The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 10.1 Shane Dawson Logan Paul Sociopath Backlash, & More...

Episode Date: October 1, 2018

Latest episode of The Philip DeFranco Show Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup you beautiful bastards, hope you're having a fantastic Monday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show and let's just jump into it. And the first thing we're going to talk about today is one of the most requested stories from over the weekend and that is Shane Dawson popped up back in the news because of his Mind of Jake Paul docuseries. And that's really not surprising given the subject matter and the number of people that have watched this thing. I mean, episode 1 and 2 have gotten past 30 million views together. But also a thing of note and possibly affecting the episodes that are coming up, is there was a good amount of backlash.

Following episode two, you had some people saying Dawson was dehumanizing and stigmatizing people with mental disorders. Some questioning and criticizing the creepy music that's in the background of the series, the random B-roll footage. You also had Logan Paul responding to the series, saying that it was misleading.

Also saying Shane was kind of blending sociopaths and psychopaths. And on the other side of this, we saw Shane Dawson apologizing. Shane posting a relatively long video on Snapchat where he says many things including, I'm sorry if if anybody was offended but you know just and it wasn't even that many people but I and the type of person who like if one person's offended I feel like gross and like and and I feel guilty and my stomach hurts and I'm like, all right, I gotta fix this. So the fact that there were hundreds of

made me feel like, oh my God, I have to say something. But also at the same time on Twitter, we saw kind of different reactions from Shane. In response to one critical tweet he wrote, "'People with severe antisocial personality disorders "'don't have empathy and don't care at all. "'So for anyone to be offended is so confusing to me

"'considering they actually literally don't care, "'like at all, and it's something that offended is so confusing to me considering they actually literally don't care, like at all. And it's something that is rarely even discussed and it can affect lives. But then later that same day he wrote publicly, part three, four and five on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, refilming some stuff today to address the concerns of part two.

But I think it's a good thing and going to make the conversation better and less dramatized. Jake will be in part five. I know it feels like I'm milking it, but trust me, it was necessary. Then on the 30th going on to say, "'As I edit, I realize no matter what I do,, a big group of people are going to be pissed at me.

Either people who hate Jake, people who love Jake, the mental health community, sociopaths, or scariest of all, the Paul family. Happy Sunday. And as far as my response to this whole situation, and keep in mind, I am filming this before episode 3 drops, so I'm not sure how he addresses this controversy. But as far as the criticism of everything being over the top, the cutaways, the music, I think even if you liked it, there is really no denying that. Like there's this one part, and it's my favorite part. There's this part at the end of episode two where Shane's talking about the potential

that someone's teacher might be a sociopath. And for some reason, they use footage from the movie The Faculty. If your teacher's a sociopath, why would she teach you about it? She doesn't want you to know her tricks I'm gonna freeze it there How is this clip of Jon Stewart in the movie the faculty where the teachers are aliens conducive to the conversation is the question? You have kind of those what the hell is going on moments throughout additionally watching through the whole piece

I think would be helpful for Shane to put up a mirror to his piece of content For example after featuring b-roll of a person eating a smaller person, he brings up Logan Paul in the now infamous Suicide Forest video. He hits on the music that's used in the piece. But to me, the weirdest part of it was when he was talking about it in the video and talking about suicide and suicide prevention.

There was like a really loud, sad song playing the whole time. It was like, like I said earlier, suicide, mental illnesses, depression. To me, it was like, oh, this is sad. I'll put a sad song playing the whole time. Like I said earlier, suicide, mental illnesses, depression. To me it was like, oh this is sad, I'll put a sad song. So not saying he's a sociopath, but like that's something that a sociopath would do, right? Be like, oh.

Yeah, cause that would be like mimicking behavior. We have to think of like, because that would make it, he'd feel it elicit the response maybe he's wanting. Suicide is not the answer. And so to this piece, I say it's important to put up a mirror so you can look at this piece of content and go, well, you're using creepy music here. So if we use the same thinking that was mentioned earlier

in the video, I mean, could this be a way to manipulate the audience that's viewing this? And then about 23 minutes in that same video, when Shane kind of changes gears from everything is creepy and Shane is sharing his own story. There is a music change. Are you like a fixer? Yeah. Yeah, because you were like a parentified child.

So you've been like an adult since you were whatever age. Yeah. Yeah. And I think now I'm just at the point where I'm like, I like stay up all night and I'm just lost. Keep in mind, I'm not saying Shane did that to manipulate people, but I think it kind of goes against the point that was sort of made earlier.

Also a big thing I want to hit on here, this is not an attack on Shane Dawson. This isn't the Shane Dawson exposed video. I do think it's important to take into account criticism, relook at pieces and not consider everything hate, which I don't believe Shane is doing. Some people have, but based off of Shane's most recent tweets, it looks like he's taking

the situation seriously. And unlike a lot of people when they receive's most recent tweets, it looks like he's taking the situation seriously. And unlike a lot of people when they receive pushback, especially when it's from a minority of the community, he at least at this point seems very open to look at that and then consider it moving forward. But with all of that said, I think for transparency's sake, it's important to note that I like Shane, we go back. Even while I'm trying to treat this like any story,

there may be bias, but that's also why I wanna pass the question off to you. What's your takeaway from this? Is it all good, bad? Is it just a form of entertainment and people are taking it too serious or no, this is a serious issue? Any and all thoughts, I'd love to see those in the comments down below. And then let's quickly talk about the roller coaster ride that has been the life of Elon Musk and Tesla. Where we last left things, the SEC had just filed a lawsuit against Tesla and Elon Musk. Over the weekend there was a massive announcement.

Musk and Tesla ended up settling with the SEC and as a result of this settlement both Tesla and Elon Musk. And over the weekend, there was a massive announcement. Musk and Tesla ended up settling with the SEC. And as a result of this settlement, both Tesla and Musk must pay $20 million. And according to an SEC press release, the 40 million in penalties will be distributed to harmed investors under a court-approved process. And two, while Musk will be able to stay on as the CEO of Tesla,

he can no longer be the chairman of the board. And so he must leave that role in the next 45 days, and he is not allowed to try and get back into that position for three years. Tesla must also add two new independent directors. Very interestingly, according to this settlement, Tesla will be required to vet Elon Musk's tweets before they go out, which can sound like they're treating

Elon Musk like a child, but also at the same time, it's important to remember that this whole situation is because of a tweet, specifically the now infamous funding secured tweet. Now with all of that said, according to a lot of experts, this is actually a win for Tesla compared to where this could have gone. The lawsuit without it being settled could have been devastating.

One of the big reasons is that the SEC lawsuit was looking to ban Elon Musk from being an officer or director for any publicly traded company. Also connected to everything that transpired over the weekend, Tesla investors got to experience a rollercoaster, the massive dissent once we learned about the lawsuit, and the massive explosion back up after the settlement was reached.

So that's where we are with this story right now, and I'll pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts around all of this? Do you think it makes sense giving the funding-secured tweet and really how the stock was affected by Elon Musk's actions. Or no, do you see this as something else, something more coordinated, maybe an attack.

But from that, I wanna share some stuff I love today and today in awesome brought to you by Postmates. And Postmates, if you don't know, is the fantastic delivery on demand service. Whether you want something from the store, your favorite restaurant, boom, just open up the app, order, they will deliver it to your house, your work, your wherever.

I personally use and love this service and even better, if you've never used it before, if you download it now, you can click the link down below, or just go to postdefranco.com. You enter in offer code Philly D, Postmates will give you $100 in free delivery credit. And the first bit of awesome today is we are doing a limited run and release

of an old design, but with a twist. For you old schoolers that remember the attractive lady in the thumbnail clickbait days, we've modified an old saying and are releasing the brand new Witches Be Crazy shirt! It was initially just going to be a joke shirt that some of the ladies in the office came up with and were getting printed, but with Halloween coming up, we thought it would be fun to release these shirts for a week, and so if you want to snag one, you can in the links down below. Then we got a brand new gameplay trailer for Red Dead Redemption 2.

Oh, I cannot wait for this game to come out. Then I just I had to share the career day sketch on SNL where Adam Driver just does an amazing job. Then we had Nicolas Cage talking to Rolling Stone about a first. We had Life Noggin asking, what if you only took naps? We had Kevin Hart and Tiffany Haddish answering the web's most searched questions. We had Call of Duty and Post Malone teaming up. Then in Personal Awesome, we also put out a bonus video regarding voting. Not so awesome, it only seemingly hit a third of subscription boxes. But if you didn't see it, you can catch up by clicking the link down below.

And if you wanna see the full versions of everything I just shared, the secret link of the day, really anything at all, links as always are in the description down below. And then let's talk about some of the big news happening in California. Over the weekend, California Governor Jerry Brown signed new laws and vetoed nearly as many.

And among them, you have new gun control measures a law that forces publicly traded companies within the state to include women on their board of directors and new net neutrality regulations and those new net neutrality rules are by far the thing that's being most talked about. Officially it's called SBA 22 the law was submitted in August and Brown had until midnight on Sunday to sign it into law which he did which makes California the third state to pass net neutrality law. Now some say that it's actually more than three because states like Vermont have executive orders protecting net neutrality, but that is really seen as a stepping stone and a band-aid solution

until a law can be passed. And as far as the other two of the three, you have Washington and Oregon who have passed their own legislation. However, California's legislation is the most strict of all, matching the levels of protections that the repealed Obama-era rules had. And the reason California's is the strongest

is that the states that have passed their own laws or issued executive orders, they usually just copy the two-page summary of the Obama-era rules. By just copying that, there are loopholes that ISPs and telecom companies can use to get around the regulations. Whereas with California, they copied nearly all 300 pages of the original rule and closed some other loopholes.

And one of the notable loopholes closed is the zero rating loophole. This allows carriers to exempt content from certain companies from counting against a customer's data usage, like their own streaming services. And an example of this is Comcast allows Xfinity Stream, their own streaming service, to not be counted in your data usage, but Netflix is.

And under California's new law, ISPs can still exempt certain content from counting against your data plan, but only if they exempt a whole category. So instead of just making Xfinity Stream exempt, Comcast would need to make exceptions for all streaming services. The law also bans interconnection fees,

which are charges a company pays when its data enters an ISP's network. Now, a big thing to understand here is this is not just a done deal, end of a situation. The Federal Department of Justice was seemingly just waiting for it to be signed because just an hour after Governor Brown signed it into law, DOJ ended up filing a lawsuit against California over it.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions issuing a statement that California was quote, "'Attempting to subvert the federal government's "'deregulatory approach to the internet,' adding, "'Under the Constitution, "'states do not regulate interstate commerce. "'The federal government does.'" And calling this an extreme and illegal state law

attempting to frustrate federal policy. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and the FCC of course also agree that the states don't have the right to enact net neutrality laws. And here they point to their net neutrality repeal where they state the removal of regulations would override any state law. Additionally, Pai is saying the California law

would hurt consumers, saying the law prohibits many free data plans which allow consumers to stream video, music, and the like exempt from any data limits. They have proven enormously popular in the marketplace, especially among lower income Americans. But notwithstanding the consumer benefits, this state law bans them.

But following this, California defended its decision, State Attorney General Javier Becerra saying, "'While the Trump administration continues to ignore "'the millions of Americans who voice strong support "'for net neutrality rules, California, "'home to countless startups, tech giants, "'and nearly 40 million consumers, "'will not allow a handful of power brokers

"'to dictate sources for information "'or the speed at which websites load. "'We remain deeply committed to protecting "'freedom of expression, innovation, and fairness." You also had California Senator Scott Weiner echoing this sentiment, saying, "'We don't think the FCC has the power "'to preempt state action.

"'We are prepared to defend this law.'" But the main thing to understand here is this is a battle that will likely last quite some time. The lawsuit's going to have to go through the courts, and the decision as to whether states can regulate ISP via net neutrality will be decided by these courts. And this is a big deal, not only because California made this move, but because it's believed that New York

and New Mexico will follow suit. And as far as what happens from here, it's ultimately we have to wait and see what happens situation. And then let's talk about possibly the sexiest topic we will ever discuss on this show, and that is international trade agreements. Oh my goodness.

Yes, imports and exports. Oh, calm down. And the reason we're talking about this today is what just happened with the United States and Canada. Now as you're likely aware, one of the signature issues for President Trump during the 2016 campaign was trade. And in particular, he repeatedly singled out NAFTA, otherwise known as the North American Free Trade Agreement.

And for those unfamiliar, NAFTA is a trade agreement between the United States, Mexico, and Canada that has been in place since 1994 and establishes the rules on $1.2 trillion worth of trade. And this agreement was meant to eliminate some of the major trade barriers Between the three countries such as tariffs or taxes on imported goods But Trump has consistently viewed NAFTA as one of the biggest mistakes the United States has ever made Husband signed laughter, which was one of the worst things that ever happened

Manufacturing in that is your you go to New England you go to Ohio, Pennsylvania You go anywhere you want, Secretary Clinton, and you will see devastation where manufacturing is down 30, 40, sometimes 50 percent. NAFTA is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere, but certainly ever signed in this country. And here, Trump is right. On one hand, studies have shown that certain manufacturing industries have been impacted badly by NAFTA. We saw some manufacturing jobs sent to Mexico where labor was cheaper as a result of the agreement NAFTA also arguably allowed companies that employed workers in the manufacturing industry in the US to pay lower wages

And you've had many critics saying the agreement does not do enough to stop Mexico from exploiting its factory workers But on the other hand at the same time other studies have shown that NAFTA has had little impact on these jobs and those Studies saying the loss of manufacturing jobs is more to do with increasing automation rather than competition from foreign markets. Proponents of the deal also saying that NAFTA has led to lower food prices at US grocery stores, that because of tariff-free food imports from Mexico, and they also say it's led to lower gas prices because of the increase in imported oil

from Mexico and Canada. And this group argues that overall, all three countries have seen increased economic growth in trade since NAFTA was signed. Now with all of that said, back in August, the president announced the United States would be abandoning the trade agreement in its current form and saying instead the United States

would be working towards new bilateral trade agreements with Mexico and Canada. And following this, Mexico got on board very quickly, agreeing to resolve several major areas of contention between the two countries. And the most significant of these areas was the auto industry. The agreement calling for 75% of car parts

to be produced in Mexico or the United States for any car sold in North America, which is an increase from the current 62% requirement. And with this, Trump believes that this will create more manufacturing jobs in the United States. The deal also called for better labor standards for auto workers, requiring that 40 to 45% of the work done on a car be done by workers making at least $16 an hour, which is three times what the average Mexican auto worker makes. But a big thing to note here is that this was a verbal agreement between the United States and Mexico, so it was not technically official.

And at the time, Mexico seemed to indicate that they would not make it official unless Canada also agreed to the new provisions. But negotiations between the United States and Canada had stalled since the initial announcement. We also saw Trump specifically calling out Canada for its policy on dairy products. And that's because Canada charges a 270% tariff on some US dairy products.

Although an important note there is that tariff only applies to the surplus amounts that are exported to Canada. But even so, Trump hit on this point and even threatened to retaliate. And in a news conference last week, it did not seem like things were going well with Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau. Did you reject a one-on-one meeting with the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau? It's truck month at GMC. Tackle the open road with added confidence in the 2025 Sierra 1500 Pro Graphite at 0% financing for up to 72 months It won't take long to tell you Neutral's ingredients.

Vodka, soda, natural flavors. So, what should we talk about? No sugar added Neutral Refreshingly simple Yeah, I did Why? Because his tariffs are too high

And he doesn't seem to want to move And I've told him, forget about it And frankly, we're thinking about just taxing cars Coming in from Canada That's the mother load That's the big one We're very about just taxing cars coming in from Canada. That's the mother load. That's the big one We're very unhappy with the negotiations and the negotiating style of Canada Now Trudeau's spokesperson refuted Trump's statement saying there was no meeting to reject as no meeting had actually been requested and in addition to

Trump's comments the United States also set a deadline for September 30th to get a deal done with Canada and over the weekend just as It seemed like the deadline would be missed We got an announcement negotiators announced they had reached a deal on with Canada. And over the weekend, just as it seemed like the deadline would be missed, we got an announcement. Negotiators announced they had reached a deal on a new NAFTA, although according to Trump, it will no longer be called NAFTA, tweeting, "'The new name will be the United States-Mexico-Canada "'agreement, or USMCA.

"'It is a great deal for all three countries, "'solves the many deficiencies and mistakes in NAFTA, "'greatly opens markets to our farmers and manufacturers, "'reduces trade barriers to the United States, "'and will bring all three great nations together "'in competition with the rest of the world. The USMCA is a historic transaction. So the question becomes,

well, what exactly is in this new deal? Well, Canada has agreed to the same provisions as Mexico regarding cars. Starting in 2020, in order for an exported car to be eligible for no tariffs, 75% of its parts must be made in Canada, the United States, or Mexico. By 2023, 40% of the work done on a car

must be done by workers making at least $16 an hour. Also reportedly, the United States will be allowed to send more dairy products into Canada that will not be subject to high tariffs. This particularly important to milk protein concentrate, milk powder, and infant formula. There will also be improved labor and environmental provisions forcing Mexican trucking

companies across the United States border to meet higher safety standards. Also Mexican workers must be given a greater ability to form unions. Additionally, there is increased protections for intellectual property that is patented or trademarked. But also at the same time, there are a few things that are not changing. U.S. tariffs on Mexican and Canadian steel and aluminum will not be lifted. And also the process for each country to challenge trade practices they deem unfair, called Chapter 19, will also stay in place.

And following the announcement of this deal, we saw a lot of people happy. Trump mentioned in a press conference today, So we have negotiated this new agreement based on the principle of fairness and reciprocity. To me it's the most important word in trade, because we've been treated so unfairly by so many nations, all over the world, and we're changing that. Christia Freeland, Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister, praising it as well. Spokesperson for the National Retail Federation saying, We are pleased. The CEO of the Information Technology Industry Council calling this a significant step forward.

But at the same time, you had other groups such as the union organization AFL-CIO being far more cautious, with the president of the organization saying, "'The text we have reviewed, "'even before the confirmation that Canada "'will remain part of NAFTA, "'affirms that too many details still need to be worked out

"'before working people make a final judgment on a deal. "'Our history of witnessing unfair trade deals "'destroy the lives of working families demands the highest level of scrutiny before receiving our endorsement." And what I will say as far as my personal takeaway, as of right now, this looks like a potential win for the president.

I mean, on one point it seems like Trump is following through on a campaign promise. And on the other hand, this situation, which really Trump created, there could have been this massive implosion where all of a sudden Canada was cut out of this deal and who knows what happens from there. And that, at least for now, seems to have been avoided.

And so you have supporters of the president saying that this is a validation of how the president acts and negotiates. Although all of that said, right now there are still some concerns. You have some economists out there saying, "'Well, this all sounds great. "'They believe that many cars

"'will no longer be made in North America "'because it will be too expensive "'under the new requirements.'" You also have the president of USI, United Steelworkers International, say, "'There are provisions that represent improvements "'over NAFTA, but there are also provisions "'that must be removed.'

"'Adding further, we have not evaluated "'what changes resulted from the just concluded agreement "'to include Canada.'" And while this deal has just been recently announced, a lot of the specifics will come out, it's also not a done deal. It still needs to be ratified by Congress before it becomes a law, which, I mean,

anything going through Congress right now is not a sure thing. And so right now we're gonna have to wait to see if there's any more information that comes out, how this moves through Congress. Also, there was another Donald Trump story because this morning when he was having this press conference about this deal, this moment happened. Okay, question? Yeah, go ahead.

Sure. She's shocked that I picked her. It's like in a state of shock. I'm not thinking, Mr. President. That's okay, I know you're not thinking. You never do. I'm sorry? No, go ahead. Go ahead. So he hits her with a, I know you're not thinking, you never do. And if you watch that clip and you're like, oh, well she said, I'm not thinking, he's

kind of, you know, having like a fun back and forth, a kind of a jab, because maybe that could have been disrespectful. What happened is the president said she's in a state of shock and she responded, I'm not, thank you, Mr. President. It's like in a state of shock. I'm not thinking Mr. President. That's okay, I know you're not thinking, you never do. But ultimately it resulted in the situation where it seemed like the president of the

United States was unnecessarily rude to Cecilia Vega. But that said, while this clip has gone semi-viral, I don't, I personally just don't think it moves the needle for anyone. It's not like it's news that Trump is hostile or antagonistic with the media. And personally I think that the people that support the president will say it was a misunderstanding or an attempted joke or people that don't care that he does stuff like this. Saying all of this, the things he does

during the press conferences and the tweets, that's just kind of noise. Ultimately, the only thing or the main thing that matters is policy. Things like the trade deal that's being discussed today. And then I'll pass the question off to you. For you, I mean, we're almost two years in on this, where do you land on this personally?

Do you separate the two? Also, do you have any opinions on the new deal? That's where I'm going to end today's show. Of course, remember, this show is a conversation, so whether it be the last story, the first one, anything in between, let me know what you're thinking in those comments down below. Also, while you're at it, if you like today's show,

you like these daily dives into the news, I do, hit that like button. If you're new here, hit that subscribe button. But with that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco, you've just been filled in, I love yo faces, and I'll see you tomorrow.