- Harry Styles is selling $26 dollar T-shirts that encourage social distancing, with 100% of the profits going to the COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund.
- Many argue that encouraging people to donate directly or doing so himself would be a better move, rather than losing some of that money to cover production expenses.
- Others took issue with him asking people to buy unnecessary items when so many are financially struggling and worried about those who now have to manufacture and deliver the shirts.
- But fans say this strategy gets people to donate who otherwise wouldn’t have since they’ll receive something in return.
Harry Announces “Stay Home. Stay Safe,” Merch
Singer Harry Styles revealed Tuesday that he was selling t-shirts to help raise funds for those fighting the coronavirus, but his plan was quickly met with some pushback online.
For $26, fans can get a white tee with a black slogan printed on the front and back. The front reads,“’Stay home. Stay safe. Protect each other,’ while the back reads,“’This T-shirt fights COVID-19 treat people with kindness.’
According to the official website where you can pre-order the item, 100% of profits will be donated to the COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund for the World Health Organization, powered by the UN Foundation.
“In times like these, it is more important than ever to remember the power of people,” Styles said in a statement to fans. “If you are able to help, please donate where you can. Stay home, self-isolate, and protect each other.”
People Raise Concerns
While many were excited about the news and rushing to order their shirts, others raised several concerns.
Some argued that encouraging people to donate directly or doing so himself would be a better move, rather than losing some of that money to cover production expenses. Many were also concerned about those who would now have to make and deliver the shirts.
“Quick reminder that 100% of the profits does not = 100% of the cost,” a Twitter user wrote. “ It is more effective for you to donate directly to the charity. You do not need this merch. You do not need to be encouraging factory workers being comissioned to make this.”
Quick reminder that 100% of the profits does not = 100% of the cost. It is more effective for you to donate directly to the charity. You do not need this merch. You do not need to be encouraging factory workers being comissioned to make this.— Emily Linka ♿️🏳️🌈 (@emilylinka) April 7, 2020
“How is making these t shirts safe? what about all the people making these and dispatching them? they’re clearly not ‘staying home’ and ‘staying safe,”’ one user asked, while another wrote, “Don’t people have to go out to work to manufacture these shirts? Isn’t that really contradictory?”
how is making these t shirts safe? what about all the people making these and dispatching them? they’re clearly not ‘staying home’ and ‘staying safe’— A | (@finelineoverhs1) April 7, 2020
I love Harry, and this message, and I know a lot of money is going to be donated which is amazing… but I have to raise the question…don’t people have to go out to work to manufacture these shirts? Isn’t that really contradictory?— aiden ✯ misses Louis (@ToBeSoLounly) April 7, 2020
Others took issue with Styles asking people to buy unnecessary products when so many have lost their jobs and are struggling to pay their bills.
Also, it’s incredibly tone deaf to ask fans to spend even more money now, when most of normal people are struggling to make rent right now. The US has had the biggest surge in unemployment in years, for example. A lot of my friends from the UK are losing their jobs as well.— Leonie (@pinkisloudest) April 7, 2020
or you know as y’all are millionaires you could give the money yourself and not ask to people who might have lost their job to give even more money away.— chloé. W△LLS (@chloe_ledx) April 7, 2020
Fans Defend Harry
But others hit back at the concerns and pointed out that the shirts are not expected to ship until 4-6 weeks after receiving a purchase confirmation, which might signal that manufacturers are holding off on production or slowing it down to ensure safety. However, no information about those details have actually been confirmed or explained.
The shirts are on preorder for 4-6 weeks, and even then it could be extended depending how things develop, so it’s highly likely that those workers ARE staying home right now and that’s why the shirts aren’t being manufacturered and shipped out as we speak— g (@kangawhoo) April 8, 2020
Others supported the strategy, arguing that some people who would not have donated before might do so now because they’ll get something in return.
It’s cause it could encourage people to indirectly donate who wouldn’t otherwise. The UN foundation still gets the money and the person purchasing the shirt feels like they’re getting something in return since people don’t like spending money and not getting something in return— m🍉✨ (@hsmoons) April 8, 2020
The backlash is not completely unexpected since Rita Ora faced similar criticism last month after releasing her own merchandise to raise funds for the same organization.
But this move is also not surprising coming from Styles. Earlier this year, he launched the Treat People With Kindness (TPWK) movement and created a range of merchandise with profits distributed to local charities around the world.
Despite some criticism, most people online generally believe that the intentions behind these merch releases are good and are ultimately benefiting an important cause.
See what others are saying: (PopBuzz) (Forbes) (Independent)
Joe Rogan Holds Spot As Top Podcaster on Spotify in 2022
Earlier this year, some threatened to boycott the platform over Rogan and the health misinformation he shared on his show.
For the third year in a row, “The Joe Rogan Experience” was the number one podcast on Spotify, the company revealed in its yearly “Wrapped” feature on Wednesday.
“The Joe Rogan Experience” became exclusive to Spotify in 2020 after the host signed a lucrative deal with the audio streaming platform. “Call Her Daddy” by Alex Cooper, also a Spotify exclusive, followed Rogan on the charts. “Anything Goes With Emma Chamberlain,” which will become exclusive to the service next year, came in third.
Rogan’s podcast has made several headlines over the last year as the podcaster faced backlash from medical professionals and major musicians for touting COVID-19 misinformation. Niel Young asked to have his music removed from Spotify in protest of the company’s deal with Rogan, and several other artists soon followed.
Just a few days later, several clips resurfaced of Rogan using a racial slur. Many called to boycott Spotify for platforming Rogan, but his popularity did not seem to fade by the year’s end.
There are over four million podcasts available to stream on Spotify and over the last year, the platform has expanded into new markets.
It also has started launching podcasts from several high-profile figures, including Kim Kardashian’s “The System,” and Meghan Markle’s “Archetypes.” Both of those debuted mid-year and did not crack the annual top-five list.
Comedian Gives David Beckham Ultimatum: Exit Role at Qatar World Cup Or £10K in Donations Gets Shredded
“Not just the money, but also your status as a gay icon will be shredded,” Joe Lycett said in a video.
Pressure on Beckham
Comedian Joe Lycett posted a video on Sunday saying he would shred £10,000 if soccer star David Beckham does not pull out of his deal to be an ambassador for the Qatar World Cup.
Ahead of the event, which kicks off on Nov. 20, many have been raising concerns about human rights abuses in Qatar. The country criminalizes homosexuality, and it can be punishable by death.
Beckham’s deal to represent the country was reportedly worth £10 million, and many are frustrated that the athlete took such a big check from a country with known anti-LGBTQ laws. In his video, Lycett noted that Beckham has been openly supportive of his gay fans and was the first premiere footballer to do a photoshoot with a gay magazine.
In an attempt to get Beckham to bow out of his role, Lycett, who is pansexual, offered an ultimatum.
“If you end your relationship with Qatar, I’ll donate this £10,000 of my own money, that’s a grand for every million you’re reportedly getting, to charities that support queer people in football,” he stated. “However, if you do not, at midday next Sunday, I will throw this money into a shredder.”
“Not just the money, but also your status as a gay icon will be shredded.”
Beckham’s Reputation “Shredded”
Lycett said he would livestream the money shredding if that’s what the situation comes to. If Beckham does not back out of the World Cup, Lycett noted he will be forced to “commit what might be a crime,” as destroying legal tender is against the law in the U.K.
“Although even then, I reckon I’ll get off more lightly than I would if I got caught whacking off a lad in Doha,” Lycett quipped.
Lycett then linked to a website titled https://benderslikebeckham.com/, which includes a written version of his message, as well as a countdown to when he will either shred the cash or send it to a non-profit.
Lycett is not the only U.K star to raise concerns about issues in Qatar. Singer Dua Lipa shut down speculation that she would be performing at the World Cup over the weekend by saying she has no intentions to visit the country until “it has fulfilled all the human rights pledges it made when it won the right to host” the event.
Other stars, however, including BTS’s Jung Kook, are slated to take the stage.
See what others are saying: (CNN) (The Hollywood Reporter) (BBC News)
Federal Judge Dismisses Dave Portnoy’s Lawsuit Against Insider
The online personality called the decision “disappointing” but not “overly surprising.”
A federal judge in Massachusetts dismissed a defamation lawsuit Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy filed against Business Insider, several outlets reported on Monday.
According to a report from The Washington Post, Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV decided that Portnoy did not successfully prove that the news outlet acted with “actual malice” or “reckless disregard for the truth” when it published two articles about his sexual relationships.
The first article, published in Nov. 2021, detailed stories from women who said they had “violent” and traumatizing sex with Portnoy. A second piece was published in Feb. 2022 and includes sources who said Portnoy filmed sexual encounters without consent.
Portnoy has repeatedly denied the allegations and maintained that the sexual encounters were consensual and positive. He sued Insider in February following the publication of the second article.
Per The Post, Saylor tossed the complaint because it did “not allege that Insider’s anonymous sources were fake, or that the articles misrepresented what the women told [Insider’s reporters].”
“Furthermore, plaintiff admits that Insider investigated its first article for months, requested an interview with him, sought his comment before publication, included his denials, and hyperlinked to his news conference and his lawyer’s full denial letter,” the judge’s decision continued.
Saylor also noted that Insider corroborated their sources’ claims with photos, texts, medical reports, receipts, and accounts from their friends.
While Portnoy argued that these stories were an invasion of privacy as they pertained to his private sex life and the women involved were not his employees, Insider held that their claims were relevant.
“When a rich, famous, and powerful person uses their power in a way that is harmful to other people, it is newsworthy,” Nicholas Carlson, Insider’s Global Editor-in-Chief, previously wrote in an editor’s note.
Saylor largely agreed with that, saying that issues of consent and power are part of “legitimate public interest,” including in instances that arise outside “the employment context.”
An Insider spokesperson told The Post that the outlet is “pleased and gratified that the judge dismissed his complaint.”
“We knew from the start that our reporting was careful, fair, and accurate, but it’s gratifying to see that validated in court,” Julia Black, one of the reporters named in the lawsuit, tweeted in response to the news.
For his part, however, Portnoy has criticized the judge’s decision, calling it “disappointing” but not “overly surprising.”
“Every single lawyer said it was an uphill battle, every legal expert said it was an uphill battle, that it’s almost impossible for a public figure to prove defamation,” he said in a video posted to Twitter. “The laws are stacked against me.”
Portnoy said that he turned in texts and other evidence he believed would prove the sexual encounters were positive but claimed “the judge didn’t even really look at the evidence.”
He later read an excerpt from the judge’s decision that said Portnoy “can’t seek to prove actual malice by challenging statements that defendants did not publish.”
“In other words: Business Insider did not publish any of my shit, I can’t talk about it, it’s not part of the case,” Portnoy explained. “It’s inadmissible.”
He said he could appeal the decision if he wanted, but added he was not optimistic about how that would turn out for him. He floated the idea of suing the sources themselves, noting he thinks he would stand a better chance in such a case.