The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 6.11 Why People Are Freaking Out About Jaclyn Hill & Jojo Siwa, Alabama Law Controversy, & More

Starting point is 00:00:00 Sup you beautiful bastards, hope you have a fantastic Tuesday. 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 entertainment slash business news, where we have the likes of Jojo Siwa and Jaclyn Hill in the news. And the reason these two just massive creators are in the news is because there are reported problems with products they've released to their audiences. The first being that the FDA actually had to tweet out a safety alert around a Jojo Siwa makeup kit, tweeting,

Starting point is 00:00:26 "'Today the FDA is releasing new results "'from its continued testing of cosmetic products "'for asbestos and is warning consumers "'to not use two additional products "'that have tested positive for asbestos "'and have been recalled.'" Unfortunately, that tweet really wasn't seen by that many people, so just let me help spread the warning.

Starting point is 00:00:40 If you know anyone that has purchased these products, most likely for a small child, tell them it has been recalled because it has tested positive for asbestos. And that the FDA recommends that they cease usage immediately. And actually, also, if they've purchased anything from Klairs recently.

Starting point is 00:00:54 Because this most recent report comes just months after several other Klairs products tested positive for asbestos. So there was that, and then there was the Jaclyn Hill situation. She's an incredibly large beauty YouTuber and Instagram influencer. She launched Jaclyn Hill Cosmetics at the end of May,

Starting point is 00:01:06 releasing a line of nude lipsticks, and if you go to social media right now, there are some not so pleased fans. We've seen people posting photos of damaged products, others claiming that the product immediately crumbled, others posting photos of what appear to be bumps on the lipstick. People have also been asking, is this hair on my lipstick?

Starting point is 00:01:22 Another creator by the name of Raw Beauty Christy put it under a microscope. And for the beauty ignorant like myself, she also compared and contrasted the Jaclyn Hill lipsticks along with what she called normal lipsticks. We saw people responding to that video saying that the hairs looked like mold or fungus, including several people who said that they were scientists

Starting point is 00:01:37 or microbiologists. You also saw people saying the same things on Twitter. And as with all controversies that gain steam, we then were hit with the memes, like this one from Chris Clemons who tweeted, Jacqueline Hill lipstick or legs? But, you know, you had the situation where it seemed that fans and customers were displeased.

Starting point is 00:01:52 And in response to all of this, she sent out a few tweets thanking people for what she called unbiased feedback. Saying she doesn't take any of this lightly. That her and her team are working non-stop to address any and all issues. Putting out an email address for anyone that wants a full refund or new product. She also later tweeted that they're looking

Starting point is 00:02:06 into what's causing the grittiness and bumpy texture. Regarding what people have been describing as the hairs on the lipstick, she said, "'My factory used brand new white gloves "'to do quality control and they shed all over my products. "'We switched to rubber gloves two days ago "'and we'll make sure this never happens again.'" But people are then pointing to footage of her in the factory

Starting point is 00:02:21 where she appears to be wearing plastic blue gloves. Hill also apologizing for her reaction and tweet towards someone who was unhappy with her product. That tweet had read, Why is my lipstick lumpy? This can't be okay, right? He'll then responded, You posted swatches two days ago loving the lipstick. Now you're wondering why it's lumpy? It's obvious this lipstick is used and not fresh from factory. Like any other lipstick, if you use it over other products, have dry lips, etc., things like this can happen.

Starting point is 00:02:42 I knew a good number of people that were bothered by that because they felt that she was blaming the fan. But also part of this ties into some making accusations that she's selling old or kind of expired product. And on that note, we saw the Jaclyn Cosmetics account tweet, "'Some lipsticks were exposed to high temperatures "'where the raw materials were not blended thoroughly,' but then added that they were only seeing

Starting point is 00:02:58 "'less than 0.1% of products that had issues.'" But ultimately, that's where we are with this story. You do have some fans saying that they're gonna be reporting this to the FDA, some seemingly not buying the responses from Jaclyn Hill and her team. And so right now we have to wait to see if anything happens there, or if people are just saying they're going to do it and they don't do it. Also as time goes on, we'll be able to see how widespread this issue actually is, or is it actually as minimal as Jaclyn Hill Cosmetics says. It appears we might get more answers soon because as I was finishing

Starting point is 00:03:24 up the story, Jaclyn Hill tweeted, "'I plan on breaking my silence "'and addressing the issues regarding my lipsticks very soon. "'I've been working hard to gather all of the facts "'and details so I can give you accurate answers. "'I appreciate you allowing me time "'to wrap my head around all of this and investigate.'" Yeah, with that said, I pass the question off to you,

Starting point is 00:03:38 especially if you're someone that is a part of the beauty community. I'd love to know your thoughts here, and if I can take this time, I would like to let you know that any hair you find at beautifulbastard.com inside of our pomade, it's there on purpose, it is my hair, and you're welcome. That's not a contaminated product.

Starting point is 00:03:53 You are a randomly selected winner. Moving on. And then very briefly, let's talk about some news news. And I'm really interested to know your thoughts around this. Axios.com put out this very interesting piece called A Nation of News Consumption Hypocrites. They pair data from a traffic analytics company called Parsley and a poll asking people what kind of stories do they want. And essentially what they

Starting point is 00:04:12 say they found here is that what people say they want to consume doesn't always line up with what they actually consume. They found things like while the consumption for national security politics and sports were number one, two, and three. The quote unquote demand had those at number five, number 10, and number 14. And the number one, two, three of what people were quote unquote demanding was healthcare, climate change, and education. But actual consumption reportedly came in at number seven,

Starting point is 00:04:35 number five, and 11. Obviously this is just one story, right? It's the connection between a traffic analytics company and what they put out regarding a poll. But I think if we're really honest with ourselves, I don't imagine this is too far off base. So I really wanna pass a question off to you and I want you to try and be really honest with yourself.

Starting point is 00:04:51 Do you personally find in your life that there is a difference between the news that you want more of or you say that you want more of and what you actually consume at a greater rate? Obviously our desires and our actions, they change day to day based off of the world around us, what is happening. But in general, do you find part of this to be true?

Starting point is 00:05:07 And if so, in what way? Then let's talk about this new bill that was just signed in Alabama. Yesterday in Alabama, Governor Kay Ivey signed a piece of legislation that would require convicted child sex offenders to undergo chemical castration before being released from prison.

Starting point is 00:05:20 And specifically what we're talking about here is once in effect, the law will apply to offenders whose victims were under the age of 13. They would begin taking pills that reduce hormones that drive libido starting one month before their scheduled release. And while on parole the offender would be required to take the pills as long as the courts feel is necessary. And there's also a monetary element to this because the offender would also be required to pay for their own treatment. Though regarding that the law does say that a person can't be denied parole based on their inability to cover the treatment. And it also says that if they're caught not taking the pills, that would count

Starting point is 00:05:45 as a parole violation, meaning that they could end up back in jail. And as far as the people involved with this bill, you had Governor Ivey saying this is a step toward protecting children in Alabama. Regarding the legislation, it was started by State Representative Steve Hearst. According to several reports, he has long advocated

Starting point is 00:05:58 for the castration of sex offenders. In the past, even proposing a bill requiring surgical castration for offenders with victims under 13, and Hearst claims that he's received a lot of support from a number of survivors for the bill that just passed. And also saying, quote, "'I'm very serious. "'Not only did I want it to pass,

Starting point is 00:06:12 "'I want to follow it on through to the future "'where we can try to improve it. "'One of the ultimate goals that I want to do "'is for us to track it and to make sure "'what medication works for what individuals.'" Now, with all of that said, if this law sounds familiar to you, that's because it actually is.

Starting point is 00:06:24 In fact, several other states have passed a law involving chemical castration for sex offenders. States like California, Florida, Montana, Louisiana, Texas, and Wisconsin all have laws allowing chemical castration to some extent. However, the degrees in which it's actually used vary from state to state. And in some of those states, the process is not required,

Starting point is 00:06:39 but rather, it's something that an offender can choose to do to quicken their parole process. But even with all these states that have passed similar laws, it's unclear how often the process is actually practiced. Now as you might imagine, there are of course critics of this law, critics of chemical castration in general, and those people note that the process

Starting point is 00:06:53 can have severe side effects including depression and anemia. In 2006, a law professor at the University of Florida, John Steneford, wrote a paper calling the process both impractical and cruel, saying that laws like these treat sex offenders like they have a sexual disorder, but he claims this is not the case, saying many of these offenders may be incorrigibly bad, dangerous, or antisocial people, but they do not suffer from a sexual sickness.

Starting point is 00:07:12 Thus, subjecting them to chemical castration is not even arguably medically appropriate. Also saying that he believes it should constitute as cruel and unusual punishment because, quote, chemical castration is designed both to shackle the mind and cripple the body of sex offenders. It is doubly cruel and should be struck down as a violation of the Eighth Amendment. And more recently, you had the likes of Randall Marshall, executive director at the ACLU of Alabama, saying, "'It's not clear that this actually has any effect

Starting point is 00:07:34 "'on whether it's even medically proven. "'When the state starts experimenting on people, "'I think it runs afoul of the Constitution.'" However, regarding this, Representative Hearst is a counterpoint to those who believe that it is inhumane, saying and asking, what's more inhumane than molesting a small infant child? But ultimately, that is where we are with this story,

Starting point is 00:07:50 and of course, I pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts regarding this law? Are you in support of it? Are you completely against it? If somewhere in the middle you have some concerns, any and all thoughts, I'd love to hear from you, because, I mean, regarding my opinion, I'm extremely biased. I think if you're a child sex offender or a child molester,

Starting point is 00:08:06 you're not even a person to me. I feel like you've been stripped of your human hood. And I know that is not helpful in regards to having a rational conversation around this story, which obviously connects to basic human rights. And so I guess for me, it's more of the question of, will this be effective? How often would it be implemented?

Starting point is 00:08:19 Because according to the Hill, state Senator Cam Ward, the bill's state Senate sponsor, said the law was unlikely to be frequently applied as most people convicted of sex offenses against children will not be up for parole. But yeah, like I said, I pass the question off to you here. And the last thing we're gonna talk about today

Starting point is 00:08:32 is this fascinating news coming out of Russia. So last Thursday, a well-known Russian investigative journalist by the name of Ivan Golunov was detained and searched by police. And the officer said that they found drugs in his backpack and also claimed that when they searched his apartment that they found more drugs and other paraphernalia.

Starting point is 00:08:45 Golinov was later charged with drug trafficking, he was taken to prison, and he denied these charges, saying instead that he was being framed for his reporting on high-level Russian corruption. You see, Golinov had been writing for an online publication called Meduza, which is Russian-owned, but is operated in Latvia to avoid persecution.

Starting point is 00:08:59 And after his arrest, Meduza published a statement online writing, "'We are convinced that Ivan Golinov is innocent. "'Moreover, we have reason to believe that Golinov is being persecuted because of his journalistic activities. And this statement also outlined suspicious activities surrounding his arrest. Like how the police refused his lawyer's request

Starting point is 00:09:13 that they test his hands and nails to see if he had touched narcotics. And how he'd been beaten by police when he was detained, but when he and his lawyer requested to go to a hospital, he was also denied that. It also claimed that he had received threats over his work in recent months. And this was by no means the end

Starting point is 00:09:25 of the questionable police activity. Following Golinov's arrest, the police launched their own publicity campaign, publishing nine incriminating pictures of drugs in a pharmaceutical scale that they claimed they took at Golinov's apartment. But regarding that, several journalists quickly established that the pictures weren't actually taken in his apartment.

Starting point is 00:09:38 And that ultimately led to the police actually backtracking and admitting that most of the pictures were in fact taken elsewhere. And this was perceived as such a phenomenal mess up that even the Russian government acknowledged that there was conflicting information in the case, with a Kremlin spokesperson saying, "'We have paid attention to the corrections

Starting point is 00:09:52 "'that were later published, "'and we also proceed from the fact "'that there are several issues "'that are in need of a clarification.'" But as it turns out, that was the least of the government's problem. After the news of Golunov's arrest spread, we saw a huge response.

Starting point is 00:10:03 On Friday, Russian journalists launched a protest in front of the police headquarters in Moscow, which ended up being really interesting because under Russian law, protesters are required to get permits two weeks before planned demonstration. But in regards to that, the protesters came up with a clever solution.

Starting point is 00:10:15 Instead of all protesting together, activists took turns standing one at a time, holding a sign for about 15 minutes or so, and then passing the post off to another person. And so you had people lining up and down the block to take part in this one person protest. A line that was reportedly so long that people waited for hours.

Starting point is 00:10:29 Now still, unsurprisingly, police special forces moved quickly to detain about a dozen protesters. This including some prominent Russian journalists who were held in custody for a little while before being released. But even as that was happening, the line kept getting longer and longer and these protests continued all weekend.

Starting point is 00:10:41 In fact, even moving to the court where Golinov was set to appear for a hearing. Also at the same time, there were a number of Russian celebrities and artists taking to social media calling for Golunov's release, saying that his arrest was a violation of freedom of speech and an important test case for rule of law. But one of the most surprising moves came on Monday

Starting point is 00:10:55 when three leading Russian business newspapers published the same exact front pages with the headline, I slash we are Ivan Golunov. While all three of these newspapers are private rather than state owned, all of them are usually very loyal to the Russian government. So it was a very big deal. And in fact, after that,

Starting point is 00:11:09 we even saw a few very prominent pro-government broadcasters expressing skepticism about this case. And reportedly a petition calling for his release received 7,500 signatures from other journalists, including those who worked for state owned outlets. Right, so we're talking about something that really just does not happen in Russia ever. And so as a result, experts have described the act as an unprecedented expression of solidarity with another journalist,

Starting point is 00:11:28 as well as an unprecedented defiance of the Kremlin. And while we're talking about things that basically just don't happen in Russia, the government actually seemed to listen to the people. Just today, Russia's interior minister announced that Golinov had been released and all charges against him had been dropped. And in a statement to the Associated Press, the Interior Minister said that the accusations against Golinov have not been proven. The AP also reporting that the Interior Minister, quote, "'Intends to seek the dismissal

Starting point is 00:11:50 "'of three senior police officials "'and to investigate others.'" And so ultimately, that is where we are with the story right now. And obviously, while this story is exciting, it appears to be a watershed moment for journalists in Russia, you also have people wondering,

Starting point is 00:12:01 is this just a one-time occurrence? While Russia has long and generally been criticized for its treatment of independent journalists, they have significantly ramped up their censorship efforts in the past few months. As you might remember, back in March, we covered Vladimir Putin signing two new laws that punish anyone who spread, quote, fake news

Starting point is 00:12:15 or insulted the government with heavy fines and jail time. And under those laws, online media can be reported to the government, which can then block access to websites if the content violates the law. And it's also important to note that the arrest that we were talking about today was not an isolated incident. As noted by Meduza, when they published an article on Friday,

Starting point is 00:12:29 they listed eight other journalists and activists who have gotten prison time for quote-unquote drug charges over the last few years. But ultimately, that is where we are right now. We're gonna have to wait to see what happens next. And of course, I pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts on this? Do you think this is a one-time moment

Starting point is 00:12:43 because so many people are paying attention? Or do you think this could be a lasting change? Or is there another angle to this that people aren't talking about? And that's where I'm going to end today's show. And remember, if you like this video, love if you took a second to hit that like button. If you're new here, definitely hit that subscribe button, ring that bell to turn on notifications. Also, if you're not 100% filled in, maybe you missed the last Philip DeFranco show. Maybe you want to check out that extra bonus video of me interviewing my son. 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 00:13:09 You've just been filled in. I love yo faces and I'll see you tomorrow.

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 6.11 Why People Are Freaking Out About Jaclyn Hill & Jojo Siwa, Alabama Law Controversy, & More

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