- On Monday and Tuesday, a host of celebrities said they would be joining the Stop Hate for Profit campaign by freezing their Instagram accounts for 24 hours on Wednesday.
- The move is an attempt to pressure Facebook to better combat misinformation and hate speech on the platform, which owns Instagram.
- The list of celebrities involved includes Kim Kardashian West, Mark Ruffalo, Demi Lovato, Jennifer Lawrence, Katy Perry, Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio, Michael B. Jordan, and Rosario Dawson, among others.
- Many online have criticized this movement as simply performative, saying such as short freeze won’t actually accomplish anything.
- Jim Steyer, the chief executive of Common Sense Media, a nonprofit that’s part of the campaign, has said the freeze is only the first part of a larger round of messaging.
Stars Join Stop Hate for Profit Campaign
A host of celebrities paused their Instagram accounts for 24 hours starting Wednesday to demand that Facebook take better action against misinformation and hate speech.
Though the protest is mainly taking place on Instagram, Facebook is the main focus of the movement because it owns the photo-sharing platform.
On Monday, celebrities such as Mark Ruffalo, Jennifer Lawrence, and Sasha Baron Cohen announced that they would be taking part in the campaign known as Stop Hate for Profit.
“Facebook claims they address hate, yet they continue to look the other way as racist, violent groups and posts sow division and split America apart – only taking steps after people are killed,” Ruffalo said.
“While they share empty talk about voting, they continue allowing blatant lies and misinformation on election to spread–undermining our democracy. That’s why this Wednesday, I am “freezing” my Instagram account to tell Facebook to #StopHateForProfit.”
On Tuesday, a host of other celebrities joined the boycott, including Kim Kardashian West, who made a very similar statement to that of Ruffalo’s. In addition to Instagram, Kardashian West said she would also be freezing her Facebook page for 24 hours.
What is Stop Hate for Profit?
According to Stop Hate for Profit’s website, it is a campaign aimed at holding “social media companies accountable for hate on their platforms.”
“Social media must prioritize people over profit, and they must do it now,” the campaign added.
Notably, the campaign is made up of several civil rights organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League and the NAACP.
On its website, the campaign cites several recent controversies on Facebook, including one involving a militia event for counterprotests in Kenosha, Washington. That event was flagged by users for promoting violence after the police shooting of Jacob Blake. When the page originally vanished, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the platform had removed the event; however, BuzzFeed News later reported that the militia group itself had taken down the event first.
As for why this campaign is targetting Facebook and Instagram specifically, it said, “Other social media companies have heard our message and started to step up.”
It then went on to list examples of how it believes Twitter, Reddit, and YouTube have addressed misinformation and hate speech, adding, “While these steps are not sufficient, they show a commitment toward real progress.”
“More importantly, these companies are sitting at the table with us and actively working to take additional steps to protect the civil rights of their users, tackle hate and harassment on their platforms, and safeguard our democracy.”
Social Media Rips into Celeb-Driven Campaign
The Instagram freeze has been met with a hefty amount of criticism and sarcasm from social media users online.
For instance, below Mark Ruffalo’s Monday tweet, many were skeptical that the protest’s short time frame would ever result in lasting change.
Wow. A whole day. That’ll show ‘em. 🙄— 😷 Elle Chestnut 🦆🏒 (@CopperSorrel) September 15, 2020
I’d rather see a “freeze” for an entire month. I don’t think a day will accomplish much, if anything.— AJ Strong (@aj_strong) September 15, 2020
In a similar post Ruffalo made to Facebook Thursday morning, one user said:
“How about you make some really big statement and just delete and get off of these social media platforms all together! They’re making billions of dollars and if you think boycotting for a 24 hour period is going to make even the slightest dent, I think you’re sadly mistaken. I’m in the process of deleting all my social media accounts even though I have a Business and it will hurt. Doing it anyway because there has to be a better and more responsible way to promote my business.”
Stop Hate for Profit’s July Campaign
Encouraging businesses to pull out of Facebook is actually an effort the Stop Hate for Profit campaign has already engaged in.
In July, the campaign persuaded more than 1,000 advertisers to pause their ad spending on the platform. Notably, that included big names like Adidas, Reebok, Best Buy, Chipotle, Coca-Cola, Target; however, a later report showed that even between boycotters and other reduced spenders, Facebook’s ad revenue in July didn’t really suffer all that much.
Because of that, some have continued to question how a single-day Instagram boycott will pressure Facebook. Some have also drawn parallels between this movement and June’s one-day #BlackoutTuesday Instagram trend, which was understood as a way to show solidarity with Black victims of police brutality and racism. During that event, some on social media accused others of simply engaging in a “performative” stunt. Others argued that such posts could actually hurt the Black Lives Matter movement by silencing critical hashtags and Black voices behind the initial campaign.
Now, people like Jenna Golden, the head of a consulting firm in Washington, have denounced the Stop Hate for Profit campaign as “worthless if temporary and short-lived (which they always are.)”
“If anything, they shine a light on the fact that we cannot live without these platforms since everyone always comes back (brands included.),” she added.
While there has been serious concern from many, others have been supportive of celebrities taking part in the campaign.
“I’m in!! Facebook is destroying minds, friendships, families, businesses,” one person tweeted in reply to Sasha Baron Cohen. “The false information that is being believed by previously rational people is destructive beyond belief. It has to stop.”
Jim Steyer, the chief executive of Common Sense Media, a nonprofit group that has joined the campaign, told The New York Times on Tuesday that the Instagram freeze is just the beginning of a larger awareness campaign.
Steyer added that once the 24-hour expires on Thursday, celebrities will begin sharing educational messages aimed specifically at their younger followers. He said those messages will promote democracy and will offer explanations into how social media platforms spread misinformation, broadcast hate speech, and allow far-right groups to form online.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (Axios) (CNBC)
Trisha Paytas Departs From “Frenemies” Podcast With Ethan Klein
The announcement came after Paytas and co-host Ethan Klein engaged in a heated argument on the most recent episode of their show.
Paytas and Klein Argue
YouTuber Trisha Paytas announced Tuesday that they are stepping down from the “Frenemies” podcast with Ethan Klein.
Paytas, who uses they/them pronouns, posted a 22-minute long video explaining their decision. The departure comes after Paytas and Klein got in a heated argument on the most recent episode of “Frenemies,” which paying members had access to on Monday and the general public received access to on Tuesday.
The dispute started when Paytas appeared unenthusiastic about a new advice segment that was added to the show. Klein then made a comment about how Paytas contributes nothing to “Frenemies” and just shows up to film, which ignited a fight about creative differences the two have when it comes to the production of the podcast.
Paytas seemed overall frustrated that they do not have more input on the show and that their ideas are allegedly often dismissed.
“I never pick the costumes, I never do the Vlogs, I give so many ideas,” they said. “I say dancing for the vlogs, I give all these ideas and you don’t…I don’t think it’s a good segment.”
Paytas also mentioned that they get no say on new hires even though Klein uses 5% of the podcast’s revenue, as well as money earned from highlight episodes of the podcast, to pay the crew and cover production costs. Klein, however, argued that he does not need to run new hires by Paytas because those people are hired as employees for his production company, H3 Productions, which produces and airs “Frenemies.”
“These are employees of our production company,” he said.
“It’s literally about we are producing the show and I am taking a cut, I feel like that is beyond reasonable,” he later added.
Klein claimed that he already gives Paytas 50% of everything else, which he argues is an incredibly good deal considering H3 Productions does all the backend work. Paytas still felt differently and said that “Frenemies” should have its own employees.
After the argument escalated, Paytas walked off the set holding back tears and the episode ended. Many found Paytas’ comments, specifically the ones referencing the crew and their pay, to be rude and disrespectful.
Paytas Leaves “Frenemies”
On Tuesday morning, Paytas posted a video announcing and explaining their departure. They claimed that the crew was frustrated and did not want to film with Paytas the next day, partially because the segment Paytas had slammed came from a new hire.
Paytas stressed that wanting more money was not their issue. Instead, they said they truly just wanted the show to be more of a 50/50 partnership creatively. Paytas said that while they understand Klein produces the show, they would have loved to pitch in on producing as well, but often just felt like an outsider.
“I do feel like I contributed half to Frenemies, building the H3 channel,” Paytas explained. “Like I would have loved to have Frenemies on my channel and build up my channel. I could have produced it, I could have built sets, I’m capable of this stuff.”
Paytas also clarified that they have no issue with the crew. While Paytas said they were not sorry for bringing these issues up, they were sorry for how the message was delivered.
They added that in the end, they really felt like they brought an underappreciated value to the show. Paytas also said that in the beginning of this partnership, they were under the impression that they would be building something entirely new with Klein.
“If I knew I was coming in as a third H3 show, like I swear hand to god I would not have done it,” they said.
Paytas added a lengthy comment below the video after it was posted, saying they were leaving “to ease the tension everywhere.”
“I don’t want to be the toxicity in their machine,” Paytas continued. “And I can feel that I am. And it’s not good for anyone involved.”
Klein and Paytas Lash Out on Twitter
Klein responded to the video on Tuesday. In two posts he joked about it being National Best Friend’s Day and asked what he should do with the 4,000 “Frenemies” hoodies he has. In a more serious tweet, he said he was “gutted” about the situation.
“Trisha’s video this morning was a total surprise to me,” he added. “I don’t really know what more I can say or do. I’m very sorry to all the fans of frenemies, I know how much it meant to everyone, I did everything I humanly could to save it.”
Things escalated later in the day when Paytas posted a second video further explaining their decision to leave the podcast. They said the last thing they ever wanted to do was disrespect the crew, and again emphasized that money was never their issue.
Paytas also acknowledged that they should have never brought up money on the podcast or in front of the crew in the first place. Things, however, continued to spiral on Twitter as Paytas and Klein engaged in a stormy back-and-forth.
Among other things, Klein said he was angry that Paytas’ fans were sending hate to the crew members online. He said he reached out to Paytas because he was upset with the way they handled things but said he will ultimately always cherish his experience making “Frenemies.”
Paytas responded to him and insisted they were never rude to the crew themself. Paytas also shared text messages, accusing Klein of being misleading and flip-flopping on how the money for production costs was spent. Paytas is receiving a considerable amount of backlash for one of the texts they shared, as one screenshot shows them making an antisemitic remark to Klein.
Crew members also engaged in online discourse about the news, including Dan from H3 Productions, who accused Paytas of lying in their videos. According to Dan, the crew was actually fully prepared to film with Paytas the next day and Klein was the one to cancel the shoot.
Dan also said that the new hire was not the person who came up with the segment Paytas took issue with and instead was just the person who presented and prepared it.
Klein and Paytas later deleted most of their tweets attacking each other. Both said they should not have aired those feelings and messages on Twitter.
Paytas Apologizes To Fans and Klein
On Wednesday morning, Paytas apologized to Klein and others who worked on “Frenemies,” saying they were “embarrassed” by the situation. In a separate tweet, Paytas apologized to fans for ending things so turbulently.
“I feel horrible,” they wrote. “This is the worst feeling to see people think I’m this heartless monster who doesn’t do anything wrong. I have been in the wrong so many times on frenemies, they’ve been really wonderful to me.”
Paytas then uploaded a third video titled “I’m Sorry.” In it, they said the whole situation had been blown out of proportion and that the first two videos were meant to clarify issues but only made things worse. They again apologized for leaving the podcast and for disappointing fans.
“I don’t know how to make the situation right…I don’t know what to do,” Paytas said.
Showtime Will Process Refunds After Crashing During Paul Vs. Mayweather Fight
Many said they were unable to watch the highly anticipated pay-per-view event because of technical difficulties.
Showtime To Issue Refunds
Showtime is processing refunds for customers who could not watch Sunday’s highly anticipated fight between YouTuber Logan Paul and boxing champion Floyd Mayweather because of technical difficulties on the streaming platform.
The night of the event, Twitter was full of users complaining that Showtime had crashed during the fight. The company released a statement saying it was “aware that some customers have been having trouble accessing tonight’s Pay Per View event” and was “working diligently to resolve the issue and will redress customers appropriately.”
Showtime Support’s Twitter account later told people to return to the event in ten minutes, though that still did not resolve the issue for many viewers.
In a tweet on Monday, the service said anyone who purchased the fight via Showtime’s website or app but was unable to watch it could request a refund.
What Happened During the Fight?
The fight ultimately lasted eight rounds, ending without a knockout or winner. After the match, Mayweather said Paul was “better” than he anticipated.
“He’s a tough, rough competitor,” he continued. “It was good action, to have fun and I was surprised by him tonight. Good little work, good guy.”
“I don’t want anyone to tell me anything is impossible ever again,” Paul told reporters. “The fact that I’m in here with one of the greatest boxers of all time proves that the odds can be beat.”
A report from The New York Times said that both Paul and Mayweather “assuredly took home millions” from the event, but exactly how much they made is still a mystery.
See what others are saying: (The Hollywood Reporter) (The New York Times) (The Wrap)
Amouranth Says Twitch Suspended Ads on Her Channel Without Warning
Amouranth claims Twitch never specified what made her channel unsuitable for ads, but many have pointed to her controversial hot tub streams, which are technically allowed under the platform’s guidelines.
Amouranth Reveals Twitch Ad Suspension
Twitch streamer Kaitlyn Siragusa, known online as Amouranth, said Tuesday that the platform indefinitely suspended ads on her channel without any warning or communication.
Siragusa has become known for her hot tub streams, a trend that has recently stirred controversy on Twitch. The platform’s terms of service technically allow streamers to wear bathing suits so long as they provide appropriate coverage and the person is streaming from a location where swimwear is standard attire. Hut tub streams fit this bill, but some believe they cross a line and are in bad taste. Others, however, think the largely female streamers participating in the trend should be allowed to continue these streams and are doing no harm.
Twitch has largely stayed out of this issue, though the company previously said it had its eyes on the situation. Now, according to Siragusa, the company might be taking a stand.
“Yesterday I was informed that Twitch has Indefinitely Suspended Advertising on my channel,” she wrote on Twitter, claiming the company did not reach out to tell her.
“I had to initiate the conversation after noticing, without any prior warning, all the ads revenue had disappeared from my Channel Analytics.”
“This is an ALARMING precedent,” she continued. She claimed that even if content falls within the site’s terms of service, Twitch has the ability to “target individual channels” and decide what is and is not “advertiser friendly” even though there are no clear guidelines for this.
“There is no known policy for what results in a streamer being put on this blacklist,” Siragusa added. “With characteristic opacity, The only thing twitch made clear is that it is unclear whether or when my account can be reinstated.”
While it looks like Twitch never specified what about her channel was not advertiser-friendly, people have unsurprisingly pointed to her hot tub streams. Twitch has not issued a comment on the matter, but its alleged decision to demonetize Siragusa would be a major one. According to Kotaku, the platform has never used its power to demonetize a creator before.
Creators Respond to Amouranth’s Claim
Online, some have cheered Twitch’s alleged decision while others have slammed the platform for its lack of communication. Several creators have echoed Siragusa’s concerns that it sets a dangerous precedent when it comes to what kind of content the site can crack down on.
“Why is it that they just didn’t come over and say, ‘stop doing this, or we are going to demonetize you.’ You know what I mean?” streamer Asmongold asked during a stream on Tuesday.
“Look, I understand people are getting a hard-on because they’re happy this thing happened because they don’t like hot tub streamers, I get that,” he continued. “But you understand what she’s saying, she’s not wrong! She’s not wrong in saying this, this is true. And them not talking to her at all about it?”
Streamer and adult film star Mia Malkova shared his concerns and confusion about Twitch not reaching out to Siragusa first.
“No statement/warning is ridiculous and no way to treat the people that use their platform,” Malkova said in a tweet to Siragusa.
On Twitter, streamer Devin Nash called out those who celebrated the demonetization, claiming that while some users might agree with Twitch in this instance, the move could impact a creator they support in the future.
“If you think this stops at sexual content, think again,” he wrote.
One of Twitch’s most popular streamers, xQc, who was previously very critical of hut tub streams, seemed to imply that he felt Siragusa’s demonetization signaled a potential issue for everyone on Twitch. He encouraged people to “chill out” until there is more communication from Twitch on the matter, but added that this means “things are a little bit adaptive” on the site.
“There’s a lot of people that do the same content that she does,” he said on a Tuesday stream. “And if everybody does the same content, and something was [against the terms of service], if one got banned, you guys would all say, ‘Look at the other guys that aren’t being banned.’ But now that this is against her and she loses her ads, nobody is saying, ‘But what about the other guys? Why aren’t they losing their ads?’”
He later added that this move “might have saved everybody from losing their ads” and that Siragusa “might be a scapegoat” for other streamers, but did not elaborate on that point.