YouTube is testing a new system for their United States-based users which would use artificial intelligence (AI) to determine a user’s age and set up restrictions accordingly.
This “age estimation model” was rolled out to a “small set of users” on Wednesday, per reports, and is aimed at protecting children from harmful content. The company said the AI will not rely on the birth date entered on the account, but will use other methods to determine the user’s age, per <a href="https://apnews.com/article/youtube-video-age-verification-system-1ce99a7089b33e88dc76e49945ded186">Associated Press</a>.
YouTube noted that users will have an option to override that estimation if they believe it’s made an error, and people will “have the option to verify your age (through government ID, selfie or a credit card) if you believe our age estimation model is incorrect.”
The system only works for users who are logged in.
James Beser, senior director of product management for YouTube’s youth products, wrote in a <a href="https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/extending-our-built-in-protections-to-more-teens-on-youtube/">blog post</a> that the move was made “so that teens are treated as teens and adults as adults.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=summer&amp;utm_content=editorialsummersale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">End of Summer Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
“This technology will allow us to infer a user’s age and then use that signal, regardless of the birthday in the account, to deliver our age-appropriate product experiences and protection,” Beser wrote, noting that this method has already been used in other countries “for some time” and is working well.
Protections put in place would be similar to when a user inputs a birthday showing them to be minor.
This includes showing only non-personalized ads, enabling “digital wellbeing” tools such as “take a break” and bedtime reminders by default, showing reminders about privacy when uploading a video or commenting publicly, minimizing recommendations of videos with content that could be “problematic if viewed in repetition,” and blocking access to age-restricted video explicitly not recommended for minors.

YouTube

YouTube Will Test AI-Based Age Verification, Automatically Restrict Content For Minors

Artificial Intelligence

Big Tech

Entertainment

minors

U.S.

Buckley vs. Vidal. Frost Vs. Nixon.
Smith vs. Murray?
Everyone is still talking about the extended debate between Libertarian comic Dave Smith and author Douglas Murray on “The Joe Rogan Experience.”
The Spotify superstar set the chat in motion, knowing the two had extremely different views that would make for a compelling exchange. It’s a sad sign of the times when a debate between two well-meaning adults is increasingly rare in pop culture.
The chat did more than let both pundits share their views. It reminded Rogan of an old saw that Uncle Ben taught a budding web-slinger long ago.
With great power comes great responsibility.
<div id="attachment_909815" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah6kirkSwTg"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-909815" class="size-large wp-image-909815" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-23-PM-2662-1024x576.jpg" alt="Screenshot: Joe Rogan Experience #2303. Dave Smith and Douglas Murray. PowerfulJRE. YouTube.com" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-23-PM-2662-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-23-PM-2662-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-23-PM-2662-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-23-PM-2662-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-23-PM-2662-2048x1152.jpg 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>Screenshot: Joe Rogan Experience #2303. Dave Smith and Douglas Murray. PowerfulJRE. YouTube.com</div>
The underlying message in the chat? Rogan’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah6kirkSwTg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hugely popular show</a> has been letting some cranks share his podcast microphone. That might not have mattered a few years ago, but now “The Joe Rogan Experience” has the power to shape the political landscape.
Many pundits suggest Donald Trump’s appearance on the show, along with Kamala Harris’ unwillingness to do the same, played a role in the real estate mogul’s victory.
Letting “historians” in Rogan’s studio who resist that label, spread erroneous facts, and refuse to take on their critics, may not be the best way to flex his podcast muscle.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/joe-rogan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rogan</a> has played podcast footsie with conspiracy monger Alex Jones for some time. Now, he’s expanding that practice to the format’s detriment. Think Ian Carroll and Darryl Cooper as two recent examples.
The latter called Winston Churchill, <a href="https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/cooper-koureas/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“The chief villain of World War II.”</a>
“I feel you’ve opened the door to quite a lot of people who now got a big platform, who have been throwing out counter-historical stuff of a very dangerous kind,” Murray said early in the conversation. “These guys are not historians. They’re not knowledgeable about anything.”
“I just think, ‘I’d like to talk to that person.&#8217;” Rogan said of his guest choice.
The far-Left Hollywood Reporter, sensing a weakness in Rogan’s podcasting armor, called the podcaster’s recent tilt, “Dangerous.” That’s overstating it, but <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/politics-news/joe-rogan-douglas-murray-podcast-1236192416/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">it’s neither healthy nor helpful.</a>
A week later, Darryl Cooper arrived to perform his act, which can be described as offering outrageous provocations he then half walks back so he can repeat them all again tomorrow. In September, Cooper had appeared on Tucker Carlson’s podcast to say that Churchill was the real villain in World War II and that Nazis didn’t want to kill Jews in concentration camps; Jews only “ended up dead” because Germany didn’t have the resources to take care of them.
Murray and Smith didn’t name call or insult one another during the often-tense exchange. Rogan proved an avuncular host, trying to keep the parties on an even keel. The two sparred over foreign policy, the Ukraine war, and, most passionately, the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Murray’s silky-smooth delivery and impeccable grasp of the facts mattered. Smith brought an Everyman’s perspective to the party, often appearing overmatched in the dustup.
<div id="attachment_909817" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-909817" class="size-large wp-image-909817" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-13-PM-5832-1024x576.jpg" alt="Screenshot: Joe Rogan Experience #2303. Dave Smith and Douglas Murray. PowerfulJRE. YouTube.com" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-13-PM-5832-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-13-PM-5832-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-13-PM-5832-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-13-PM-5832-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-13-PM-5832-2048x1152.jpg 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Screenshot: Joe Rogan Experience #2303. Dave Smith and Douglas Murray. PowerfulJRE. YouTube.com</div>
Who “won” depends partly on who you were rooting for prior to the exchange. Both landed some blows, from Murray detailing the horrors of October 7 to Smith sharing the devastation in Gaza from the extended conflict.
It’s increasingly rare to watch these kinds of debates play out on the pop culture landscape. Hollywood’s near total domination by the Left means there’s little appetite for these healthy exchanges. 
Consider today’s late-night hosts. They all sing from the same progressive hymnal and invite progressive guests on to nod along with the audience. The host of ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” just raged against President Donald Trump in a Rolling Stone interview. Here’s part of his <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-features/jimmy-kimmel-trump-late-night-future-interview-1235315906/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">jeremiad against all things GOP</a>.
&#8220;There’s no decency. It’s just a bunch of animals [emphasis added], and it’s disgusting… I mean, on the Fourth of July, I still put up a flag, and I’m never going to stop doing that, because I’m never going to let them have that symbol.&#8221;
Does that sound like someone willing to host a free and fair debate on his platform? Why can’t Kimmel invite someone like Dr. Jordan Peterson or Greg Gutfeld on his show for a civil conversation? It would make for compelling TV and might boost the show’s ratings.
Plus, audiences might take away something valuable from it beyond demonizing those with whom they disagree. It’s increasingly clear folks on the Left aren’t interested in that kind of exchange.
There is an exception, though. Classical liberal Bill Maher, both on his HBO talk show and “Club Random” podcast, routinely invites Right-leaning guests to talk out their differences. Think Dave Rubin, Kid Rock, and actor Zachary Levi, to name just three.
<div id="attachment_909819" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-909819" class="size-large wp-image-909819" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-36-PM-7260-1024x576.jpg" alt="Screenshot: YouTube/Club Random Podcast. " width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-36-PM-7260-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-36-PM-7260-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-36-PM-7260-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-36-PM-7260-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-36-PM-7260-2048x1152.jpg 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Screenshot: YouTube/Club Random Podcast.</div>
Rogan probably didn’t like to hear someone like Murray, well-regarded in many circles, dressing him down on his own show. He needed to hear it all the same. It’s reminiscent of another pivotal moment from the show’s past.
Rogan invited then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on his show for what appeared to be a tepid chat that let Dorsey slink away from his platform’s censorious ways. Rogan got an earful from his fans who felt he had let the CEO off too easily. So he invited Dorsey back on the show, but brought backup.
He added journalist gadfly <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZCBRHOg3PQ" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tim Pool to the conversation</a>. Pool brought some unflattering receipts, and the exchange proved far more illuminating than the first interview.
Perhaps Rogan needed a reminder of why his show matters and the consequences of having one of the biggest podcasts in the country.
Uncle Ben would be proud if he took that lesson seriously.
* * *
Christian Toto is an award-winning journalist, movie critic and editor of <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>. He previously served as associate editor with Breitbart News’ Big Hollywood. Follow him at <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

MixCollage-18-Apr-2025-04-07-PM-2073

Joe Rogan’s Smith-Murray Debate Shows The Power And Risk Of Platforming

comedian

Conservatives

Debate

Douglas Murray

Joe Rogan

Libertarian Party

Podcast

Pro-Israel

Pro-Palestinian

Spotify

Ukraine-Russia War

Winston Churchill

World War II

Fans of the popular YouTube content creator MrBeast (real name Jimmy Donaldson) who paid for an “immersive” experience in Las Vegas are demanding their money back, saying they didn’t get anything close to what was advertised.
The event at Resorts World Las Vegas was advertised as an &#8220;immersive&#8221; and &#8220;unforgettable.&#8221; It was supposed to include exclusive games, a MrBeast-themed menu, and mystery bags filled with limited-edition merchandise. There was also supposed to be at least one bag containing a $10,000 gift voucher.
All of these details were meant to justify the $1,000 per-ticket price tag for the three-day event, which took place from April 13 to April 15.
“It should have been like mini-games, meet and greets, photo ops, special drinks, and things,” participant Theresa Metta <a href="https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/mrbeast-fans-seek-refunds-after-las-vegas-event/">told</a> Vegas-based outlet 8NewsNow. “Unfortunately, we didn’t get any of that.”
&#8220;I was told to wait in my room for two days for a package to come, so I legit spent two days in my room for a package to come, and it was a box of chocolates,&#8221; she continued.
&#8220;They said there would be mystery bags or boxes, and that one person would win $10,000, and then there would be a limited edition merchandise inside the boxes,&#8221; another guest, Jamie Yacksyzn, told <a href="https://people.com/mrbeast-fans-seek-refunds-for-usd1k-per-ticket-las-vegas-event-after-disappointing-experience-11716907">People</a>. 
&#8220;They also said the contents of the boxes are secret and not to be found out until you get the box,” she added. “So it alluded to the fact that there was going to be more special surprises in the box, and that there would be immersive experiences throughout the hotel floor and restaurants and activations.&#8221;
Yacksyzn continued, &#8220;I had seen things about the experience reported on MrBeast pages. Knowing how MrBeast is, and he does secret surprises and things, the hotel had also mentioned that it would be aligned with MrBeast&#8217;s reputation for being generous and his generosity.&#8221;
One guest posted a complaint on X with similar gripes about the lack of “experience” and the special merchandise being nothing more than “leftover shirts that cost $9.”
This prompted Donaldson to <a href="https://x.com/MrBeast/status/1912299963838509240">reply</a> from the MrBeast X account, saying, &#8220;Hey! This definitely isn&#8217;t the experience we hoped they&#8217;d deliver. My team&#8217;s already on it–I&#8217;d love to personally make it up to you and anyone else by inviting everybody affected to tour my actual studio! Can&#8217;t wait to meet you all and my team is reaching out to everyone :D.&#8221;
Resorts World took responsibility for the ordeal, admitting that &#8220;expectations were not met during the MrBeast experience.&#8221; The hotel said in an email that customers would be refunded in the next three to five days.

MrBeast

MrBeast Fans Demand Refund After $1K Per Ticket Vegas Experience Disaster

General

influencer

Las Vegas

Nevada

Utah Republican Governor Spencer Cox signed a law on Tuesday that will increase protections for the children of online content creators. This move was inspired by the child abuse conviction of Ruby Franke, a popular YouTube personality who was found guilty of severely abusing her children.
The new law says that online creators who make more than $150,000 a year from content featuring children will be required to set aside 15% of those earnings into a trust fund that the kids can then access when they turn 18. This will also be the rule for parents of child actors appearing in TV or film projects, per the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/ruby-franke-child-influencer-protections-utah-d9702b22c9ea7adba6e15003971493ce#">Associated Press</a>.
“Children cannot give informed consent to be filmed on social media, period,” Ruby’s ex-husband Kevin Franke said. “Vlogging my family, putting my children into public social media, was wrong, and I regret it every day.”
The Frankes became famous after starting the “8 Passengers” YouTube channel in 2015. The series followed their day-to-day lives as a Mormon family in Springville, Utah. The Franke children were included in the videos Ruby posted up to five times a week, the outlet noted. Their content became popular, attracting 2.5 million subscribers by 2020. 
In 2012, Ruby changed track and started creating parenting content with therapist Jodi Hildebrandt. At Hildebrandt’s insistence, Ruby became estranged from her husband and moved into the therapist’s home with her two youngest children. Viewers became increasingly alarmed by Ruby’s disciplinary suggestions.
The women were taken into custody on child abuse charges after Ruby Franke’s severely underweight 12-year-old son, Russell, climbed out of a window and ran to a neighbor for help. The neighbor called 911 after noticing that the teen’s ankles were wrapped in bloody duct tape. Responding officers discovered the youngest Franke child, 9-year-old Eve, with her head shaved and sitting cross-legged in a dark closet.
A search of the home uncovered handwritten journals where Ruby claimed that her son was possessed by the devil. In the journals, she detailed abuse including starvation and making her children work outside in the heat without protection or nourishment. 
Both Ruby and Hildebrandt received prison sentences of up to 30 years. The Hulu documentary “Devil in the Family: The Fall of Ruby Franke” led to national attention.
The youngest Franke daughter, Eve, wrote a statement regarding the new law. “I’m not saying YouTube is a bad thing. Sometimes it brings us together,” she said. “But kids deserve to be loved, not used by the ones that are supposed to love them the most.”
The content creation industry is largely unregulated, AP noted, but several states have started adding protections. Illinois, California, and Minnesota all have laws that protect the earnings of young creators.

Utah Law To Protect Child Influencers Passes After YouTuber Ruby Franke’s Child Abuse Conviction

New Utah Law Protects Child Influencers After YouTuber Ruby Franke's Child Abuse Conviction

Child Abuse

Children

Utah

One of the most popular authors on YouTube was accused of sexually assaulting another social media influencer, only for the accuser to delete her accusation and post multiple apology videos.
Daniel Greene, who has written three <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/21193761.Daniel_B_Greene" target="_blank" rel="noopener">popular fantasy books</a> and boasts more than 500,000 YouTube subscribers, was accused of sexual assault by fellow influencer and author Naomi King on February 11 of this year. King posted a now-deleted video of herself crying and claiming that two years earlier, “Greene threatened to wipe me off social media,” adding that if she disappears, “you&#8217;ll know who did it,&#8221; <a href="https://www.sportskeeda.com/pop-culture/what-naomi-king-daniel-greene-drama-booktuber-allegations-explained-scandal-leaves-fantasy-book-community-shellshock">according</a> to pop culture news website Sportskeeda.
King then claimed that a video she made in June 2023, where she said a “friend that turned out not to be a friend” had sexually harassed her, was actually about an encounter she had with Greene. She claimed that after she posted that video, Greene’s legal team sent her a cease and desist letter demanding she take the video down or face a lawsuit. King in her February 11 video claimed she ignored the letter but never heard anything else from Greene’s attorneys.
King then said in her video that in May 2023, she planned to meet Greene in Las Vegas and waited for him by “getting baked by the pool.” She claimed she planned to hang out with Greene as a friend, but that when he arrived, he allegedly pushed her into sexual activity even though, she claimed, she was “half asleep and on drugs.” She claimed she kept resisting and eventually Greene masturbated on her. The next morning, she said, they talked about the encounter and agreed that the previous night shouldn’t have happened, but that they would remain friends. King claimed that Greene did the same exact thing as soon as they were alone again.
After the Vegas trip, King said she reached out to Greene’s fiancée and told her about what happened, saying that she “needed her to know that I didn’t want it.” In this video as well, King kept crying and claimed other people had accused Greene of similar actions.
Two days after King posted her video accusation, Greene responded in <a href="https://youtu.be/6BhPv-NDcPI" target="_blank" rel="noopener">his own video</a>, saying: “This is an important message in response to various false allegations made against me by Naomi King of alleged sexual assault in a campaign launched on YouTube and more. Let me be clear. I had consensual sex with Naomi King. Yes, it was an affair.&#8221;
Greene also said in his video that he had “clear and convincing” evidence that the encounters were consensual, though he didn’t present it at that time. He also said he planned on suing King for &#8220;libel.&#8221;
Even with Greene’s denial, commenters flocked to support King and condemn Greene, as is the norm when women make accusations of sexual assault — even before any proof is provided.
On February 17, King posted another now-deleted video, this time walking back her allegations and saying she agreed to meet up with Greene because he planned to pay for the trip and give her money, which she wanted for a tattoo, according to Sportskeeda. She also said that Vegas was not the first trip she took with Greene, even though she had said previously that it was. In this new video, she also said she lied about being assaulted, saying she undressed in front of him and agreed to be his “sugar baby.”
She went on to profusely apologize to those who have actually been sexually assaulted.
&#8220;I hurt so many people, it was not my intent,” she said. “I genuinely thought I was doing something good. I am not okay with my behavior. It&#8217;s really gross. I agree with your comments and I am going to take a step back and reflect. I don&#8217;t like this version of me. So, I&#8217;m going to put an end to this and I&#8217;m going to acknowledge my faults. I stand by trauma, but I don&#8217;t stand by my behavior. I&#8217;m sorry.”
Though she didn’t apologize to Greene for her accusations, the tide turned against her, with commenters saying she was “in full meltdown mode” and suggesting she seek professional help.
After King posted her apology video, Greene <a href="https://youtu.be/JYjpvQ2Jar8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a> a video focusing on how King said, &#8220;I wish I could take it all back, it was not worth losing what we had. I wish I&#8217;d never gone to Vegas.&#8221; He used King’s video as vindication for himself.
On February 23, King posted <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQNlsE-2dus" target="_blank" rel="noopener">yet another now-deleted video apology</a>, in which she said her last apology “was not me admitting to falsely accusing anybody” but also saying she was leaving the internet for a while. Comments on the video were incredibly critical of her, with people writing that they could no longer believe a word King said, especially since she was continuing to post after previously saying she was going to check into a mental health facility and leave the internet. In that video, which is still on YouTube, King also contradicts herself, saying her encounter with Greene was not consensual but that she was not accusing him of sexual assault.
Greene <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGphg1IRxxs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">followed up</a> on King’s numerous apology videos, sharing a post that alleges her “malicious intent.” In the post shared by Greene, King insists that she stood by her claims that Greene pressured her into sexual activity she didn’t want, and that she took down her apology video because “people were taking it as an admission to falsely accusing.”
But in private messages from a third party Greene claims were shared to him, King was told that people called Greene a rapist because of what King said, and that people supported her for her accusation. The discussion is apparently about King’s apology, because the third party says “that’s why everyone was talking about survivors in your comments.”
King allegedly responds to these messages with an upside down, laughing turtle image and the word “oops.”
The third party then asks: “What do you mean oops[?]” Naomi allegedly responds by saying, “Well, we’ll see what happens.”
This, Greene says in his video, is proof that King is not stopping her allegations against him.
“I have a right to defend myself in the court of public opinion and law,” Greene said in his video, before claiming that King is “making light” of the experiences of sexual assault survivors.
Since Greene’s video, he has not posted anything more about King, and King’s channel, which had more than 130,000 subscribers, appears to have been deleted.
King did not respond to a Daily Wire inquiry, but Greene’s spokesperson Mike Paul told The Daily Wire: “Unfortunately, due to pending and serious litigation, as well as criminal investigations with law enforcement currently in both the US and Canada, we have no further comment at this time.”
Paul did not respond to further inquiry, asking for information about the litigation and criminal investigations.

Popular YouTube Author Accused Of Sexual Assault By Woman Who Apologized For Accusation

Popular YouTube Author Accused Of Sexual Assault By Woman Who Deleted And Apologized For Accusation

Canada

false accusations

Sexual Assault

World

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: the Right must stop cheering on bad people who don’t care about their principles.
Today’s case: Andrew Tate.
Now, let me say at the outset, I’m not upset at all with anyone interviewing Tate. Go for it. Have at it. There are lots of great questions to ask him. But that’s not what’s happening here. What’s happening is that people are dishonestly conflating “interviewing” Tate with cheering on Tate — applauding him, talking about how brave and wonderful he is while he rips off thousands of people with his scam Hustlers University and preaches the virtue of treating women in a way you would never allow anyone to treat your wife or daughter.
No one is saying you can’t have Tate on your show. It’s a free country. What I’m saying is that if you claim you are a conservative and have someone truly disgusting on your show, and you proceed to tout them, praise them, and nod along to everything they say, you’re doing more than “platforming” — you are becoming a propagandist for that person. A person who purports to stand for Biblical values, American values, and traditional values has a moral obligation to ask Tate hard questions about his actions, beliefs, and past — not help him falsely rewrite his legal record or ignore all he has actually said while nodding enthusiastically.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2115-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Tate isn’t a conservative politician trying to push conservative policies, with part of the job being to separate out his agenda from his personal behavior. He’s an online troll who revels in precisely the evils conservatives hate. It’s his entire, self-stated persona. If you don’t ask about that, you’re not doing your job.
Now, I get the appeal of Andrew Tate. For decades, the hatred of traditional masculinity has been so strong, so thoroughgoing throughout the media and politics, that people have run away from traditional masculinity altogether. Young men were basically told they were useless, if not outright toxic. That left a vacuum. And Tate filled that vacuum with masculinity, but its ugliest iteration — not a responsible masculinity that protects women, children, and civilization, but the sort of masculinity that tears everything good down.
Tate’s basically playing a WWE heel, and he knows it. He says he wants to be the most hated man on Earth, and he professes to make money off of that — and that’s what he’s telling the truth about.
But here’s the thing: Andrew Tate is a crap sandwich. He presents differently to different audiences: He’ll present as a sort of low-rent anti-feminist talking head for people on the Right, bashing Left-wing wokeism; he’ll present as an anti-Semitic radical who’s willing to violate any taboo for the fringes; and he’ll pretend to be an upstanding person who cares about family values when he’s sitting down with someone conservative.
But what he really is, in the end, is a con artist.
And an evil con artist at that.
* * *
<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>

Andrew And Tristan Tate Appear At Bucharest Court Of Appeal

The Right Should Dump Andrew Tate

Andrew Tate

Ben Shapiro

Masculinity

Opinion

Social Media

Women

Internet personality Bryce Hall just appeared on George Janko’s podcast to discuss several topics, including Donald Trump, his UFC debut, and gambling. The popular <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/youtube">YouTube</a> star made a revelation during the course of their conversation about a film he respected.
“If you had to be a part of a movement … and you really wanted to push an agenda more, what is something you would get behind where you really want your children to like, have that in life?” Janko asked.
“I’d tell them to watch the movie ‘<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/am-i-racist">Am I Racist</a>?’” Hall replied. 
“Did you like that movie?” Janko asked.
“That movie was awesome,” Hall said. “It really dumbs it down to like, show people how stupid everything really is.”
Janko reflected on interviewing the documentary’s star, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/matt-walsh">Matt Walsh</a>. “Out of all the people I’ve interviewed, I’ve never been more nervous,” the podcast host admitted. “Because I could crack anybody dude … anybody, as long as I can make them laugh, I feel good.” Janko recalled trying out a joke on Walsh that didn’t land.
“I think he’s hilarious,” Hall said. 
“He’s super dry, but he’s hilarious. And he’s intelligent,” Janko agreed. “He’s literally one of a kind.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Bryce Hall - Donald Trump, UFC Debut &amp; Gambling Everything | EP. 93" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DWwT8JQqna8?start=2146&#038;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>
“Am I Racist?” was a massive success at the box office and with fans. It became the most successful release in DailyWire+ history after a solid run at the box office. During its time in theaters, the film exposing the grifters behind the DEI industry grossed more than $12 million and debuted in the top five films in the country on its opening weekend.
“Am I Racist?” also became the top-grossing documentary of the decade.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
The film’s success was celebrated by its star Matt Walsh, who wrote on X in October, “The streaming launch of ‘Am I Racist?’ on Daily Wire was the biggest launch in the history of our platform. This is after it had the best box office performance of any documentary in the past five years. Blown away by the support. Thank you.”
“Am I Racist?” has a 96% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes with more than 2,500 verified reviews. Despite the overwhelming popularity of the movie, mainstream critics have largely ignored it.
Hall wasn’t the only internet star who loved the movie. Podcast host Joe Rogan also said “Am I Racist?” was hilarious.
“Your movie is really funny. It’s really funny,” Rogan told Walsh during an interview. “By myself, laughing out loud hysterically today,” he went on. “I watched it in the sauna, I watched it in the gym. … It’s one of the best comedies I’ve seen in a long time because there’s so many moments in it that are so uncomfortable.”
The film was also submitted to the Academy for Oscar consideration.

Bryce Hall

YouTube Personality Bryce Hall On ‘Am I Racist?’: ‘That Movie Was Awesome’

YouTube Personality Bryce Hall On 'Am I Racist?': 'That Movie Was Awesome'

Am I Racist

Matt Walsh

Movies

YouTube announced Friday that it will demonetize videos from creators that instruct viewers how to create or promote pornographic <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/artificial-intelligence" target="_blank" rel="noopener">artificial intelligence</a> videos.
The new policy will ensure that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/youtube" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a> creators teaching viewers how to use AI to create sexually explicit content will not earn ad revenue off the videos. With the explosion of AI in recent years, there have been increasing concerns from lawmakers about the dangers of AI-generated pornography. At the same time, there has been a growing market for individuals to post AI-generated content on pornographic platforms like OnlyFans.
YouTube updated its advertiser-friendly <a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">guidelines</a> to clarify that “promoting the creation or distribution of content that has been digitally altered or generated to be sexually explicit or to contain nudity” is not ad-friendly.
This includes videos “providing instructions on how to create or distribute sexually explicit synthetic content or synthetic content containing nudity” and “promoting the creation of sexually explicit synthetic content or synthetic content containing nudity, such as endorsements or comparisons of deepfake pornography services.”
This would include videos that instruct people how to make AI-generated OnlyFans accounts. According to the third-party plugin vidIQ, there are 800,000 average views per video found when searching &#8220;AI only fans business.&#8221; The highest views for a video with those guidelines is over 5.1 million, and the average subscriber total for channels featuring related content is nearly 700,000.
Current videos on YouTube on related content <a href="https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ai+only+fans+creator" target="_blank" rel="noopener">include</a> titles like “$30k+ with Ai OnlyFans Models | is this Legal? (how to create ai onlyfans models &amp; avoid jail),” “$5 Million per Month AI Side Hustle Video on Onlyfans using SORA!,” and “AI influencers are getting filthy rich&#8230; let&#8217;s build one.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
YouTube also added an updated definition of “deepfakes,” defining it as “synthetic media that have been digitally manipulated to replace one person&#8217;s likeness convincingly with that of another.”
“We are updating the YouTube <a href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en">Advertiser-friendly guidelines</a> to make it clear that we do not allow ads to run on any content promoting services that create synthetic sexually-explicit content,” a YouTube spokesman told The Daily Wire.
The spokesman added that much of this content was already prohibited under YouTube’s Community Guidelines.
The updates to its advertiser guidelines come as lawmakers have grown increasingly wary of the potential dangers of AI. Earlier this year, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cruz-introduces-bill-protecting-victims-from-deepfake-revenge-porn" target="_blank" rel="noopener">introduced</a> a bill that would criminalize the publication of non-consensual AI-generated deepfake pornography, while <a href="https://fox59.com/news/national-world/what-state-laws-protect-kids-against-ai-generated-deepfakes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">many states</a> have moved to ban AI-generated child sexual abuse imagery.

In this photo illustration, the American video-sharing

YouTube Demonetizes AI Porn Tutorial Videos

Pornography

Technology

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/kim-kardashian">Kim Kardashian</a> appears to have taken down her 8-year-old son Saint’s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/youtube">YouTube</a> channel after he posted two videos criticizing Democratic presidential candidate <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/kamala-harris">Kamala Harris</a>.
The account @TheGoatSaint had been removed as of Wednesday, and anyone searching for it gets the message: “This page isn’t available. Sorry about that.” 
Screenshots circulating on X showed two pieces of content allegedly posted before the account was removed, including one showing a cartoon saying they “stepped in s***” with a picture of Harris on the character’s foot.
The second video showed a popular GIF of the cast of “Saved By The Bell” saying “dumb,” “stupid,” “crazy,” and “dangerous” over a photo of Harris’ face, per <a href="https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/tv/news/saint-west-kamala-harris-youtube-kim-kardashian-b2638960.html">The Independent</a>.
Kardashian told followers in September that Saint was getting a YouTube channel. The mom of four explained that she had drawn up a contract for her son with explicit rules he must follow to keep the account.  
“I must show my mom or guardian all videos before I post them. I give permission to any grown up if mom says to delete my video for any reason. If I don’t listen to all of the rules, mom could make my page private or delete my account,” the contract said, <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/10/31/us-news/saint-west-deletes-youtube-channel-after-anti-harris-posts/">according</a> to the New York Post. 
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a>
Kardashian promoted Saint’s channel on her Instagram page, where she has 359 million followers. Within a week of launching the channel, it had generated 13,000 subscribers and posted 33 videos.
Kardashian has not publicly endorsed either candidate for the 2024 presidential race, but she did meet with Harris in April of this year at the White House to discuss pardons of non-violent drug offenders, per <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/10/31/us-news/saint-west-deletes-youtube-channel-after-anti-harris-posts/">the New York Post</a>. The celeb met with Trump during his administration to discuss similar issues.
While Kardashian hasn’t made any endorsements, her fans made comments about the 44-year-old influencer wishing her friend Ivanka Trump a happy birthday with a post on Instagram on Wednesday alongside a photo of the two of them posing together.
“kim k posting this a week before the biggest election in history is a deliberate choice and i’m not saying i expected anything more from her or her family but wow!!” one fan reaction on X <a href="https://x.com/chxriks/status/1851775209063284981">said</a>.
“Posting this right before one of the biggest US elections in history is certainly a … choice,” another commenter<a href="https://x.com/LadyZaa/status/1851837286742176083"> agree</a><a href="https://x.com/LadyZaa/status/1851837286742176083">d</a>.

Kim and Saint

Kim Kardashian Deletes Son’s YouTube After He Posts Anti-Kamala Videos: Report

Kim Kardashian Deletes Son's YouTube After He Posts Anti-Kamala Videos: Report

Celebrities

Kamala Harris

Kim Kardashian

I informed you a little bit earlier this week that I got a message from The New York Times in which they essentially were attempting to pressure YouTube into censoring all sorts of conservative podcast videos.
The claim was that I was engaged in election misinformation; the entire email was all about how I essentially needed to be shut down by YouTube. If you&#8217;re demonetized on YouTube, they also shut down your reach.
When I say that there is a Democratic Legacy Media Human Centipede, it&#8217;s because that’s the reality. The entire goal of that Centipede is to shut down anyone and everyone who disagrees with them. So Media Matters brought out a study — apparently behind closed doors — and fed it to The New York Times, which then attempted to get comments from people like me, Tucker Carlson, and a bunch of other people on the Right in which they were essentially attempting to elicit a response. They were suggesting that we are all election deniers and engaged in misinformation so YouTube could shut us down.
But just in case you thought that the email was not a part of a coordinated hit, within 48 hours I got an email from — you guessed it — The Washington Post. 
It stated: 
<blockquote>Hi, Ben. I&#8217;m a tech reporter at The Washington Post. My colleagues and I are working on a story that examines the role podcasts are playing in casting doubt on the integrity of the 2024 election. The piece includes interviews with researchers who say podcasts are an especially effective medium for such claims because of how technically challenging it is for companies to do content moderation. </blockquote>
So what does that mean? The suggestion here is that companies ought to be doing content moderation. Which companies? Presumably, social media companies ought to be shutting down, once again, shows like this one. YouTube ought to shut down the show, according to The Washington Post. Or perhaps he was talking about Spotify or perhaps iTunes or perhaps advertisers. 
Back to the email:
<blockquote>A Washington Post analysis found that The Ben Shapiro Show is one of many nationally prominent podcasts that have aired these claims. Our analysis, based on your October interview with former President Trump, where you referred to Democrats as professionals at ballot harvesting and Trump referred to them as cheaters. Could you please let me know if you have any comment? My deadline is 5 p.m. Eastern today. </blockquote>
Notice the claim. The claim is that I was engaged in election misinformation by referring to Democrats as professionals at ballot harvesting. That, apparently, is election misinformation.
But here is <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/republicans-ballot-harvesting-fraud-claims-rcna151952" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NBC News</a> in May 2024: 
<blockquote>Democrats, for their part, have long enjoyed successes in mail voting, fueled in part by ballot collection where it is legal. The Democratic National Committee said it plans to spend ‘tens of millions of dollars in support of voting programs like mail and early voting.</blockquote>
NBC News, you election deniers. You engage in election misinformation every day. 
Of course, they don&#8217;t believe that I&#8217;m engaged in election misinformation. The thing they&#8217;re mad about is that I had Donald Trump on my show. It&#8217;s not just me they want to censor. They also want to censor Trump. They believe that it is some sort of informational crime for me to have on the former and likely future president of the United States.
That&#8217;s insane. It&#8217;s totally crazy. They think we are supposed to censor President Trump and that I can&#8217;t say things that are perfectly true about ballot harvesting, which is one of the most corrupt practices in America. It&#8217;s legal but it’s also corrupt.
The Washington Post has become a joke, so much so that Jeff Bezos had to issue an <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/28/jeff-bezos-washington-post-trust/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">editorial</a> just a couple of days ago titled “The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media,” in which according to Gallup, Americans think the news media stink.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2075-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Perhaps if Jeff Bezos actually wants to correct things at The Washington Post, it&#8217;s not enough to stop them from endorsing Kamala Harris on the editorial pages. Perhaps he ought to look to his reporting staff who are now doing the bidding of places like Media Matters as well as obviously coordinating with the Democratic apparatus to unleash two separate stories that came out almost simultaneously.
One of those stories came from The New York Times and one from The Washington Post on Wednesday. Both of these stories say the same thing: that conservative media ought to be destroyed.
The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/31/technology/youtube-election-conspiracy-theories-misinformation.html">piece</a> had a big graphic including people ranging from me to Tim Pool to Rudy Giuliani to Tucker Carlson to Michael Knowles. The title? “Election Falsehoods Take Off on YouTube as It Looks the Other Way.”
Obviously, YouTube is not censoring things the way The New York Times would like YouTube to censor things.
Think for a second how truly sick this is. You have members of the media, members of the press, people who are supposed to be about the free dissemination of speech, actively asking YouTube to shut down people they don&#8217;t like. And again, this is not about election misinformation because included in their litany of sins is me <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/31/technology/youtube-election-conspiracy-theories-misinformation.html">saying things</a> such as Democrats set the rules on ballot harvesting and mail-in voting, all of which is true, as reported by The New York Times. 
They quote me saying the Democrats rigged voting rules in 2020. What I actually said is that the Democratic Party rigged many of the voting rules in advance in order to advance mail-in voting and ballot harvesting. That&#8217;s also true. It was reported by both The New York Times and CBS News.
Nico Grant, the ridiculous reporter at the New York Times, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/31/technology/youtube-election-conspiracy-theories-misinformation.html">wrote:</a>
<blockquote> In June 2023, YouTube decided to stop fighting the most persistent strain of election misinformation in the United States: the falsehood that President Biden stole the 2020 election from Donald Trump. Within months, the largest video platform became a home for election conspiracy theories, half-truths and lies. They in turn became a source of revenue for YouTube, which announced growing quarterly ad sales on Tuesday.</blockquote>
So again, the theory here is that YouTube is making money off election denial.
Now, why would you quote me in that context? This is the dead giveaway. I&#8217;m the dead giveaway in the story.
Why?
Because I never said that Trump won the 2020 election. I&#8217;ve said repeatedly that Joe Biden won the 2020 election, at least by the counted ballots, by the state certification procedure. In fact, I challenged, between November and January, Trump&#8217;s claims that he had the legal capacity to overthrow the election or that Mike Pence did.
Yet they include me in the article anyway, because it&#8217;s not about election misinformation: it&#8217;s about destroying everyone on the Right. That&#8217;s what The New York Times wants to do.
The New York Times writes:
<blockquote>While Media Matters is a partisan organization that regularly criticizes conservatives, reporters and academics frequently cite it as a source on YouTube misinformation because it devotes significant resources to tracking the vast platform.
The New York Times independently verified the research, examining all of the videos identified by Media Matters and determining whether YouTube placed ads or Fact Check labels on them.</blockquote>
So the Times is attempting to justify precisely why they cribbed Media Matters’ work. My favorite part of the story from The New York Times is what follows: I put up a <a href="https://x.com/benshapiro/status/1851061597286060401" target="_blank" rel="noopener">thread on X </a>that received millions of views. Tucker Carlson also released a screenshot of his replies to The New York Times reporter, basically telling them to go f*** themselves, which, coincidentally, is what I told a New York Times reporter.
Here is the quote about our comments: 
<blockquote>Mr. Carlson and Mr. Shapiro did not directly respond to a series of questions, but attacked reporting from The New York Times.</blockquote>
I did notice that when I put up the thread and then I sent this reporter the thread — which was extensive — he could have quoted that thread.
But he can&#8217;t quote the thread. If he quotes the thread, it totally debunks his entire stupid story and shows the underlying motive.
If you thought that that was just a one-off, it was not.
Only hours later, The Washington Post put up <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/10/31/podcasts-election-fraud-misinformation/">their piece</a>, titled, “In the podcast election, top shows cast doubt on integrity of 2024 vote.” 
The Post added: 
<blockquote>Claims aired on the free-flowing and beloved medium could undercut trust in the results of a razor-tight election, experts say.</blockquote>
“Experts”? As always, they just go and find somebody who works at a leftist outlet such as the Brookings Institution, and get them to say the thing the reporter wants them to say. “Experts say” is just a guise for something the writer wants to say. I can find an expert to say anything in America. It&#8217;s so easy.
Take the lead picture in the Post piece. It&#8217;s a terrible old picture of me. (I always enjoy when I&#8217;m shown in legacy media because they find whatever is the worst picture of me and put it on there; it&#8217;s kind of amusing.) I’m Captain Election Misinformation, according to the Post.
<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>
But the only reference to me in the story refers to the fact that Donald Trump appeared on my program. What was the big problem with anything that I said? 
They can&#8217;t identify the thing that I said: the problem doesn&#8217;t exist. Instead, they just say:
<blockquote>During October appearances on the Shapiro and Rogan shows, Trump said that Democrats were cheating and that the media was interfering with the election.</blockquote>
I have a question: Is it my job to not have Donald Trump on my show? Is that the implication by The Washington Post, which boasts “Democracy Dies in Darkness”?
The Post continued: 
<blockquote>Asked for comment, Shapiro in a post on X cast this story as part of  ‘the legacy media’s coordinated attempt to DESTROY conservative media.’</blockquote>
Yes. That&#8217;s exactly what it is when you come out with the story at the same exact time as The New York Times, and both of you are cribbing from the work of Media Matters, and both of you are lying about the purpose of your story. Of course it&#8217;s an attempt to destroy conservative media one week out from an election.
I&#8217;m sorry I thwarted your little stupid plans to get YouTube to shut down shows like this one five days before an election.
Your little October surprise has fallen flat.
YouTube, to its credit, has said this stuff isn&#8217;t election misinformation. It doesn&#8217;t violate their rules, and so they are not going to ban it. So good for YouTube.
But that doesn&#8217;t mean that the attempt didn&#8217;t happen. And again, this is all a broader part of the attempt by legacy media to strangle in the crib any sort of competitive media and any social media structure that refuses to abide by its rules.

New Washington Post Editor Won’t Take Job Following Ethics Furor

I Just Got Another Astounding Email — From The Washington Post

Leftists

Legacy Media

Media Matters For America

New York Times

Washington Post

On Monday, I was wondering what exactly the October surprise from the Democrats and the media would be; one week out from an election and they haven’t had much. Is attacking comedian Tony Hinchcliffe and supposed jokes about Puerto Ricans all they had? Is that really all they had in their bag?
And then I received a text.
It came from a reporter at the New York Times, and read as follows:
<blockquote>Good day, Mr. Shapiro. I hope you&#8217;re well. I&#8217;m Nico Grant, a reporter at The New York Times. I wanted to give you an opportunity to comment for an upcoming article that takes a look at how political commentators have discussed the upcoming election on YouTube.
We rely on an analysis conducted by researchers at Media Matters for America. Could you kindly provide us with a comment or decline to comment by the end of day tomorrow, Tuesday, October 29? Thank you so much for your time. 
Here are points we plan to include. Media Matters identified 286 YouTube videos between May and August that contained election misinformation, including narratives that have been debunked or not supported with credible evidence. Researchers identified videos posted by you in those four months that contain election misinformation. We feature a clip of you saying, “ &#8230; Your party rigged many of the voting rules in advance of the election in order to ensure an extraordinary number of mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting &#8230;”
I also have a few questions: 1. Are you a member of the YouTube partner program? 2. If so, how frequently does YouTube demonetize your videos? 3. Has YouTube sent you messages, emails or notices in the last year that your content contains misinformation? Thanks for your time. </blockquote>
This is not just a text. This is the October surprise.
Here&#8217;s what the New York Times was planning, as they were pretty obviously and clearly working with Media Matters for America, which is a far-Left radical organization, started by David Brock in an overt attempt to destroy all conservative media. Media Matters was launched to astroturf boycotts on conservative media and anyone who would advertise with conservative media.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2073-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Media Matters became incredibly famous by essentially launching secondary boycotts on people like Rush Limbaugh. They&#8217;ve tried it with us at Daily Wire as well. They&#8217;ve tried it with our hosts. This is what they do.
The New York Times is overtly, clearly admitting to using Media Matters research in order to pressure YouTube to demonetize people on the Right and destroy them, because when you are demonetized, that also limits your reach.
They want to destroy the dissemination of information from people on the Right one week prior to an election.
That&#8217;s what&#8217;s going on here. It turns out the October surprise from our media, along with Media Matters — again, both Media Matters and the New York Times are Democratic apparatchiks — is an overt attempt to silence dissent one week before an election.
That is what this is about. That is what the text is about. That&#8217;s the entire game. They run an article on the front page in the New York Times saying that YouTube is subsidizing election misinformation which, in turn, pressures YouTube (owned by Google, the number one donor to the Democratic Party) to censor any and all hosts, any and all information that disagrees with the Left.
The important point is: They didn’t just reach out to me. As we now know, they reached out to pretty much everybody on the Right, other hosts from The Daily Wire, people like Tucker Carlson — everyone on the Right.
Why?
Because their goal is to shut the spigot off so you can&#8217;t get any information on places like YouTube. Thirty-seven percent of Americans get their news from YouTube, according to <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/">Pew Research</a>.
Theoretically, that number is even higher because some people engage with news on YouTube without even knowing it. Political ads run on YouTube. It is possible to watch a non-political video and be pushed to a political video, watch for five minutes, and only then tune out.
Shutting off the spigot on news information one week in advance of an election: That is the New York Times’ trick.
Obviously, none of this is about election misinformation and about shutting down “bad information,” as everyone knows.
How do I know? Because they reached out to me about “election misinformation.” To me, of all people. If you listen to the show, you know I have been perfectly consistent since November of 2020 in that I believe Joe Biden won the 2020 election. I thought Donald Trump had every right to legally challenge that election, but I did not see the actual evidence that the allegations he was making about fraud in the election and the election itself were sufficient to overcome the state certification of the ballots.
So of all the people to come to about election misinformation, coming to me is absolute proof that this trick has nothing to do with election misinformation. Instead, it is about silencing anybody on the Right. That is the goal. It is always the goal for the Left. It&#8217;s always the goal for the New York Times.
Consider the craziness of this. The New York Times is supposed to be the tip of the spear in terms of freedom of the press and free speech; that same media outlet is overtly and clearly attempting to pressure the biggest video platform on planet Earth to shut off other press outlets.
That&#8217;s crazy. They say it&#8217;s a challenge to the press if Trump calls them “fake news.” Imagine if we at the Daily Wire called for the New York Times to be completely demonetized and shut down on social media because of misinformation. Would that not be a challenge to free speech principles?
It&#8217;s unbelievable.
What&#8217;s hilarious is the quote they sent me about “election misinformation,” where apparently I said, “Your party rigged many of the voting rules in advance of the election in order to ensure an extraordinary number of mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting…”
Really?
FiveThirtyEight <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/2020-election-changes-election-administration-laws/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> in 2023, “One of the most striking aspects of the 2020 election was the unprecedented use of mail-in voting. Nearly half (43 percent) of all voters cast a ballot by mail in 2020, a record share, according to the latest Survey of the Performance of American Elections, a post-election poll of tens of thousands of registered voters run by MIT political scientist Charles Stewart III. Much of this was driven by COVID-19 — states changed voting rules and requirements to make it easier to vote by mail, and voters hoping to avoid crowded polling places in the middle of a pandemic took advantage.”
Wait, that sounds like rigging the voting rules in order to increase mail-in balloting.
<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>
Maybe they ought to fact-check CBS News about ballot harvesting. In 2020, CBS News <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ballot-harvesting-collection-absentee-voting-explained-rules/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>, “The Nevada Assembly passed legislation that would allow the state to mail a ballot to every registered voter, and the bill allows for third parties to collect ballots. Fierson argues that the threat to Postal Service funding and the warning of mail delays ‘makes ballot assistance even more important.’ But critics argue it opens the door to abuse and interference. The Nevada law does not limit how many ballots a person can collect. The Trump reelection campaign filed a lawsuit against the measure in Nevada and in other states.”
Again, that sounds like rigging the rules so as to increase ballot harvesting.
In 2020, the late-breaking media interference came in the form of shutting down the Hunter Biden laptop story. The New York Post had the Hunter Biden laptop story, and the social media “bros” were pressured into taking down that story by both the press and by members of the federal intelligence agencies. They shut it down. They throttled it. They prevented dissemination of the story on places like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter).
Now, they are doing something even more overt. They are overtly attempting to shut down all conservative dissemination of information on the biggest video platform in existence one week in advance of an election.
If that&#8217;s not an attempt to rig an election, I don&#8217;t know what is.

The New York Times

I Got A Shocking Text From The New York Times

2024 Election

Elections

Misinformation

Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro revealed on Monday night an effort by The New York Times to deplatform conservative podcasters on YouTube using information provided to them by a highly-partisan liberal activist group.
Shapiro posted a text message he received earlier in the day from a reporter at The New York Times about a report that was about to be published on &#8220;how political commentators have discussed the upcoming election on YouTube.&#8221;
The reporter disclosed that the newspaper relied on research provided to them by Media Matters for America, a far-left organization dedicated to destroying conservative media that is <a href="https://freebeacon.com/democrats/democratic-megadonors-bankroll-media-matters-leaked-donor-list-shows/">funded</a> by Democrat megadonors.
Media Matters claims that they identified 286 alleged instances from May through August of this year of podcasters on YouTube promoting what they claimed was &#8220;election misinformation, including narratives that have been debunked or are not supported with credible evidence.&#8221;
The reporter said that they are including a clip of Shapiro saying: &#8220;&#8230; Your party rigged many of the voting rules in advance of the election in order to ensure an extraordinary number of mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting &#8230;&#8221;
The New York Times asked the following three questions:
<ol>
<li>Are you a member of the YouTube Partner Program?</li>
<li>If so, how frequently does YouTube demonetize your videos?</li>
<li>Has YouTube sent you messages, emails or notices in the last year that your content contains misinformation?</li>
</ol>
The quote from Shapiro that Media Matters flagged for The New York Times came from Shapiro&#8217;s show on June 21, 2024, titled: &#8220;The Debate Is COMING.&#8221;
In the portion of the video where Shapiro makes the remarks, he is talking about how former President Donald Trump should have responded to Biden when Biden brings up January 6.
The following is the full context of Shapiro&#8217;s remarks:
<blockquote>And what Donald Trump needs to say is: &#8220;Listen, Joe, you and I disagree on what happened in the 2020, election. I, for example, think that your party rigged many of the voting rules in advance of the election in order to ensure an extraordinary number of mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting. I think that you worked with the media in order to prevent the dissemination of a story about Hunter Biden&#8217;s laptop in the last month of the election, and you and your son knowing that the laptop was real, lied about it to the American people. We can disagree about what happened in 2020 but none of that matters to the American people, because right now the calendar reads 2024. It reads June 27, 2024, no one in America is thinking about January 6. And the only reason you are is because you are a cynical actor attempting to avoid the consequences of your own failed presidency. In other words, January 6 happened three years ago, and the number of Americans who are thinking about January 6 is relegated to Joe Biden and his campaign. Most Americans are concerned about how they put food on the table today, and that&#8217;s your fault, because you&#8217;re the president. It doesn&#8217;t matter who I think won the presidency. You are the president. You&#8217;ve been the president since January 2021, and you&#8217;ve been terrible at it.&#8221; That&#8217;s the answer on January 6.</blockquote>
<iframe loading="lazy" title="The Debate Is COMING" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e67njDieFyE?start=1175&#038;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>
Shapiro posted a lengthy <a href="https://x.com/benshapiro/status/1851061597286060401">thread on X</a> outlining the message from The New York Times and explained what their agenda was.
&#8220;What, precisely, is NYT doing?&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;It&#8217;s perfectly obvious: using research from Media Matters, a radical Left-wing organization whose sole purpose is destroying conservative media (see below), in order to pressure YouTube to demonetize and penalize any and all conservatives ONE WEEK FROM THE ELECTION.&#8221;
&#8220;That&#8217;s the entire game here,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Run an article in America&#8217;s &#8216;most trusted newspaper&#8217; that declares pretty much every major conservative a purveyor of &#8216;misinformation&#8217; on YouTube, thus strong-arming YouTube into taking action against conservatives.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
3/ That&#8217;s the entire game here. Run an article in America&#8217;s &#8220;most trusted newspaper&#8221; that declares pretty much every major conservative a purveyor of &#8220;misinformation&#8221; on YouTube, thus strong-arming YouTube into taking action against conservatives.
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1851061602717474911?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2024</a></blockquote>
Shapiro noted that the claim that the report was about &#8220;election information&#8221; was false considering that he &#8220;always acknowledged that Joe Biden won the 2020 election.&#8221;
&#8220;And if it is &#8216;election misinformation&#8217; to point out the &#8216;rigging&#8217; of the voting rules for election 2020, resulting in massive mail-in voting and ballot harvesting, then the NYT might want to talk to&#8230;the NYT and CBS News, for starters,&#8221; he said in a post that included screenshots from CBS News and ABC News&#8217; FiveThirtyEight.
Shapiro noted that even if someone does believe that President Joe Biden did not win the election, those claims are still protected under the First Amendment.
&#8220;But that&#8217;s the point: you don&#8217;t have to purvey &#8216;misinformation&#8217; to be the target. You just have to support Trump,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;This is totally scandalous. In 2020, the legacy media shut down dissemination of the Hunter Biden laptop story and laundered the claim that it was all Russian disinformation, all to get Joe Biden elected.&#8221;
He continued, &#8220;In 2024, they&#8217;re even more brazen: they&#8217;re openly trying to intimidate YouTube, one of the most dominant news platforms in America, into shutting down anyone who isn&#8217;t pro-Kamala.&#8221;
Shapiro posted a graphic from the Pew Research Center that showed more than a quarter of adults in the U.S. get their news from YouTube.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
8/ In 2024, they&#8217;re even more brazen: they&#8217;re openly trying to intimidate YouTube, one of the most dominant news platforms in America, into shutting down anyone who isn&#8217;t pro-Kamala. <a href="https://t.co/nwbwfRY3zf">pic.twitter.com/nwbwfRY3zf</a>
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1851061611760664676?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2024</a></blockquote>
&#8220;Again, understand the mission from these supposed guardians of free speech and American liberty: silence the opposition the WEEK BEFORE THE 2024 ELECTION,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;They can&#8217;t get away with it, and they won&#8217;t. If ever you doubted that The New York Times is part of the Democrat-Media Human Centipede (see below), doubt no longer.&#8221;
Shapiro posted screenshots of headlines by The New York Times Editorial Board and its columnists, and news division during the same time frame that Media Matters conducted its search.
The examples included:
<ul>
<li>The newspaper endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris with a headline that stated: &#8220;The Only Patriotic Choice for President.&#8221;</li>
<li>A columnist from far-left writer Jamelle Bouie that said: &#8220;JD Vance&#8217;s Blood-and-Soil Nationalism Finds Its Target.&#8221;</li>
<li>A report titled: &#8220;At Mar-a-Lago, Extremism is Good for Business.&#8221;</li>
<li>A headline that consumed the entire front page of the newspaper&#8217;s opinion section that said: &#8220;DONALD TRUMP SAYS HE WILL PROSECUTE HIS ENEMIES, ORDER MASS DEPORTATIONS, USE SOLDIERS AGAINST CITIZENS, ABANDON ALLIES, PLAY POLITICS WITH DISASTERS. BELIEVE HIM.&#8221;</li>
</ul>
Shapiro concluded the thread by posting: &#8220;So, The New York Times wants comment? Here&#8217;s my comment: kindly, go f*** yourself.&#8221;
X owner Elon Musk responded to Shapiro&#8217;s post: &#8220;The New York Times is a threat to our democracy.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The New York Times is a threat to our democracy <a href="https://t.co/uF9lMuCh5j">https://t.co/uF9lMuCh5j</a>
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1851077086460723636?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2024</a></blockquote>
Other media figures who posted screenshots of similar messages that they received from The New York Times included Andrew Klavan, host of &#8220;The Andrew Klavan Show&#8221;, and Tucker Carlson, head of the Tucker Carlson Network.

mixcollage-29-oct-2024-12-39-pm-6341_720

Ben Shapiro Exposes New York Times Agenda To Deplatform Conservatives Before Election

Censorship

Menu