The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 3.26 The Jussie Smollett Scandal's New Twists & Corruption Accusations, PewDiePie, & Article 13

Starting point is 00:00:00 Sup you beautiful bastards, hope you're having a fantastic Tuesday Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show and let's just jump into it And the first thing we're to talk about today is a story that apparently has no end to the number of twists and turns in it So Jussie Smollett, of course previously best known as an actor on Empire Jussie who is black and openly gay said that on January 29th at 2 o'clock in the morning two masked men beat him They made derogatory comments yelled this is MAGA country They allegedly put his head in a noose. This led to an investigation.

Starting point is 00:00:27 Two persons of interest that ended up being brought in. They later get identified as two Nigerian brothers that actually have connections to Empire. But then the two persons of interest are released and everything happened so fast. Jussie was a suspect. Then he actually turned himself into police. He was arrested, he was charged.

Starting point is 00:00:40 Then a grand jury indicts Jussie Smollett on 16 felony counts of disorderly conduct. Right, he's accused and charged with faking this hate crime against himself. And the news we're seeing come out today is that charges against Jussie Smollett have been dropped by Chicago prosecutors. According to reports, this morning Smollett appeared

Starting point is 00:00:55 in court for an emergency hearing and agreed to forfeit his $10,000 bond to the city of Chicago. Kim Fox, a Cook County state attorney, released a statement saying, "'After reviewing all of the facts "'and circumstances of the case, "'including Mr. Smollett's volunteer service service in the community and agreement to forfeit his bond to the City of Chicago,

Starting point is 00:01:09 we believe this outcome is a just disposition and appropriate resolution to this case. Smollett's attorneys also said that his record would be expunged and the court records on the case have been sealed. They also released a statement where they maintained that the attack against him did happen, saying, Jussie was attacked by two people he was unable to identify on January 29th. He was a victim who was vilified and made to appear as a perpetrator as a result of false and inappropriate remarks made to the public causing an inappropriate rush to judgment. Jussie and many others were hurt by these unfair and unwarranted actions. This entire situation is a reminder that there should never be an attempt to prove a case in the court of public opinion.

Starting point is 00:01:41 In addition to that Smolin also spoke out himself in a press briefing outside the courthouse this morning. I want you to know that not for a moment was it in vain. court of public opinion. In addition to that, Smollett also spoke out himself in a press briefing outside the courthouse this morning. I want you to know that not for a moment was it in vain. I've been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one. I would not be my mother's son if I was capable of one drop of what I've been accused of. And as far as what prompted prosecutors to drop the charges,

Starting point is 00:02:00 as of right now, there is no official specific reasoning. There's not a ton of reporting from sources that I would go, yes, I definitely believe that 100%. Also, if you're shocked right now that the charges were dropped, you are not alone. We saw reports come out after this that Chicago police were actually unaware that these charges were being dropped when the news broke.

Starting point is 00:02:14 We saw Chicago police commander, Edwin Nicky, responding to the news by calling it a kick in the gut. We saw police superintendent, Eddie Johnson, confirm, we found out when you all did. Also saying, do I think justice was served? No. What do I think justice is? I think this city is still owed an apology.

Starting point is 00:02:28 We also saw Johnson addressing the ceiling of the case. I've heard that they wanted their day in court with TV cameras so America could know the truth. And though they chose to hide behind secrecy, broker a deal to circumvent the judicial system. Although on that note, Patricia Holmes, attorney for Smollett, said that there is no deal. Also claiming that this is not part of a deferred prosecution. We also saw Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel say that he believes that Jussie Smollett is getting

Starting point is 00:02:54 special treatment. This is without a doubt a white watch of justice and sends a clear message that if you're in a position of influence and power, you'll get treated one way. Other people will be treated another way. There is no accountability than in the system. Just watching the rest of the press conference, you could just see how furious he is. Mr. Smollett is still saying that he is innocent, still running down the Chicagoago police department how dare him how dare him and even after this whitewash stare still no sense of ownership of what he's done he says that in fact he is the wrong in this case this is an unbelievable not just whitewasher justice this is a person now who's been let

Starting point is 00:03:41 off scot-free with no sense of accountability of the moral and ethical wrong of his actions. And according to First Assistant State's Attorney, Joseph Magatz, this decision does not mean that there were flaws in the case against Smalley. Reportedly telling the Chicago Sun-Times, we stand behind the CPD investigation done in this case. We stand behind the approval of charges in this case.

Starting point is 00:04:00 They did a fantastic job. The fact there was an alternative disposition in this case is not and should not be viewed as some kind of admission there was something wrong with the case or something wrong with the investigation that the Chicago police did. But then you still have the question for Magatz, then why drop the charges? Because you had people skeptical of what was actually going to happen given why he was even in his position. If you didn't know, the state's attorney for Cook County, Kim Fox, actually had to recuse herself. This because according to reports, she tried to convince Chicago police to turn the Jussie Smollett case over to the FBI. And that effort, according to the Chicago Sun-Times, came after a former Michelle Obama chief of staff reached out to her in that newspaper reporting that that chief of staff and lawyer was a supporter of Smollett, who was a woman identified as Tina Chen.

Starting point is 00:04:37 And given the words coming from Rahm Emanuel, it appears that he thinks that there is corruption or something shady going on. And ultimately, as of recording this video, that is where we are. We've also seen a lot of big reactions online. There's a lot of disgust and confusion. There are some people cheering this on. That including a Fox and 20th Century Fox spokesperson saying, We also saw the official Empire Writers Twitter tweet, See y'all Wednesday?

Starting point is 00:05:01 On the other side of this, you had people like Chief Communications Officer for the Chicago Police tweeting, in our experience, innocent individuals don't forget bonds and perform community service in exchange for dropped charges. And as far as my personal reaction to this, I very much connect to that last statement. Smollett has maintained his innocence. He says that he has been completely truthful. But if he was fully innocent,

Starting point is 00:05:19 why would prosecutors say they took into account his community service and the fact that he was gonna give them $10,000? You have Smollett saying that he's been consistent and truthful But like I think back to his interview says he gave authorities a brief description Whereas you know, he couldn't give eye color, but he saw the spot here and in that interview He also throws in that now famous line and it feels like if I had said it was a Muslim or a Mexican or someone Black I feel like the doubters would have supported me much more a lot more everything we've seen regarding the reporting here

Starting point is 00:05:44 We've heard the police talk about how they tracked these men down via cameras. The two attackers, one of which Smollett said, I saw the area here, they were black men. And personally, this closure has just left, I think, all of us with more questions. If Smollett isn't guilty, what actually happened? Are there arrests around the corner?

Starting point is 00:05:59 None of it seems to make sense right now, but with all of that said, that's situation a little for me and I pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts regarding this story and situation? I'd love to know. Then we should at least briefly talk about the weird evolution and transformation that is the PewDiePie versus T-Series situation.

Starting point is 00:06:16 And for those that don't know, Felix, aka PewDiePie, has been the most subscribed YouTuber on the platform for so long, and what we've seen over the past year was that there was a massive Indian media and YouTube channel that was coming for that number one spot. And it created this situation slash meme where people were trying to keep Felix in that number one spot.

Starting point is 00:06:31 And this lasted for a pretty long time. He stayed in that number one spot. Then, you know, T-Series would pass him for 10 minutes. But recently they have passed him. They've stayed in that position. Actually, as of recording this video, they are almost 12,000 subscribers ahead. But one of the interesting things that we saw

Starting point is 00:06:44 with this situation is that hackers were getting involved. We saw people's printers getting hijacked to print out papers that said subscribe to PewDiePie, the Wall Street Journal got hit, although they probably didn't see those harmless. But that said, according to reports over the last three months, there have been two PewDiePie ransomware strains released.

Starting point is 00:06:59 The first one was reportedly released in mid-December, and according to several ransomware researchers, it was a poorly modified shell locker. And for my fellow non-hackers out there, a shell locker encrypts the data of the computer it infects, and then usually a message alerts the user that they need to pay something in order to regain access to their files.

Starting point is 00:07:13 But reportedly, this version didn't save the encryption codes, which means that none of the encrypted data could actually be accessed even by those behind it, so many dismissed it just as a joke. However, the second ransomware called PewCrypt, which was reportedly released in January, is being taken seriously. This time, according to reports,

Starting point is 00:07:26 the coding actually encrypted data correctly and offered an option to regain access after PewDiePie reaches 100 million subscribers, and right now PewDiePie has over 91 million. But also of note, it appeared that it wasn't just if he reaches it. It also says, if T-Series beats PewDiePie, the private key will be deleted and new files gone forever. But with all of that said, in good news, especially if you're one of the people that was affected by this, the ransomware author has released the command line based encryption tool and MCSoft polished it and released it. So any encrypted data can now actually be recovered.

Starting point is 00:07:53 But yeah, if you're one of the people hit, now you have an answer. I mean, as far as my reaction to this, whoever created this, they got what they want, right? They got the attention. And really I wonder how much these days the subscribe to PewDiePie thing is actually based off of fans, right? Because it started out as this community thing and then morphed into a meme slash attention grabber slash subscriber getter. And I hope if there are more subscribe to PewDiePie campaigns, they are not lock you out of your data things, and they're more subscribe to PewDiePie, otherwise you will make Sheba feel sad posts.

Starting point is 00:08:19 Look at us projecting specific feelings and thoughts onto that animal. Adorable. And the last thing we're gonna talk about today is the EUCD and of course articles 11 and 13. And the last time we covered the EUCD, the European Union Copyright Directive, it was earlier this month. We talked about how the different branches of the EU had finally hashed out a final version of the directive that was set to have a vote in the European Parliament. In response to that, there was tons of backlash. We had people pushing their EU representatives to vote against the bill. There was a petition that circulated receiving over 5 million signatures, there was a broad coalition of tech companies and groups that lobbied against the bill, and we actually saw thousands of people demonstrate against the

Starting point is 00:08:52 bill in Berlin. But today the news is that the European Parliament has passed the EUCD. Members of Parliament voted 348 in favor and 274 against, and there was actually a last-minute to remove Article 13, otherwise known as the upload filter, but that was rejected by only five votes. So, what happens now? Well, the EUCD now gets passed on to EU member states who will have two years to implement the law in their countries. Now of note here, the member states do get to decide

Starting point is 00:09:17 the details of the legislation individually, but the law is still going to have a huge impact on how the internet works in Europe. Also, just to prevent any confusion here, just like during the draft stages of the EUCD, Articles 11 and 13 still are the most controversial in the bill, but now Article 13 has actually been renamed Article 17.

Starting point is 00:09:33 And if you're not familiar with what these articles do, we've talked about it a lot in the past, so I'm just gonna give you kind of a brief TLDR. Article 11, also called the Link Text, says that links to webpages and articles can only be posted or shared on other platforms with a license. And while there are some exceptions, it is incredibly likely that this is going to hurt news aggregators like Google News because it will allow publishers to charge them when they display snippets of stories.

Starting point is 00:09:52 And Google has said that if publishers do decide to charge licenses for their material, they will be forced to scale down the content they show on Google News and potentially have to shut it down altogether. And while Article 11 has received a lot of criticism here, the real heavy hitter of this whole situation is Article 17, formerly known as Article 13, aka the upload filter. Article 17 requires platforms like YouTube to be responsible for copyright infringements committed by their users.

Starting point is 00:10:14 The language in the law is vague, and many people think that this is going to force these platforms to monitor and block copyrighted content from being uploaded or else they will be held viable. And people have argued that this provision could lead to automated upload filters, hence the nickname. These filters would scan all user content before it's uploaded to remove copyrighted material.

Starting point is 00:10:29 And while the law doesn't explicitly require automated filters, if you really think about it, there's so much content being uploaded to YouTube every single second, which makes it impossible for people to manually sort through every single video to make sure it doesn't violate copyright. And to make matters worse, and this won't be a surprise to any and all creators who have been falsely hit

Starting point is 00:10:44 with copyright, experts have said that these filters are not ready for the market and are won't be a surprise to any and all creators who have been falsely hit with copyright, experts have said that these filters are not ready for the market and are likely to be error prone or ineffective. Now I will say when we talk about this, we often talk about all the people that are standing up against the EUCD in articles 11, 13, 17. But it should be noted that there are many groups that are happy today, right? Groups like the music publishing and film industries have applauded the passage of the law. Supporters of the EUCD have also included the likes of Paul McCartney and Lady Gaga. President of European Magazine Media Association said in a press release, this is a vote against content theft.

Starting point is 00:11:13 Publishers of all sizes and other creators will now have the right to set terms and conditions for others to reuse their content commercially, as is only fair and appropriate. Helen Smith, the head of the Independent Music Companies Association, saying, this is a landmark day for Europe's creators and citizens and a significant step towards a fairer internet. Platforms facilitate a unique relationship between artists and fans and this will be given a boost as a result of this directive. It will have a ripple effect worldwide." But of course, the other side is incredibly concerned about that last sentence, that this will have a ripple effect worldwide. Today, in response to the bill's passage, YouTube thanked creators who spoke out against Article 13 in a tweet and shared their official statement, saying,

Starting point is 00:12:00 But on that note, right, there's this kind of hope regarding the EU member states that they all individually get to choose things. But even let's say it was just half. If more than half and especially the larger EU member states, they pass the harshest versions of this, that still potentially creates a huge, huge problem. Like we've seen with legal policy in the United States, it has a ripple effect worldwide as far as how other content is handled. And if now at the end of the day it is YouTube the company that is going to take the monetary hit You're gonna be damn sure they're going to protect themselves It's not surprising that with article 11 Google News is like if you if you're gonna charge us We're just gonna say no you're just not gonna get included or you're gonna get shut down You want to lose that traffic with article 13 now 17?

Starting point is 00:12:36 It would not surprise me that if someone actually tried to go after YouTube that they're just gonna block content and how let's say we Get to a situation where YouTube themselves that they're just gonna block content. And hell, let's say we get to a situation where YouTube themselves, that they're not, you know, permanently banning EU member states from watching content, from uploading content as well. If it created a situation where my videos might get taken down because of some law in the EU, I'm just gonna block my content from the EU. I wouldn't want to, but that would be my new reality.

Starting point is 00:12:58 But that's the situation we're in today. It will be very interesting to see what these EU member states do over the next two years, who moves forward faster, who goes harsher, softer. With all that said, I pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts and feelings on this topic? Especially if you're someone that lives in the EU. I'd really love to hear from you in those comments down below.

Starting point is 00:13:15 And that's where we're going to end today's show. And if you're new to the videos, welcome. I don't know how you got in front of my stupid face, but I'm happy you did. If you want more of these daily dives into the news, you want to jump into it with us, be sure to hit that subscribe button. Definitely click that bell to turn on notifications. Also on that note, if you missed the last Philip DeFranco show or this morning's Extra Morning News Deep Dive, you want to catch up, you can click or tap right there to watch those. But with that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco.

Starting point is 00:13:36 You've just been filled in. I love your faces and I'll see you tomorrow.

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 3.26 The Jussie Smollett Scandal's New Twists & Corruption Accusations, PewDiePie, & Article 13

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.