feeling
Practical ways to improve your relationship with technology without throwing your phone in a river
Why the anti-smartphone movement is anti-privacy and pro-surveillance
How to think about your phone as a tool instead of an enemy

Sen. Ron Wyden speaks about Section 230, internet freedom, free speech, and how Trump is pushing big tech's policies. 
Big Tech interest groups and reactionary non-profits are spending millions to try to get Section 230 revoked. My work is 100% self-funded. This series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. If you value this reporting, please, please support the channel: 
Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz    
Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co 
Section 230 is one of the most important, and most misunderstood, laws in the history of the internet. In this episode of my Section 230 mini series, I sit down with Senator Ron Wyden, one of the original co authors of Section 230, to break down what the law actually does, why it exists, and what would happen if it were repealed. 
Section 230 protects user generated content and ensures platforms are not treated as the speaker of everything posted online. Without it, social media platforms, forums, comment sections, Wikipedia, Reddit, and any website that hosted user generated content could be sued out of existence.
There is growing political pressure to "reform" aka dismantle Section 230 entirely. If you care about online privacy, free speech, data surveillance, algorithm accountability, Big Tech regulation, or the future of the internet, I hope you'll watch!
This is part two of my Section 230 deep dive series taking place every Monday. 
Follow me:
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz       
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0      
https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz  
https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  
https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz  
We cover:
• What Section 230 really says
• Why both the left and right are attacking it
• Whether repealing 230 would protect kids
• The truth about Big Tech and liability
• Identity verification and online privacy
• Surveillance advertising and algorithm regulation
• What free speech online actually means
• Why generative AI is not covered by Section 230

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is pushing a bill that would END free speech on the internet, and he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about.
[FREE SPEECH FRIDAY]
Join the Patreon: ⁠https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz⁠  

Subscribe to my Substack:  ⁠https://www.usermag.co⁠  

Section 230 is one of the most important laws in the history of the internet. It is often called “the law that created the internet” because it protects websites, forums, blogs, comment sections, Wikipedia, and every platform that hosts user-generated content.
But for some reason, actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt wants it gone. Yesterday, he released a video following backlash from his talk last week in congress, where he called on Senators to repeal Section 230.
Almost every single thing he said in his response video was factually wrong.
For this week's Free Speech Friday episode, I'm debunking Gordon-Levitt's crusade against Section 230 and unpacking how repealing Section 230 would actually mass-censor the internet, wipe out indie platforms, destroy LGBTQ and marginalized online spaces, and hand total monopoly power over to Meta, Google, and powerful billionaires. 
I also break down the far-right groups like Morality in Media and The Heritage Foundation, which has made Section 230 repeal core to their Project 2025 tech policy agenda. If Section 230 is repealed, the cost of defending user speech could jump from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars per lawsuit. It would wipe out small communities overnight and leave only Big Tech corporations with buildings full of lawyers.
Mike Masnick’s brilliant takedown of JGL’s claims on TechDirt: https://www.techdirt.com/2026/02/12/joseph-gordon-levitt-goes-to-washington-dc-gets-section-230-completely-backwards/ 
Support independent tech journalism!
Big Tech interest groups and reactionary non-profits are spending millions to try to get Section 230 revoked. My work is 100% self-funded. This series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. If you value this reporting, please, please support the channel: 
Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz   

Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co    

Follow me:
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     
https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 
https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social 
https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 
In this video I cover:
What Section 230 actually says

The publisher vs platform myth

Why Section 230 was created after Stratton Oakmont v Prodigy

How FOSTA SESTA changed Section 230

Why repeal would increase censorship

How lawsuits would silence speech

Why big tech companies can survive without 230 but small platforms cannot

The real way to regulate big tech through antitrust and data privacy

White women have long been a core voting bloc for conservatives, so why are right wing media figures suddenly obsessed with attacking them?
Support my independent journalism:
🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz   
🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co   
In this episode, Crooked Media Hysteria's Erin Ryan joins me to break down the growing hatred towards white women in MAGA spaces and conservative media. 
From the massive hate campaigns against Amber Heard and Blake Lively, to smearing women like Renee Good during today's ICE protests in Minneapolis, to so-called "Karens" and accusations of hysteria, to the idea of "toxic empathy," we unpack why white women who step outside their assigned role have become such a powerful political target.
We discuss the demonization of "Wine Moms" and "Childless Cat Ladies" in relation to the rise of the trad-wife fantasy. We explore why conservative media is obsessed with controlling white women and why this demographic is trending away from the Republican party. We also examine how these narratives are used to justify regressive policies around reproduction, education, marriage, and bodily autonomy.
We discuss why scapegoating white women in particular works, why it’s so effective, and what it reveals about a movement that needs the most privileged women to be silent and compliant.
Follow me:
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      
https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     
https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 
https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  
https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz  
We cover: 
➤ The origins of "white woman" as an insult—from both the left and right 
➤ Why MAGA is strategically attacking their own voting base 
➤ The "toxic empathy" narrative and why caring is now considered dangerous 
➤ How this keeps conservative women in line through fear 
➤ The connection to attacks on IVF, surrogacy, and reproductive freedom 
➤ Why passport bros and the manosphere hate white women specifically 
➤ What this reveals about the MAGA vision for women in America