Connect with us


Logan Paul Says Andrew Tate’s Rhetoric Is “More Dangerous Than You Can Imagine”



The YouTuber went on to argue that social media companies were acting within their authority by banning Tate. 

Logan Paul Calls Out Andrew Tate

YouTuber Logan Paul warned that online personality Andrew Tate is spreading a “hateful” agenda and criticized fellow creators who give those ideas a platform. 

Tate has exploded on social media over the last several months for spewing misogynistic rhetoric to an audience of primarily teen boys and young men. By mid-August, videos of Tate had racked up over 11 billion views on TikTok. 

Some of the most viral clips of Tate show him saying that rape victims should bear some “responsibility” for what happened to them. He has also said that men “must have a degree of authority” over the women they date and argued that if a woman is dating a man, they “belong to” him.

He said he would respond to a woman who accused him of cheating by going to “bang out the machete, boom in her face, and then grip her up by the neck.”

As his concerning messages began to spread online, so did discussions about how to limit his influence. Social media companies like Meta, TikTok and YouTube responded by banning him (had had previously been booted from Twitter), but fan accounts still re-upload and share his remarks. 

On a Tuesday episode of his podcast, Paul said that creators with large audiences should avoid giving air to Tate.

“I don’t feel like platforming this guy. I don’t feel like giving him the blessing of being my dance partner in the ring,” Paul, now most famous for his boxing bouts, said on “Impaulsive.” “Especially after the social media platforms have made it very clear how they feel about this guy. And I would even put a little call-out here to fellow creators, and even [KSI], like, you wanna re-platform this guy? Anyone, you wanna have him on your shows, you want to give him another opportunity to speak and spread his agenda?”

Concerns About Platforming Hate

Paul’s remarks come at a time when many major creators have opted to share the online stage with Tate. Paul’s brother, Jake, tweeted that while he does not “roll with Andrew Tate,” he does “roll with freedom of speech”. Hen then shared a link to a video Tate made in response to his social media bans. 

YouTuber and boxer KSI also suggested he wanted to fight Tate. While that act does not condone his messaging, many criticized such an idea as it would still give Tate public visibility. 

Paul thinks that by giving Tate any platform, creators are giving him room to widen his reach and message. He is concerned about the consequences of this. 

“The shit that Andrew Tate is saying will have a ripple effect much more dangerous than you can imagine,” he argued. “Because his narrative is truly hateful. His rhetoric has extreme negative energy in it, and it will affect impressionable young people in a way that will not show until years from now and it is dangerous.” 

He then defended the social media companies who opted to expel Tate. 

“Freedom of speech, go for it brother, you can say whatever you want. Go in the courtyard in the mall, stand on the table, and say whatever you want,” Paul said. “But when you are now at the mercy of, you know, an organization that has brought you the visibility that you so desperately seek, and now you want to not play by the rules? Like, that’s just not going to work.” 

Paul continued to question where the line should be drawn when it comes to shutting down personalities who spread dangerous ideas online. 

“So where is your line in the sand?” he asked. “Do we want to let Andrew Tate keep doing this before his subscribers of little fucking TikTok schoolboys start doing negative bad shit to women?” 

“How bad do we want to let it get? When we know where it’s going to lead, you know how this ends.” 

His co-host Mike Majlak agreed that Tate’s popularity has already had an impact on young men. 

“The jokes about violence towards women, about, you know, that type of activity, are at a height right now,” Majlak said.

On TikTok, teachers have already begun posting videos explaining how Tate has impacted the behavior of their young male students. Domestic violence organizations have also expressed concern, claiming they fear his words could inspire men to harm women. 

See what others are saying: (Dexerto) (Mirror)


Halyna Hutchins Family Settles With “Rust” Production, Filming to Resume in 2023



Alec Baldwin said everyone involved was motivated by the “desire to do what is best for Halyna’s son.”

Settlement Reached

The family of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, who was fatally shot on the set of “Rust” last year, reached a settlement with the production over a wrongful death lawsuit on Wednesday. 

The lawsuit was filed in February, several months after Hutchins’ death in New Mexico last October. The cast and crew were rehearsing a scene that involved producer and actor Alec Baldwin pointing a gun toward the camera. Baldwin claims he did not know it was loaded when it fired, killing Hutchins and injuring director Joel Souza. 

The actor also claims he did not actually pull the trigger, but investigators determined it must have been pulled. 

Hutchins’ husband Matthew filed the wrongful death suit on behalf of himself and his young son. It claimed that the production did not follow proper safety procedures and endangered the crew via reckless cost-cutting measures. Baldwin was listed as a defendant, as well as the set’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, first assistant director, Dave Halls, and others involved with the film. 

The amount of the settlement was not disclosed, but as part of the agreement, the production of “Rust” will resume in January 2023. The late cinematographer’s husband will join the project as an executive producer. 

“I have no interest in engaging in recriminations or attribution of blame (to the producers or Mr. Baldwin),” he said in a statement. “All of us believe Halyna’s death was a terrible accident. I am grateful that the producers and the entertainment community have come together to pay tribute to Halyna’s final work.”

A Tribute to Hutchins

Souza will return as the director. In a statement, he said his “every effort on this film will be devoted to honoring” Hutchins.

For his part, Baldwin shared the news of the settlement on his Instagram Wednesday morning.

“Throughout this difficult process, everyone has maintained the specific desire to do what is best for Halyna’s son,” he wrote. “We are grateful to everyone who contributed to the resolution of this tragic and painful situation.”

According to The Los Angeles Times, while Gutierrez-Reed and Halls were not part of the settlement, if a judge approves it, the allegations against them will be resolved.

There is still an ongoing criminal probe happening separately from this lawsuit. It is unclear what impact the settlement will have on that, if any. 

Last month, Santa Fe District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies sent a letter to the New Mexico Board of Finance seeking additional funding to prosecute up to four people over the incident, including Baldwin. So far, no charges have been filed. 

In April, the New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau fined the production after it found multiple safety violations on set. 

See what others are saying: (The Los Angeles Times) (The Hollywood Reporter) (Deadline)

Continue Reading


The Try Guys Address Removal of Ned Fulmer: “We Had No Idea This Was Going On”



The group said that by severing ties with Fulmer, it felt like they were losing a friend. 

“That Is Not What We Stand For”

Digital comedy and sketch group The Try Guys posted a video on Monday night explaining the recent removal of member Ned Fulmer. 

Last week, the Internet was filled with speculation that Fulmer, who is married with children, was having an affair with a staffer for The Try Guys. Fulmer confirmed the reports, claiming he had a “consensual workplace relationship.” The Try Guys quickly announced that Fulmer would no longer be working with the group as the result of an internal review. 

In Monday’s video, the remaining three members, Eugene Lee Yang, Zach Kornfeld, and Keith Habersberger, explained what led to their decision to remove Fulmer. While the trio noted there were legal issues that prevented them from sharing certain details, they wanted to be as transparent as possible. 

“On Labor Day weekend, multiple fans alerted us that they had seen Ned and an employee engaging in public romantic behavior,” Habersberger explained. “We reached out to check on that employee and Ned confirmed the reports, and since confirmed that this had been going on for some time, which was obviously very shocking to us.”

He emphasized that the rest of the group “had no idea this was going on.” 

After this, The Try Guys reached out to a variety of lawyers and HR professionals to make sure they handled the situation correctly. 

“This is something we took very seriously,” Yang said. “We refused to sweep things under the rug. That is not who we are, and that is not what we stand for.” 

Removing Fulmer From Content

They decided to immediately remove Fulmer from work activities and hired an HR rep to conduct a review. Fulmer was also withdrawn from releases pending the results of that review. 

As part of this, his video section was erased, he was digitally taken out of some content, and he was not included in merch drops. The Try Guys said this was a long and tedious process. 

“Honestly, I want to give major props to our editing staff for how deftly they handled that,” Kornfeld said. “There are several videos that we have deemed as fully unreleasable, you will never see them, and that is due to his involvement. And that is a decision that has cost us lots of money.” 

“We will not be able to recoup that money,” he continued. “But it’s a decision we stand by proudly.” 

The group declined to share details of the review but claimed it found that Fulmer engaged in “conduct unbecoming” of the team. Because of this, Yang, Kornfeld, and Habersberger gave written consent on Sept. 16 to ax Fulmer as a manager and employee of The Try Guys company. 

The three said they were always planning to make a public statement about their decision, but were initially waiting out of respect to the families and employees involved. As online speculation arose, they chose to deal with it sooner. 

“We’re losing a friend, we’re losing someone we built a company with, we have countless memories with, we just made a TV show together,” Kornfeld said. “I’m sure many of you feel the same way.” 

According to the group, some upcoming videos featuring Fulmer will be edited to remove him. They said they are currently taking time to reimagine their channel. 

See what others are saying: (USA Today) (People) (Deadline)

Continue Reading


Bruce Willis Denies Rumors He Sold His Likeness For Deepfake Use



Deepfakes face criticism from Hollywood to social media.

Willis Debunks Rumors

Actor Bruce Willis denied rumors over the weekend that he sold his likeness to the deepfake company DeepCake. 

Willis agreed last year for his face to be used in a commercial for a Russian telecoms company. For this commercial, DeepCake digitally edited Willis’ face onto a Russian actor. This sparked rumors that Willis had sold the rights to his likeness for the company to use in future projects. 

However, both management for Willis and DeepCake itself denied any partnership or agreement for these rights.

“Bruce couldn’t sell anyone any rights, they are his by default,” DeepCake said.

Agreements for the AI generation of actors have been heard of before, however. Recently, actor James Earl Jones agreed for his voice to be technologically generated for the voice of Darth Vader in the Star Wars franchise. 

Deepfakes Online

This comes as deepfakes are facing mounting criticism online, including from prominent YouTube personality and author, Hank Green. He recently tweeted about a channel that uses similar deepfake technology and AI-voice generation to parody popular YouTube creators. He stressed his concern that while the channel in question may not be nefarious, this technology could end up being harmful. 

“There are ways to do this that would be much worse, more mean spirited, and more exploitative than this,” Green said. “And I’m very worried about what that will look like, because if this is working (and allowed), people will do it.”

Among other issues, Green mentioned these videos could abuse monetization and sponsorship opportunities while exploiting someone else’s face and brand. Green even implored YouTube to evaluate its terms of service as the popularity of deepfakes rise. 

See what others are saying: (BBC) (Mashable) (The Telegraph)

Continue Reading