Imagine that an executive of a major corporation sits down for dinner at a restaurant. Unbeknownst to him, it&#8217;s a sting operation. Everything he says is being recorded. Very quickly, in order to impress someone he thinks is interested in him, the executive confesses that his company is lying to the American public. In secret, the executive says, they&#8217;re thinking about conducting extremely dangerous medical experiments within the borders of the United States — and these experiments are similar to the ones in Wuhan that led to the COVID pandemic. Then the executive admits that government regulators aren&#8217;t scrutinizing these experiments as much as they should, for the simple reason that they don&#8217;t want to jeopardize their potential future job opportunities at the corporation. And then imagine that, once the executive realizes he&#8217;s on camera and that he&#8217;s just confessed to a fraud on the American public, he begins screaming and crawling on the floor of the restaurant. In his hysteria, he pushes people away, tries to hide his face, and ultimately runs away. He demonstrates a clear consciousness of guilt, in other words.
What do you think the end result of this kind of episode might be? In a rational world, you might expect, at a minimum, that this executive would be fired, and that his company would immediately be investigated — both by the government, and by every media organization in the country. After all, it&#8217;s not every day that a corporate executive admits that his company is working on research that could cause another pandemic. He also just divulged trade secrets on camera, which you&#8217;d think would upset his bosses.
But in reality, none of those things happened. 
The situation I just described took place in early 2023, when Project Veritas secretly filmed a senior official in Pfizer&#8217;s research and development division. You might remember that whole episode. Pfizer came out and denied, essentially, that the executive had meant what he said. As far as we know, the company took no action against him. In the end, Pfizer, needless to say, did not suffer any significant consequences. They remain one of the largest and most profitable corporations on the planet. But incredibly, the people who exposed the Pfizer executive didn&#8217;t fare so well. It was like Pfizer pulled a Reverse Uno card. 
For one thing, Project Veritas did not survive. It collapsed soon afterwards. So did the one show on cable news that covered Project Veritas&#8217; reporting, Fox News&#8217; &#8220;Tucker Carlson Tonight.&#8221; They were taken off the air shortly after covering the Pfizer sting operation, for reasons that remain officially undisclosed. To restate: Less than five months after a Pfizer executive was exposed and humiliated on camera, everyone who talked about the scandal was deplatformed. Meanwhile the executive went back to work.
If you wanted to illustrate the extraordinary power that the pharmaceutical industry has in this country, you&#8217;d be hard pressed to find a better example. One way or another, people who criticize them tend to lose their platforms. That&#8217;s a level of protection that very few other corporations have, regardless of their financial situation. Tesla, for example, is about ten times the size of Pfizer by market cap. And as we all know, they&#8217;re subjected to constant media attacks. So what is it about the pharmaceutical industry, specifically, that makes them so hard to criticize?
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1563-member-exclusive">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
The leading theory, which we&#8217;ve talked about before, is that companies like Pfizer essentially buy off the media. You can&#8217;t watch Fox or CNN or MSNBC without seeing an ad from the pharmaceutical industry. In total, the pharmaceutical industry <a href="https://substack.com/home/post/p-159740117?utm_campaign=post&amp;utm_medium=web" target="_blank" rel="noopener">spends</a> something like $5 billion on advertising every year — which in some years, is <a href="https://marylandmatters.org/2024/01/19/report-finds-some-drug-manufacturers-spend-more-on-advertising-executives-salaries-than-new-research/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">more</a> than they spend on research and development. And a lot of this spending is concentrated on news stations. As the journalist Kyle Becker reported on his Substack, &#8220;Nearly 31% of ad minutes on major nightly news broadcasts in 2024 came from pharmaceutical brands.&#8221; If you watch any amount of cable news, you know that figure is probably accurate. Turn the television on, and you&#8217;ll probably see one of these ads within five minutes. These are among the most lucrative ad purchases — pushing drugs like Ozempic, Skyrizi, &#8220;Vyvgart Hytrulo,&#8221; and so on. Naturally, that kind of spending leads to favorable coverage. Big Pharma doesn&#8217;t even need to establish any kind of quid pro quo, or request anything from the news networks. It&#8217;s just generally understood that, if you&#8217;re working for one of these networks, you should go easy on the pharma giants.
This dynamic is one of the reasons why a lot of people took notice recently, on hearing the news that RFK Jr. and the HHS had supposedly implemented a total ban on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Those reports turned out to be inaccurate, at least for the time being. But RFK Jr. has pledged to implement a similar ban in the past. And he&#8217;s been very clear about his reasoning. While he was campaigning for Trump last year, and while he was leading his own presidential bid, for example, RFK Jr. made the point that pharmaceutical advertising has compromised the news industry. He&#8217;s also said that, in part because of these advertisements, Americans spend far more on prescription drugs than pretty much every other major country. By some estimates we spend more than twice as much.
And it&#8217;s logical to conclude that advertising plays some role in those numbers. When people see an advertisement for a new prescription drug, they&#8217;re more likely to tell their doctor they want it, as opposed to a cheaper generic brand. Keep in mind, only two countries on the planet allow direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising: the United States and New Zealand. The vast majority of the civilized world has rejected this kind of marketing. And one of the obvious consequences of this carve-out for big pharma is that they sell a lot more drugs to people who otherwise wouldn&#8217;t pay for them. They wouldn&#8217;t spend $5 billion a year on advertisements if that weren&#8217;t true. (And this isn&#8217;t even getting into Big Pharma advertisements and solicitations that target physicians and other professionals).
Just to give one example, in 2022, the manufacturer of the drug Skyrizie, AbbVie, spent around $229 million advertising the drug that year. The next year, AbbVie decided to increase its advertising budget for the drug by more than double. And the results were clear: drug sales went up to $7.8 billion, an increase of roughly 50% year-over-year. There was no major FDA approval that occurred in this period. The drug&#8217;s formula didn&#8217;t change in some way. Instead, more people heard about it, so more people asked their doctors for it. And by the way, the vast majority of the $7.8 billion came from customers in the United States, because they&#8217;re pretty much the only people seeing the advertisements.
This advertising exemption, of course, is just one of several carve-outs that Big Pharma enjoys in this country. It&#8217;s also nearly impossible to sue them when one of their vaccines ends up hurting or killing you, thanks to a federal law passed three decades ago. But the advertising carve-out is one of the most important ones, because it has a lot of downstream effects that aren&#8217;t immediately obvious. One of those effects is that the ads increase the price of the drugs. When billions of dollars are spent on advertising, inevitably that cost will be passed on to the consumers. This is basic economics and common sense, and doctors see it everyday. As far back as a decade ago — when direct-to-consumer advertising was much less common than it is today — the American Medical Association noticed the problem. They voted to ban all direct-to-consumer advertising.
The chair of the AMA, a woman named Patrice Harris, announced that, “Today’s vote in support of an advertising ban reflects concerns among physicians about the negative impact of commercially-driven promotions, and the role that marketing costs play in fueling escalating drug prices. Direct-to-consumer advertising also inflates demand for new and more expensive drugs, even when these drugs may not be appropriate.”
It&#8217;s true that, by law, these advertisements have to list all of the potential side effects. Invariably, they rattle them off at the end of the commercial, and they do it so quickly that you can&#8217;t really tell what&#8217;s happening in some cases. Pretty much everyone ignores these disclaimers at this point, because they all end up sounding like a bizarre list of horrible afflictions, always ending in death or paralysis or something catastrophic. You can watch an ad for Claritin and they&#8217;ll tell you that the side effects could include getting hit by a train or something. It&#8217;s almost as if the drugmakers have trained us to become numb to all of these potential side effects, and to think they&#8217;re all extremely rare and unlikely to occur.
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
That&#8217;s because, even with the often comically long disclaimer at the end of these drug commercials, the ads still don&#8217;t do enough to emphasize the potential side effects and dangers of the drugs. They don&#8217;t discuss the relative risk of every side effect, or how common they are, for example. And that makes sense because ads — regardless of who&#8217;s making them — are meant to manipulate and create an emotional response in a very short period of time. That&#8217;s fine when you&#8217;re selling cars or clothing or whatever. But it just shouldn&#8217;t be the way medical treatments are presented to the public. People should consult with professionals when they&#8217;re seeking these treatments, instead of watching paid actors sing a song about it.
But pharmaceutical ads, by design, short-circuit this process. They allow Big Pharma companies to sell the disease, not just the cure. They convince people that they have such-and-such a disorder and enlist them to go to their doctor and request the drug to treat it. This is totally backwards. You&#8217;re supposed to go to the doctor with your symptoms, not with a wishlist of drugs you want to receive. Pharma ads have helped to turn doctors into glorified drug dealers. About a dozen studies bear this out. Patients who go to the doctor and say &#8220;I saw an ad for Paxlovid&#8221; or &#8220;I saw an ad for Prozac&#8221; are a lot more likely to get that drug, than a patient who simply presents with depression-related symptoms. And on top of that, these advertisements have also contributed to the perception that, whatever problem you might have — whether it&#8217;s depression, or &#8220;feeling like you&#8217;re in the wrong body,&#8221; or whatever — that a drug from Big Pharma can be the solution. As we&#8217;ve discussed, this is a sentiment that has ruined the lives of thousands of people, including children.
Part of the reason this perception has been allowed to fester, as Liz Wheeler pointed out the other day, is that there&#8217;s no critical reporting on Big Pharma in the mainstream press. The pharmaceutical industry is allowed to buy billions of dollars&#8217; worth of advertising, which presents them as the solution to everyone&#8217;s problems. And then the press — along with many scientific institutions that also receive money from Big Pharma— don&#8217;t have any incentive to contradict the narrative. If and when HHS does ban these advertisements, then suddenly, that incentive will reappear. Very quickly, corporate media will fail, because they&#8217;ll be deprived of most of their advertising revenue. And in their place will be a slew of investigations by actual journalists into the various grotesque abuses of power by the medical establishment in recent years — on everything from gender ideology to the COVID shot.
As of right now, again, it appears that the reports were wrong about an imminent ban on these direct-to-consumer advertisements. But there are reasons to think that RFK Jr. and HHS are still planning to implement one. If that comes to pass — and there are indicators it will — then it would inevitably set up a major legal battle between Big Pharma and the federal government on First Amendment grounds. They will claim that they have the constitutional right to flood the airwaves with sales pitches for extremely potent medications that could ruin your life. But they don&#8217;t have that right, any more than the local drug dealer does. If RFK Jr. can win this fight, then in one fell swoop, he will destroy the corporate press, save billions of dollars for Americans, and usher in a new era of skepticism for an industry that badly needs it. He would be the single most consequential HHS secretary in the history of this country. All he needs to do is what pretty much every country in the world is already doing, which is to tell Big Pharma to get off our televisions.

Ozempic, Victoza and Wegovy, injectable prescription weight loss medicines.

All The Reasons Why Big Pharma Commercials Should Be Banned

advertising

Big Pharma

Department of Health and Human Services

Doctors

Drugs

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Ozempic

Pfizer

Project Veritas

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro announced that he’ll be taking a fresh approach with a new ad partner in 2025. Instead of traditional ad reads, “The Ben Shapiro Show,” one of the most popular podcasts in the world, will integrate the AI search platform Perplexity as part of their first native ad integration.
Perplexity will be used mid-show to verify claims, explore cultural topics, and highlight Shapiro’s unapologetic pursuit of highlighting “facts over feelings,” per <a href="https://www.adweek.com/media/daily-wire-perplexity-ben-shapiro-show/">ADWEEK</a>.
A press release for the initiative called Perplexity &#8220;the conversational &#8216;answer engine&#8217; designed to revolutionize the way users discover information.&#8221;
&#8220;Perplexity provides instant, factual, and unbiased answers to any question with full sources and citations included, sparing users from having to compare answers or endlessly dig for information,&#8221; the press release adds.
The tech company’s chief business officer Dmitry Shevelenko said of the partnership, “Ben very much prides himself on fearlessly pursuing the truth. This was just a good fit.”
&#8220;The world changes fast, and now Ben doesn&#8217;t have to search endless webpages of information because he can turn to Perplexity for real-time context and facts on the most important issues of the day,&#8221; Shevelenko added.
The pair met at President Donald Trump’s inauguration in January. The partnership represents a shift in how tech companies treat conservatives, which previously had been extremely biased toward leftists. It was also telling that Google and Meta heads were present at the inauguration.
“Trump went on a bunch of podcasts, and it helped him win,” Shevelenko said. “If there’s a lesson from 2024 …  not choosing to engage with certain types of media is not good strategy. You need to be where a lot of people are.”
Perplexity, which has a valuation of $9 billion, also did a spot during a Sunday Night Football ad featuring Chargers coach Jim Harbaugh &#8212; but, the outlet noted, the deal with “The Ben Shapiro Show” is a little different, as it aims to integrate seamlessly with the content and not feel so much like a traditional ad.
The Daily Wire’s SVP of Ad Revenue Christine Hoffman called the new partnership “significant.” 
“This would put Perplexity in the range of our top ad partners who are currently spending with The Daily Wire,” Hoffmann said.
&#8220;Ben has famously quipped that ‘Facts Don’t Care About Your Feelings,’ so we’re thrilled to partner with a company like Perplexity that aligns so well with Ben’s—and his audience’s—reverence for the truth.&#8221; added Hoffmann.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
THE TAKEDOWN: AOC losing to facts in today&#39;s Takedown segment powered by new search partner <a href="https://twitter.com/perplexity_ai?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@perplexity_ai</a> <a href="https://t.co/9JAdJYknGV">pic.twitter.com/9JAdJYknGV</a>
&mdash; The Ben Shapiro Show (@BenShapiroShow) <a href="https://twitter.com/BenShapiroShow/status/1898092559726981135?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Shapiro utilized the new partnership on his show which aired on Friday, March 7, during a segment of the podcast called The Takedown. While refuting Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) claim that President Trump just pushed through tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires, Shapiro asked Perplexity, “What percentage of total income taxes did the top 1% pay in 2016, and what percentage did the top 1% pay in income taxes in 2020?”
The search platform found that in 2016, the top 1% paid 37.3%, and in 2020, they paid nearly 42% of all income taxes. 
“So all that talk about how the richest in our society were sort of disproportionately benefited by the Trump tax cuts – if that’s so, then why did we pay a larger share of the taxes total than we did before the Trump tax cuts?” Shapiro asked.

Perplexity

‘The Ben Shapiro Show’ Takes Fresh Approach To Advertising With Perplexity Search Partnership

'The Ben Shapiro Show' Takes Fresh Approach To Advertising With Perplexity Search Partnership

Ben Shapiro

Technology

The Ben Shapiro Show

The Daily Wire

U.S.

A promotional video featuring a handful of female Democrats taking fight stances — while theme music from the Super Smash Brothers video game plays in the background — got absolutely trashed by critics.
In the video, which was originally posted on TikTok by influencer Sulhee Jessica Woo, also featured several female Democratic House members along with their &#8220;stats&#8221; — each of whom was shown posturing or shadowboxing for several seconds.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Our side will be in power forever if this is our opposition <a href="https://t.co/JnrKQhEchl">pic.twitter.com/JnrKQhEchl</a>
&mdash; End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1897638214174687633?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Woo superimposed angel wings on herself to kick off the video, listing her own stats as follows: &#8220;bento box queen; mommy of the century; sleep deprived.&#8221; Her post also included the hashtags, &#8220;#womenshistorymonth, #womenwhofight, #fighter, #savedemocracy, and #girlpower.&#8221;
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) appeared next, along with her stats: &#8220;New York&#8217;s 14th Congressional District; youngest women + Latina to be elected to the House; Trekkie.&#8221;
Next came Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-IL), who was described as the &#8220;youngest black woman ever elected to Congress; cofounded the black maternal office,&#8221; and &#8220;hates balloons.&#8221;
The video went on to describe Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA), the House Minority Whip, as being from Massachusetts&#8217; 5th Congressional District and noted that she was &#8220;not into hair dye.&#8221;
Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) was described as &#8220;too sweet,&#8221; and the post noted that she was the first Chinese-American woman elected to Congress.
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) had the following stats listed: &#8220;Texas&#8217; 30th Congressional District; Public defender + attorney; not a morning person.&#8221;
The video concluded with Rep. Susie Lee (D-NV), who serves Nevada&#8217;s 3rd Congressional District, is &#8220;President of Communities in Schools of Nevada,&#8221; and apparently has &#8220;2 sprained fingers.&#8221;
Critics were not impressed with the attempt, however, and made it clear in their responses on X.
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), for example, responded to the video with an application to clown college.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/184U1OTDF4">https://t.co/184U1OTDF4</a> <a href="https://t.co/80EXti6uWA">pic.twitter.com/80EXti6uWA</a>
&mdash; Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1897678059399987620?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Mark Hemingway added, &#8220;I literally wrote a piece this morning headlined, &#8216;Democrats’ Biggest Problem Right Now Is That They Are Out Of Touch And Uncool.&#8217; I rest my case.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I literally wrote a piece this morning headlined, &quot;Democrats’ Biggest Problem Right Now Is That They Are Out Of Touch And Uncool.&quot;
I rest my case. <a href="https://t.co/uCfdQ7pivt">https://t.co/uCfdQ7pivt</a> <a href="https://t.co/uE7vZtIFgU">https://t.co/uE7vZtIFgU</a>
&mdash; Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) <a href="https://twitter.com/Heminator/status/1897657993308569949?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Oh my goodness,&#8221; was all former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer could manage.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
oh my goodness <a href="https://t.co/ZoJcOGOQjy">https://t.co/ZoJcOGOQjy</a>
&mdash; Sean Spicer (@seanspicer) <a href="https://twitter.com/seanspicer/status/1897668867926700381?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Why can’t they just be normal?&#8221; another asked.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Why can’t they just be normal <a href="https://t.co/xau1OjkzwI">https://t.co/xau1OjkzwI</a>
&mdash; Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) <a href="https://twitter.com/EmmaJoNYC/status/1897678392855519352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;This is nuts. Dems are getting terrible political advice. As @elonmusk says, this is not rocket science. It’s politics 101 — and the Dems are failing,&#8221; Tom Bevan posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is nuts. Dems are getting terrible political advice. As <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@elonmusk</a> says, this is not rocket science. It’s politics 101 &#8211; and the Dems are failing. <a href="https://t.co/Z44zyEKdd7">https://t.co/Z44zyEKdd7</a>
&mdash; Tom Bevan (@TomBevanRCP) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomBevanRCP/status/1897634363128291430?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;The Democrats have ceased to be anything more than performative activism by unserious people,&#8221; Jim Hanson said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The Democrats have ceased to be anything more than performative activism by unserious people <a href="https://t.co/cgW74hjz3c">https://t.co/cgW74hjz3c</a>
&mdash; Jim Hanson (@JimHansonDC) <a href="https://twitter.com/JimHansonDC/status/1897628344901943343?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;This cannot possibly be real,&#8221; CNN Republican commentator Scott Jennings posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This cannot possibly be real <a href="https://t.co/fUVUDZv6eb">https://t.co/fUVUDZv6eb</a>
&mdash; Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) <a href="https://twitter.com/ScottJenningsKY/status/1897641672596492703?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Choose your character? Lmao, just know if you choose any of these characters, you’re about to get your butt kicked. I’m just saying…&#8221; Shermichael Singleton said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Choose your character? Lmao, just know if you choose any of these characters, you’re about to get your butt kicked. I’m just saying… <a href="https://t.co/VBhgJxygL8">https://t.co/VBhgJxygL8</a>
&mdash; Shermichael Singleton (@MrShermichael) <a href="https://twitter.com/MrShermichael/status/1897660076254491073?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Alright repeal the 19th,&#8221; Olivia Rondeau declared, referencing the Constitutional Amendment that gave women the right to vote.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Alright repeal the 19th <a href="https://t.co/3f7hD37q4x">https://t.co/3f7hD37q4x</a>
&mdash; Olivia Rondeau 🇺🇸 (@rondeaulivia) <a href="https://twitter.com/rondeaulivia/status/1897670840461746216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;This is at a level of abject absurdity that always makes me think I must be missing something, that it can’t just be what it is. But sometimes a pipe is just a pipe,&#8221; David Marcus observed.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is at a level of abject absurdity that always makes me think I must be missing something, that it can’t just be what it is. But sometimes a pipe is just a pipe. <a href="https://t.co/GAskJD3Ni6">https://t.co/GAskJD3Ni6</a>
&mdash; David Marcus (@BlueBoxDave) <a href="https://twitter.com/BlueBoxDave/status/1897657551111516314?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

119th Congress Begins Its Term On Capitol Hill

Female Dems’ ‘Choose Your Fighter’ Promo Delivers Knockout Blow To Illusion They Were Ever Serious

Female Dems' 'Choose Your Fighter' Promo Delivers Knockout Blow To Illusion They Were Ever Serious

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Democrats

Politics

Social Media

Even those who have never considered purchasing a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/cars">Jaguar</a> are confused by the brand’s latest <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/advertising">relaunch</a>, which has been getting attention for all the wrong reasons. Viewers are saying the luxury car brand has gone <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/woke">woke</a> and in doing so, has destroyed more than 100 years of legacy.
Some thought the colorfully bizarre, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/woke-is-dead-jaguar-gets-mocked-for-colorful-car-free-brand-re-launch">car-free car commercial</a> and the introduction of the “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-jaguar-concept-car-revealed-mocked-for-being-pink-batmobile">Pink batmobile</a>” electric concept car this month came out of nowhere. However, the descent into madness at Jaguar has been going on for decades, even if most people weren’t paying attention.
There may be no exact date to point to in terms of steering this <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/united-kingdom">British</a> brand in a new direction. But it may have started around 2002 when brand reps conducted a survey and determined that they should be marketing to gay and lesbian car buyers who at the time commanded $450 million of purchasing power in the United States, as The Advocate <a href="https://www.advocate.com/news/2002/12/19/jaguar-targets-gay-drivers-7249">reported</a> at the time. 
&#8220;[LGBT buyers] spend more money on luxury cars, and they have more money to spend,&#8221; Jaguar spokesman Simon Sproule said. &#8220;They are very loyal to brands and organizations that talk to them in a way that is relevant.&#8221;
“In recent years, Jaguar has targeted gay consumers on a smaller scale and found the brand is very appealing to this segment,” Jaguar North America marketing vice president George Ayres <a href="https://www.just-auto.com/news/usa-jaguar-targets-new-ad-campaign-at-gay-and-lesbian-buyers/">agreed</a>.
Their <a href="https://www.jaguar.co.uk/partnerships/jaguar-x-attitude.html">website</a> offers further clues to the brand’s progressive shift, touting that since 2016 Jaguar has been “a proud partner to the world’s biggest LGBTQ+ media brand, Attitude Magazine.” 
The brand also sponsors Attitude Magazine’s big annual event, the Attitude Awards, claiming to be the largest of its kind anywhere in the world. In 2019, in partnership with Attitude Magazine, the brand <a href="https://www.thedrum.com/news/2019/10/04/jaguars-long-term-attitude-partnership-births-jag-race-mini-series">launched</a> an online mini-series – Jag Race – featuring four drag queens, which happened to coincide with the popular American reality show “Ru Paul&#8217;s Drag Race” premiering on the BBC.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Courtney Act and The Vivienne actually drag race | Heat One – Jag Race S1, E1" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4OLZnksXD4U?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Jaguar Land Rover UK marketing director Anthony Bradbury told media outlet The Drum that their goal was, &#8220;challenging stereotypes of what an automotive campaign can be.”
&#8220;The industry has a stereotypically masculine image, so it’s important we use our platform to challenge that perception and reflect the diversity not only in our customer base but our employee network,&#8221; he said of the campaign, also noting that the Jaguar Land Rover Pride community had more than 450 members.
Mike Buckley, head of partnerships at Attitude, said he’s been thrilled with the collaboration with Jaguar. He said “Jag Race” is just one example of the brand’s “commitment to the LGBTQ+ audience.”
&#8220;They&#8217;ve been a dream partner since the start, committed to providing bespoke content for our audience,” Buckley said. “A number of concepts were initially presented by us to them but they wanted to be even more fearless than we thought they did. So Jag Race was their idea which we developed, produced and distributed for them.&#8221;
Also in 2019, Jaguar partnered with Queer Screen to present its 26th Mardi Gras Film Festival. Their “Fit for a Queen” campaign to promote the festival had the <a href="https://campaignbrief.com/jaguar-launches-new-fit-for-a/">intention</a> of  “celebrating individualism and queer storytelling.”
Mark Cameron, managing director of Jaguar Land Rover Australia, said of the sponsorship, “Inclusion is integral to the way that we do business at Jaguar and we recently established the Jaguar Land Rover PRIDE LGBTQI network in the UK. We are excited to celebrate creativity, equality and diversity with the incredible line-up of LGBTQI talent and films in this year’s festival, and of course to have some fun at our Jaguar Service Centre.”
There’s more. In 2022, Jaguar highlighted “the voices of two queer creatives” to discuss topics like representation and not caring what people think. Layton Williams <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eggWFSxN3XM">discussed</a> being cast as the first black Billy Elliot cast in a stage production of a show. “As queer people, sometimes we have to… well, you have to work a little bit harder sometimes. Well, I feel I have.”
The work that Jaguar started in 2002 and has been dutifully working toward ever since – to turn the brand into an homage to LGBTQ ideals – should not have been a surprise at all. During an appearance at the Virgin Atlantic Attitude Awards in October, Santino Pietrosanti, UK Brand Director at Jaguar Land Rover, said the company rebrand was exactly what it looked like.
&#8220;We&#8217;re on a transformative journey of our own. Driven by a belief in diversity, inclusion, creativity, policy and, most importantly, action. We&#8217;ve established over 15 DEI groups such as Pride, which are here tonight, and Women in Engineering and Neurodiversity Matters,&#8221; Pietrosanti <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/jaguar-marketing-directors-comments-celebrating-commitment-dei-resurface-after-woke-rebrand">said</a> at the time.
&#8220;We&#8217;ve launched major policy revisions such as transitioning at work to drive equity and support for our communities, embracing individuality as our superpower,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;We&#8217;re not just talking about new cars. We are talking about all new ways of thinking and embracing the full spectrum of human potential and creativity. Because Jaguar has always stood for fearless originality, striving to be a copy of nothing. And we believe that every person has the potential to be something unique, something original, and that&#8217;s what makes us strong.&#8221; 
He said, &#8220;At Jaguar we proudly stand with the LGBTQ+ community because we know that originality and creativity thrives in spaces where people are free to be themselves.”
Despite Bud Light’s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bud-lights-parent-company-lost-over-1-billion-in-revenue-after-dylan-mulvaney-partnership-report">billion dollar advertising train wreck</a> and several high-profile companies shying away from hot button social issues and abandoning <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/companies-are-running-from-dei-lgbt-initiatives">DEI initiatives</a>, Jaguar is all in for progressive values and unashamed to say so. Time will tell if that works out for them.

Screenshot 2024-12-10 at 12.01.19 PM

Jaguar Has Been Going Woke For Two Decades, Even If We Just Noticed It

Jaguar Has Been Going Woke For Two Decades, We Only Just Noticed It Now

Business

Cars

LGBT

United Kingdom

Wokeness

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/google">Google</a> is being mocked for a new ad for holiday shopping which features a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/lgbtq">man</a> dressed as a woman shopping for skincare.
In an Instagram post sponsored by Google, influencer Cyrus Veyssi laments his dry skin. “I’m so dry,” he pouts while looking at his reflection. “This winter dryness is not it, especially when I have so many holiday looks to pull off. Thankfully, I know just the thing.”
The scene cuts to Veyssi searching his phone for skincare products on Google. “And it’s in stock nearby!” he exclaims. “Hydrated skin is a gift to everyone, no wrapping needed,” he continues while walking through a store. “Happy holidays to me!”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Christmas ad from Google. Dear Lord.<a href="https://t.co/O6ML2Li9c4">pic.twitter.com/O6ML2Li9c4</a>
&mdash; End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1866844550951502121?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 11, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Reactions online have been mostly negative. 
“Google is canceling women. Bizarre marketing strategy,” one person <a href="https://x.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1866846432453656978">replied</a>.
“My ideology is whatever is necessary to stop this bulls***. I’m tired of this,” another person <a href="https://x.com/iamyesyouareno/status/1866902937416466859">wrote</a>.
“Google is Bud Lighting it this Christmas,” a third person <a href="https://x.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1866848428711362836">added</a>, referencing the beer brand losing $1 billion in market share after they partnered with trans-identified influencer Dylan Mulvaney last year.
Asked by The Daily Wire about the backlash against the ad, a Google spokesperson said in a statement, “Everyone likes to find a good deal and save money. That’s why we’re promoting Google Shopping as the best way to do that. To put it in perspective, this was a single sponsored Instagram post, representing a fraction of a percent of a much wider Google Shopping campaign.&#8221;
Veyssi, who identifies as non-binary and uses they/them pronouns, has over one million followers across TikTok and Instagram combined. 
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
The social media influencer&#8217;s content is filled with messaging pushing LGBTQ ideology and social justice issues, plus his ongoing effort to relate with his straight Iranian father.
In one TikTok video, Veyssi talks down to men by imploring them to use Windex to clean their hair out of the sink post-shave, insisting that it makes them “masculine” and “super strong.” He delivers this plea while wearing bright red lipstick and a low-cut tank top that shows his chest hair.

Cyrus Veyssi

Google Trashed For Holiday Shopping Ad Featuring Man Dressed Like A Woman

Google

LGBTQ

Transgender

The new <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/cars">Jaguar</a> concept car has been revealed, and just like the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/woke">woke</a> advertising that preceded its debut, the electric vehicle is being mercilessly mocked online.
The Type 00 two-door coupe has an extra long hood and a low roof with no rear window. Jaguar chief creative officer Gerry McGovern <a href="https://www.engadget.com/transportation/evs/jaguar-unveils-polarizing-concept-ev-as-part-of-its-rebrand-133026168.html#:~:text=All%20of%20this%20is%20part,officer%20at%20Miami%20Art%20Week.">said</a> of the vehicle, “When Jaguar was at its best, it threw away the design rulebook and created E-Type and the XJS; objects of desire.” 
Futuristic design elements aside, the detail about the Type 00 that’s getting the most attention is the car’s colors: Satin Rhodon Rose, dubbed ‘Miami Pink,’ and Inception Silver Blue.
Podcaster Jay Anderson addressed the redesign on X, <a href="https://x.com/TheProjectUnity/status/1863576689764147470">writing</a>, &#8220;Go woke&#8230;You all know the rest.&#8221;
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1732727087136000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3Ao27zcTCGutKhTz_xpaKC">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
&#8220;I have a feeling [Jaguar] may be about to find out that there are fewer well off non binary woke lesbians of color than their echo chamber assured them there were,&#8221; another commenter <a href="https://x.com/LozzaFox/status/1863593708081324519">wrote</a>.
“Copy Nothing, i.e. upsize a 2008 Chrysler Crossfire and &#8230; make it a Mary Kay Cosmetics sales prize,” another commenter <a href="https://x.com/iowahawkblog/status/1863671960472842466">wrote</a>, referencing the brand’s tagline that goes along with the redesign.
&#8220;Jaguar has successfully copied nothing. Nobody has ever demolished a brand more quickly or efficiently than this. Kudos,” Babylon Bee CTO Dan Dillon <a href="https://x.com/dandillondev/status/1863639336840737152">agreed</a>.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Jaguar has successfully copied nothing. Nobody has ever demolished a brand more quickly or efficiently than this. Kudos. <a href="https://t.co/qiTUy9EoCY">pic.twitter.com/qiTUy9EoCY</a>
&mdash; Dan Dillon (@dandillondev) <a href="https://twitter.com/dandillondev/status/1863639336840737152?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 2, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“Copy nothing? It’s a pink Batmobile,” former Kevin McCarthy speechwriter Charles Correll III <a href="https://x.com/_CharlesCorrell/status/1863648971098325157">added</a>.
The Jaguar brand redesign had already been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/woke-is-dead-jaguar-gets-mocked-for-colorful-car-free-brand-re-launch">making headlines</a> as of last month after it premiered a bizarre ad with no cars in it. The colorful commercial included people dressed in vibrant, outlandish outfits, making gestures such as grabbing sledgehammers, painting over the camera lens, and striking poses.
It also featured disjointed phrases such as “create exuberant,” “live vivid,” “delete ordinary,” “break molds,” and “copy nothing” on the screen.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk responded to the ad by asking, “Do you sell cars?”
The car brand’s chief creative officer Gerry McGovern is quoted as saying, “Jaguar has its roots in originality. Sir William Lyons, our founder, believed that ‘a Jaguar should be a copy of nothing.’ Our vision for Jaguar today is informed by this philosophy. New Jaguar is a brand built around Exuberant Modernism.”
He continued, “It is imaginative, bold and artistic at every touchpoint. It is unique and fearless. We are creating Jaguar for the future, restoring its status as a brand that enriches the lives of our clients and the Jaguar community.”

JAGUAR_TYPE00_SIDEPROFILE_16x9_021224

New Jaguar Concept Car Revealed, Mocked For Being ‘Pink Batmobile’

New Jaguar Concept Car Revealed, Mocked For Being 'Pink Batmobile'

Electric cars

General

A new <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/apple">Apple</a> ad for its AirPods Pro 2&#8217;s hearing aid feature is getting a lot of attention online as viewers say it’s the perfect antidote to woke advertising which has become far too commonplace.
The pro-family ad, called “Heartstrings,” is making many viewers emotional. Instead of portraying the family patriarch as a bumbling fool, this ad puts a father with hearing loss at the center of a message that depicts a loving family in addition to promoting a product.
The two-minute commercial opens with a family unwrapping gifts on Christmas morning. The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/fatherhood" target="_blank" rel="noopener">father</a>, who sits on the couch while the family opens presents around him, is presented as having some level of hearing loss. The muffled sounds of wrapping paper and people talking around him help the viewer understand his disability.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1732727087136000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3Ao27zcTCGutKhTz_xpaKC">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
Next, he flashes back through memories of his daughter growing up, with these small moments also heard through a muted lens. Then, the father puts in the AirPods and turns up the hearing aid feature, making the sound clear. He can hear his daughter singing and playing “Our House” by Crosby, Stills, Nash &amp; Young on her new guitar as he experiences the same memories from her youth again, but this time hearing them clearly. The commercial ends as the father looks at his daughter with tears in his eyes.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Heartstrings | Apple Holiday | Hearing Aid feature on AirPods Pro 2" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EvnJhwIwqds?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The ad has close to 8 million views on YouTube as of Monday morning.
After posting the clip on X, Apple CEO Tim Cook <a href="https://x.com/tim_cook/status/1862229896296374762">said:</a> &#8220;I&#8217;m so proud of the many teams across Apple developing powerful technologies that are improving people&#8217;s lives. The Hearing Aid feature on AirPods Pro 2 uses your personalized sound profile so you can hear the moments that matter.&#8221;
“This is cool,” X owner Elon Musk <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1862332184645779458">replied</a>.
Plenty of other social media users pointed out how this ad signified a return to wholesome, effective advertising, which is a stark contrast to the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/woke-is-dead-jaguar-gets-mocked-for-colorful-car-free-brand-re-launch">woke Jaguar ad</a> that generated a lot of negative attention last month.
“Is Apple finally back to being non woke!?” another reply <a href="https://x.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1862366324455882814">said</a>.
“Great commercial. Touching. Family oriented. Not woke!” another <a href="https://x.com/Bubblebathgirl/status/1862332837937979761">agreed</a>.
“I’m stunned. Apple just released the single greatest pro-parenting ad in the history of American advertising. The pro-family cultural revolution is here. Watch. Try not to cry…” podcaster Benny Johnson <a href="https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1862145986077839450?s=43&amp;t=BDz6oekueqrSVJ50bM62xw">wrote</a>.
“I don&#8217;t know what&#8217;s better. The commercial, or the fact that we pushed the culture back to sanity where woke companies are realizing their ideologies were rejected by the American people,” another agreed.

Teenage Girl Playing the Guitar

This Non-Woke, Pro-Family Apple Ad Is Making Everyone Cry

Apple

fatherhood

Social Issues

As the mockery of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/cars">Jaguar</a>’s massive brand relaunch continues, one company exec is speaking out against the “intolerance” from the public. 
Managing director Rawdon Glover said in a recent <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/e164df19-54e2-48d8-b07c-50687813bf56">interview</a> with the Financial Times that the campaign messaging was drowned out in “a blaze of intolerance” on social media. Glover also claimed that the colorful new ad was not meant to be “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/woke">woke</a>.”
“If we play in the same way that everybody else does, we’ll just get drowned out. So we shouldn’t turn up like an auto brand,” Glover told the outlet.
“We need to re-establish our brand and at a completely different price point so we need to act differently. We wanted to move away from traditional automotive stereotypes.”
The Jaguar exec said there have been “very positive” reactions to the campaign but that he’s been dismayed by “the level of vile hatred and intolerance” to the viral ad.
Glover added that the rebrand was done in part to attract new customers. “This is not a depiction of how we think our future customers are,” he said. “We don’t want to necessarily leave all of our customers behind. But we do need to attract a new customer base.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
A senior advertising executive who previously worked with the brand agreed with the criticism, telling the outlet, “You can destroy a brand in 30 seconds that took a lifetime to build. Strong brands reinvent themselves but always remain true to the core of their DNA. For luxury brands in particular, authenticity is key and this fails the test.”
The new ad campaign includes a commercial of people dressed in vibrant, outlandish outfits. The characters can be seen grabbing sledgehammers, painting over the camera lens, and striking poses as the music plays. It also debuts the new logo, which strips away personality and removes the iconic jaguar graphic.
The entire campaign has been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/woke-is-dead-jaguar-gets-mocked-for-colorful-car-free-brand-re-launch" target="_blank" rel="noopener">derided and mocked</a> on social media, especially since the commercial does not feature vehicles. 
Tesla founder Elon Musk responded to the ad by writing, “Do you sell cars?”
The official webpage says the brand will now be built upon “exuberant modernism.” A new concept car will debut at Miami Art Week the week of December 2.

Jaguar

Jaguar Exec Whines About ‘Vile Hatred And Intolerance’ Over Woke Rebrand

Jaguar Exec Whines About 'Vile Hatred And Intolerance' Over Woke Rebrand

A newly released Bud Light commercial featuring comedian Shane Gillis is getting positive feedback from viewers as it subtly targets edgy, progressive advertising and champions the common man.
The ad spot is called “Wrong Commercial.” In it, Gillis poses as a regular guy who was scheduled to be in a beer commercial at a bar but instead finds himself in an over-the-top artistic perfume ad shot in black and white — which also features a model holding a snake and a rock star guitarist trying to hand him a fistful of sand. 
Gillis reacts as any normal person would, questioning his co-stars with one-liner quips, until the camera cuts to the alt-rock character who was supposed to appear in the perfume ad sitting in a bar enjoying a plate of wings and a Bud Light.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Shane Gillis x Bud Light | Wrong Commercial" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TO6hngy9Ajw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Gillis has become the new face of Bud Light. The controversial comedian is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-comedian-snl-fired-offensive-comments-was-james-barrett">best known</a> for being fired from “Saturday Night Live” in 2019 after decades-old comments he made were deemed “offensive, hurtful, and unacceptable.” He returned to host the sketch comedy show in February 2024. Gillis has been described as politically moderate, which makes him appealing to conservatives in the leftist-dominated comedy space. He’s known for making jokes about both sides. 
The new Bud Light ad wouldn’t have been noteworthy years ago when the beer brand was known for clever advertising. But everything appears different in the wake of the Bud Light scandal that led to the biggest successful conservative boycott ever. Former Anheuser-Busch VP Alissa Heinerscheid decided that Bud Light’s image was “fratty” and “out of touch.” This led to the brand sending a promotional can to trans-identifying activist Dylan Mulvaney, who publicized it on social media. 
The resulting backlash cost the brand more than $1 billion in lost revenue and lost them their title as best-selling beer. The Bud Light debacle is considered one of the worst marketing fiascos in history.
Now as they work to rebuild the brand, this commercial appears to mock woke advertising. It was released the same week as the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/woke-is-dead-jaguar-gets-mocked-for-colorful-car-free-brand-re-launch">brand re-launch of Jaguar</a>, which is being scorned for being overly pretentious and most crucially, for not having any cars in it.
Reactions to the “Wrong Commercial” are mostly positive, though many fans say it’s not enough to overcome Bud Light’s past sins.
“Big fan of Shane. There may be redemption in your future,” one commenter <a href="https://x.com/troi_oi_la_troi/status/1859358391153389769">wrote</a>.
“Pretty good. Probably should have shaved 10 seconds off it. You want people to enjoy it and feel a tinge of nostalgia but not linger too long on why they rejected you. I give it 7/10. But you need to keep doing better to win back your base,” another person wrote.
“I see your [sic] trying Bud Lite and I appreciate it,” a third person <a href="https://x.com/WaylonJennings/status/1858956641359852017">said</a>.

Bud Light

Bud Light Tries To Woo Back Customers With New Commercial Starring Shane Gillis

comedian

One of the most agonizing sights in politics is watching Democrats trying to ape the motions of normal, everyday people. We&#8217;ve talked about this a lot lately. Tim Walz tried to play a football video game and go hunting, only to demonstrate that he doesn&#8217;t know what a &#8220;Pick 6&#8221; is, or how to load his own shotgun. 
Then, White Dudes for Kamala, led by Adam Kinzinger, went to the range for a fun day of shooting, only to violate every single gun safety rule that exists. They even managed to accidentally <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2024-10-23/flyaway-metal-from-missouri-democratic-senate-candidates-rifle-grazes-reporter-at-campaign-event" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shoot</a> a reporter who was covering the event. He was <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/reporter-hit-shrapnel-shooting-range-lucas-kunce-1973634" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hit</a> by a bullet fragment off a very predictable ricochet, which is a story that should probably be getting more attention than it is. And then there was Kamala Harris <a href="https://x.com/BrutalBrittany2/status/1850362943680164276" target="_blank" rel="noopener">grabbing</a> a casual beer with the governor of Michigan the other day, surrounded by dozens of cameras that she pretended not to notice so she could have a fake &#8220;hot mic&#8221; moment. The whole thing looked about as phony as Elizabeth Warren&#8217;s infamous &#8220;beer catastrophe.&#8221;
Democrats struggle to emulate basic human interactions like this for a lot of reasons. One of them is that Democrats are statists. Maintaining interpersonal relationships, and having normal interactions with one another, isn&#8217;t something that concerns them. Their goal is advancing the broader interests of their party. This is an outlook that makes it extremely difficult for Democrats to relate to everyday Americans who, unlike Democrats, aren&#8217;t transfixed by the idea of obtaining more political power. It shows up everywhere in their messaging. They can&#8217;t help but reveal how clueless and manipulative they are.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1475-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
That brings me to what may be the single most vile political advertisement I&#8217;ve ever seen. This ad just came out the other day on social media. On paper, the idea behind this advertisement is to appeal to liberal women who are married to conservative men. But in just the span of thirty seconds, this advertisement — which was produced by the nonprofit &#8220;Vote Common Good&#8221; — reveals that Democrats don&#8217;t understand anything about marriage, or women, or men. Instead, probably without even realizing it, the people who made this advertisement were very transparent about the goal of the Democrat Party, which is to turn families against one another.
Here&#8217;s the full, 30-second advertisement, which is narrated by the actress Julia Roberts. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 Julia Roberts" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7J339jGTOLM?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
It&#8217;s actually impressive they managed to jam so much insanity into one 30-second advertisement. According to Julia Roberts, the voting booth is &#8220;the one place in America where women still have a right to choose.&#8221; Outside of the voting booth, women can&#8217;t make any decisions for themselves. Women are completely controlled by men, 24/7, in every aspect of life — except in the voting booth on Election Day. That&#8217;s their one, precious moment of freedom. It’s not like they’re free to make choices every moment of every day, all the time. No, they have no freedom to choose anything, except on the ballot. 
If that&#8217;s true, it raises the obvious question of how Julia Roberts was able to do the voiceover for this advertisement. What man told her to do that, against her will? Who exactly is holding Julia Roberts hostage and making her embarrass herself like this? Surely, she couldn&#8217;t have made the decision to read these lines on her own. After all, she&#8217;s a woman, and she&#8217;s not in a voting booth. So, by the advertisement&#8217;s own terms, we can only assume that Julia Roberts is tied up in a basement somewhere. Or maybe she&#8217;s being blackmailed. The possibilities are endless. And none of them are good. 
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
Not to mention, if the patriarchy has successfully banned women from making any choices in life at all, then how do women still have the right to vote? That seems like a rather significant oversight by the patriarchy. It’s almost like the patriarchy doesn’t exist. 
But aside from that, there are about a million other problems with it. You&#8217;ll notice that, in the ad, the conservative man has the hat with the American flag and the bald eagle. He seems like a patriotic, friendly guy. And his wife&#8217;s hat has an American flag, too. But then we learn that the wife is only pretending to be patriotic because her husband is abusive or whatever. Really, she identifies more with the mysterious woman across from her, who&#8217;s not wearing any hat. The two women exchange a knowing glance. And then the man&#8217;s wife walks away with the mysterious woman, like they&#8217;re going on a date or something.
So far, the two messages this ad is sending is that conservatives are patriotic, and that Democrats think women have no agency whatsoever. They&#8217;re supposedly too cowardly to speak their own minds to their own husbands, or to make their own decisions about anything. And this particular ad is coming from a nonprofit that says it wants to appeal to &#8220;Evangelical and Catholic voters,&#8221; because, apparently, &#8220;evangelical and Catholic&#8221; voters are in the habit of lying to their spouses. 
As insulting as this is, again, it would be a mistake to dismiss this ad as merely tone-deaf and patronizing, although it&#8217;s obviously both of those things. The ad is actually saying something important, which is that one of the goals of the Democrat Party is to turn spouses against one another. They want women to keep secrets from their husbands, and to see their husbands as some kind of threat. Democrats are pushing this message because ultimately they want to destroy marriages and families, which are the single greatest threat to their political power.
A couple of days ago, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1463-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">I talked about this effort</a> in the context of Democrats&#8217; last-minute pitch to win over male voters. 
Michelle Obama delivered a 30-minute <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEe4ujgHapk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">speech</a> in which she repeatedly told men that their role is to be subservient to liberal women. The only time she talked about improving the lives of men was when she was telling them to kill their children. If you kill your child and destroy your family, Michelle Obama said, then you can go to college. And then you can be a miserable, screeching activist who&#8217;s loyal to the Democrats, instead of your own children. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 Michelle Obama" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SqQZzV1o2jM?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
As with everything else we hear from prominent figures in the Democrat Party, nothing exists in isolation. It&#8217;s all part of a broader, collective message. Every single agent of the party has to push the same exact script at all times. Michelle Obama didn&#8217;t come up with her anti-family message, anymore than that nonprofit came up with its anti-family message. 
They&#8217;re all working in concert to push the same rhetoric that ultimately leads to the enactment of policies like this one, in California:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="003 California" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XLv_kxmpgtA?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
So over the past couple of years in California, various school districts were requiring that administrators notify parents if their child starts identifying as transgender. That&#8217;s a policy that makes sense for a lot of reasons. One of them is that children who think they were born in the wrong body are about a million times more likely to suffer from serious mental health conditions. They&#8217;re also almost certainly being influenced by their teachers or their peers — neither of whom care about these children. They care about an ideology. The only people who actually care about the children in this scenario, in basically every single case, are their parents.
But in California, the state thinks it knows better than parents. Here&#8217;s just one example of how that plays out. In 2019, mother in California named Abigail Martinez lost her 16-year-old daughter to suicide, after she says her school and the Department of Children and Family Services pressured her daughter to &#8220;transition&#8221; into a boy. Authorities placed Martinez&#8217;s daughter in foster care because she wouldn&#8217;t &#8220;affirm&#8221; her daughter&#8217;s new gender identity. She didn&#8217;t see her daughter again until she deliberately sat down on some railroad tracks and was hit by a train. 
Here&#8217;s an excerpt of the mother&#8217;s remarks, where she outlines the horror that the state of California put her family through:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="004 Gender Ideology" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/al7wtGCeb8w?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
This woman&#8217;s daughter probably wouldn&#8217;t be dead today if the state of California hadn&#8217;t taken custody of her child. And by the way, if you watch her full remarks, you&#8217;ll hear that even after her daughter committed suicide, the state still treated this mother like a criminal. These people are ruthless in their efforts to destroy families and ruin the lives of children. That&#8217;s why California just made it a law that prevents schools from mandating these kinds of parental notifications.
But Gavin Newsom sees it differently. Newsom&#8217;s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/07/16/california-trans-school-law-parents/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">spokesman said</a>: “This law helps keep children safe while protecting the critical role of parents. It protects the child-parent relationship by preventing politicians and school staff from inappropriately intervening in family matters and attempting to control if, when, and how families have deeply personal conversations.”
So if you&#8217;re following the doublespeak, the state of California is &#8220;protecting the child-parent relationship&#8221; by making it easier for schools to hide critical information from parents about the mental state of their children. The more secrets there are, the better.
This is the same message that nonprofit was pushing in that advertisement with Julia Roberts. Democrats want family members to treat each other with suspicion and contempt so that, eventually, families collapse. It&#8217;s the same reason the Soviets encouraged people to report their relatives for wrong-think. When families are gone, the state can move in to fill that power vacuum. This is the plan that Democrats, with the help of former celebrities like Julia Roberts, are now attempting to execute.
The problem they&#8217;re having is that they&#8217;re being extremely obvious about it. At a time when trust in the Democrat Party has never been lower, they&#8217;re pitching themselves as your surrogate family. It&#8217;s as heavy-handed and unappealing a pitch as you can imagine, but it&#8217;s clearly what they&#8217;re going with. And in less than a week, we&#8217;ll find out exactly how well that pitch works out for them.

MixCollage-30-Oct-2024-03-20-PM-2222

This Anti-Family Ad Reveals Democrats’ Sick Agenda

2024 Election

California

Gender Transition

Julia Roberts

Kamala Harris

Michelle Obama

Facebook admitted Tuesday that it mistakenly removed an ad from Michigan Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers that called to keep men out of women&#8217;s sports.
The Rogers campaign told The Daily Wire that the ad — which slams Rogers&#8217; opponent, Rep. Elissa Slotkin, for supporting trans-identifying men competing against women — was posted to Facebook last Friday before Meta took it down. With just around two weeks until the election, the Rogers campaign repeatedly tried to post the ad, but it was removed by the social media platform three more times over the weekend.
According to the Rogers campaign, Facebook&#8217;s parent company initially said the ad was removed for &#8220;Unacceptable Business Practices,&#8221; but then clarified that the ad was removed &#8220;incorrectly&#8221; by the tech giant&#8217;s &#8220;automated review systems.&#8221; The ad hits Slotkin over her support for the Equality Act, which seeks to allow boys to play in girls&#8217; sports.
Rogers re-posted the ad — which was made by the political action committee, Michigan Victory Committee — on X Monday, writing, &#8220;Time and again, big tech activists at Facebook have REMOVED our ad exposing Slotkin’s failures to protect our daughters. Biological men should not compete in women’s sports. This is about FAIRNESS for our daughters and privacy for women.&#8221;
&#8220;Thankfully, people like @ElonMusk believe in free speech and that voters deserve to know the truth,&#8221; Rogers added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
BREAKING: Time and again, big tech activists at Facebook have REMOVED our ad exposing Slotkin’s failures to protect our daughters. Biological men should not compete in women’s sports. This is about FAIRNESS for our daughters and privacy for women.
Thankfully, people like… <a href="https://t.co/M5WuqyjlPH">https://t.co/M5WuqyjlPH</a>
&mdash; Mike Rogers (@MikeRogersForMI) <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeRogersForMI/status/1848458803794047484?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
A Meta spokesman confirmed in a statement to The Daily Wire that the removal &#8220;was an error and the ad was restored.&#8221; The tech giant has increasingly relied on artificial intelligence (AI) for content moderation, especially after the COVID pandemic and vaccine rollout. In 2021, Meta <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2021/12/metas-new-ai-system-tackles-harmful-content/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> a new AI system &#8220;that can adapt more easily to take action on new or evolving types of harmful content faster.&#8221;
&#8220;Harmful content continues to evolve rapidly — whether fueled by current events or by people looking for new ways to evade our systems — and it’s crucial for AI systems to evolve alongside it. But it typically takes several months to collect and label thousands, if not millions, of examples necessary to train each individual AI system to spot a new type of content,&#8221; Meta said at the time. &#8220;To tackle this, we’ve built and recently deployed Few-Shot Learner (FSL), an AI technology that can adapt to take action on new or evolving types of harmful content within weeks instead of months.&#8221;
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1729077615157000&amp;usg=AOvVaw17Kprl74oE9DYOLREdiBPU">MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ COMING TO DAILYWIRE+ OCT. 28</a>
In the final week of the 2024 campaign, Meta &#8220;will also block new political, electoral and social issue ads&#8221; while allowing ads &#8220;that have previously run before this restriction period.&#8221;
&#8220;Our rationale for this restriction period remains the same as it has since 2020: in the final days of an election, we recognize there may not be enough time to contest new claims made in ads,&#8221; Meta <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2023/11/how-meta-is-planning-for-elections-in-2024/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.
Rogers has recently gained ground on Slotkin, trailing by just 2.1 points as of Tuesday afternoon, according to the <a href="https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/senate/general/2024/michigan/rogers-vs-slotkin" target="_blank" rel="noopener">RealClearPolitics</a> average.

Mike Rogers

Facebook Says It Mistakenly Blocked GOP Senate Candidate’s Ad About Protecting Women’s Sports

Facebook 'Incorrectly' Removed Ad Posted By GOP Senate Candidate On Protecting Women's Sports

Facebook

Michigan

Vice President Kamala Harris&#8217; campaign flooded Meta platforms Facebook and Instagram with ads during the week of her debate against former President Donald Trump, outspending the Trump campaign 20 to 1 on the social media sites.
The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/20/us/politics/kamala-harris-trump-campaign-spending.html?campaign_id=9&amp;emc=edit_nn_20240920&amp;instance_id=134806&amp;nl=the-morning" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> on Friday that the Harris campaign spent $12.2 million on Facebook and Instagram in the week surrounding the debate, while the Trump campaign spent $611,228, according to Meta&#8217;s records. The Democratic nominee&#8217;s big social media advertising spend focused on battleground states, especially Michigan and Pennsylvania, where the Harris campaign spent $1.5 million and $1.3 million, respectively, on Meta&#8217;s social media platforms.
The Trump campaign, meanwhile, only spent $34,790 in Michigan and $22,465 in Pennsylvania on Facebook and Instagram over the same period, the Times reported.
Trump campaign National Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump&#8217;s team doesn&#8217;t need to spend as much as the Harris campaign on social media advertising because &#8220;millions of people want to organically watch and engage with President Trump — you can’t put a dollar value on that.&#8221;
&#8220;The Harris campaign must spend an enormous amount on digital advertising, and we don’t because our campaign’s greatest asset is President Donald J. Trump,&#8221; Leavitt added.
Playing into Harris&#8217; spending on social media is her campaign&#8217;s large fundraising advantage over Team Trump. The Harris campaign has <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/kamala-harris/candidate?id=N00036915" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> bringing in nearly $500 million for the 2024 election, while the Trump campaign has <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race/donald-trump/candidate?id=N00023864" target="_blank" rel="noopener">brought</a> in $265 million. Democrats immediately saw a boost in fundraising after President Joe Biden stepped out of the race as many Democratic donors expressed concerns about Biden continuing his 2024 campaign. Harris also benefitted from transferring the Biden campaign&#8217;s cash on hand into her campaign&#8217;s war chest after the president dropped out in July.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1726313279401000&amp;usg=AOvVaw115_qPFFEePDP86-Fvo-Vd">Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here!</a>
The Harris campaign has not spent any money on advertising on the Elon Musk-owned social media platform X, formerly Twitter, according to the Times. Musk endorsed Trump for president shortly after the July 13 assassination attempt on the Republican nominee. The Trump campaign has spent $100,000 on X since Harris became the Democrats&#8217; de-facto nominee.
Despite the Harris campaign spending big bucks on Facebook and Instagram last week, polls <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-debate-had-no-major-effect-on-battleground-state-polling?topStoryPosition=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener">show</a> that neither candidate saw a significant spike after the September 10 debate on ABC. Harris and Trump remain neck-and-neck in battleground states, according to polling averages from RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight.
While Harris&#8217; campaign focuses on spending money on digital advertising, the Republican nominee is sitting down for numerous interviews and continuing his rigorous campaign schedule. Harris has been criticized for her lack of solo interviews with the media as her opponent continues to take questions from reporters regularly.

Menu