- 'Sup, you beautiful bastards?
Welcome back to the final scheduled "Philip DeFranco Show,"
for what we're calling season 15, the year 2021.
And so, I just wanna say two things.
One, I hope this show has helped you feel in the know,
maybe less alone in the chaos of this world.
And if you want to take that into 2022,
in addition to being subscribed to this channel,
make sure you got those notifications turned on.
The bell should look like this.
And/or, you can text me at (813) 213-4423.
And two, even though I'm your designated bringer of sadness
by talking about the news,
you don't always get to talk about fun stuff,
we can end on a positive high note in at least one way.
Yes, make sure you're subscribed,
definitely hit that like button on today's show,
and leave a comment about one of today's stories
because I'm gonna be giving away
some free "Beautiful Bastard" gear.
But, yeah, main thing is I love yo' faces,
and let's just jump into it.
You know, the first thing that we're gonna talk about today,
and I'd really love to know your opinion on,
is this controversy around mukbangs.
And looking into this,
this is not actually a new controversy,
it's kind of just re-emerged and has a big spotlight on it,
in part because one of the biggest YouTubers in the world,
PewDiePie, talked about it two days ago.
But, for those unfamiliar, according to Wikipedia,
"A mukbang, also known as an eating show,
is an online audiovisual broadcast
in which a host consumes various quantities of food
while interacting with the audience."
And noting, "It became popular in South Korea in 2010,
and since then has become a global trend."
And when I was first introduced
to this genre, this type of show,
it seemed kind of basic.
Someone's having their lunch or dinner.
If they're livestreaming, maybe they're doing a Q and A.
If it was just a regular video,
maybe they're doing a storytime just while they eat.
And you know, people that are watching,
they could be watching it for that content,
not necessarily the food.
Maybe they just wanna not eat by themselves
and they eat at the same time.
But, in 2021,
if you do a quick search on YouTube for mukbang,
it seems like the videos are way, way, way more extreme.
With a lot of the results featuring,
and thus a lot of the commenters talking about,
Nikocado Avocado,
with a lot of the thumbnails seeming to show Nick,
and sometimes another person,
in front of just an immense amount of food.
But, this has been going on for a long time,
so why talk about it now?
Well, like I said, PewDiePie.
He recently uploaded a video called "I hate mukbang,"
talking about the trend,
criticizing videos from the genre.
And with that, revisiting creators like Nikocado Avocado,
who he touched on last time that he talked about this,
three years ago.
And in this video, which I'll link to,
he makes a number of points,
but ultimately giving his final take on the trend as a whole
saying-
- I just find it weird
how this kinda stuff, YouTube is just...
And I'm not saying they should do anything about it,
I'm just saying, observing how it works.
Like, this is all fine,
mistreating animals,
just blatantly promoting obesity.
I know they're not condoning it,
especially Nikocado, has never condoned it,
but, you know, it has it's effect that,
still, kids are impressionable, right?
As someone who's dealt with so much censorship
on this platform,
it's like, "What? Really?"
I'm just baffled by it.
I'm not saying I disagree with it existing, at all.
It's just weird
when you find these different corners on YouTube
and you're like, "Oh, this is fine. Oh, okay."
- And regarding Felix
talking about the mistreatment of animals,
I think that's in reference to
there was a woman featured in one of videos
eating a squid alive.
And then, of course,
kinda the main point of the debate is,
is this content promoting obesity?
And then, a greater conversation that people are saying,
"Okay, well, should this content exist here?
Should it be age gated?"
Which, actually, the next thing that we're gonna talk about
touches on social media and minors.
And while all this is being debated,
Nikocado actually responded to the video.
He responded in a 38-minute video,
so I'll link, once again, all to that down below.
But, some of the key things that he pushed back on.
One, regarding the idea
that he is promoting obesity in some way.
He said-
- I'm resulting in more weight loss success stories
because people watch me eat for them.
I can't tell you how many messages,
my manager, my team, my network, gets letters all the time
of people saying, "I lost 50 pounds because of the show.
Nikocado ate all that junk for me.
It kept me from eating it myself.
I watched him on the treadmill.
I listened to his conversation
while commuting to the gym in the car.
I watched him late at night
when I was having tendencies and urges
to run out to McDonald's,
but I watched Nikocado do it
and it put it to rest."
- But, I'm also claiming that Felix,
who he constantly refers to as a video gamer,
is promoting way worse things than he is.
Then, regarding the argument
that the content that he's putting out there
is actually bad for the platform,
we saw Nick respond-
- Y'all remember adpocalypse from 2017?
Who was the reason us people had to experience that?
Him!
You!
By saying the N-word.
- And then, finally, regarding highlights from this video,
he addressed the idea
that he is affecting impressionable children,
saying-
- This is not a daycare center.
You're so concerned, watch the kids.
Watch your kids if you're so concerned.
- And so, with all of that said,
and understanding that both of the people
that I'm talking about here,
I couldn't hit every single point they made in their videos,
I now wanna pass the question off to you.
What are your thoughts regarding this mukbang controversy?
Where do you land?
Or, do you see it as promoting obesity, yes or no?
Do you see it as potentially harmful to the platform?
Do you see it as the natural progression
of like a lot of genres on YouTube?
I mean, look at pranks.
That started with kind of like little, silly stuff,
ultimately resulting in people posting videos like,
"I faked blowing up my child."
Also, if you do have an issue
with the content that Nikocado is putting out there,
do you also have that same issue with people,
like professional eater Mat Stonie?
Write why, why not.
Yeah, there's a lot to touch on,
so really, any and all thoughts you have on this,
let me know in those comments down below.
And then, I just want give a massive congratulations
to anyone that had JoJo Siwa
getting named dropped at a congressional hearing,
that may help shape the future of social media
on their 2021 bingo card. (laughs)
Right? And so, let me explain.
Yesterday, there was a congressional hearing
between Instagram head, Adam Mosseri,
and a Senate subcommittee.
And there were several key moments in this.
The first, which was also arguably the most unexpected,
happened when Mosseri was confirmed
the platform will soon bring back chronological feeds.
Also, though, in a less surprising statement,
he refused to commit to fully scrapping Instagram for kids,
instead saying-
- The idea of building a version of Instagram
for 10 to 12-year-olds was trying to solve a problem.
The idea being that we know that 10 to 12-year-olds
are online, they wanna use platforms like Instagram,
and it's difficult for companies like ours to verify age
for those that are so young, they don't yet have an ID.
And so, what I can commit to today
is that no child between the ages of 10 and 12,
should we ever manage to build Instagram
for 10 to 12-year-olds,
will have access to that
without their explicit parental consent.
- It's important to remember this whole hearing happened
in response to those leaked whistleblower documents
that exposed internal research at Instagram
and it's parent company, Facebook, now known as Meta.
And some of the key documents there are showing
that Meta knew Instagram was harmful to millions of teens,
most notably teen girls with body image issues.
Then, following very notable and widespread backlash,
Instagram indefinitely paused plans
to launch a kid friendly version of the app.
But, even now, they refuse to entirely kill the plan,
which is likely part of the reason
we saw ranking Republican Marsha Blackburn
trying to catch Mosseri off guard,
saying at one point-
- In your testimony,
you said you removed more than 850,000 accounts
because they did not meet your minimum age requirement.
These accounts were disabled
because the users did not provide identification
showing that they were at least 13-years-old.
So, why did you say you didn't want to know
when JoJo Siwa said she had been on Instagram
since she was eight-years-old?
Is that your general attitude toward kids
who are on your platform?
- And there, what Senator Blackburn is referring to
is this interview between Mosseri and Siwa
that happened back in June,
where this was said-
- I know you're not supposed to have Instagram
till you're 13.
I did, I had an account, many-.
- [Mosseri] I don't wanna hear that.
- You didn't hear that. (Mosseri laughing)
Nobody else heard that.
- And so, in response to Blackburn,
we see Mosseri say-
- We invest a lot
to try to identify those under the age of 13.
And whenever we find them, we remove-
- Okay, but at that moment,
when you responded to her that you did not want to know,
why didn't you use that as a teaching moment?
- Senator, I would say it was a missed opportunity.
- Indeed, it was a missed opportunity
and it sends the wrong message.
- Though, we've seen a number of people
pushing back against that kind of tactic and mindset.
But still, both Democrats and Republicans alike
continue to grill Mosseri throughout yesterday's hearing.
This, even after he proposed a formation
of a new industry body
to set safety standards for social media platforms,
with him saying
that it could help protect younger children online.
We also saw Mosseri trying to walk back research
that claims Instagram specifically
can be addictive and bad for mental health.
Saying, he doesn't believe research shows
that social media drives a rise in suicides.
And while there are a lot of different aspects of the story,
I will say it always bugs me
when people at social media platforms
say with a straight face,
"I don't think what we do and what we have is addictive."
I know why they'll never say that it does publicly,
but like that's the whole fucking game.
Right? How do I get people to engage,
to get that dopamine hit,
to stay here and not go somewhere else?
Engagement leading to your time and attention
equals dollars.
But, to be fair, that's not just an Instagram issue,
it's a social media issue,
and one I don't think we're gonna be able
to properly navigate.
But hey, ultimately, that's the story,
some of my opinion,
and I pass the question off to you.
What are your thoughts here?
But, from that,
I wanna take a quick second
to thank the sponsor of today's show, Vessi.
It's hard to find lightweight shoes
that actually keep your feet warm and dry
through rain, snow, mud.
But, Vessi does just that.
This sneaker will not just improve your life,
but it is a perfect gift for everyone this holiday season.
And if you didn't know,
Vessi makes 100% waterproof and snowproof sneakers
that are incredibly comfortable, breathable, stylish,
with anti-slip technology,
which is why I'll be taking my Vessis with me
on winter vacation,
where the weather's gonna be all over the place
and there's lots of walking.
They're great for everyday life,
for running errands to playing in the yard with the kids,
even on muddy hikes,
and their antibacterial insole always keeps things fresh.
Vessis are made from Dyma-tex material, a dual climate knit,
keeping you cool in the summer, warm in the winter.
Linds is lovin' the new Chelsea boots, by the way,
and I see they're already packed for vacation.
But, the main thing, Vessis truly are a great gift for all.
So, head on over to Vessie.com/DeFranco right now,
and be sure to use code "DEFRANCO" to get $25 off.
And from now to January 1st,
get up to 30% off on select Vessi vault items.
So, grab some now while they still have your size
and you'll be thanking me later.
And then, let's talk about a kind of ban
that I've really never seen before.
Depending on where you live,
there are age requirements for certain things.
Here in the United States,
legally you have to be 21 to drink or smoke,
18 to vote or watch porn,
and 17 to join our military
because of course that's how we ordered it.
America, we're a fun and special place.
But, the reason I bring up the age requirements,
as well as using the word ban,
is that New Zealand is trying something different.
Because they are moving to try and ban
the next generation of children from ever buying cigarettes
as part of it's Smokefree 2025 campaign.
So, what would happen under this newly proposed legislation
is that the country would raise the legal smoking age
by one year every year,
effectively blocking anyone 14 and under,
when the bill is passed, from ever buying tobacco,
which is expected to happen by 2023.
On top of that,
the government also hopes that other aspects of the bill
will reduce the number of current smokers, right?
Policies like limiting the amount of nicotine
allowed in tobacco products.
This, in part, because despite the fact
that only 13.4% of New Zealand adults smoke,
it's still the leading cause
of preventable death in New Zealand,
and causes one in four cancers.
The government also planning to implement
what they call practical support measures
to help people quit.
And while this law has been highly praised,
it's also received its fair share of criticism,
with the ACT party pointing out
that lowering the nicotine content in products
affects the poor far more,
and saying that'll likely encourage them to buy more,
and in turn that can increase their exposure
to other harmful substances in cigarettes
while trying to get their nicotine fix.
While you have the current government claiming
that's a small problem,
and that low nicotine content has been proven
as a useful way to wean people off of cigarettes.
However, one of the issues that will arise from this,
and nearly everyone agrees that it will happen,
is that this will grow the black market.
Right? Because I don't know if you know this,
just because you make something illegal,
doesn't mean people won't get their hands on it.
And that's in addition to a number of people pointing
that there's this big elephant in the room, and it's vaping,
with people arguing the legislation doesn't cover it,
despite the fact
that it's the most popular way to get nicotine
among young people,
with nearly 20% of students vaping daily.
And so, with all of that said and explained,
I now wanna pass the question off to you.
What are your thoughts on this?
Do you think the proposal makes sense,
it is a step forward?
Or, are you against it,
and if so, why?
And then, as we're closing out the year,
I definitely wanna talk about some Omicron news
because we did get some news, good and bad.
I'll start with the bad.
As scientists initially speculated,
preliminary studies do appear to show
that the Omicron variant is more transmissible
than previous variants,
but it is unclear exactly how transmissible.
One recent unpeer-reviewed study by a Japanese scientist
who advises the country's health ministry
found that the strain is about four times more transmissible
in it's initial stage than Delta was.
Also, in some of the countries hit early,
like South Africa, where the variant was first detected in,
is already the dominant strain.
New COVID cases have more than doubled over the last week.
And in the UK,
Omicron cases are doubling every two or three days,
and health officials have said that the strain
could become dominant in the country in a matter of weeks.
But, open your mouth for the choo choo train,
there's good news.
Yesterday, we saw the World Health Organization Director
saying that, yes, while the early data
does seem to show high transmissibility,
it also appears to be causing
just more mild cases than Delta, rather than severe.
And that's something that was also backed up
by CDC Director, Rochelle Walensky, who told reporters
that of the 40 known Omicron cases in the US,
as of yesterday, nearly all of them are mild.
And while one person has been hospitalized so far,
none have died.
Also, another piece of good news,
(laughs) at least by 2021 standards,
so far studies have shown the vaccines are effective
at preventing severe illness and death in Omicron patients,
and boosters provide at least some added protection.
So, just yesterday, Pfizer and BioNTech announced
that laboratory tests have shown
that a third dose of their COVID-19 vaccine
appears to provide sufficient protection
against the Omicron variant,
but also saying that two doses may not.
According to the companies,
researchers saw a 25-fold reduction
in neutralizing antibodies for Omicron
compared to other strains of the virus,
for people who had just two Pfizer doses.
But, they found that samples from people,
one month after they had received a Pfizer booster,
presented neutralizing antibodies against Omicron
that were comparable
to those seen against previous variants after two doses.
But still, with all that,
you had Pfizer's chief executive saying yesterday
that Omicron could increase the likelihood
that people might need a fourth dose
earlier than previously expected,
which he had initially said
was 12 months after the third shot.
But, I do wanna note here,
and I always try to,
the Pfizer research right now
has not yet been peer-reviewed.
And obviously, in general,
you wanna be as sure as possible,
but you also wanna get outside opinions and findings
than just the people that monetize and benefit the most
off of these vaccines.
But, ultimately, where I'll end this
is by saying if you've been paying attention,
none of this is surprising.
We have an uneven distribution of the vaccine,
especially in poorer countries,
with notable chunks of the population
deciding not to get vaccinated.
The unvaccinated increase a likelihood of spread
and mutation of the virus.
So, unless something just drastically
or unexpectedly changes,
it feels like this is gonna be a part of our new normal.
I'm tired of it,
I fuckin' hate it,
but you know, that's the world (laughs) right now.
But, ultimately, that is where that story,
and today's show, and shows for the year, end.
With that, I'll say, in addition,
whether it be the final story,
the first one, anything in between,
if you just wanna say anything,
I know that I'm gonna be
definitely scrolling through these comments,
so leave a comment down below.
Also, remember,
I'm just gonna be randomly selecting some people
to get some free gear.
But, potentially, for the last time this year,
my name's Philip DeFranco.
You've just been filled in.
I love yo' faces and I'll see you next time.