Connect with us

Industry

Andy Signore Responds to Sexual Misconduct Allegations

Published

on

  • Andy Signore released a video on Monday addressing sexual misconduct allegations against him that surfaced nearly two years ago.
  • In the video, he apologized for making inappropriate comments to fans, but denied ever assaulting anyone.
  • He argued that his relationship with one of his accusers, April Dawn, was consensual.
  • Dawn later tweeted a response to the video and defended her previous claims.

Signore Accused of Misconduct

Screen Junkies creator Andy Signore has responded to sexual misconduct allegations and is maintaining that the assault claims against him are false. 

In 2017, Signore, who was at the time the Vice President of Content at Defy Media, which owned Screen Junkies before its collapse, was accused of sexual harassment and assault. One allegation came from a former employee named Emma Bowers. She identified herself as an intern working for copy credit and said that Signore sent her inappropriate messages complimenting her physical appearance.

 “Lol jacking it to you in your undies,” one message read. 

Another major allegation came from April O’Donnell who goes by April Dawn. Dawn was a fan of Signore and the Screen Junkies who said that Signore sexually assaulted her multiple times. She alleged that he tried to force a sex toy inside of her, took photos of her without her permission, and promised her a position at Screen Junkies for sexual favors. 

When she tried to report this to HR at Screen Junkies, she says they did nothing to help her. This claim was backed up in a statement by her boyfriend, who worked at Screen Junkies, as well as another Defy employee named Dani Fernandez.

Dawn said that Signore threatened her boyfriend’s job over the matter. She also found other women online who said they had received inappropriate messages from Signore in the past. 

These allegations resulted in Signore losing his job at Defy. In August 2018, he sued to the organization for claiming he was wrongfully fired. The lawsuit was settled in June. 

After the accusations came out, other stories brought to the surface painted a similar picture of Signore. In a 2018 interview, Roxy Striar, who worked at Defy under Signore, said that while she was never assaulted, she found his behavior crossed lines. 

“There were things that would happen through the years that I spoke about and was really, I didn’t speak about it publicly,” Striar said in an interview with Kristian Harloff.

“Uncomfortable,” Harloff asked.

“More than uncomfortable, really inappropriate,” she answered.

“He was a super, super inappropriate guy,” she later added.

Signore has denied ever harassing Striar. 

Signore Responds to Claims

On Monday, Signore posted a video titled “#MeToo Misfire – An Honest Defense of Andy Signore” in an effort to clear his name. He said that until now, he was not legally allowed to discuss the situation. 

“The truth is I did awkwardly flirt with and make inappropriate comments to some of my fans despite being married,” Signore admitted. “And in doing this I betrayed so many people that I love and respect. I put them into horribly awkward and uncomfortable positions. And I’m truly sorry for this behavior.” 

While he admitted to inappropriate flirting, he still denied ever assaulting anyone.

“These egregious claims labeling me a sexual predator, workplace harasser, and a rapist are categorically untrue,” Signore said. “And I do not want my family hounded forever by such malicious slander.” 

He claims his relationship with Dawn was consensual and referred to it as an affair. He showed text messages between to two to show the relationship was mutually founded. 

He says that they met at a comic con in 2015. In the messages, he claims the two are flirting. In one Dawn says thinks being his groupie would be fun. However, in some of the messages, it does appear that Signore is doing most of the flirting. He refers to her as a cute nerd girl, says he can’t stop thinking about her, and says he will regret not kissing her for the rest of his life. 

Screenshot via YouTube: Popcorned Planet.
Screenshot via YouTube: Popcorned Planet.
Screenshot via YouTube: Popcorned Planet.

Signore then addressed Dawn’s accusation that he took photos of her, and claimed it was false. He showed screenshots that show that Dawn had sent nude photos herself. 

Signore also said that while Dawn claimed she was invited out to Los Angeles to appear on Fan Cam, this was not the case. He said they planned this together, and that when she got to L.A., she sent him messages about hooking up. Based on the screenshots, it appears she invited him to her hotel room and mentions needing condoms.

After revealing this, he denied ever using sex toys in any of their encounters. 

Signore then continues to say in 2016, he received an email from Dawn saying she found messages he was sending her to be unacceptable. However, he claims he was not sending her anything. 

In the e-mail, Dawn says that she only went along with their relationship because she was concerned for her safety based on comments he made.

 “It honestly was at the point I was afraid to turn you down for anything and kept making excuses for you to not do anything to me,” Dawn wrote. 

Screenshot via YouTube: Popcorned Planet.

Dawn also requested that he stop calling her, and sending her texts, emails, gifts, and mail. She added that she was “truly afraid of the lengths you would go to get what you want.”

Signore replied saying he had not contacted her in a while and will continue to not do so.

He goes that when he learned Dawn took the matter to HR, he told them about the relationship and sent their correspondence even though it would jeopardize his marriage. He wanted to prove to HR that their relationship was consensual. He said that Dawn had given no evidence of his misconduct. He claims the reason HR never followed up on her complaint was because of his evidence.

Signore then accused Dawn of leading a charge against him. 

She began to look for anybody that she could find who had ever been a fan of the show to look for infidelities and other exchanges that she could use against me,” Signore claimed. “She was determined to have others join her in labeling me as a serial abusing rapist who was ready to assault the next woman in my path.” 

Dawn did not accuse him of being a rapist in her statement against him. 

After addressing the allegations from Dawn, he moved onto the ones from Bower, which he also claimed were false. He said that these events took place before Screen Junkies existed. He also said that Bowers was not an intern and was actually higher up than she implied. 

He then said that she sent him nude photos of herself and that he responded with compliments. However, they both agreed that the situation was awkward and mutually apologized. 

“I remain perplexed that Emma would inflate our indecent, comparing me to the criminal and abusive acts of Harvey Weinstein,” Signore said. 

He then adds that he believes the stories that Dawn and Bowers told made the flirtatious messages he sent to fans look way worse than they were. He shares a tweet that backs him up in part and reads: “His behavior is appalling but if anything the majority of these DMs just prove he’s a cheat, a bit of a creep and has zero game.”

He also includes this message from a girl who shared a screenshot of their interaction. 

“Never said I was harassed,” the girl states. “Just sharing my interactions with him. Like I said at the time, I thought it was all innocent.”

As for why he believes Dawn might fabricate this situation, Signore believes she wanted to use his status.

“I believe that she was using me for access to my brand,” Signore said. “And I believe that when I became unavailable, due to being married, she moved onto my colleague. And I believe that she didn’t want him to think that she was using him too.”

He adds that he thinks her accusation undermines real sexual assault victims and says.

“I’m not proud of many of the lousy decisions that I have made, but I committed no crimes,” he states towards the end of his video.

Statements About the Video

Rogue Rocket reached out to Signore for further comments about the situation. He again admitted that he made mistakes when speaking with fans. 

“At the time I had developed a warped idea in my mind that conflated fan support with romantic interest,” Signore told Rogue Rocket. “And that led me to make some poor choices in the realm of fan interaction. As has been documented, I crossed lines in that regard that I now very much regret.”

“While it has been devastating to be caught up in this movement as I have been, I am grateful for the opportunity to have become a better person,”
Signore added.

He also told Rogue Rocket about his intentions behind making the video. He said he never wanted to deny he did anything wrong, but said he did want to tell his side of the story. 

“I did not make my video to dispute any of that,” he said. “My priority is to clear my name of a wrongful sexual assault allegation that has cost me my reputation and my livelihood.”

Dawn responded to his video in a tweet. She stood by her allegations and maintained that she is telling the truth. 

“I was ready then and I’m ready now to take the hits, comments or criticism you can throw at me because at the end of the day I know my truth and what I did was right,” Dawn wrote. 

Industry

South Korea’s Supreme Court Upholds Rape Case Sentences for Korean Stars Jung Joon-young and Choi Jong-hoon

Published

on

  • On Thursday morning, the Supreme Court in Seoul upheld the sentences of Jung Joon Young and Choi Jong Hoon for aggravated rape and related charges.
  • Jung will serve five years in prison, while Choi will go to prison for two-and-a-half.
  • Videos of Jung, Choi, and others raping women were found in group chats that stemmed from investigations into Seungri, of the k-pop group BigBang, as part of the Burning Sun Scandal.
  • The two stars tried to claim that some of the sex was consensual, but the courts ultimately found testimony from survivors trustworthy. Courts did, however, have trouble finding victims who were willing to come forward over fears of social stigma.

Burning Sun Scandal Fall Out

South Korea’s Supreme Court upheld the rape verdicts against stars Jung Joon-young and Choi Jong-hoon on Thursday after multiple appeals by the stars and their co-defendants.

Both Jung and Choi were involved in an ever-growing scandal involving the rapes and sexual assaults of multiple women. Those crimes were filmed and distributed to chatrooms without their consent.

The entire scandal came to light in March of 2019 when Seungri from the k-pop group BigBang was embroiled in what’s now known as the Burning Sun Scandal. As part of an investigation into the scandal, police found a chatroom that featured some stars engaging in what seemed to be non-consensual sex with various women. Police found that many of the message in the Kakaotalk chatroom (the major messaging app in South Korea) from between 2015 and 2016 were sent by Jung and Choi.

A Year of Court Proceedings

Jung, Choi, and five other defendants found themselves in court in November 2019 facing charges related to filming and distributing their acts without the consent of the victims, as well as aggravated rape charges. In South Korea, this means a rape involving two or more perpetrators.

The court found them all guilty of the rape charge. Jung was sentenced to six years behind bars, while Choi and the others were sentenced to five years. Jung was given a harsher sentence because he was also found guilty of filming and distributing the videos of their acts without the victim’s consent.

During proceedings, the court had trouble getting victims to tell their stories. Many feared being shamed or judged because of the incidents and didn’t want the possibility of that information going public. Compounding the court’s problems was the fact that other victims were hard to find.

To that end, the defendants argued that the sexual acts with some of the victims were consensual, albeit this didn’t leave out the possibility that there were still victims of their crimes. However, the court found that the testimony of survivors was trustworthy and contradicted the defendant’s claims.

Jung and Choi appealed the decision, which led to more court proceedings. In May 2020, the Seoul High Court upheld their convictions but reduced their sentences to five years for Jung and two and a half years for Choi.

Choi’s sentence was reduced because the court found that he had reached a settlement with a victim.

The decision was appealed a final time to the Supreme Court. This time they argued that most of the evidence against them, notably the Kakaotalk chatroom messages and videos, were illegally obtained by police.

On Thursday morning, the Supreme Court ultimately disagreed with Jung and Choi and said their revised sentences would stand.

Jung, Choi, and the other defendants will also still have to do 80 hours of sexual violence treatment courses and are banned from working with children for five years.

See What Others Are Saying: (ABC) (Yonhap News) (Soompi)

Continue Reading

Industry

YouTube Says It Will Use AI to Age-Restrict Content

Published

on

  • YouTube announced Tuesday that it would be expanding its machine learning to handle age-restricting content.
  • The decision has been controversial, especially after news that other AI systems employed by the company took down videos at nearly double the rate.
  • The decision likely stems from both legal responsibilities in some parts of the world, as well as practical reasons regarding the amount of content loaded to the site.
  • It might also help with moderator burn out since the platform is currently understaffed and struggles with extremely high turn over.
  • In fact, the platform still faces a lawsuit from a moderator claiming the job gave them Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. They also claim the company offered little resources to cope with the content they are required to watch.

AI-Age Restrictions

YouTube announced Tuesday that it will use AI and machine learning to automatically apply age restriction to videos.

In a recent blog post, the platform wrote, “our Trust & Safety team applies age-restrictions when, in the course of reviewing content, they encounter a video that isn’t appropriate for viewers under 18.”

“Going forward, we will build on our approach of using machine learning to detect content for review, by developing and adapting our technology to help us automatically apply age-restrictions.”

Flagged videos would effectively be blocked from being viewed by anyone who isn’t signed into an account or who has an account indicating they are below the age of 18. YouTube stated these changes were a continuation of their efforts to make YouTube a safer place for families. Initially, it rolled out YouTube Kids as a dedicated platform for those under 13, and now it wants to try and sterilize the platform site-wide. Although notably, it doesn’t plan to make the entire platform a new YouTube Kids.

It’s also not a coincidence that this move helps YouTube to better fall in line with regulations across the world. In Europe, users may face other steps if YouTube can’t confirm their age in addition to rolling out AI-age restrictions. This can include measures such as providing a government ID or credit card to prove one is over 18.

If a video is age-restricted by YouTube, the company did say it will have an appeals process that will get the video in front of an actual person to check it.

On that note, just days before announcing that it would implement AI to age-restrict, YouTube also said it would be expanding its moderation team after it had largely been on hiatus because of the pandemic.

It’s hard to say how much these changes will actually affect creators or how much money that can make from the platform. The only assurances YouTube gave were to creators who are part of the YouTube Partner Program.

“For creators in the YouTube Partner Program, we expect these automated age-restrictions to have little to no impact on revenue as most of these videos also violate our advertiser-friendly guidelines and therefore have limited or no ads.”

This means that most creators with the YouTube Partner Program don’t make much, or anything, from ads already and that’s unlikely to change.

Community Backlash

Every time YouTube makes a big change there are a lot of reactions, especially if it involves AI to automatically handle processes. Tuesday’s announcement was no different.

On YouTube’s tweet announcing the changes, common responses included complaints like, “what’s the point in an age restriction on a NON kids app. That’s why we have YouTube kids. really young kids shouldn’t be on normal youtube. So we don’t realistically need an age restriction.”

“Please don’t implement this until you’ve worked out all the kinks,” one user pleaded. “I feel like this might actually hurt a lot of creators, who aren’t making stuff for kids, but get flagged as kids channels because of bright colors and stuff like that”

Hiccups relating to the rollout of this new system were common among users. Although it’s possible that YouTube’s Sept 20. announcement saying it would bring back human moderators to the platform was made to help balance out how much damage a new AI could do.

In a late-August transparency report, YouTube found that AI-moderation was far more restrictive. When the moderators were first down-sized between April and June, YouTube’s AI largely took over and it removed around 11 million videos. That’s double the normal rate.

YouTube did allow creators to appeal those decisions, and about 300,000 videos were appealed; about half of which were reinstated. In a similar move, Facebook also had a similar problem, and will also bring back moderators to handle both restrictive content and the upcoming election.

Other Reasons for the Changes

YouTube’s decision to expand its use of AI not only falls in line with various laws regarding the verification of a user’s age and what content is widely available to the public but also likely for practical reasons.

The site gets over 400 hours of content uploaded every minute. Notwithstanding different time zones or having people work staggered schedules, YouTube would need to employ over 70,000 people to just check what’s uploaded to the site.

Outlets like The Verge have done a series about how YouTube, Google, and Facebook moderators are dealing with depression, anger, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because of their job. These issues were particularly prevalent among people working in what YouTube calls the “terror” or “violent extremism” queue.

One moderator told The Verge, “Every day you watch someone beheading someone, or someone shooting his girlfriend. After that, you feel like wow, this world is really crazy. This makes you feel ill. You’re feeling there is nothing worth living for. Why are we doing this to each other?”

That same individual noted that since working there, he began to gain weight, lose hair, have a short temper, and experience general signs of anxiety.

On top of these claims, YouTube is also facing a lawsuit filed in a California court Monday by a former content moderator at YouTube.

The complaint states that Jane Doe, “has trouble sleeping and when she does sleep, she has horrific nightmares. She often lays awake at night trying to go to sleep, replaying videos that she has seen in her mind.

“She cannot be in crowded places, including concerts and events, because she fears mass shootings. She has severe and debilitating panic attacks,” it continued. “She has lost many friends because of her anxiety around people. She has trouble interacting and being around kids and is now scared to have children.”

These issues weren’t just for people working on the “terror” queue, but anyone training to become a moderator.

“For example, during training, Plaintiff witnessed a video of a smashed open skull with people eating from it; a woman who was kidnapped and beheaded by a cartel; a person’s head being run over by a tank; beastiality; suicides; self-harm; children being rapped [sic]; births and abortions,” the complaint alleges.

“As the example was being presented, Content Moderators were told that they could step out of the room. But Content Moderators were concerned that leaving the room would mean they might lose their job because at the end of the training new Content Moderators were required to pass a test applying the Community Guidelines to the content.”

During their three-week training, moderators allegedly don’t receive much resilience training or wellness resources.

These kinds of lawsuits aren’t unheard of. Facebook faced a similar suit in 2018, where a woman claimed that during her time as a moderator she developed PTSD as a result of “constant and unmitigated exposure to highly toxic and extremely disturbing images at the workplace.”

That case hasn’t yet been decided in court. Currently, Facebook and the plaintiff agreed to settle for $52 million, pending approval from the court.

The settlement would only apply to U.S. moderators

See what others are saying: (CNET) (The Verge) (Vice)

Continue Reading

Industry

Chinese State Media Calls TikTok-Oracle Deal “Reasonable” as Trump Signals Approval

Published

on

  • On Friday, the United States Commerce Department issued an order that would ban U.S. downloads of TikTok and WeChat starting Sunday night.
  • The order for TikTok was delayed for one week on Saturday after President Donald Trump gave his preliminary approval on a deal between TikTok and the software company Oracle.
  • A federal judge also issued a temporary injunction Sunday against the WeChat ban, which would have largely destroyed the app’s functionality.
  • Oracle and Walmart have since released more details of the deal, including that TikTok Global will likely pay $5 billion in U.S. taxes. This does not seem to be the same as a commission from the deal, even though Trump suggested such.
  • On Monday, Chinese state media called the deal “unfair” on ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company. However, it also described it as “reasonable,” suggesting the Chinese government may approve the deal.

U.S. and China Signal Support for Deal

What began as a tumultuous weekend for TikTok ended with both the U.S. and Chinese governments potentially signaling approval of its deal with Oracle. 

Last week, TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, struck a deal with Oracle to avoid a U.S. ban. On Monday, Chinese state media called the deal “more reasonable to ByteDance,” and said it’s less costly than a shutdown.

“The plan shows that ByteDance’s moves to defend its legitimate rights have, to some extent, worked,” it added.

While not officially confirmed, this seems to suggest that the Chinese government may approve the deal. 

It also came off the heels of Saturday, when President Donald Trump, after having suggested unhappiness with the deal last week, said he has given his approval “in concept.” He will still need to officially sign off on it before the deal is set into motion.

Because of that, the U.S. Commerce Department staved off a download ban that was set for Sunday, now pushing it back to this coming Sunday, Sept. 27.

Some Republicans, such as Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fl.), have still expressed concern because ByteDance won’t be handing over its secretive algorithm as part of the deal.

What’s in the Deal?

On Saturday, Oracle released more details of its deal with TikTok. Under it, Oracle and Walmart would take a combined 20% stake in TikTok Global.

Still, there’s been much back and forth over how much control ByteDance, will have under the agreement. For his part, Trump has claimed that TikTok Global will “be a brand new company… It will have nothing to do with China.”

However, ByteDance has maintained that it will retain 80% of the stake. The discrepancy here seems to be because 40% of ByteDance is owned by U.S. venture capital firms. Therefore, Trump could technically claim that TikTok Global will be majority-owned by U.S. money.

Trump doubled down Monday and said that he would not approve the deal if ByteDance retained ownership. He added that the Chinese-owned company will “have nothing to do with it, and if they do, we just won’t make the deal.”

Later, Oracle announced that ByteDance will not have any stake in TikTok Global, though this statement heavily conflicts with what is being reported in China.

“Upon creation of TikTok Global, Oracle/Walmart will make their investment and the TikTok Global shares will be distributed to their owners, Americans will be the majority and ByteDance will have no ownership in TikTok Global,” the company said.

According to Walmart and Oracle, if this deal goes through, TikTok Global will pay $5 billion in new tax dollars to the U.S. Treasury over the next few years. As both companies noted, this is just a projection of future corporate taxes, and that estimate could change.

The water around that $5 billion figure was later muddied as Trump claimed that TikTok Global would be donating “$5 billion into a fund for education so we can educate people as to [the] real history of our country — the real history, not the fake history.”

To be clear, Trump is referring to his plans to establish a “patriotic education” commission.

On Sunday, ByteDance said in a statement that this was the first it had heard about a $5 billion education fund.

In fact, TikTok Global never promised to start an education fund. Instead, it promised to create an “educational initiative to develop and deliver an AI-driven online video curriculum to teach children from inner cities to the suburbs a variety of courses from basic reading and math to science, history and computer engineering.” 

That initiative doesn’t seem to have anything to do with that $5 billion tax figure. Since he began pursuing a ban, Trump has vowed that the U.S. will receive some form of commission from a deal with TikTok. As far as it is known, this $5 billion figure is also not that commission.

As previously reported, this deal will allow Oracle to host TikTok’s user data on its cloud service and review TikTok’s code for security. According to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, it would also shift TikTok’s global headquarters from China to the U.S.

On top of that, TikTok’s board members would reportedly have to be approved by the U.S. government, with one being an expert in data security. That person would also hold a top-secret security clearance.

Commerce Department Announces Download Ban

Friday seemed like the beginning of the end for TikTok. That morning, the Commerce Department issued an order that would ban U.S. downloads of not only TikTok but also WeChat starting Sunday night.

Both bans were a result of concerns the Trump administration has that ByteDance and WeChat’s parent company, Tencent, are either already giving or could give U.S. user data to the Chinese government.

The Trump administration has repeatedly said that both apps pose a national security threat.

TikTok and ByteDance have consistently denied these claims, saying that U.S. user data is stored domestically with a backup in Singapore. WeChat, for its part, has also made similar statements.

The download ban was announced in response to two Aug. 6 executive orders from Trump. Those orders ban any U.S.-based transactions with TikTok and WeChat starting on Sept. 20, which is why the Commerce Department set the deadline for this past Sunday.

While this ban would have been much more restrictive for WeChat because a large part of its functionality relies heavily on in-app transactions, for TikTok at least, it would only affect new downloads and updates to the app.

“So if that were to continue over a long period of time, there might be a gradual degradation of services, but the basic TikTok will stay intact until Nov. 12,” Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Fox Business on Friday.

“If there’s not a deal by Nov. 12, under the provisions of the old order, then TikTok would also be, for all practical purposes, shut down.” 

What Happens on Nov. 12?

Ross is referring to another executive order, this one signed on Aug. 14. Notably, it gives ByteDance 90 days to divest from its American assets and any data that TikTok had gathered in the U.S. As Ross pointed out, that requirement could be satisfied if a deal is reached before the deadline.

If that doesn’t happen, the TikTok app could begin to see lags, lack of functionality, and sporadic outages.

However, it’s not just the U.S. One of the big questions that loomed after Oracle and ByteDance confirmed their deal last week was whether or not China would also need to approve it. ByteDance later confirmed that it will need the confirmation of the Chinese government, despite the deal not involving a technology transfer. 

Downloads Soar and TikTok Sues

On Friday, downloads for both apps soared. TikTok was downloaded nearly a quarter of a million times that day, up 12% from the previous day. WeChat was downloaded 10,000 times, up 150%.

The same Friday, TikTok as a company criticized the Commerce Department order, saying it had already committed to “unprecedented levels of additional transparency.”

TikTok added that the order “threatens to deprive the American people and small businesses across the US of a significant platform for both a voice and livelihoods.”

Later Friday, TikTok sued the Trump Administration to stop the download ban. 

On Sunday, a federal judge also halted the download ban for WeChat with a preliminary injunction. The injunction additionally blocks the Commerce Department’s attempt to bar transactions on the app.  

The Commerce Department responded by saying that it’s preparing for a long legal battle.

TikTokers: “Scared, angry, and confused”

“I’ve mostly just been feeling scared, angry, and confused,” TikToker Isabella Avila, known online as onlyjayus, told Rogue Rocket on Monday. “Those are just the main things.” 

Avila has amassed a following of 8.7 million followers on TikTok in a relatively short amount of time. She’s also gained about half a million followers on YouTube and Instagram each.

A couple of months ago, Avila said she thought a potential ban was all just talk; however, as the situation progressed, she said she became more worried.

While she said that she personally thought her career could survive a TikTok ban (thanks in part to a Netflix podcast deal), she added, “The people in-between a 100,000 to a million [followers], they have a platform right now, and if TikTok’s were to be gone, their platform’s pretty much gone if they haven’t built an audience on anything else. 

“This is where we go to express ourselves,” she said. “This is where we go to make videos. I don’t know, TikTok gave everybody a chance to kind of get famous and have a following. That’s what people liked about it. YouTube, it’s really hard to get followers and subscribers. TikTok was a lot easier.” 

Avila also expressed that a ban wouldn’t just be detrimental to creators. 

“I feel like my generation needed an app,” Avila said. “There was Instagram and Twitter, but it was kind of like for the millennials. Gen Z didn’t really have an app, and TikTok kind of fit that spot, so if TikTok’s gone, I don’t know, I feel like Gen Z isn’t really going to have a place.” 

Avila now says she is largely hopeful that TikTok will not be banned in the U.S.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (NBC News) (Axios)

Continue Reading