- It's so dumb, y'all, it's ridiculously dumb.
And I know that I'm the last person
to talk about this, because the news broke
right after I finished the last show last week,
but who really cares that they're changing the M&Ms?
The company announces,
hey, we're changing the M&Ms to be more inclusive.
Just everything about this situation is dumb.
I mean, one, if you are someone that's like,
oh, I now feel seen and welcomed to the world
because the female M&Ms,
they now have more practical shoes.
Because a character that a candy company made
to sell you chocolate and/or merchandise said,
hey, did you know the orange M&M has anxiety?
Do you have anxiety?
Yay!
I think it's dumb, but it also affects my life in 0.0 ways.
And on the other end, people who are like up in arms
that they made the brown and green M&M less sexy,
what is wrong with you?
One, the internet exists.
I'm sure there's some fan fiction like,
melts in your mouth, not in your hands,
volume one to seven one, adult content out there somewhere.
And I just like, feel like I'm losing brain cells
watching people get up in arms about this.
- The other big change is that the brown M&M
has quote transitioned from high stilettos
to lower block heels.
Also less sexy, that's progress.
M&Ms will not be satisfied
until every last cartoon character
is deeply unappealing and totally androgynous,
until the moment you wouldn't wanna have a drink
with any one of them.
That's the goal.
When you're totally turned off, we've achieved equity.
They've won.
- Well, just how weak of a man do you have to be
to feel attacked and victimized
that you go to your mountaintop
and you're like, they made the candy less fuckable!
(upbeat music) ♪ This is a news show ♪
(upbeat music)
(monkey laughs)
'Sup you beautiful bastards?
Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show,
and a quick and awesome announcement before we jump into it.
If you've ever found yourself
during one of my beautiful bastard drops
that I try to do every two months going,
ah, I just don't have the money right now,
or I wanted to get more, but I just, I can't justify it,
this is for you.
Today, I launched the first
and possibly last, broke bastard mystery box sale.
Essentially, every item is 50% off, some a little less,
some a little more.
For example, the $30.00 mystery item,
those include hoodies, crew necks, jackets, some sweatpants.
They range from like 55 to $80.00 normally.
So to get this while you can,
all you gotta do is go to beautifulbastard.com,
select the quantity, right,
how many mystery items do you want?
And boom,
I'll send you a mystery box.
But, and it is a big one,
unlike other jobs where I give you seven days,
like this is not going to last the night.
The stock is limited because this is just my fun way
of trying to empty out the warehouse
for everything new 2022.
Yeah, with that said, hit that like button.
Let's start this week on a good note,
and let's just jump into it.
You know, the first thing we're gonna talk about today
is we had Kanye West in the news
for actually a really interesting reason,
unrelated to how he and his new lady, Julia Fox,
continually have been showing up in public
looking like B-movie super villains,
nor is this about his actions
like moving next door to his ex Kim Kardashian
and making threats against Pete Davidson,
because I guess he's not happy
that he's making sweet, sweet love to Kim Kardashian.
Which by the way, Kanye,
I don't know how often it's happening,
but it's probably happening a lot.
Rather Kanye is in the news right now
because he's arguing that celebrities should get a cut
of the pictures that paparazzi take of them.
They have him actually captured on video
explaining this idea,
while he was interacting with photographers.
- Y'all gotta end up giving all celebrities
a percentage of our image.
We gotta take control of our image.
Right now, y'all get to shoot us without having to pay.
I'm gonna change that.
I'm not saying it in a negative way.
I'm saying it's just like, right now,
it's just really one-sided.
You guys can follow us.
You guys can stand outside of a hotel at any given time.
You don't give us any percentage
of what you're making off of us, off of our kids,
and I'm gonna change that.
- While Kanye didn't share a clear plan
on like how you would even do this,
I mean, this issue of not owning photos of yourself,
it's been a big issue for a while now.
I mean, as you might remember, we've talked about situations
like Ariana Grande being sued by a photographer
for posting an image that they took of her on her Instagram.
The lawsuit saying that,
even though she was the subject of the photo,
Ariana violated copyright law,
because she quotes, has never been licensed
or otherwise authorized
to reproduce, publicly display, distribute,
and/or use the photographs.
Others like Khloe Kardashian and Dua Lipa
have also been sued for similar reasons,
and they are by no means outliers.
Gigi Hadid was also sued,
and she ended up getting a win for her case
against the paparazzi.
Though this might not be applicable
to all the other celebrities, because in this case,
a judge dismissed the complaint filed against her
by a photo company, because the company
did not obtain copyright registration of the image
before filing the suit.
Though, I will say though, the legal argument
that Gigi and her team used is interesting,
with the lawyers arguing that Gigi's decision
to post a paparazzi photo of herself on her Instagram
counted as fair use,
because she contributed to the photo itself
by smiling and selecting the outfit she was wearing,
with them even calling Gigi the creative director
of the image.
But because the judge dismissed the case for another reason,
those arguments weren't decided on,
and we don't know if they were valid or not.
And so the two questions I wanna pass off to you is,
one, do you think that celebrities should get a cut
of these paparazzi photos because they are the subject,
and I guess they're making choices that make it possible
to take that photo?
And two, how many times do you think Kanye wakes up at night
thinking about Pete Davidson?
All right, equally important question.
And then will you just please change the rules?
That is what an overwhelming number of NFL fans are saying
after last night's game between the Kansas City Chiefs
and the Buffalo Bills.
Now, the first thing I'll say is,
it's one of the best games of football I've ever seen,
especially, I mean,
I've never seen a last two minutes so crazy.
But when the Chiefs ended up winning in overtime,
because they scored a touchdown on their first drive,
it had a lot of people just kinda
with a bad taste in their mouth.
With many saying, yes,
the NFL rules say that if the first team gets the ball,
they score a touchdown, the game is over.
The other team doesn't even get a chance on offense.
We understand it's the rules,
but maybe just change the fuckin' rules.
Or like imagine playing an entire season,
making it to the playoffs, playing a hardcore game,
and then the game essentially is decided by a coin toss,
especially when you're dealing with two teams
that have incredibly explosive offenses like these two.
Also, here I will say, I don't have a dog in this fight.
Like I appreciate both of these teams,
largely because I'm just a huge fan
of Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes.
They make the NFL exciting to watch.
What I'll add here is if you're one of the people
that's like, yeah, the rules are ridiculous.
Fuck the Kansas City Chiefs.
Before you say that, I mean,
you should look at the history of this situation.
If anything, you should be saying,
fuck the NFL and fuck the other owners,
because Kansas City actually back in 2019,
asked for the rules to change in overtime in the playoffs.
Ian Rapoport of the NFL network,
pointing back to a tweet he put out in 2019,
reading Kansas City's proposal on overtime
that would force both teams to have a possession
was not voted on and does not have the support
to go forward.
So while incidental,
last night's game was essentially them going,
I mean, okay, if you say so, you don't want the new rule.
When you actually take a second to look at the data,
it becomes very apparent that the rules need to change.
Since the rules were implemented in 2010 for the playoffs,
2012 for the regular season,
if you look at the teams that won the overtime coin toss
and then went on to win the game, during the regular season,
when you have good teams and bad teams,
it's much closer to like an even split.
But, once you get to the playoffs
with the best of the best teams,
there have been 11 overtime playoff games.
Of those, 90.9% of the time,
the team that won the coin toss won the game.
I mean, that's absolutely insane,
and it just feels like the numbers speak for themselves.
That's the story, the stats, some of my opinion,
and now I pass the question off to you.
What are your thoughts here?
Do you think the rules need to change?
Yes, no, why, or why not?
But from that, I wanna take a second
to thank the sponsor of today's show, Keeps.
Did you know that two out of three guys
will experience some form of male pattern baldness
by the time that they're 35?
Maybe you have that friend or that family member
that's dealing with hair loss right now.
And you don't just have to wait around
for that to happen to you,
because now is the time to do something about it.
Keeps helps you stop hair loss before it's too late
with their scientific and affordable approach to treatments.
They're up to 90% effective
at reducing and stopping further hair loss.
And Keeps offers generic versions
of the only two FDA approved hair loss products
that are out there.
So some of you may have already tried them before,
but probably never at this price.
And you can get these products
delivered directly to your door,
meaning no more going to the in-person doctor's office
for your prescriptions,
saving you more valuable time and money.
So if you're ready to take action and prevent hair loss,
go to keeps.com/defranco,
or just click that link in the description down below
to receive 50% off your first order.
And then,
is affirmative action soon going to be a thing of the past?
That is something that people are wondering
now that the Supreme Court announced this morning
that it will again consider
whether race conscious admissions programs at universities
are legal in two cases that could have major implications
for affirmative action.
The cases in question center around admissions policies
at Harvard and the University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill,
both of which were brought by the conservative non-profit,
Students for Fair Admissions.
The Harvard case,
which we've talked about before on the show,
started back in 2014 with a lawsuit that claimed
that the school discriminated
against Asian-American students
by effectively creating a quota for their admission,
as well as using a subjective standard
to measure personality traits
like likability, courage, and kindness.
Now the school denied the allegations
claiming that the challengers
used incorrect statistical analysis
and broadly arguing that race-conscious policies are legal.
As far as the UNC case,
it was slightly different with the group there alleging
that the school discriminated
against White and Asian applicants
by giving preference to Black, Hispanic,
and Native American students.
With the university there, for it's part,
arguing its policies create more diversity
among the student body and echoing Harvard's argument
that such rules are legal
under decades of Supreme Court precedent.
And in fact, notably here,
lower courts have ruled in favor of both schools,
finding that they did indeed comply
with Supreme Court decisions.
But now in taking up these two cases,
the high courts conservative majority
will now examine whether race conscious admissions
are legal at all.
A move that could decide the future of affirmative action
and reverse more than four decades of precedent
on the use of race in college admissions.
Because the last two times the Supreme Court took up cases
regarding affirmative action,
the justices upheld the constitutionality
of race conscious programs by slim majority.
So now those majority's have been replaced
by a conservative block
that includes three Trump appointed justices.
So as far as what happens next, right,
we're not gonna see a change in the next week
or the next month,
but it still could be relatively soon
that justices likely hearing the cases in October
and then making a ruling late spring or early summer
of next year.
And then, World War III is trending on Twitter again, y'all!
It's never a great sign,
and this time it pertains
to what is happening with Russia and Ukraine.
Now if you've been following my updates over on TikTok,
we've been posting updates
even on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
You know this situation has been escalating and escalating
and, hey, while I'm thankful for the new 100,000 followers
and the millions of views, I'd rather not get those numbers,
and the world feel safer.
But, with that said, let's set up the situation
and go through all the big updates.
All right, so for awhile now,
Russia's been building up a large force
along the Ukrainian border, as well as possibly in Belarus.
As far as why Russia is doing this?
There are several ideas,
one of which is related to fresh water issues with Crimea.
But right now,
the most dominant narrative is that this is in order
to stop Ukraine's request to officially join NATO.
And in fact, on Saturday,
British Intelligence Services backed by U.S. officials
claimed that Russia is seeking
to install a pro-Russian government in Kiev,
the capital of Ukraine, and even has a candidate in mind,
which, hey, just might explain why Russian troops in Belarus
are particularly concerning,
as Kiev is just about 200 miles away from its border.
Very notably,
this is much closer than the Donbas region,
where pro-Russian separatists
have been fighting Ukraine for years now,
with the support of Russian troops,
or even other areas of the Russian, Ukraine border.
As far as what we're seeing other countries do
to support and help Ukraine, well, that varies,
but generally speaking,
many NATO nations are providing arms.
For example, the UK has been sending anti-tank weapons
to Ukraine for over a week now.
Also U.S. Secretary of State, Blinken,
said that he authorized the Baltic countries
to send their U.S. made anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons
to Ukraine.
And, on top of that,
the U.S. has directly sent nearly 80 million tons
of military aid as part of an additional $200 million
in lethal aid that Biden approved in late December.
So if you're wondering,
like, is the U.S. taking this seriously?
The U.S. has provided nearly $650 million worth
of arms and military services to Ukraine over the past year.
Also, beyond sending arms directly to Ukraine,
other nations are scrambling to send warships and aircraft
to the region.
And all of that puts Russia in a tough spot, right?
It can let the forces sit there
and risk them eventually directly helping Ukraine,
or, I mean, they could target those other forces,
but that would guarantee a NATO response.
And then, I mean, one of the most recent updates
is we've seen reports that President Biden
is considering deploying several thousand U.S. troops
to NATO allies in Eastern Europe and the Baltics,
as well as plans for American planes and warships
to be sent to the region.
With reports saying that President Biden
was originally against this over fears
that it would actually provoke Russia,
but things have clearly still gone to shit.
Biden is ultimately expected
to make a decision sometime later this week on the matter.
Also, if you, or someone you know is an American in Ukraine,
you need to get the fuck out now.
U.S. and UK have told families of embassy staff in Kiev
to evacuate.
State Department elevating Ukraine travel advisory warning
to level four, do not travel.
And if you're just an average American,
the U.S. may not be able to help you
if things truly go upside down.
Well, I know everything in this report, it seems like a lot,
understand it's even bigger.
I'm actually condensing this heavily.
And ultimately, as far as what happens next from here,
we're not exactly sure.
But Blinken has begun to draw a line in the sand,
and it is a hard line, saying on Sunday,
"if a single additional Russian force goes into Ukraine
in an aggressive way, as I said,
that would trigger a swift, a severe, and a united response
from the United States and from Europe."
Which then leads to the billion dollar question,
as far as response,
are you talking about more and stiffer sanctions
meant to devastate the Russian economy
and discourage the country from making this decision?
Or are you talking about actual U.S. troops?
Or are you talking about both?
If so, what's the split?
Because what we don't know what tomorrow will bring,
what we do know is this situation
has continued to escalate and escalate, and as it does,
it becomes far more dangerous for everyone involved.
The main thing, whether it be here on YouTube,
on our TikTok, on any of our social platforms,
if you wanna stay up to date on this,
be subscribed, be following,
because we're gonna be keeping it up to date.
Unfortunately,
this situation warrants our attention and concern.
But ultimately, that is where that story
and today's show ends.
And so with that said, thank you for watching.
I love yo' faces.
Remember, if you wanna get in on the mystery box drop,
do it right now.
It's not gonna last the day.
And, of course, I'll see ya tomorrow.