Hundreds of public figures — including tech leaders, celebrities, media personalities, and politicians — signed a statement released on Wednesday calling for an immediate pause on the development of advanced artificial intelligence, referred to as &#8220;superintelligence.&#8221;
Superintelligence technology is currently being pursued by tech giants such as Mark Zuckerberg&#8217;s Meta, Sam Altman&#8217;s OpenAI, and Elon Musk&#8217;s xAI. These companies hope to build &#8220;superintelligence in the coming decade that can significantly outperform all humans on essentially all cognitive tasks,&#8221; according to a preamble to the <a href="https://superintelligence-statement.org/">statement</a>. The preamble points to concerns &#8220;ranging from human economic obsolescence and disempowerment, losses of freedom, civil liberties, dignity, and control, to national security risks and even potential human extinction.&#8221;
The &#8220;Statement on Superintelligence&#8221; itself, which now has more than 1,000 signatures, consists of just 30 words: &#8220;We call for a prohibition on the development of superintelligence, not lifted before there is broad scientific consensus that it will be done safely and controllably, and strong public buy-in.&#8221;
High-profile signers include leaders in the tech industry, such as Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak and AI pioneers Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton.
In a statement accompanying his signature, Bengio wrote that superintelligence &#8220;could surpass most individuals across most cognitive tasks within just a few years.&#8221;
&#8220;These advances could unlock solutions to major global challenges, but they also carry significant risks,&#8221; he added. &#8220;To safely advance toward superintelligence, we must scientifically determine how to design AI systems that are fundamentally incapable of harming people, whether through misalignment or malicious use. We also need to make sure the public has a much stronger say in decisions that will shape our collective future.”
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to <a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">DailyWire.com/Subscribe</a> to join now.
The &#8220;Statement on Superintelligence&#8221; was promoted by the <a href="https://futureoflife.org/about-us/">Future of Life Institute</a>, a group that aims &#8220;to steer transformative technologies away from extreme, large-scale risks and towards benefiting life.&#8221; Future of Life Institute President Max Tegmark said he reached out to all the CEOs of major AI developers, asking them to sign the document. However, he added that he did not expect them to endorse the statement, the Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/ai-superintelligence-risk-prince-harry-meghan-bannon-acf6b17d3b53abc08694d5d8defc7009">reported</a>.
“I really empathize for them, frankly, because they’re so stuck in this race to the bottom that they just feel an irresistible pressure to keep going and not get overtaken by the other guy,” Tegmark said. “I think that’s why it’s so important to stigmatize the race to superintelligence, to the point where the U.S. government just steps in.”
Former U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen also signed the document, as did multiple former Democratic and Republican members of Congress. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, were among other high-profile signers.
The statement was also signed by conservative media personalities Glenn Beck and Steve Bannon. Numerous faith leaders endorsed the statement, such as Paolo Benanti, a Papal AI advisor and Catholic priest; Johnnie Moore, the president of the Congress of Christian Leaders and a White House evangelical adviser; and Andrew T. Walker, the Associate Professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Both Altman and Musk have warned about potential major consequences to the development of advanced AI. In a <a href="https://blog.samaltman.com/machine-intelligence-part-1">blog post</a> 10 years ago, Altman wrote, &#8220;Development of superhuman machine intelligence (SMI) is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity.&#8221; Musk has similarly discussed the risks that come along with advanced AI, saying earlier this year that he believes there&#8217;s &#8220;only a 20% chance of annihilation,&#8221; CNBC <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/22/800-petition-signatures-apple-steve-wozniak-and-virgin-richard-branson-superintelligence-race.html">reported</a>.

AI apps smartphone

A Surprising Mix Of Public Figures Call For Halt To ‘Superintelligence’ AI That Could ‘Outperform All Humans’

Artificial Intelligence

Big Tech

Elon Musk

Mark Zuckerberg

Sam altman

Technology

A shadowy for-profit company and its nonprofit counterpart provide free services to at least 40 far-left prosecutor offices, raising questions about whether it&#8217;s working on behalf of taxpayers or of donors who have essentially bought government.
The Wren Collective is a shadowy group that emerged from a Cold War-era initiative aimed at promoting Soviet films in the United States. Its current iteration — funded by a former Enron executive and host of other leftist megadonors — claims that America&#8217;s &#8220;system of policing and mass incarceration is deeply flawed and intractably racist.&#8221;
The group has intervened on specific criminal cases, written policies that the district attorneys implement — such as eliminating cash bail — and strategized with at least one district attorney to mobilize activists to pressure judges who stood in the way.
That&#8217;s according to new research from the <a href="https://www.policedefense.org/outsourcing-justice/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund</a>, which used public records laws to secure tens of thousands of communications between leftist prosecutors and Wren.
Emails suggest that the collective gets funding from donors contingent on government offices agreeing to do the group&#8217;s bidding, even demanding proof that an office is following Wren&#8217;s recommendations in order to satisfy donors. Those same donors often bankrolled the district attorney&#8217;s election campaign.
&#8220;Once in office, these donor-activist groups leverage their political relationships with prosecutors to embed The Wren Collective in their offices as the DAs&#8217; lead policy and communications advisors,&#8221; the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund said.
&#8220;The Wren Collective, a single obscure consulting group, could only make policy for dozens of progressive prosecutors&#8217; offices and nearly 50 million Americans if those district attorneys understood the group&#8217;s help was strongly suggested by their shared political donors and allies,&#8221; it added. &#8220;Wren&#8217;s fiduciary duty and client loyalty remained with their political and nonprofit donors — the same donors who got them &#8216;hired&#8217; as unpaid policy and communications consultants to the elected prosecutors.&#8221;
One donor is David Menschel, a Portland activist who has funded the campaigns of radical DAs across the country. Menschel was a top donor to Portland DA Mike Schmidt in 2020. After he won the election, Menschel connected Schmidt with Jessica Brand, a former public defender who runs the Wren Collective.
Wren employee Amy Weber wrote to Schmidt: &#8220;We do this work without any billing or publicity. These policies will be yours.&#8221; It soon became apparent that Menschel would be funding Wren for its quasi-governmental work – with conditions. &#8220;I spoke to Dave, and all he needs is for us to give him a final scope of work,&#8221; Weber wrote.
Another donor is oil heiress Stacy Schusterman. Schusterman donated $1.8 million to PACs supporting the election of José Garza in Austin, Texas. Brand then had Garza&#8217;s office speak directly with their shared funder about the work that Brand&#8217;s group could do inside government.
Wren stands at the ready anytime soft-on-crime policies create a mess for prosecutors. When Loudoun County, Virginia&#8217;s prosecutor, Buta Biberaj, personally tried to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says" target="_blank" rel="noopener">jail the father of a girl who was raped</a> by a &#8220;genderfluid&#8221; boy in the school bathroom — while the boy went on to sexually assault a second girl — Wren asked whether &#8220;you would like some communications support.&#8221; Wren went on to form a relationship with Biberaj&#8217;s office that included drafting &#8220;diversion&#8221; policies, which involved even lighter penalties for crime.
George Soros has reshaped law enforcement in the United States by injecting <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/documents-reveal-how-george-soros-controls-prosecutors-2" target="_blank" rel="noopener">huge sums of money</a> into previously sleepy elections, with far-left candidates sometimes outspending their rivals tenfold, and still squeaking out only the narrowest victories. The strategy involves the idea that influence groups don&#8217;t have to convince legislatures to change laws if they can place prosecutors who will simply decline to enforce them.
But this new breed of candidate has often never worked as a prosecutor, instead coming from activism circles that defend the rights of criminals. Once they&#8217;re in office, that support never goes away, the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund report found.
&#8220;The node of this donor-backed prosecutor influence operation is The Wren Collective LLC,&#8221; it wrote. &#8220;The substance of those policies – abolishing bail and releasing dangerous offenders, declining to prosecute narcotics, shoplifting, prostitution, and rioting while increasing prosecutions of law enforcement officers – have had serious consequences for public safety.&#8221;
In San Antonio, Texas, the Wren Collective &#8220;developed and implemented prosecutorial policies&#8221; for DA Joe Gonzales, all without a public contract. Brand was Gonzales&#8217;s &#8220;shadow communications director and senior advisor–despite other holding those roles on the public payroll,&#8221; the report said.
Even as the group secretly worked for the DA, Brand presented herself to the media as an independent expert who sought to deflect blame from Gonzales when crime rose. When the police chief complained of an increase in homicides because criminals saw few consequences, Brand orchestrated a seemingly organic &#8220;op-ed from a community advocate&#8221; in response.
Text messages show that in March 2020, Brand told the San Antonio DA&#8217;s office to drop a death penalty case, and offered to use a political action committee to pressure judges. &#8220;You could settle that death penalty case right now and no one would bat an eye,&#8221; she <a href="https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2024/01/31/take-a-closer-look-at-the-conversations-between-bexar-county-das-office-criminal-justice-reform-group/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>. &#8220;Are the judges being any better? Or would it be helpful if some real justice pac volunteers started calling?&#8221;
In 2022, when a police officer non-fatally shot a suspect who hit him with a car, Wren pushed to drop charges against the suspect and indict the officer instead. &#8220;We got an indictment on the officer,&#8221; Gonzales&#8217; deputy texted Brand. &#8220;Thanks for the help.&#8221; Brand&#8217;s group even told Gonzales what to say about it, with the deputy reassuring her that he &#8220;stuck to the talking points.&#8221;
When Gonzales faced a recall, Brand connected him with lawyers to fight it. Gonzales replied, &#8220;This was sent to my work email, and I do not always check my work emails as often as I do my personal.&#8221; He told her to communicate with him on his personal email &#8220;because my secretarial staff can see my emails.&#8221;
The group wrote policies eliminating cash bail that were adopted by prosecutors in Virginia, Texas, and Florida; a policy that resulted in Portland not charging left-wing rioters; and a &#8220;Sex Work Policy&#8221; to &#8220;mitigate the many harms and abuses plaguing sex workers, who often also struggle with poverty, discrimination, and marginalization, by declining to prosecute.&#8221; It held weekly calls with since-recalled San Francisco DA Chesa Boudin.
Yet the Wren Collective is shrouded in secrecy. The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund said many prosecutors refused to turn over communications with the group under public records laws, with some demanding up to $14,000 and others producing responses that omitted communications that the law enforcement group knew existed.
Wren&#8217;s nonprofit arm is structured as a &#8220;fiscally sponsored project&#8221; of a larger nonprofit: the shell of a group dedicated to pushing Soviet films in the United States before the fall of the Communist bloc. That intermediary serves as a black box, preventing its donors and its staff salaries from being directly disclosed. But the larger group, once known as the American-Soviet Film Initiative, has reported millions in funding from the foundations of Schusterman, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg&#8217;s wife, Priscilla, and Cari Tuna, the wife of Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz.
Another major funder is Arnold Ventures, the charity of former Enron executive John Arnold. Arnold Ventures&#8217; former COO now works for Wren.
Yet records show that even as billionaires wrote checks so the nonprofit could provide shadow government workers free of charge, which the Wren Collective used to gain easy access to offices, Brand would sometimes later ask DAs to pay an identically-named for-profit firm. One contract obtained by the law enforcement group showed that the money — $15,000 a month from the office of Los Angeles DA George Gascon — went to Wren Collective, LLC. The contract was awarded without competition.
Wren may have pulled the same bait-and-switch on Minneapolis prosecutor Mary Moriarty. In May, the Department of Justice said it was investigating Moriarty for civil rights violations after saying that charging decisions would <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/04/us/doj-minnesota-hennepin-moriarty-race" target="_blank" rel="noopener">take into account a suspect&#8217;s &#8220;racial identity&#8221;</a>. The following month, Moriarty asked the Board of Supervisors for approval to pay Wren $150,000 to counteract &#8220;misinformation.&#8221;
Brand did not respond to The Daily Wire&#8217;s questions about the difference between the nonprofit and for-profit groups, how much she was paid, which prosecutors she had worked for, who funded the nonprofit, and whether providing donor-funded services to government offices posed ethical concerns.
The group works hand-in-hand with a second group that steers Soros prosecutors after their election, Fair and Just Prosecution. FJP&#8217;s founding executive director, Miriam Krinsky, resigned last year, the day that The Daily Wire published documents showing her staff accused her of racism and said she hypocritically <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/head-of-soros-prosecutor-group-resigns-following-daily-wire-report-on-staff-mutiny" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called the police on them</a>. She was replaced by Aramis Ayala, a black former Orlando prosecutor who is married to a member of the Wren Collective&#8217;s board.
Ayala was replaced as Orlando prosecutor by Monique Worrell, who gave confidential files to Wren so that the group could write a memo justifying not charging a teen with murder. The suspect was found in possession of a machine gun months later and sent to prison by federal prosecutors.

Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and Los Angeles DA George Gascon

How A Lefty Soviet Influence Group Formed A Shadow Government In Prosecutor Offices

Communism

George Soros

Law Enforcement

prosecutors

Soviet Union

Multiple Big Tech leaders, including some who have opposed President Donald Trump in recent years, joined the president for a White House dinner on Thursday and praised him for his “pro-business, pro-innovation” actions.
Apple CEO Tim Cook and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman both thanked Trump at the presidential dinner that was also attended by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, IBM CEO and Chairman Arvind Krishna, and Oracle CEO Safra Catz.
“I want to thank you for setting the tone such that we could make a major investment in the United States and have some key manufacturing, advanced manufacturing here,” Cook told Trump. “I think that says a lot about your focus and your leadership and your focus on innovation. I also want to thank you for helping American companies around the world. This is a really key thing, and I really enjoy working with your administration on those topics as well.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/Apple?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Apple</a> CEO <a href="https://twitter.com/tim_cook?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@tim_cook</a>: &#8220;I want to thank you for setting the tone such that we could make a major [$600 billion] investment in the United States&#8230; That says a lot about your focus and your leadership and your focus on innovation.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/289vkiB6vy">pic.twitter.com/289vkiB6vy</a>
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1963786061114417495?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Since Trump took office in January, Apple has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/apple-announces-500b-investment-in-u-s-plans-to-build-ai-server-factory-in-texas">announced</a> $600 billion of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-scores-another-win-apple-to-pump-100-billion-more-into-u-s-economy">investments</a> in the United States, including plans to build an artificial intelligence server factory in Texas and start a new manufacturing program that will focus on bringing more of Apple’s supply chain to the United States.
Altman, the head of OpenAI, also praised Trump, saying, “Thank you for being such a pro-business, pro-innovation president. It’s a very refreshing change. We’re very excited to see what you’re doing to make all of our companies and our entire country so successful.”
“The investment that’s happening here, the ability to get the power of the industry back, I think that’s going to set us up for a long period of great success leading the world,” Altman added. “And I don’t think that would be happening without your leadership.”
Altman said that he believes the expansion of the AI industry in the United States “will transform the world in a profound way.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/OpenAI?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@OpenAI</a> CEO Sam Altman: &#8220;Thank you for being such a pro-business, pro-innovation President. It&#8217;s a very refreshing change&#8230;The investment that&#8217;s happening here, the ability to get the power of the industry back&#8230; I don&#8217;t think that would be happening without your leadership.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/suGDIJFlx8">pic.twitter.com/suGDIJFlx8</a>
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1963787418429018457?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
President Trump praised the “high IQ” group of tech titans, adding, “The most brilliant people are gathered at this table.”
Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who recently had a public falling out with Trump, stated that he was also invited to the dinner but was unable to attend.
“I was invited, but unfortunately could not attend. A representative of mine will be there,” Musk <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1963624123998896368">posted</a> on his social media platform, X.
Microsoft founder Bill Gates was also in attendance, seated next to first lady Melania Trump, while Zuckerberg sat to the right of the president. Some conservatives, including pro-Trump activist Laura Loomer, were enraged that Gates and Zuckerberg got an invite to the dinner.
“Zuckerberg and Gates belong in prison. Not at the dinner table with President Trump,” Loomer <a href="https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/1963770145358143598">wrote</a> on X. She said that the tech executives are two “of the biggest funders of anti-Trump and leftist activism in our country,” arguing that Zuckerberg helped rig the 2020 election against Trump.
During the dinner, Zuckerberg <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/1963776213945897399">announced</a> that Meta plans to invest “at least $600 billion” in the United States in the coming years to build out data centers and infrastructure to power the next wave of innovation.”
Catz, the head of Oracle, told Trump that “AI is going to change everything.”
“The fact that you are our President and you recognized this right away, and you’ve unleashed American innovation and creativity, all the work your doing and basically every Cabinet post in addition to what’s coming out of the White House is making it possible for America to win,” she added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/Oracle?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Oracle</a> CEO Safra Catz: &#8220;AI is going to change everything&#8230; The fact that you are our President and you recognized this right away, and you&#8217;ve unleashed American innovation and creativity&#8230; is making it possible for America to WIN.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/gWfrUHhc9R">pic.twitter.com/gWfrUHhc9R</a>
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1963791984394408239?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Before the dinner, some of the tech executives — including Altman, Pichai, and Krishna — attended a roundtable hosted by the first lady, which focused on AI in education. Google and OpenAI, along with Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, and Nvidia, also announced commitments to investing in AI education on Thursday, The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/trump-tech-ceo-rose-garden-dinner-1fee2de3">reported</a>.

President Trump Holds Dinner For Tech And Business Leaders At The White House

‘A Very Refreshing Change’: Tech CEOs Praise Trump During White House Dinner

Apple

Bill Gates

Donald Trump

Melania Trump

Microsoft

Tim Cook

White House

Two Republican U.S. senators called for a congressional investigation into Meta Platforms on Thursday after Reuters exclusively reported on an internal policy document that permitted the company’s chatbots to “engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual.”
Meta confirmed the document’s authenticity, but said that after receiving questions earlier this month from Reuters, the company removed portions that stated it is permissible for chatbots to flirt and engage in romantic roleplay with children. The standards described in the Meta document don’t necessarily reflect “ideal or even preferable” generative AI outputs, the document states. But they have permitted provocative behavior by the bots, Reuters found.
In one example, the document notes that it would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply.”
&#8220;So, only after Meta got CAUGHT did it retract portions of its company doc,&#8221; Senator Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, said in a post on social media site X. &#8220;This is grounds for an immediate congressional investigation,&#8221; Hawley said.
A spokesperson for Senator Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee, said she supports an investigation into the social media company.
A spokesperson for Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters.
Blackburn also added that the report illustrates the need to pass reforms to better protect children online, such as the Kids Online Safety Act, a bill she co-sponsored that the Senate passed last year but which failed in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“When it comes to protecting precious children online, Meta has failed miserably by every possible measure. Even worse, the company has turned a blind eye to the devastating consequences of how its platforms are designed,&#8221; Blackburn said.
The Kids Online Safety Act would make explicit a &#8220;duty of care&#8221; that social media companies have when it comes to minors using their products, focusing on the design of the platforms and the regulation of the companies.
Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, called the policies &#8220;deeply disturbing and wrong,&#8221; adding that Section 230, a law that shields internet companies from liability for the content posted to their platforms, should not protect companies&#8217; generative AI chatbots.
&#8220;Meta and Zuckerberg should be held fully responsible for any harm these bots cause,” he said.
Senator Peter Welch, a Democrat of Vermont, said the report &#8220;shows how critical safeguards are for AI — especially when the health and safety of kids is at risk.&#8221;
The Senate voted 99-1 in July to remove a provision in President Donald Trump&#8217;s sweeping tax-cut and spending bill that would have effectively barred states from passing AI regulation.
In the absence of federal laws regulating AI, states have passed legislation, including bans on using the technology to create child sexual abuse material.
(Reporting by Jody Godoy in New York; Additional Reporting by Alexandra Alper in Washington; Editing by Aurora Ellis)

FILE PHOTO: Illustration shows Meta logo

GOP Senators Push For Probe Into Meta’s AI Chatbot Engaging In ‘Sensual’ Discussions With Children

Children

Josh Hawley

Marsha Blackburn

Meta&#8217;s Oversight Board expressed indignation at the social media giant for its January policy overhaul that axed fact-checking and eased restrictions on discussions about immigration and gender identity.
The independent oversight board railed against the company for implementing the changes &#8220;hastily&#8221; with supposedly no transparency about &#8220;what, if any, prior human rights due diligence&#8221; was performed.
Zuckerberg acknowledged that previous content moderation efforts had resulted in &#8220;too many mistakes and too much censorship.&#8221;
President Trump had frequently criticized Facebook during his first term, culminating in his platform suspension following the January 6, 2021, Capitol events — a ban eventually lifted as he launched his successful 2024 campaign.
Since President Trump’s election to a second term, the Meta CEO has been working to mend fences and roll back a decade of content policies that prohibited “hate speech” and supposed misinformation that conservatives have long criticized as biased.
As part of the January policy <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/metas-oversight-board-rebukes-company-over-policy-overhaul-2025-04-23/">overhaul</a>, Meta scrapped its U.S. fact-checking program, replacing third-party partnerships with a Community Notes tool similar to Elon Musk&#8217;s X, per Reuters.
In addition, Meta removed restrictions on “hate speech” towards LGBT individuals, and also announced it would stop proactively scanning platforms for &#8220;less severe policy violations,&#8221; instead focusing its automated systems only on serious content like terrorism and child exploitation.
Among its 17 recommendations, the board requested that Meta improve enforcement of its bullying policies while clarifying which hateful ideologies remain banned.
The board expressed concern about potential impacts in countries experiencing conflicts, urging Meta to &#8220;assess whether the changes could have uneven consequences globally.&#8221;
Despite the success of Community Notes on X, the Oversight Board still requested that Meta assess the new tool&#8217;s effectiveness and release reports every six months.
Meta said it would respond to the board&#8217;s 17 recommendations within 60 days.
The board did uphold Meta&#8217;s decisions to allow some controversial content, including posts discussing transgender people&#8217;s access to bathrooms, while requiring the removal of posts with racist slurs.
A Meta told Reuters the company welcomed decisions &#8220;that leave up or restore content in the interest of promoting free expression,&#8221; but did not address rulings calling for content removal.
Despite tensions, Meta has so far committed to funding the Oversight Board through 2027, allocating at least $35 million annually over the next three years, placed in an Irrevocable Trust designed to protect the board&#8217;s independence.
Oversight Board Co-Chair Paolo Carozza stated, &#8220;We have no reason to think that Meta is soured on the board or planning to make any large-scale structural changes in terms of its commitment with the board.&#8221;

US-POLITICS-IT-FACEBOOK-TRUMP

Meta Oversight Board Fumes As Facebook Ends Censorship Initiatives

Censorship

Facebook

Social Media Censorship

Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg reportedly offered the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) nearly $1 billion to keep a case out of court that could break up his social media empire.
Zuckerberg sat for a third day of testimony on Wednesday in an antitrust case brought against his company by the FTC, which is attempting to force Meta to sell off Instagram and WhatsApp over what the government has said are Meta’s anticompetitive business practices.
Zuckerberg called the head of the FTC, Chairman Andrew Ferguson, in March to try to settle the case out of court. Zuckerberg initially offered the agency $450 million, but later increased that offer to nearly $1 billion to avoid bringing the case to court. Ferguson rejected the offers, which were far below the $18 billion payment and consent decree that he offered Meta, according to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/mark-zuckerberg-meta-antitrust-ftc-negotiations-a53b3382" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Wall Street Journal</a>.
The Meta founder has also courted President Donald Trump in recent months to try to avoid the trial in which Zuckerberg has begun to testify. The social media mogul donated $1 million to Trump&#8217;s inauguration and settled a lawsuit for $25 million over a Facebook ban on Trump after January 6, 2021 – the lion’s share of that settlement went toward Trump’s presidential library.
Meta’s head found himself in court on Monday despite those efforts. Government attorneys say that Meta has used illegal anticompetitive practices to buy up its competition, namely Instagram in 2012 for $1 billion and WhatsApp in 2014 in a nearly $22 billion deal. The FTC says that Meta has bought out competitors and now illegally dominates the “personal social-networking” market.
Meta has said that the FTC’s definition of the market is arbitrary and too narrow, and it ignores other major competitors of the tech giant. According to the FTC, Meta’s major competitors are Snapchat and an app called MeWe. Meta has said that it also competes with YouTube, TikTok, and X, among other companies not included in the FTC’s definition.
During the trial, Meta has argued that the growth of TikTok has been a major barrier to Meta’s own development. Meta has also said that an outage at TikTok earlier this year resulted in a bump in Instagram traffic, suggesting that Americans use the two platforms for similar purposes.
In public statements, Meta has complained about the Trump administration’s pursuit of it while appearing to treat TikTok, a Chinese-owned platform, more loosely by extending a pause on a congressionally approved ban on the app.

Zuck Offered FTC $1B To Avoid Trial Threatening His Social Media Empire: Report

Business

Trump Administration

Another legal battle is brewing over the deportation of half a million migrants allowed into the United States by Joe Biden. President Donald Trump pulls the federal funding rug out from under NPR, PBS – and Harvard. Will it hold up in Congress and the courts? And, Mark Zuckerberg is back in the hot seat as Facebook is accused of antitrust practices and cozying up to China.
It’s Wednesday, April 16, and this is the news you need to know to start your day. If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/judge-blocks-deportation-effort-federal-funding-fights/id1576594336?i=1000703714504" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>Trump Blocks Migrant Benefits, Border Crossings At All-Time Low</h2>
<div id="attachment_908237" style="width: 875px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-908237" class="size-large wp-image-908237" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-865x576.jpg" alt="" width="865" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-865x576.jpg 865w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-1536x1023.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-2048x1364.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Border-Wall-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 865px) 100vw, 865px" />(Photo by Jorge Salgado/Anadolu via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: Border crossings continue to fall at a historic pace as President Trump takes new steps to prevent illegal immigrants from accessing taxpayer benefits.
In recent years, the Biden administration enacted a controversial humanitarian parole program that offered legal status and two-year work permits to migrants from Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba, and Nicaragua. More than 530,000 people from those countries took advantage and flew directly to the United States. In March, President Trump moved to revoke legal status for those migrants, giving them until April 24 to leave the country or face deportation.
The White House argued these migrants were undermining American workers and faced little vetting before entering the country. But this week, a federal judge appointed by President Barack Obama blocked that effort, saying the Trump administration must instead offer each migrant a case-by-case review before revoking legal status.
However, in general, the Trump administration’s immigration efforts have borne fruit. The latest report from Customs and Border Protection confirmed that border crossings fell 95% in <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/04/icymi-illegal-border-crossings-hit-new-record-low-in-march/">March</a> compared to the same month last year, with just 7,100 migrants apprehended across the entire month – that’s roughly the number of migrants that came in every single day during Biden’s term in office. The Trump administration has also continued to go after the roughly 435,000 people living here illegally who’ve been convicted of additional crimes. ICE arrests have tripled in the last three months, and the number of illegal aliens in detention facilities is at an all-time high.
“We did in three weeks what Biden didn’t do in three or four years,” Border czar Tom Homan <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/1911893560116592730">said</a>. “Right now as you and I are talking, we have the most secure border in the history of this nation and the data proves it.”
According to The New York Times, the White House is now seeking $45 billion in additional funding to construct new detention facilities so it can expedite its mass deportation effort. The public still broadly approves of Trump’s immigration policy.
<h2>Trump Moves To Cut Funding To NPR, PBS &amp; Harvard</h2>
<div id="attachment_908239" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-908239" class="size-large wp-image-908239" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/NPR-PBS-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)</div>
Topline: President Trump is renewing his push to strip NPR and PBS of their funding while also freezing more than $2 billion in federal grants earmarked for Harvard. The moves have sparked heated debate, with supporters calling it a step toward fiscal responsibility and critics warning it threatens independent journalism and academic freedom.
Conservatives have talked about defunding NPR and PBS for years, but now they appear to have the political winds at their backs. Trust in the media is at an all-time low, and a lot of Americans are sympathetic to the idea that we do not need to spend billions of dollars in taxpayer money on these entities that many view as biased.
President Trump specifically accused NPR of being “a mouthpiece for the radical left.” And he’s calling on Republicans in Congress to introduce legislation that rescinds the funds that had been previously approved. Rescission would require the approval of the House and the Senate, where Republicans control narrow majorities and are already negotiating a major spending package.
Meanwhile: The Trump administration froze $2.2 billion in multi-year grants and $60 million in contracts to Harvard after the university refused demands to overhaul its policies, and as much as $9 billion in funding could be on the table. The White House, through its Joint Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, claims Harvard hasn’t done enough to address antisemitism tied to radical anti-Israel and pro-Hamas campus protests. They demanded changes like banning face masks, which a lot of the protestors wear, and enforcing merit-based rather than race-based admissions.
Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, rejected these demands, calling them a violation of First Amendment rights and academic freedom, saying in a statement “No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”
<h2>Facebook Faces Antitrust Lawsuit</h2>
<div id="attachment_908241" style="width: 778px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-908241" class="size-large wp-image-908241" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Facebook-dislike-768x576.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Facebook-dislike-768x576.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/Facebook-dislike-300x225.jpg 300w" sizes=" (max-width: 768px) 100vw, 768px" />(Photo by Alfieri via Getty Images)</div>
Topline: FTC vs Meta Platforms, Inc. began in court this week. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sat for his second day of testimony in the trial that risks breaking up his social media empire.
This case was initially brought during President Trump’s first term and has taken more than four years to work through the courts. The FTC says that Meta is a monopoly that has bought its way out of competing. The government argues that when Facebook paid $1 billion for Instagram in 2012 and bought WhatsApp in a nearly $22 billion deal in 2014, Facebook illegally cornered what the FTC calls the “personal social-networking” market. According to the government, the only other major competitors to Facebook are Snapchat and an app called MeWe.
Meta disputes this. It says the market is actually much larger, and includes TikTok, YouTube, and X. For instance, when TikTok had an outage earlier this year, Instagram saw its usage spike, which suggests that people use the sites interchangeably. Meta has also argued that by going after it, the Trump administration is helping the Chinese-owned TikTok even more. TikTok was banned in the United States <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/tiktok-rages-after-u-s-passes-law-requiring-its-sale-from-chinese-parent-company">last year</a>, but earlier this month, Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-extends-tiktok-sale-deadline-by-75-days-as-acquisition-talks-continue">extended</a> the pause on a Congressionally-approved ban on that app that was put into place in January.
This trial is expected to go on for eight weeks, so there will be plenty more ahead. But if Meta loses, it could be forced to sell off Instagram and WhatsApp.

The-White-House-Press-Secretary-Karoline-Leavitt-Had-Press-Brief

Morning Brief: Border Crossings Plummet, NPR Funding Trouble & Meta Antitrust

Anti-Semitism

Anti-trust

Harvard University

Illegal Immigration

Media

Morning Wire

National Public Radio (NPR)

Politics

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, announced Friday that its fact-checking program in the United States would be &#8220;officially over&#8221; on Monday, when it will roll out the community notes feature across all platforms.
The news comes after Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced in January that the company would end fact-checking and move to restore free speech on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. Starting Monday, fact-checkers will no longer be able to rate new content, and old fact-checks placed on content will no longer appear.
Instead of fact-checks, Meta will adopt an X-style community notes system where users can add context to posts, which are then rated by other users. Anyone will be able to sign up to be a contributor to community notes if they are over 18 and have had a verified account for over six months.
Joel Kaplan, Meta&#8217;s chief global affairs officer, announced the changes on Friday.
&#8220;By Monday afternoon, our fact-checking program in the US will be officially over. That means no new fact checks and no fact checkers. We announced in January we’d be winding down the program &amp; we haven’t applied penalties to fact-checked posts in the US since then. In place of fact checks, the first Community Notes will start appearing gradually across Facebook, Threads &amp; Instagram, with no penalties attached,&#8221; Kaplan posted on social media.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
By Monday afternoon, our fact-checking program in the US will be officially over. That means no new fact checks and no fact checkers. We announced in January we’d be winding down the program &amp; removing penalties. In place of fact checks, the first Community Notes will start…
&mdash; Joel Kaplan (@joel_kaplan) <a href="https://twitter.com/joel_kaplan/status/1908204701457236472?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 4, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The changes come after Meta was placed under congressional scrutiny for targeting conservative views on topics like the 2020 election, the COVID vaccine, and the Hunter Biden laptop story. Zuckerberg has pinned much of the blame for the censorship on former President Joe Biden, saying Meta was pressured to target conservative content.
Meta started testing out its community notes feature last month, allowing some 200,000 potential contributors to sign up.
&#8220;Meta won’t decide what gets rated or written – contributors from our community will. And to safeguard against bias, notes won’t be published unless contributors with a range of viewpoints broadly agree on them,&#8221; the company said. &#8220;This isn’t majority rules. No matter how many contributors agree on a note, it won’t be published unless people who normally disagree decide that it provides helpful context.&#8221;
In January, Zuckerberg <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/zuckerberg-says-meta-restoring-free-speech-will-get-rid-of-fact-checkers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> that the move was part of Meta&#8217;s goal of restoring free speech on its platforms.
“We’re going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies and restoring free expression on our platforms,” Zuckerberg said. “We’re going to get rid of fact-checkers and replace them with Community Notes similar to X, starting in the United States.”
Zuckerberg said restrictions on discussions on topics like immigration and gender were “out of touch with mainstream discourse.”
“What started as a movement to be more inclusive has increasingly been used to shut down opinions and shut out people with different ideas,” he said.
In that same announcement, Zuckerberg said that Meta would work with the incoming Trump administration to fight censorship abroad.
“We’re going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more,” he said. “The U.S. has the strongest constitutional protections for free expression in the world.”

US-TECHNOLOGY-INTERNET-CHILD-EXPLOITATION

Facebook To Shut Down Fact-Checking Program On Monday: ‘Officially Over’

Fact Check

Earlier on Wednesday, President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> signed an agreement requiring Meta Platforms to pay $25 million to settle a lawsuit he brought after his social media accounts were suspended in 2021.
The settlement resolves a 4-year-long court battle over free speech and social media censorship, with Meta suspending Trump following his remarks on the January 6 Capitol riot.
According to a report by The Wall Street Journal, settlement negotiations <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/trump-signs-agreement-calling-for-meta-to-pay-25-million-to-settle-suit-6f734c8c" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reportedly</a> became more serious after Mark Zuckerberg dined with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in November following Trump’s election victory.
Of the settlement, $22 million will go toward the president’s library, with the remainder designated for legal fees and other plaintiffs.
This settlement follows efforts by tech companies previously hostile to Trump to get into his good graces, with Amazon Chairman Jeff Bezos and Apple CEO Tim Cook, in addition to Zuckerberg, each <a href="https://www.commoncause.org/articles/big-tech-is-donating-millions-to-trumps-inauguration/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">donating</a> $1 million respectively, to the inauguration.
Alongside Meta, Trump sued other major platforms, including Twitter and YouTube, over his suspensions, arguing that the companies had wrongfully violated his right to share political speech.
A federal judge ultimately dismissed the Twitter action in 2022, concluding that the First Amendment applies to government entities rather than private corporations, although Trump’s legal team lodged an appeal that has yet to be resolved. The YouTube suit was put on an administrative pause in 2023, with the possibility of being reopened at a later date.
One of Trump’s lawyers acknowledged that they saw an opening for possible settlements, noting that corporate defendants appeared willing to mend fences with the new administration.
Although Trump’s Facebook and Instagram access was eventually restored, his attorneys argued that an atmosphere of uncertainty continued for him online.
Zuckerberg, for his part, had previously explained that Meta saw security concerns in allowing continued engagement by high-profile figures who contested election results.
Reflecting on the 2021 suspensions, he said the potential risks posed amid that tumultuous period were “simply too great.”
While the lawsuit with Meta has now been settled, the broader debate over what boundaries, if any, private businesses can set for political speech shows few signs of fading.

The Inauguration Of Donald J. Trump As The 47th President

Trump, Meta Settle Lawsuit Over Social Media Ban for $25 Million

Courts

Lawsuit

U.S.

Last week the news broke that Meta — the company that owns Facebook, Instagram, and half the internet — claims it will be pulling back drastically from its censorship policies. Free speech will reign again on Facebook, supposedly. The CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, appeared on Joe Rogan a couple of days ago to elaborate on this decision. Much of what he says in the conversation — along with the entire conversation itself — would have been unthinkable four or five years ago. But times are rapidly changing.
Specifically, in the interview, Zuckerberg affirmed that there&#8217;s nothing wrong with a masculine culture in a workplace — and that, in fact, a lot of companies would benefit from it. Imagine that. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 Zuck" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aL_ODZpmMCM?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;
Eight years ago, these are the kinds of ideas that would&#8217;ve — and if you recall the case of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fired-google-engineer-james-damore-dropped-his-lawsuit-against-company" target="_blank" rel="noopener">James Damore</a> — did get rank-and-file employees fired at Google. And now the head of a major Big Tech company is saying it.
Of course, the obvious response to this interview is that Zuckerberg doesn&#8217;t actually believe any of this. He&#8217;s just saying it because Trump won the election, and he wants to cozy up with power. And that&#8217;s almost certainly true. But it doesn&#8217;t fully capture what&#8217;s going on — which is that there&#8217;s also been a major shift in American culture this time around. After all, Trump won the election back in 2016, too. And Zuckerberg didn&#8217;t say anything like this. Instead his companies reacted by entrenching themselves even deeper on the Left. Now the exact opposite is happening.
In the interview, Zuckerberg suggested that some of Facebook&#8217;s censorship was the result of pressure by the Biden administration, although he claims to have resisted some of it. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 Biden censorship" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0kEGe4pRgTY?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;
Of course, it wasn&#8217;t just &#8220;vaccine side effects&#8221; that the Biden administration wanted Facebook to censor. They also wanted Facebook to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story, for obvious reasons. It was a damning account of the Biden family&#8217;s corruption, and no one could really dispute its accuracy because it came directly from Hunter Biden&#8217;s laptop. And Facebook went along with that, too, on the ridiculous theory that the laptop was really some secret scheme by Russian intelligence.
It goes without saying that Facebook could have gone public with these concerns at any time in the last several years. They didn&#8217;t need to wait until Trump won a second term. So, no, we shouldn&#8217;t &#8220;trust&#8221; Mark Zuckerberg, now that he&#8217;s made a calculation that telling the truth is in his best interests. He had a chance to do the right thing when it would have required some measure of courage to do so. Although not that much, considering he was and is a multi-billionaire. That provides you a lot of cover that most of us don’t have. But Zuckerberg waited until now. 
There’s a lot of this going around right now. People who are seeing the light and coming out against wokeness, now that wokeness is a punch line and has no political power and little Cultural power. I welcome these people to Team Sanity. But I don’t trust them, and I certainly won’t congratulate them.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1513-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
At the same time, again, Zuckerberg&#8217;s shift is a reflection of a broader change in the culture. And it&#8217;s a shift that&#8217;s quite dramatic in some respects. Here&#8217;s how the New York Times is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/10/technology/meta-mark-zuckerberg-trump.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reporting</a> on some of the changes at Meta, for example: 
<blockquote>The company removed the transgender and nonbinary &#8216;themes&#8217; on its Messenger chat app. &#8230; That same day at Meta’s offices in Silicon Valley, Texas and New York, facilities managers were instructed to remove tampons from men’s bathrooms, which the company had provided for nonbinary and transgender employees who use the men’s room and who may have required sanitary pads, two employees said.</blockquote>
Yes, tampons have been removed from the men&#8217;s bathrooms at Meta. Presumably the tampons have also been removed from the virtual bathrooms in the Metaverse too, although I don&#8217;t have a &#8220;Meta Quest&#8221; VR headset, so I can&#8217;t verify that at the moment. This is a sudden change that happened virtually overnight, after years of having tampons in the men&#8217;s bathroom. The CEO decides one day to end it. And it ends.
Why did the men’s bathrooms ever have tampons to begin with? Why did he ever think that was a good idea? Did Zuckerberg believe that men could have periods and then see the light after reading a biology textbook? I don’t think so. He knew it was absurd the whole time.
And guess what? There have been no riots at Meta over this change. There have been no massive protests or mass resignations. The Metaverse hasn&#8217;t collapsed. That&#8217;s because everyone at Meta — including the supposedly &#8220;trans&#8221; employees — know that reality is not subjective. They know that men do not need tampons. And now that an adult has told them the truth, they&#8217;re accepting it because they have no other choice.
That&#8217;s all it really takes for a return to sanity. And it&#8217;s happening more and more often.
To give another example — recently a federal court in Kentucky handed the Biden administration a major defeat in a Title IX case. In case you&#8217;re not familiar with Title IX, it&#8217;s a law that prevents sex discrimination in educational programs, including sports, that receive any kind of federal assistance. The Biden administration unilaterally tried to re-interpret Title IX so that it prevents discrimination on the basis of so-called &#8220;gender identity.&#8221; Their rule would have required teachers to use students&#8217; preferred pronouns, among other demands.
From a legal perspective, the Biden administration and trans activists thought they had a winning case. And that&#8217;s because an earlier Supreme Court ruling had held, by a 6-3 vote, that a different provision of civil rights law — Title VII — prohibited discrimination on the basis of so-called &#8220;gender identity&#8221; in the workplace. Gorsuch and Roberts sided with the Leftist judges to come up with that ruling.
But last week, a federal judge in Kentucky held that the same logic doesn&#8217;t apply to Title IX, because Title IX is explicitly focused on sex discrimination — and no other form of discrimination. <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25483131-order-in-title-ix-case/?q=eviscerates&amp;mode=document#document/p7" target="_blank" rel="noopener">This</a> is from the judge&#8217;s ruling: &#8220;The entire point of Title 9 is to prevent discrimination based on sex. Throwing gender identity into the mix eviscerates the statute and renders it largely meaningless.&#8221;
This ruling will obviously be appealed, and work its way up the courts. But as it stands, it could lay the groundwork for a new Supreme Court ruling — one that rejects any attempt to conflate &#8220;sex&#8221; and &#8220;gender&#8221; within the meaning of the law.
<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>
A ruling like that would&#8217;ve been hard to imagine a few years ago. But it&#8217;s not hard to imagine anymore. That&#8217;s because, even in places like California — some of the most Left-wing places in the country — there are clear signs that people are tired of this insanity. Consider the eruption of anger over California&#8217;s DEI policies and general incompetence in the wake of these historic fires, which still aren&#8217;t under control.
The corporate press is trying to run the same familiar narrative, where they blame racism and climate change. For example, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/california-wildfire-pacific-palisades-pasadena-altadena-inequality-63ea76d186740359f7f5dd188896354f" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here&#8217;s the AP</a>: 
<blockquote>The California wildfires could be leaving deeper inequality in their wake. .. The fires also burned through a remarkable haven for generations of Black families avoiding discriminatory housing practices elsewhere. They have been communities of racial and economic diversity, where many people own their own homes.</blockquote>
The reaction to this article online has been, as you might expect, universal mockery and derision. People aren&#8217;t persuaded by this anymore. Well, people never were persuaded by it. The difference is that now nobody pretends to be. No one talks like this, unless they&#8217;re a journalist for an outlet like the AP. The rest of us are sharing clips like this one, featuring the chief of the Los Angeles Department of Water &amp; Power. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="003 LA" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4TznyI2d60Q?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;
She says: &#8220;The #1 thing that attracted me to this role&#8230; It’s important for me that everything we do is with an equity lens and social justice.&#8221;
It&#8217;s reminiscent of the aftermath of the Maui fires, when a top official <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/08/19/hawaii-official-worried-about-equity-over-water/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">talked</a> about how access to water should involve &#8220;conversations about equity.&#8221; These are the kinds of clips that have quickly surfaced in the wake of the California fires. And they&#8217;re surfacing because people are tired of DEI hires running their cities into the ground. People are realizing that lives are at stake now.
That&#8217;s especially obvious after the discovery that a key reservoir was <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-01-10/as-flames-raged-in-palisades-a-key-reservoir-nearby-was-offline" target="_blank" rel="noopener">empty</a> in the Pacific Palisades when the fires began. From the <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-01-10/as-flames-raged-in-palisades-a-key-reservoir-nearby-was-offline" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Los Angeles Times</a>: 
<blockquote>Officials said that the [Reservoir] had been closed since about February for repairs to its cover, leaving a 117-million-gallon water storage complex empty in the heart of the Palisades for nearly a year.</blockquote>
Keep in mind, that&#8217;s the L.A. Times with that exclusive reporting. That&#8217;s the same paper that called Larry Elder &#8220;the black face of white supremacy&#8221; not too long ago. Then (like Jeff Bezos), the Times&#8217; owner withheld the paper&#8217;s endorsement of Kamala Harris, so they&#8217;d focus more on the news. Now they&#8217;re exposing genuine misconduct and incompetence, no matter how embarrassing and damaging it may be for California&#8217;s Democrats.
You won&#8217;t find a clearer sign that wokeness — meaning the suspension of reality to appease the preferred demographic groups of the Democratic Party — is coming to an end. It may be coming to an end in part because of self-interested political actors like Mark Zuckerberg. But it&#8217;s ending, one way or another, because people are tired of it. When Donald Trump won in 2016, that wasn&#8217;t the case. But if there&#8217;s one overriding reason for optimism for Trump&#8217;s second term, it&#8217;s that this time around, no one — not even Silicon Valley mega-corporations like Meta — is pretending to take this nonsense seriously anymore.
* * *
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Interview On The Circuit

Wokeness Is Dying

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Joe Rogan

Los Angeles

Opinion

Silicon Valley

Social Media

Woke Culture

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/prince-harry">Prince Harry</a> issued a statement making it clear he is not happy that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/meta">Meta</a> has decided to no longer fact-check people when they say things that the member of the royal family finds upsetting.
In a <a href="https://sussex.com/fact-checking-meta/">lengthy statement</a> on Monday — from the Office of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — the royal said the company’s policy to roll back &#8220;hate speech&#8221; restrictions on the social media platform “should deeply concern us all,” calling on Meta to reverse course.
Last week, Meta CEO <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/mark-zuckerberg">Mark Zuckerberg</a> announced the company would no longer work with independent fact-checkers, end restrictions on topics like gender and immigration, and scale back filters that censored people for often innocuous posts. 
“It doesn’t matter whether your views are left, right or somewhere in between—the latest news from Meta about changes to their policies directly undermines free speech,” Prince Harry wrote. “Contrary to the company’s talking points, allowing more abuse and normalizing hate speech serves to silence speech and expression, not foster it.”
“Online spaces must be designed with public safety and well-being at their core, resilient against political pressures and lapses in corporate leadership,” he added. “This latest move from Meta is an example of a social media company—fully aware of their power to shape public discourse—disregarding any responsibility to ensure that power is not abused and instead allowing either ego or profit, likely both, to guide decisions that affect billions.&#8221;
“Meta’s changes to its ‘Hateful Content Policies’ do not protect free expression but instead foster an environment where abuse and hate speech silence and threaten the voices of whole communities who make up a healthy democracy,” the royal continued. “We urge Meta to reconsider and reinstate policies to protect all users. We also call on leaders across industries to uphold their commitments to integrity and public safety in online spaces, and we applaud leaders who refuse to kowtow to bullying.”
At one point, the Duke also focused his ire on the decision by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/meta-axes-dei-programs-in-the-lead-up-to-trumps-inauguration">Meta to axe</a> its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, claiming that it was undermining “protections for marginalized communities&#8221; and putting “everyone in harm’s way and contributing to a global mental health crisis.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a>
Shortly after the statement was released, social media users cracked jokes about Prince Harry being upset.
“Mark Zuckerberg has upset the Markles,” <a href="https://x.com/HollyBriden/status/1878835786700955820">one person joked</a>. “People on Meta are now free to call Meghan a ‘gold-digging fame-whore’ or Harry a ‘half-blood prince’ and there’s nothing they can do about it. This is tragic. #SaveTheMarkles.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Mark Zuckerberg has upset the Markles. 
People on Meta are now free to call Meghan a “gold-digging fame-whore” or Harry a “half-blood prince” and there’s nothing they can do about it. 
This is tragic. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SaveTheMarkles?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SaveTheMarkles</a> <a href="https://t.co/3vKiDJ2OT3">https://t.co/3vKiDJ2OT3</a>
&mdash; 🥜🫃🏼💉🇺🇦🥥Hollaria Briden, Esq. (@HollyBriden) <a href="https://twitter.com/HollyBriden/status/1878835786700955820?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While <a href="https://x.com/InsightfulWatch/status/1878757722860245416">another added</a>, “They have blamed racism, the Royal Family, the UK media, the people of the UK and now they are saying it’s haters. It’s time Harry noticed that people across the world do not like his and his wife’s behavior and treatment of others. They are to blame.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/meghan-markle-lifestyle-series-coming-to-netflix-and-people-have-thoughts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Meghan Markle Lifestyle Series Coming To Netflix — And People Have Thoughts</a>

Prince Harry

Prince Harry’s Mad Meta Is No Longer Fact-Checking People When They Say Upsetting Things

Prince Harry's Mad Meta Is No Longer Fact-Checking People When They Say Upsetting Things

Celebrities

Entertainment

First Amendenet

Meghan Markle

Royal Family

Meta CEO <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/mark-zuckerberg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Mark Zuckerberg</a> revealed during a Friday interview with Joe Rogan that his company is scrapping diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and embracing &#8220;masculine energy&#8221; in corporate culture.
&#8220;A lot of the corporate world is pretty culturally neutered,&#8221; Zuckerberg told Rogan. &#8220;The kind of masculine energy I think is good, and obviously society has plenty of that, but I think corporate culture was really trying to get away from it.&#8221;
He acknowledged that while it&#8217;s important for companies to support women, the notion that &#8220;masculinity is bad&#8221; has become prevalent, which he believes is not the right approach. &#8220;These things can always go a little far,&#8221; he added.
“I think having a culture that celebrates the aggression a bit more has its own merits that are really positive,&#8221; said Zuckerberg, suggesting that companies should strive to strike a balance between both perspectives. 
 
“It’s one thing to say we want to be welcoming and make a good environment for everyone, and I think it’s another to basically say that ‘masculinity is bad,'&#8221; he said. “And I just think we kind of swung culturally to that part of the spectrum. … It’s like, no. Both of these things are good.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7k1ehaE0bdU?si=neXBsgQuTT2PRdfV" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Zuckerberg’s perspective is reflected in recently announced changes to Meta&#8217;s content moderation policies. According to The New York Times, Meta has also <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/meta-orders-removal-tampons-mens-rooms-amid-zuckerberg-post-election-shakeup-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered</a> the removal of tampons in the men&#8217;s restrooms in multiple facilities, &#8220;which the company had provided for nonbinary and transgender employees who use the men’s room&#8230;&#8221;
Additionally, Meta dropped major diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives on Friday, with an internal memo indicating that the term &#8220;DEI&#8221; had become &#8220;charged&#8221; because it was &#8220;understood by some as a practice that suggests preferential treatment of some groups over others.&#8221; The memo&#8217;s release followed Meta&#8217;s announcement that it was abandoning its fact-checking program, citing concerns that fact-checkers were &#8220;too politically biased.&#8221;
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN ’25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a>
Zuckerberg&#8217;s interview with Rogan comes shortly after he met with President-elect Donald Trump at his Florida estate. Despite past tensions, including Trump&#8217;s previous criticisms of Zuckerberg and threats of legal action, the Meta CEO expressed optimism about the incoming administration. &#8220;I think he just wants America to win,&#8221; Zuckerberg said of Trump.
Zuckerberg expressed that he now feels a &#8220;much greater command&#8221; over Meta&#8217;s policies and dismissed the idea that the recent changes are &#8220;purely political&#8221; due to their timing near the recent elections. He emphasized that the adjustments are part of a long-term strategy to address concerns over bias and content moderation.

Key Speakers At The Acquired Live Podcast Event

Facebook Culture Shift: Zuckerberg Backs ‘Masculine Energy,’ Drops DEI Efforts

Menu