The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 12.7 Ariana Grande Backlash, ‘Blackfishing’ Controversy, Gene Edited Babies Cause Outcry & More!

Episode Date: December 7, 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 Friday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show And if you're new here on Fridays, I do things a little bit different. On Fridays I try to cover more of the viewer requested stories from the week And so with that said let's just jump into it. And the first thing we're gonna talk about today is actually this massive news around Fortnite and it was not because of the season 7 news which the way they're able to change the game constantly is amazing to me I'm horrible at it almost never play it, but I always end up finding myself watching it But the news that we saw come out this week is that Epic Games, who makes Fortnite, they are being sued by rapper 2Milly. And the reason is because of this Fortnite emote.

And the reason for this is 2Milly, aka Terrence Ferguson, he has filed a copyright lawsuit claiming that this emote is copyright infringement of his Millie Rock dance. And following this, I've seen a lot of debate online as to whether this choreography can be copywritten. But what was really interesting, the lawsuit we saw this. The lawsuit reading, However, Epic has consistently sought to exploit African-American talent in particular in Fortnite by copying their dances and movements. Then referencing a dance from the music video Drop It Like It's Hot, named the Tidy emote. The Carlton from Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, named the Fresh emote.

Donald Faison's dance from Scrubs, named the Dance Moves emote. And adding upon information and belief, Epic did not seek consent or authorization to use any of these movements or dances. And following this, some have referenced previous tweets like one from Donald Faison writing, Dear Fortnite, I'm flattered though part of me thinks I should talk to a lawyer. At first, I didn't know if he was being serious, but at a recent Scrubs cast reunion, he was asked to do the dance and he said, quote, If you want to see it, you can play Fortnite because they jacked that shit. I don't get no money. That's what y'all are thinking, right? Somebody got paid., no, I did not somebody stole that shit and it's not mine anymore

But we have also seen some other artists like chance the rapper who in the past has tweeted fortnight She put the actual rap songs behind the dances that make so much money as emotes black creatives created and popularized these dances But never monetize them imagine the money people are spending on these emotes being shared with the artists that made them And so the very least we've seen people arguing that this is kind of theft of culture or adoption of culture that is monetized, but the originator is not paid. But as far as the argument of this being copyright infringement, ugh.

So there are a few key pieces. According to the lawsuit, Terrence Ferguson is in the process of copywriting the dance, filing with the US Copyright Office a few days before the lawsuit. So there's part of that timing angle behind it. But as far as whether it could be protected, I mean, that's a whole other issue.

Around dancing, the US Copyright Office says, "'Individual movements or dance steps by themselves "'are not copyrightable, such as the basic waltz step, "'the hustle step, the grapevine, "'or the second position in classical ballet.' "'The comparison is drawn to language, "'same as how phrases and common words "'are not subject to copyright.'"

But could the sequence, the choreographic work, could that be protected? This will be very interesting to see how it plays out. And I really do wonder, even if this is not protected now, could that lead to an evolution of the law moving forward? But with all that said, aside from that legal aspect, I do wanna pass the question off to you. Do you feel like the people that created these dances,

that are known for these dances, do you think they should be paid because it's being used in this game? Right, like are we dealing with a situation where this is like the visual cover of a movement, much as someone does a cover of a song? Any and all thoughts on this one, I'd love to hear from you.

And then let's talk about a story that involves claims of black scents, black faces, and I guess in general you could call them blackusations. And part of this story actually starts with Ariana Grande who we talked about for different reasons earlier this week. So earlier this week, if you don't know, Ariana Grande was named Billboard's Woman of the Year. And as part of it, she did an interview with the magazine,

and as part of that interview She took a look at some of her old childhood photos and a good number of users took issue with how Ariana was speaking In the video saying that the pop star was trying to sound black many pointing specifically to this clip bitch. That's my cookie It's my juice, okay Carry on Thank you next that's what this baby picture says someone on social then took that clip, compared it to an older clip of Ariana talking, writing, Ariana Grande and this black scent. And there were a lot of people that agreed. Some people saying y'all ended Iggy Azalea because of her black scent, but are silent about Ariana Grande now.

And along with those comments about how she was speaking, people also began criticizing Ariana for what they called her overly tanned look. Some going even further, calling it blackface, sharing side-by-side photos of her then and now. But of course that wasn't the only reaction. There were many fans defending her, asking how do you speak a certain skin color? People calling it nitpicking. Some saying that fake tans are what she's done for years. Others going on to say that this narrative is disturbing and that it actually shows that few people know the history of blackface. But really Ariana Grande is just kind of the insertion point for this story. Because something we've seen in the news recently is something called blackfishing. It's a term that became fairly prominent in November when Instagrammer Emma Hallberg

was accused of pretending to be black. Someone revealed to some of her followers or people of color that she was white, leaving them confused about her racial identity. Hallberg's someone that I wasn't aware of, but it seems that most people just assumed that she was at least biracial. But on that note, Hallberg told Buzzfeed last month

that she never portrayed herself as anything but white, saying, I do not see myself as anything else than white. I get a deep tan naturally from the sun. But on that note, oneberg told Buzzfeed last month that she never portrayed herself as anything but white, saying, I do not see myself as anything else than white. I get a deep tan naturally from the sun. But on that note, one of the things that upset many users was the fact that Hallberg was reposted by accounts that promote black women. But on that note, she says that she never asked to be put on those pages, but people said,

well, you never asked them to take those pictures down. Some accused her of at least posing that she was black by pointing to how she styles her hair and the way she does her makeup to change her skin tone or accentuate features. Others going as far to say that this was the same as doing blackface, rejecting her claim that she was darker skinned just because she tanned easily.

And while this was happening, she eventually had to just disable comments on her social media account and issued the following explanations via stories, saying, I've been accused of doing frequent spray tans, taking melatonin, getting hair, wait, melatonin? Melatonin makes your skin darker? Oh Jesus, I forgot how much I hate googling medical things.

It's the same damn thing every time. It's like, it causes this, next article. It causes the exact opposite of that. Anyway, getting hair perms and lip injections and many more when I haven't done anything of the above. These are pictures taken during the summer of 2016 to 2018. This is how the sun tans my skin naturally during the summer. This is my father and brother, as you can see they also tan very easily. This is a picture of me and my brother where you clearly can see that we both tan very easily,

not just me. For those who do not believe my mother's hair is curly and that white people can't have naturally curly hair, and then commenting on the YouTube video that a lot of people were passing around, saying in my YouTube video I use a darker foundation than my face only to match it to the rest of my body, which I'm showing you before I apply it.

Why my face is less tan than my body is because I have some acne and scar issues, so I use a lot of face scrubs, toners, and peeling products. Following all of this, she then reactivated her comments. But it wasn't just this one moment. I mean, even the BBC this week, they put out an article called Blackfishing, the Women Accused of Pretending to be Black.

And in it, they speak to different women who have been accused of blackfishing online. Starting with Agha Brz, not even gonna try and pronounce that name. She goes by Alicia online, and she defended herself against claims. Although she says she gets why these two pictures of her went viral on Twitter cuz yeah But she said I understand why the Twitter thread was made and it makes sense to use my pictures because without looking at anything or

Knowing me it makes sense to put those two pictures together because obviously you can see a mad difference a crazy difference So I'm not really upset at the fact that someone used the pictures without knowing me It makes sense of what they're trying to get across while she admitted she does make her skin darker She also added that she is naturally not pale which if I can real quick, I don't think that's what the accusations are. But she goes on to say, With things like tanning, I don't think I've done anything in a malicious way. Adding, why would I stop doing something that's benefiting me or that I enjoy doing? And adding, I'm proud to be Polish, but I don't know why I look like this.

My features are just there. I can't help that I have big lips and not the stereotypical Polish features. There's also another woman in the interview by the name of Jaden Gumbayin. She's been accused of blackfishing, But she says that it's really just appreciation saying it could be looked at as the biggest form of flattery to some black women or people Of color and to others it's mimicking and taking their culture without knowing the history behind it and while she is denied pretending to be Another race she also said the backlash against her taught her that there are other ways to show Appreciation and as far as my opinion on this man, I don't know and I truly mean that I don't know I mean I'm gonna personally be more interested in your opinion

But it's also hard because we're talking about several different people in this one story. So rather than talking about all of them, if I was going to just talk about Hallberg, right, and look at that situation, and she's never verbally or in text claimed to be something, she's been featured, and she, I guess, didn't find those places and tell them to take her down.

And as far as her being able to get very tan naturally and then just kind of painting up her face to Matt, that's technically possible. For example, while I am one of the pastiest fucking people on the planet right now, I'm Sicilian and I can actually get very, very tan, but I've been playing this 33 year long game of hide and seek with the sun.

And I don't know the real history of this woman who I've never heard of his face is. But also, I mean, obviously I have to acknowledge this is my standpoint from someone that is in no way affected by this. So that's why, if anything, while I'm obviously interested in everyone's opinions, people that are black are that are black

Hispanic just anything except just white. I'm really interested in what you think about this situation then in quickie news Let's talk about Gwyneth Paltrow She was in the news this week for a reason that was unrelated to her company having to pay out money for making Unsubstantiated medical claims, but it was still for an incredibly stupid reason She was doing an interview with Wall Street Journal magazine and she said this, "'Forgive me if this comes out wrong.' And just with the way it starts, you know it's gonna be so great. "'Forgive me if this comes out wrong.'

But I went to do a yoga class in LA recently and the 22 year old girl behind the counter was like, "'Have you ever done yoga before?' And literally I turned to my friend and I was like, "'You have this job because I've done yoga before.'" The article then continues, "'That was the beginning of people thinking I was a crackpot,' Paltrow said

about Goop's founding in September 2008. Like, what do you mean food can affect your health you fucking psycho? I remember when I started doing yoga and people were like, what is yoga? She's a witch. She's a freak. And so following those comments, I would like to reach out to the yoga community. I don't know how many of you watch me. How many of you do yoga or know someone that does yoga because of Gwyneth Paltrow? And some of the articles on this have gone into how she is so incredibly disconnected from reality about yoga in general, yoga in the West. But I also kind of want to flip the story. Let's live in imaginary land. Let's live in our head for a second.

Her reaction to a very basic question would still be incredibly dickish. Was my hair like that the whole time? No one told me? Okay, out of the time to re-film. How dare you, person that's not watching this live and just reviewing the product I put out on the internet after the editing process. The point that I was trying to get at, when you're asked a basic-ass question like that, you just say, yeah, I've been doing it for years and it's provided insert whatever benefit, not, this bitch wouldn't even have a job. I made this. That's gonna be used out of context. But let's move on. And then let's talk about this story involving a Chinese scientist by the name of He Jianquan. Last Monday, he announced that he edited the DNA of human embryos to prevent them from contracting HIV. He said the twins, Luna and Nana, were delivered successfully a few weeks ago,

and if true, this would make them the world's first ever genetically edited babies. The experiment was publicized through a video posted online by the scientist on his YouTube channel, The He Lab. And according to the scientist, in this experiment, embryos from seven couples who underwent in vitro fertilization had been edited. The description of the project

on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry says that He created embryos from couples with an HIV-infected father. He then allegedly used a tool that can make targeted cuts to DNA called the CRISPR-Cas9, which he says he used to remove the gene CCR5, which would prevent HIV from infecting cells. And at the time he said that so far his experiment had resulted in one successful pregnancy. But this controversial experiment announcement was quickly met with a ton of backlash from scientists worldwide. This news came out just before the second International summit on human genome editing in Hong Kong. An event that is dedicated to discussing the emerging

science and ethics around tools that give scientists new potential to alter traits and eliminate genetic diseases. This topic and these conversations have been important to a lot of people because these new powerful tools have raised concerns over the creation of designer babies. Right, editing the DNA of human embryos would allow scientists to not only change the genes of an individual

but that of their future offspring. Meaning that you could effectively change the human species as we know it. The last summit was held in 2015, and the scientists who organized the meeting closed with a statement calling it irresponsible to proceed with editing human embryos until there is a broad societal consensus about the appropriateness of any proposed use. And adding, while each nation ultimately has the authority to regulate activities under its jurisdiction, the human genome is shared among all nations. Which on the note of legality, editing the genes of embryos intended for pregnancy is actually banned in most countries. For instance, the United States prohibits federal dollars from funding research into genetically editing embryos.

So scientists were pretty stunned to hear that this experiment had taken place since it's still unknown whether the procedure is actually safe or whether it could have unintended consequences for the babies later in life or for future generations. Joyce Harper, a professor in genetics and human embryology said that this research was premature, dangerous and irresponsible. And she called for public debate and legislation saying, quote, before this procedure comes anywhere near clinical practice, we need years of work to show

that meddling with the genome of the embryo is not going to cause harm to the future person. However, in a series of YouTube videos, Ha said that his experiment worked and that the gene editing hadn't made any unintentional changes to the children's DNA. But scientists believe that it is impossible for him to make that claim since the twins could be affected

in ways that no one fully understands. And in fact, scientists say that by eliminating the gene, CCR5, he has likely made the girls more susceptible to other viruses. Scientists also felt that the use of this technology was a huge ethical issue since there are other ways to prevent HIV transmission to a fetus. And some feel that the first application of gene editing

should be reserved for diseases that are deadly and have no treatment options. So many arguing HIV is not a high priority and isn't worth the other risks introduced by this experimental procedure. Also on top of the ethical issues behind gene editing, the study has also been criticized for its unconventional release.

The news was announced with no supporting data provided to verify the claims and has not been vetted by other experts in a traditional peer review process. And in this particular situation, according to the Associated Press, Hupp provided them with some of his research material, which they allowed several scientists to review. And the AP reported that the scientists said, quote,

"'Tests so far are insufficient to say the editing worked "'or to rule out harm.'" They also noted evidence that the editing was incomplete and that at least one twin appears to be a patchwork of cells with various changes. The founder and director of Scripps Research Translation Institute spoke about the study saying, quote, "'Here you have a scientist changing the human race

"'and you have a YouTube video about it "'with no scientific paper. "'It's just almost surreal.'" Adding, "'This guy must have just remarkable "'hutspots to proceed. "'Basically, for the first time in history, "'he has used this powerful tool in a reckless way "'for no good reason.'"

But main point, this is released, and then last week we saw 120 Chinese scientists call the experiment crazy in a letter condemning the study also calling it A huge blow to the global reputation of Chinese science and added Pandora's box has been open We still might have a glimmer of hope to close it before it's too late and the university said in a statement that it would Be investigating the experiment and added that it seriously violated academic ethics and codes of conduct Also saying the researcher has been put on unpaid leave since February and also tried to distance themselves by adding the research was conducted outside of the campus and was not reported to the university nor the department. The university and the department were unaware of the research project and its nature.

In a statement Tuesday morning, China's National Health Commission said that it immediately requested the Guangdong Provincial Health Commission to seriously investigate and verify the claims made by the scientists. Also, the hospital that was listed on documents as having given ethical approval for the experiment tried to distance themselves as well, saying we can ensure that the research wasn't conducted in our hospital nor were the babies born here. The hospital also saying two of the doctors named in H's documents work at that hospital and suggested an internal investigation was underway.

The commission denounced the legitimacy of the hospital ethics committee and the review process that approved the application. We also saw Feng Zheng, the co-creator of CRISPR, calling for a temporary freeze on gene-edited babies. But with all that said, we also saw her defend his study and he tried to separate himself from those who recklessly try to create designer babies, saying this in one of his YouTube videos. Their parents don't want a designer baby, just a child who won't suffer from a disease which medicine cannot prevent. Gene surgery is and should remain a technology for healing.

Enhancing IQ or selecting hair or eye color is not what a loving couple does. That should be banned. I understand my work will be controversial, but I believe family need this technology and I'm willing to take the criticism for them. And He also spoke at the gene editing summit on Wednesday. And there he talked about his experiment saying

the twins were born normal and healthy and that they will be monitored over the next 18 years. He also announced though that there was another potential pregnancy of a gene edited embryo in its early stages. Also going on to say that the university has been unaware of his work. And he was also evasive when asked about other experts

that he claimed had reviewed his work and gave feedback, which he would not name. Also claiming that he had already submitted the study to a scientific journal for review, but he wouldn't name the journal either. After that appearance, he was scheduled to appear at the summit again Thursday, but his talk ended up being canceled over security concerns

and concerns that another talk would make it seem like the conference supported what he had done. And in a statement, the scientist said, "'I will remain in China, my home country, and cooperate fully with all inquiries about my work. My raw data will be made available for third-party review.'" And at the close of the meeting on Thursday at the University of Hong Kong,

the organizing committee of the summit released an official statement. And in it they say, while they applaud the rapid advance of somatic gene editing into clinical trials, "'We continue to believe that proceeding with any clinical use of germline editing remains irresponsible at this time."

Going on to call the claim disturbing and recommending an independent assessment. But going on to say, even if the modifications are verified, the procedure was irresponsible and failed to conform with international norms. Also last Thursday, we saw China's government order that He and his team halt their work on gene-edited babies,

saying this brazenly violated Chinese laws and regulations, and breached the science ethics bottom line. And as far as what they might do, they have not announced actions against He right now. They said they're still investigating. But here's the thing, reports have come out saying that the scientist hasn't been seen since his appearance at the summit.

And some of the early reports suggest that he might have been brought back to Shenzhen by the university president and was put on house arrest on the campus. But officially, the university has denied those claims. So as of now, no one knows where this guy is. So obviously we'll be keeping an eye out for this, but with this story,

I did want to pass a question off to you. What are your thoughts around gene editing? And specifically, I want to talk about just the ethics of should it be a thing? Are you worried about this being kind of like the first step down the road to design our babies? Do you think it's wrong? Do you think it's scary?

Or are you excited about this, that you think down the road, this might be part of humanity's future? Just as now many children are vaccinated, in the future, is it just, this is the ultimate preventative move? Or like in your head, is this the next step for human evolution,

man-made evolution? I'd love to know your thoughts because it is such an interesting, trippy topic. And that's where I'm going to end today's show. And remember, if you like this video, hit that like button. If you want more of these daily dives into the news, hit that subscribe button. Also, if you missed either of the two news videos

we uploaded yesterday, you can click or tap right there to watch those. But with that said, of course, as always, my name is Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love yo faces and I'll see you Monday.