The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 5.1 "HE'S STALKING ME!" Kendrick Lamar Euphoria Drama, New Baby Reindeer Stalker Threats, Campus Chaos &

Episode Date: May 1, 2024

Start your free trial today: http://www.Squarespace.com/Phil  & enter offer code “Phil” to get 10% off your first purchase!   Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “PDS” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! https://seatgeek.onelink.me/RrnK/PHIL Daily Dip newsletter subscribers can win up to $1,000 in SeatGeek credit so make sure you’re subscribed: https://www.dailydip.co/ ==== ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩- – 00:00 - Kendrick Lamar Takes Drake Feud to New Level with “Euphoria” Diss Track 03:37 - Netflix’s “Baby Reindeer” Has Viewers Playing Detective 07:20 - Brown Univ. & Campus Protesters Reach Agreement, But Other Protests Continue 10:31 - Sponsored by Squarespace 11:17 - Biden Admin Moves to Ease Federal Restrictions on Marijuana 13:43 - Federal Judges Block Louisiana Congressional Map 16:47 - Expanded China State Secrets Law Goes Into Effect 18:53 - UFW Accused by Workers and Wonderful Nurseries of Bogus Union Drive 23:48 - Comment Commentary ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Star Pralle, Chris Tolve, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on UFW Union Battle: Brian Espinoza  ———————————— #DeFranco #KendrickLamar #Euphoria ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup, you beautiful bastards? We got a lot of news to talk about today. The alleged real-life stalker behind baby reindeers throwing out threats. We break down Kendrick Lamar dropping six minutes of beautiful hatred. We've got campus chaos and crackdowns. Marijuana reclassification. Gerrymandering drama right before the election. And a new concerning Chinese crackdown. And it's all made possible by beautiful bastards like you, who support things like our new drop at beautifulbastard.com this week. With us dropping six new fantastic teas this week. With them all made using our new custom cut and sew teas. They go all the way up to 5XL. They feel like butter. So grab one of those while you can. I'll include a link down below. But we got a lot of news to talk about. Starting with, in big drama news, we got to talk

about Kendrick Lamar and Drake. Because if perhaps you're living under a rock, you may not realize that we are currently living in dish track season. Though truthfully, like, there's a decade's worth of catch up here, but I'll spare you all that. Instead, we'll say this stems from last October when J. Cole and Drake put out a song called First Person Shooter, where J. Cole said he, Drake, and Kendrick were the big three of modern rap. But then fast forward to March and Kendrick was like, fuck your comparison by compliment. Where he essentially denounced the big three claim and said it's just big me. Then Drake in April firing back with two diss tracks, one called Push Ups, the other called Taylor Made Freestyle. The latter of which included AI vocals from Tupac and Snoop Dogg, which also resulted in Tupac's estate actually

threatening to sue over it. You know, all of that, it brought us to yesterday with Kendrick releasing a song called Euphoria, which is just a six minute decimation of Drake. Also, and this is just me speaking, if you're someone that's like, oh, Kendrick missed with Euphoria, kind of weak, Drake wins this round. I just got to say, I've never seen someone deep throat a dick from the back. To deny that euphoria at the very least was pretty fucking fantastic. Like that, that's either ignorance or bias. Though I will say my favorite criticism of euphoria was, you can't even dance to this. My man, are you trying to cha-cha slide to a dish trap? Yeah, I just had to say that before we move forward. You know, as we've seen this song and the whole situation blow up, so has the discourse. With one of the first big conversations

being about the role race plays in all this. Because in Euphoria, Kendrick takes a few swings at Drake's blackness with lines like, how many more black features till you finally feel that you're black enough? There's also a part where Kendrick says that he doesn't like when Drake uses the n-word and says that he's not a rap artist, but a scam artist with the hopes of being accepted. You know, those lyrics have received kind of a mixed response. The likes of NPR saying they're definitely disrespectful but they're also not too explosive. Right, noting that other artists like Rick Ross, Megan Thee Stallion, and Pusha T have thrown those accusations at Drake in the past. But then also this is you had people including even Suge Knight chiming in from prison saying even though he thought Kendrick won the round,

he still should stop saying light-skinned people aren't black because the police think otherwise. But that is also a lot of people have pushed back to say that's not what Kendrick meant. Explaining Kendrick isn't coming at Drake for being half-white. He's coming at Drake for the ways he seems to use blackness. Wearing it like a costume he can put on for fun and take off when it's time to be serious. And saying Drake's career has greatly benefited from being detached from blackness politically, while simultaneously exploiting his blackness for entertainment. Another saying he cosplays blackness from every artist and region he can steal it from, despite never speaking on black issues.

And also outside of race, there's been a lot of conversation about the role AI plays in this. Like, this is the first rap feud that really this new technology has played a part in, both from a standpoint of how Drake used Tupac, but also, I mean, every time a new song comes out, fans are like, is this real?

Is it not? Unless like the original artist is the one tweeting it out. Fake AI tracks have been released throughout this thing. But ultimately, ultimately you know that's where I'm gonna leave it for today because like literally you've got people putting out essays about every two lines in this six minutes entire video is dedicated to like oh Kendrick definitely meant this and saying it's connected to that and well of course I'd love to know your thoughts on this latest development especially if you're fans of either or both but for me I feel like I'm just the real winner in this and specifically the people that just like music

and just this whole drama situation. Because I just got my popcorn out for this one and I'm enjoying the show. And I'm sure on their side, as long as things don't get violent, they're gonna enjoy all the streams and the money that comes from this. And then it's time we talk about

Netflix's Baby Reindeer problem. Which if you haven't seen yet, Baby Reindeer is the seven episode autobiographical comedy drama thriller series written by and starring comedian Richard Gadd. It is a fascinating, entertaining, horrifying watch, and since its release three weeks ago, the show's generated an unusual amount of drama and controversy. Because aside from some minor details and names, pretty much all the major events actually happen to Gadd, who plays himself in the show. Driving the plot are two crimes that he fell victim to in his 20s. First, he was relentlessly stalked for years

by a woman fictionalized in the show as Martha, who's played by Jessica Gunning. 41,071 emails, 350 hours of voicemail, 744 tweets, 46 Facebook messages, four fake Facebook accounts, 106 pages of letters, and one cup of tea. And second, he was raped by another character. And despite getting very little promotion from Netflix, Baby Reindeer climbed to the top of the most watched charts in the UK and US within a matter of days, attracting 2.6 million viewers in its first week, 13.3

million in its second week, and 22 million in its third. Those numbers increasing over three weeks being incredibly rare. And you've now got both Gad and Gunning reportedly expected to get Emmy nominations. And while they're likely thrilled about this surprise success, all the attention has fueled unwanted speculation about the identities of the real people behind the characters, which has naturally led to internet detectives hunting for clues online, and some claiming they found the real Martha, though it's never officially been confirmed. According to videos from Gad's old stand-up shows where you can hear a laugh in the audience that sounds like Martha's, or digging up old tweets directed at Gad that use the same sexual innuendo of hanging my curtains that Martha does in the show. Also,

others believe that Gad's rapist is the actor, writer, and director Sean Foley, whom they say resembles the character on the show. The big thing there is that both Gad and Gunning have shot down speculation and discouraged viewers from trying to identify the characters. But then basically just telling fans that is not the point of the show. Right in all his public statements, Gad has stressed that it should be judged as a work of art and a story, not a puzzle for people to solve. I wanted to show the nuances of the human condition, really. I wanted to show that people are a mixture of good and bad. And I think stalker stories usually tend to be one person's good, one person's bad. And I wanted to kind of get away from that.

And saying that the things that he saw to portray weren't just how two specific individuals victimized him, but more so how actual stalkers suffer from mental illness, how police often don't take stalking victims, especially male ones, seriously, and how Gad himself was complicit in his own victimization, indulging his stalker and repeatedly returning to his rapist. And so he posted on Instagram that people I love, have worked with, and admire, including Foley, have gotten unfairly caught up in speculation. And Foley himself, adding,

police have been informed and are investigating all defamatory abuse and threatening posts against me. So now you have some people criticizing Netflix for not doing enough to prevent viewers from being able to identify the characters. With, for example, the Daily Mail writing, Gad's claim that he has protected her identity by changing key details is baffling, given that both women are Scottish, both studied law at university, both are around 20 years older than Gad, and both used highly sexualized language in their speech and writing. Which at that point, if you're wondering, how does the Daily Mail know that? Well, they claim that the real woman who inspired Martha's character gave it an exclusive interview.

And in that, she threatens to sue Netflix and Gad for defamation. Accusing him of bullying an older woman on television for fame and fortune. Claiming that she's received online death threats and abuse from Richard Gad supporters. Notably, if true, would confirm that a number of internet detectives have found the right person. But also, a big thing is she goes further to say that he, Gad, right, is using baby reindeer to stalk me now, saying I'm the victim, he's written a bloody show about me. But they're also deciding to throw a petty jab at Gunning, right, the actor who plays her, saying she sort of looks like me after I put on four stone during lockdown, but I'm not actually unattractive, which honestly sounds exactly like something the character that Gad wrote would say. But in the meantime, all we're seeing from all the drama, the speculation,

now the legal threats is that it's really just driven more viewers to the show, which I mean, makes sense. Even me covering this is probably going to lead to a number of you watching it for the first time, which I will say on that note, if you have watched the series and you're now hearing this news, I'd love to know what you think. And then while we're currently seeing chaos rock college campuses across the country right now, we're seeing a very different situation play out in Rhode Island. And that's because at Brown University, university leaders and protesters have actually had a dialogue. The two sides actually reaching an agreement for the university's governing body to discuss and eventually vote for the divestment of funds from companies connected to the Israeli military. And in exchange, pro-Palestine demonstrators agreed to dismantle their encampment, as well as them agreeing to not participate in any unauthorized protest activity for the remainder of the year.

And even more specifically, the agreement lays out a series of steps for the months ahead. So this month, five students will meet with five members of the university's governing body to discuss their specific demands regarding the divestment of funds from companies connected to the Israeli military campaign in Gaza. And then by September 30th, the university's advisory committee on resource management will release its own recommendations and advice regarding divestment. And finally, in October, the university will vote on the issue with the agreement explicitly stating that the vote will not be deferred or delayed. And this agreement also stating that no member of the

Brown community, including faculty, staff, graduate students, undergraduate students, or alumni will face retaliation for their involvement in the encampment or related activity. With all that, I should note that the university is still holding disciplinary proceedings related to the encampment. And this is reports of harassment and discrimination will still be investigated, you know, as they should be. And actually, to that point, as of recording, Brown is still pursuing charges against 41 students arrested in a sit-in last December. Right, and so for many, people see this as the university striking a reasonable balance between protecting free speech, listening to students, holding them accountable for rule-breaking, and avoiding escalation. And that is the Brown protesters are claiming this agreement as a major victory, especially with it being the first major concession from an elite American university

on this issue. And on Instagram, the Brown groups behind the protest said that the agreement would not have been possible without the hard work of university encampments across the country, whose collective power has forced university administrators to acknowledge the overwhelming support for Palestine on their campuses. And to that point, Brown isn't the only university that has actually opted to listen to what protesters are saying and have a discussion. Right, Northwestern University in Illinois, for example, they've come to an agreement with students to disband the encampment but leave one tent up until June 1st. The school also pledging to support Palestinian faculty and students and revive its advisory committee on investment responsibility. But of course, the reason we're talking about this today is those are the exceptions to what we're generally seeing. Because like we talked about yesterday,

what we've mostly been seeing is as this movement grows, we're seeing confrontations, crackdowns, and now even violence. Last night, nearly 300 people were arrested at Columbia University and City College of New York as police cracked down on college protests there, that including 119 protesters who were barricaded inside Columbia's Hamilton Hall. And at UCLA last night, violence broke out after counter protesters tried to remove barricades from a pro-Palestinian encampment that the university had earlier demanded dispersed. You had people throwing fireworks into the encampment, protesters being attacked and mobbed, it all playing out without police intervention for a pretty long time. Though also, with everything that we've said, despite the fact that the

peaceful resolution achieved at Brown seems like a better outcome, it has still come under criticism. Where some Palestine supporters feel anything short of a full commitment to divest is a failure, while some supporters of Israel are saying deals like we see at Brown or Northwestern are just a capitulation to protesters. With, for example, the likes of Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner actually accusing Brown of negotiating with terrorists. And honestly, if I was to make an educated guess here, I think what we saw play out at Brown, I think that's very likely going to be an outlier. Everything else from a lot of these different campuses seems like it's just going to escalate and escalate. But for now, we'll have to wait and see as all these situations evolve.

And then, you know, for any of you focused on getting your business off the ground, creating a place to share your homemade goods, or even a personal blog, I got a great solution for you. And it comes from, and I want to thank the fantastic sponsor of today's show, Squarespace. Because, you know, I've been partnering with Squarespace for years now, and I have to say, it is just so easy. There's nothing to install, patch, or update ever. And creating a beautiful website with Squarespace's Fluid Engine is so easy. You just drag things where you like, no coding necessary. And if you need a starting point,

Squarespace has a bunch of great professional templates. You can even sell custom merch easily. Squarespace handles all the production and shipping. Plus, with Squarespace, you get access to all their marketing tools and analytics and their award-winning customer care team via email or live chat 24-7. So go check it out. See why so many others love it. See why you're going to love it and start your free trial today over at squarespace.com slash phil. And when you realize it's for you, just make sure you enter an offer code phil to get 10% off your first purchase. And then we've got to talk about this massive

marijuana news because the Justice Department just announced that it is recommending easing restrictions on marijuana. But to be clear, we're not talking about federal legalization of weed or even decriminalization of weed at the federal level. Instead, it would change the classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug to Schedule 3. So it would leave its current category, its teammates, heroin, ecstasy, and LSD, and it would join anabolic steroids and ketamine. And while this is kind of shocking news, it also shouldn't be too surprising. Right, marijuana is easier to get than ever before in America. In fact, a majority of all Americans now live in states where they can purchase it legally. Right, 24 states have approved recreational cannabis.

38 have approved medical programs. You know, at the federal level, we've seen the Biden administration issuing pardons and commutations for nonviolent drug offenses. Federal prosecutors have also been increasingly deprioritizing marijuana cases. The big thing, even with the reclassification, marijuana will still be a federally controlled drug that's subject to prosecution. So if you get caught with it and you are punished for it, don't go blaming me. I'm being specific in how I'm painting this picture. But, that said, there are some pretty substantial real-world impacts that could come from all this.

We may see a lightening of sentencing guidelines. It may also pave the way to create legal protections for medical marijuana users who run up against federal laws on public housing or employment. Also, a big one is that this will loosen restrictions on research, facilitating scientific studies on the harms and benefits of marijuana that have long been hampered by its strict classification. And beyond that, it opens the door for doctors to eventually prescribe marijuana to patients, even without FDA approval for marijuana products. But really, in general, this move will have the biggest overall impact on the marijuana business in legal states. And that's because under the U.S. tax code, businesses that sell Schedule I drugs, they can't deduct business expenses. So companies that sell or they grow cannabis, they have much higher tax rates. But with a Schedule III classification, those businesses would be eligible for tax breaks.

And the financial effects this could have on the market would be massive. With reports explaining this tax relief is estimated to free up millions of dollars for companies to put toward things like hiring, expansion, and product development, all of which could be a boon to local economies. And those financial benefits may also be passed down to the consumer because it would allow these businesses to lower the prices of their products. That's incredibly significant because it comes at a time when the industry has been struggling financially in recent years, which in effect has driven down tax revenues for states. But I need to stress this has a long road ahead of it. The DOJ has just made this recommendation. People familiar with the matter have said that the White House's Office of Management and Budget,

they have to still review it. And if the agency accepts that recommendation, the change would then need to be published and go up for public comment, meaning it would technically be subject to change and it wouldn't go into effect for several months. But regardless that it is not happening immediately, this is huge and it's gonna be very interesting

to see all the impacts and changes. And then, so let's talk about gerrymandering. And specifically, I want to talk to you about what's going on in Louisiana right now. Because it's there that in a two-to-one decision, a panel of federal judges has blocked a newly drawn congressional map. And you have a lawsuit being brought by people who explicitly describe themselves as, quote, non-African American voters. And you have the judges who sided with them, arguing that this new map, which formed a second majority black district in the state, it amounted to an impermissible racial gerrymander that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. But notably, this decision by Louisiana's Western District Court seemingly flies in the face of legal precedent

recently set by higher courts in the United States. Pray of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which is where appeals from the Western District of Louisiana eventually end up, having ordered Louisiana lawmakers to make a new map in the first place, finding that the old one violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting power of black residents. And a key thing is that decision came as several southern states have been forced to redraw maps due to a Supreme Court ruling last year, finding that Alabama had actually violated the Voting Rights Act

by diluting the power of black voters in its redistricting process. And so in the case of Louisiana, the old map was drawn by the Republican-controlled legislature, and only one of the six congressional districts had a majority black population. And that's despite the fact that the 2020 census clearly showed that black voters made up roughly a third of the overall population. So you get a lot of people saying, the math's not math-ing, but a lot of people feel in this decision may be about more than just the Constitution. For example, Eric Holder, former U.S. Attorney General and current chairman of the National

Democratic Redistricting Committee, telling the New York Times that the ideological nature of the decision could not be more clear. And in a dissenting opinion, Judge Carl Stewart of the Fifth Circuit argued that the challengers had failed to prove that their constitutional rights were violated, with him saying the totality of the record demonstrates that the Louisiana legislature weighed various political concerns, including protecting particular incumbents alongside race with no factor predominating over the other. And to that point, the two Donald Trump-appointed judges who made the ruling, David Joseph and Robert Summerhays, acknowledged that race had not been the only factor in the process, though they argued that it was, in fact, predominant over other factors.

And, you know, as part of the evidence for that, they pointed to the unusual shape of the district, which, yes, to be fair, that thing looks ridiculous. And actually, to that point, some have speculated that Republicans drew a, quote, unnecessarily mangled district in the hopes that it would get struck down. And actually, you had people like Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor, telling the Washington Post, state lawmakers could have prevented the latest ruling by more closely adhering to redistricting principles when they drew the maps. But of course, even if there are problems with the new map,

there are also real problems with the old map. And so now, Louisiana is in this weird place of being six months away from the election and having no idea what the districts are going to be. And so one option is that the black voters who brought the original case could try to get the issue back before Judge Stewart and the Fifth Circuit Court. And with that, Louisiana's Republican Attorney General, Liz Merle, has also said that the Supreme Court needs to clear this up. But of course, both of those things could and likely will take time. So for now, the judges who made this latest ruling have scheduled a hearing on May 6th to discuss next steps. And that is the Louisiana

Secretary of State has also ordered that the congressional map be finalized by May 15th. So basically, there's a lot of different actors involved. There's a lot of potential paths forward. But one thing that is very, very clear is that this is important more than just for the people of Louisiana. I mean, for one, the Republicans right now, they're barely hanging on to their razor-thin majority in the House. So whatever map does end up being finalized could actually have a meaningful impact on the balance of power in Congress. And then even bigger than that is that the decision could have broader implications on voting rights in general. For now, we're gonna have to wait to see what happens.

And then huge international news, China just implemented new rules on its internet companies that turn them into de facto spies for the state and its largest firms. With those rules being a part of its expanded state secrets law and among things like preventing officials from leaving the country, it'll require network operators like ByteDance, Weibo,

and Tencent to actively monitor users and report anyone giving away, quote, state secrets. Which is really interesting, because companies in China are already under very strict rules about what users can post. But the difference now is that they have an active duty to monitor and rapidly cooperate with the authorities when they find infringing content or posts.

Like when a leak happens, they're required to, quote, immediately stop its transmission, save relevant records, and report the case to the secret administration departments or public security organs and state security organs. Another major issue is that this update to the law expands what qualifies as a state secret. It's not just things like taking video of military convoys moving around the country or copying official government documents. It'll now include what's described as work secrets and information about how government agencies make decisions, both of which are expected to have a major chilling effect on journalists in China, which I know may sound

oxymoronic, but there are reporters who actively work in China, and business is one of the last beats that they could actually report on semi-normally. But also, here's the thing. Technically, it is entirely possible that it's not meant to be as expansive as everyone's making it out to be. But the problem is that the new rules are so vague that few lawyers and experts actually understand what's being covered. Though honestly, that's not surprising as vague laws are kind of the hallmark of Chinese law. It lets the government selectively crack down on whatever they want to. And so all of this has put a lot of foreign companies on edge as they try to navigate this vague law.

Especially because China has recently shown that it has no issues going after and arresting foreign firms and employees. Like how they arrested a senior Japanese employee of Astellas Pharma on espionage charges. And in a more broad international response, Taiwan warned its citizens from going to China over fears they could be detained because of content they've posted. Or because despite tensions, Taiwanese and Chinese people go between the two countries all the time for work and family. So it's common for Taiwanese people to use Chinese social media and spend time in China, which would open them up for arrests. But for now, we're gonna have to wait to see how they actually use these rules and also to see if it affects the overseas operations of Chinese companies like TikTok. Although that might not even affect the company that long,

since ByteDance doesn't appear to want to sell it, so it's probably gonna get banned. And then? So big business and unions fighting each other, that's not a new thing. But this story has a twist. Because it's the union here that's been accused of using underhanded tricks in order to decide whether a facility would be unionized or not. And at the center of all this is Wonderful Nurseries, which is the country's largest grapevine nursery out in Kern County, California, and it's owned by the state's wealthiest farming family. And facing off against them is the United Farm Workers. However, you have Wonderful Nurseries and over 150 of its workers accusing UFW of tricking workers into being unionized with a massive bait-and-switch. And here's how it allegedly happened. UFW had extended invitations to wonderful nursery workers to off-site meetings

where they were taught how to apply for $600 in federal money for people who were farm workers during COVID. You know, $600 is no joke, so understandably a lot of people went. Especially as for mostly migrant farm workers, that could be a major windfall. But this is where the stories differ a bit. UFW claims that while the workers were there, they were heavily encouraged to sign union cards that would authorize UFW to represent them. And after the successful meeting, they then used those cards, which were reportedly signed by most of Wonderful's 600 workers,

with them petitioning the Agriculture Labor Relations Board in order to be granted the right to represent the workers, with it being granted in early March, making it the third major unionization drive by UFW across a few months. And if any of that process sounds a bit off, that's because it's not how unionization is normally done. Right in the rest of the U.S., there would need to be an election period and workers would need to vote on the matter. But back in 2022, California had passed a law that allowed farm workers to do this through mail-in ballots rather than at actual polling places. And there had actually been some concerns about the entire process, which is why Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar bill in the previous year. But notably, he later gave in to

pressure and allowed the new one. And then in 2023, it was amended to allow unions to do the entire process away from a job site and without notifying the company. And once they had what they thought was a majority of the workers agreeing to unionization, they then petitioned the government. Pretty much exactly how UFW did it. But Wonderful Nurseries and many of its workers, they have a different story. They claim that, yeah, UFW approached workers to help them get $600 from the feds. It's just that during that process, they kind of just mixed in the union authorization cards with everything else people were signing. So you have employees like Claudia Chavez going on the record saying she had no idea

what the card she was signing was for, and quote, they said clearly, this I do remember, that it was $600 of aid for farm workers who worked during COVID. But they never said, if you sign, we're going to come to your work. And in total, Wonderful submitted about 150 signed declarations from other workers that they didn't understand that they were also voting to unionize. And about 100 of them drove pretty far to the ALRB's regional offices to protest the unionization. Obviously, there's been a lot of back and forth about this. Both sides are claiming that the other's story is a complete fabrication, that coercion takes place. UFW's communications director calling the allegation categorically false and claiming that Wonderful Nurseries pressured workers into signing those declarations and going to the protest.

With them also pointing out how the company has hired a consultancy firm well known for union busting. As a matter of fact, that firm is also part of the mystery of what exactly happened here. Right. Raul Calvo is a consultant who helps agricultural businesses avoid unions. And it was after that UFW meeting that he met with the workers to talk about what happened and what the UFW called a captive audience. With workers then claiming that it was only once Calvo explained that they had voted to be in a union that they realized what had happened. With them also probably paying extra attention because Calvo pointed out that 3% of their paychecks would go to union dues.

And as one worker told the LA Times, thanks to Calvo, we understood what was happening because the union never really explained what they did. But then this is other workers say, that's not really what happened. Instead saying Calvo was the one who first put the idea into the worker's head that they were tricked. Or that some of these same people who had been stoked on the idea of the union were suddenly now renouncing it. Allegedly at the pressure of supervisors. So now the ALRB is dealing with Wonderful Nursery's appeal of the process and shifting through contradictory stories of what happened.

And all this, as it should be noted, this is not the first time even recently that the UFW has been at the center of such a scandal. In another case, UFW was accused by a regional packing house of falsifying drive cards, the thing Governor Newsom was worried about when he first vetoed the bill, although the ALRB didn't find them credible. Also adding a wrinkle to all of this is that some of Newsom's biggest donors come from California's massive agricultural business. But also, regardless of whether UFW was engaged in some sort of scheme or not, this entire thing could also end up hurting its credibility.

And this is the union used to be massive back in the 60s and 70s with nearly 80,000 members. But since then, it is dwindled to just now barely 5,000. And that's after its recent wins throughout California. And obviously, if the allegations are true, that's a massive problem, both legally and with the people they're supposed to protect. But then even if they're not true, I mean, just the allegations alone could be enough to poison workers against them, especially because they're coming from wonderful nurseries. Which I

will say, do not get this confused with like me trying to grandstand for some mega corporation. But you've many pointing out that when it comes to large farm companies in the Central Valley, wonderful nurseries is actually considered one of the best to work for. They pay above minimum wage, which farm workers often struggle to even legally get. They offer widespread benefits that are often unheard of in that industry. Additionally, they're well known for trying to help build up the communities their workers live in with stuff like parks. And again, I'm not trying to sell them. I'm explaining why for a lot of workers, they're pretty popular.

Because again, when we're talking about that, like we're kind of grading on a curve here because things could certainly be better. It's just that the farm industry is generally so shit that anything considered remotely normal in another industry is a gold standard. But for now, we're going to have to see what comes from all of this, and we'll have our eyes on it. And then finally, today, we got two things. First, congrats to Amaya W., the latest winner of the weekly $500 giveaway towards any tickets on Seat Geek. They're looking like Amaya's going to see glass animals with her fiance. And remember, Seat Geek and The Daily Dip are still giving away up to $1,000 in tickets, and you should definitely enter today if you haven't already. Literally, all you got to do, add code PDS to your SeatGeek app profile for a chance at the weekly $500 prize, no purchase necessary.

And $1,000 prizes are available to Daily Dip subscribers who add code PDS newsletter, doubling entries and winning. But then also, too, we've got comment commenter. We dive into the comments in the last show and see what y'all were saying. With a number of the top comments yesterday talking about Ethan Klein and that whole Ticketmaster situation. With Sean Mack saying, It's very scary Ethan didn't know that Ticketmaster had raised his show tickets. The fact that Ticketmaster can do that without telling him, he clearly has zero control over his own show when it comes to ticket sales.

You know, in that, I will say there was some Ethan Klein slander, but I just, I want to make something clear. Part of the reason we talked about the Ethan Klein situation is it's a continuation of of things that we've seen both like that that mainstream artists have been struggling but also online creators as well i mean we even talked about dropout tv and dimension 20 having an issue of what a few months ago and hanaj and beat of the bop adding with this ethan said their ticket master rep didn't explain it correctly and they presented it as an anti-scalper algorithm saying so they got his approval by literally lying to him and noting like we've talked about on the show that ticket master has exclusive contracts with venues, so there's really no escaping them. And VanceV99 saying here, the fact that he's openly calling it out and trying

to refund everyone shows he's actually genuine about his reaction. Also yesterday, there was some back and forth regarding Zendaya and the whole sex debate regarding Challengers and the future of cinema, with Austin saying, people analyzing these film trends and concluding sexy scenes are popular, do more of that, is the same reductive reasoning that has made film so uninteresting over the last decade. And when asked how, another user by the name of Chess responded, just doing something because it's popular without understanding why it is popular. Not just sex scenes, but other tropes as well. Which, you know, with that, I would say yes and no. Like, for example, there's been a massive decrease in the number of R-rated comedies that we would see every year. And then also in specific genres, like, let's say, superhero movies.

It's part of the reason it was such a big deal that Deadpool got an R rating, that Logan got an R rating. I'm not saying Logan is a comedy. You know, when the industry sees success in an avenue that they've strayed away from in years because they want, you know, mass market approval, that's a big deal because it can be seen as a green light.

So if people have wanted to do it, all of a sudden they can. But yeah, there are gonna be no shortage of screenplays and movies that are just like sex, sex, sex, and not realize why the scenes in like Challengers or why the scenes in Salt Burn, they were so impactful. But you're always going to see that in any business or entertainment venue, thoughtful and creative and expressive versus quick cash grab. But hey, that is where today's show is going to end, though. There's really a lot more that I want to talk about today, which is probably going to be why tomorrow is going to be such a big show.

Definitely come back for that. But I'll leave you how I always do, saying my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love yo faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.