- Vigilante justice is back, baby.
Say it with your chest.
Am vengeance at least in Florida.
So this story and situation starts last week,
where you have 32 year old Brandon Joseph Harris.
He allegedly breaks
into multiple homes throughout Wednesday.
According to the police,
Brandon's been on their radar since he was 13,
having 17 arrests since then,
serving six years in prison for a home invasion.
And so on this day in question,
Brandon's being chased by the police.
He's hopping over fences,
going through people's property,
and eventually entering a person's home,
who has a gun.
With a homeowner firing at Harris,
who jumps out of a window straight into the arms of police.
All right, Brandon's happy he didn't get shot,
but he still goes to jail.
But all of that is just the setup for the story,
because what everyone has been focused on is the next day
at the press conference,
you have sheriff Bob Johnson say it.
- We don't know what homeowner,
which homeowner shot at him,
I guess they think that they did something wrong,
which they did not.
If somebody's breaking into your house,
you're more than welcome to shoot them in Santa Rosa County.
We prefer that you do actually.
So whoever that was, you're not in trouble.
Come see us.
We have a gun safety class we put on every other Saturday,
and if you take that, you'll shoot a lot better
and hopefully you'll save the taxpayers money.
- Yee-hah, motherfucker,
with the sounding like the sheriff being like,
"Don't feel bad you shot at him,
feel bad you missed."
You know, this clip goes viral over the weekend,
a lot of people are going,
"Wait, what the fuck?
Did the sheriff just tell people to shoot
and kill people to save the county money?"
Without ultimately leading to sheriff Bob Johnson apologize,
no, he didn't.
Instead Johnson going on Fox News and essentially said,
"I said what I said."
- Well you know, I always talk like that,
I ran on the fact that I'm a cop,
not a politician.
And I'll tell you right now, you know,
somebody breaks in your house in Santa Rosa County,
and you shoot and kill 'em ,
the chances of them reoffending
after that are zero,
and we like those odds.
So in Santa Rosa County, if you break into a house,
you roll the dice.
- [Phillip] Plus earlier saying.
- He broke into one house and the homeowner fired at him.
Unfortunately did not hit him.
- [Phillip] It also feels at times
like the interviewer just egging him on.
- Well you are being tough and you are standing up
for the good guys and not the bad guys.
- Now, all of that said, to be fair to Johnson,
a number of lawyers have said,
"You know, he's not wrong.
What he is saying is legally accurate, right"
"Florida's Stand Your Ground law
lets people use deadly force, prevent a forcible felony,
including home invasion,
even if the intruder doesn't have a weapon."
But a number of those experts,
were reportedly aghast at kind of how brazen
and joyful Johnson was,
with the president of the Florida Association
of Criminal Defense Lawyers telling NPR,
"It's wildly irresponsible
because it essentially encourages people to use deadly force
without giving it more consideration.
There's often times that somebody
is not an imminent threat to you."
With another lawyer adding,
"For Johnson to put that notion in people's head,
could lead to a parent shooting their daughter
as she sneaks home late at night.
Or imagine a teenager,
who asks his friend to come on over
and sneak into the house.
Kids make mistakes."
And to that I kind of see the point they're making,
but this is not the first time,
but it may be a rarity.
I think I kind of agree with Florida man.
If you break into my home,
where my wife and my children live,
the only thing telling yours side of the story
is gonna be the camera footage and your cold body.
You're equating accidental shootings
about kids sneaking in and some motherfucker
who has a history of home invasions,
breaking into someone's property,
where the situation we are talking about
is an active police pursuit.
And if anything, I feel bad for the homeowner for being put
into the position where they have
to make that choice.
Like yeah, it is possible that sheriff Brad Johnson,
it gets his dick hard to take the life from a man,
but at the end of the day, there's the core of the story
that we're talking about is a homeowners' right
to defend themselves, if someone enter or property.
Well, tons of situations
can have different factors, nine times outta 10,
I'm gonna sympathize with the homeowner.
And then let's talk about massive and concerning news
when it comes to digital content and ads.
But in general, ads are a big part of digital content,
whether you're reading something,
listening to something, watching something.
Hell, even recently, Netflix is like,
"Do we need to start playing ads?"
But the focus of this story,
is that we're starting to see a concerning trend
for platforms and the creators on them,
which could change what those creators do
thus impacting their viewers.
Those are some of the things we're seeing,
last week, you had the CEO of Snap,
describing their first quarter as "challenging" and saying
that the company provided a week sales forecast
for the second quarter.
Which you might say, "Okay well that's Snap."
But then you've got the king of online ads, YouTube,
announcing, "Oh shit, we missed the mark this quarter,"
Before their earnings and revenue,
YouTube is expected to go up 25%
and add dollars for the quarter,
instead though only hitting 14%,
which you could say, "Hey, that's still a positive,
but that is a concerning miss."
According to StreetAccount,
"YouTube advertising revenue is supposed to come in
at $7.51 billion, instead only hitting $6.87 billion."
With Paul Verna and analyst at Insider Intelligence,
blaming it on, "Increased competition
from social video platforms like TikTok,
and a plethora of premium entertainment services led
by Disney plus."
Though, personally, I do wanna say,
"I think this could just be a bump in the road,
YouTube has been really focused on YouTube shorts,
and on the daily they bring in 30 billion views,
but the monetization for it's just not there.
But if they are able to figure out
how to monetize that well,
I mean one, that's a huge influx of cash,
but also it gives them a major advantage
over TikTok who essentially,
just kind of throws table scraps at their top creators.
And then today you had Twitch announcing
some major potential changes.
With the starting today,
thanks to a Bloomberg report saying
that people familiar with the matter claim the Twitch
is looking at switching up how it pays top talent.
A move the outlet says would boost its profit,
but would also risk alienating some of its biggest stars.
And among the main potential changes,
are them adding incentives,
for streamers to run more ads,
as well as a proposal that would cut down
on how much the subscription fee would go to the creator,
noting that the staff
is considering cutting the subscription revenue pie
for the top echelon of streamers, to 50% from 70%.
Also weigh the options of creating different tiers,
and offering to allow creators
out of their exclusivity contracts,
so they could stream in places like YouTube.
With Bloomberg saying that we may see these changes soon.
Right, they want that big summer month.
And with ads especially ads that stop you
from being able to consume the content
being so negatively received,
we've seen a lot of big reactions from top creators.
With the likes of one of their biggest streamers,
Hasan Piker tweeting, "When I negotiated my contract,
I knew this was coming
and wanted to lock in one minute of ads per hour.
Twitch still served prerolls 'cause it wasn't three minutes.
Love Twitch but it seems they're moving away
from content creators to fix their profits.
Adding, "Nearly my entire revenue comes from subscribers
who elect to give me $5 a month.
Twitch doesn't consider the 50/50 split
it takes from smaller creators
in that process profitable enough.
That's wild.
Hate to say it but Twitch only makes moves like this
because they think there is no competitor
in the live streaming space.
Mixer is dead, Facebook is a black hole for relevance
and YouTube is too big
to care about live streaming and too slow to change.
They threw some money, at some creators and stopped."
Also the likes of Jacksepticeye, keeping it short and simple
saying, "What a joke.
Makes it worse for everyone except Twitch themselves."
Pokimane also chiming in saying that,
"Twitch should just implement ads
that don't directly interfere
with a stream, sidebar, picture in picture,
underlay, et cetera."
And adding, "I understand advertisers
are essential to make a platform profitable,
but intervening with the viewers' experiences
isn't how they should go about it."
Emma Langevin tweeting,
"They should just straight up tell us
that they hate us and don't care."
And keep in mind, this is just a little bit
of the flood of reactions we've seen.
Which I think is a really important thing
to know it and it makes me think
of today's sponsor Manscaped, I'm kidding.
You know, with all this,
I did find something interesting,
and I was like freelance reporter, Zach Bussey,
he seeming add some insight here adding,
"What's worse is that allegedly,
the people who have been hired by Twitch
to represent creators and be their voice at the table,
have apparently been at the forefront of saying
that creators don't really deserve
to dictate sub split."
And adding, "I don't know what the future holds,
I don't know precisely what is being said
or planned but if you haven't already,
I would strongly recommend you start working
on your YouTube and TikTok.
Set up a Patreon, Fanhouse or Koffi."
Maybe even a Fourth Wall.
But also at the same time, you have some saying, you know,
there are pros and cons here,
saying, "No exclusivity is way overdue, good to see that.
But also saying a majority of ad revenue
should always go to creators.
I'd say expand other video formats
to help growth instead of inundating viewers
with more ads on live streams."
But with all of that said,
I do wanna pass a question off to you,
what are your thoughts here?
Whether it be Twitch specifically,
or ads in general right now.
That question is for everyone,
even the 35% of you that use Ad Blockers.
From that I wanna take a second
to thank the fantastic sponsor of today's show,
Manscaped, the leading brand
for men's grooming and hygiene solutions.
Did you know that one man, every hour, every day
is diagnosed with testicular cancer?
In fact, it's the most common form
of cancer among men ages 15 to 35.
Well, in honor of testicular cancer awareness month,
Manscaped has partnered up
with the Testicular Cancer Society,
to create the first limited edition,
purple TCS Lawn Mower 4.0 collectible trimmer.
While you're down there,
trimming away with a Lawn Mower
or waterproof cordless skin safe trimmer,
it's the perfect time to remember
to do simple at home, self checks in.
Feel confident that you're taking the time
to care for yourself in the process.
Shave 'em to save them if you will.
With the release of the purple TCS trimmer,
Manscaped is also donating $50,000
to TCS to help those impacted by testicular cancer.
So to purchase or for more info
on how you can perform simple routine self checks at home,
visit manscaped.com/TCS.
And right now you can get 20% off plus free shipping
when you use my code 'PHILTCS' at checkout.
It's code PHILTCS,
for 20% off plus free shipping,
off your entire order @manscape.com.
And then we need to talk about
what the fuck is going on with Britain's parliament,
and I know the Brits watching are like,
"Yeah which thing Phil?
Gonna need you to be a little more specific."
So what we're talking about is a series of events
that started unfolding last week.
With a report by "The Sunday Times" finding
that 56 members of parliament,
including three senior ministers,
are facing allegations of sexual misconduct
after being reported to a parliamentary watchdog.
So far pretty normal, right?
Unfortunately not many people are surprised
that sexism is a thing.
But then it gets worse with a few days later,
the "Daily Mail" reporting
that at least one anonymous conservative lawmaker
made a disgusting claim about labor deputy leader,
Angela Rayner.
Saying that she likes
to put Boris Johnson, quote, 'Off his stride,'
by crossing and uncrossing her legs while he is talking.
Comparing it to a scene in the film "Basic Instinct",
and adding, "She knows she can't compete
with Boris' Oxford Union debating training
but she has other skills which he lacks."
Leading to a wave of people denouncing the article
even some conservatives with Johnson saying...
- But I have to say,
I thought it was the most appalling lead
of a sexist misogynist tripe
and I immediately got in touch with Angela
and we had a very friendly exchange
and you know if we ever find
who was responsible for it we'll,
I dunno what we'll do with them,
but we'll be the terrors of the earth."
- And just like that,
the patriarchy was systematically dismantled,
except it wasn't and then it kind of got worse,
'cause last night conservatives held a meeting
which female lawmakers shared their own experiences
of sexual harassment by their colleagues,
with around a dozen of them reportedly doing so.
One even crying and another MP calling it "blood-letting."
Others demanding that action be taken
against three specific cabinet ministers accused
of being sex pests.
With things like one woman recalling an incident
where a male lawmaker saw his female colleague
and a knee length leather skirt and said,
"That's a nice outfit,
what do you do for your day job?"
Also, there was an allegation
that "An unnamed conservative MP,
was watching porn on his phone
inside the house of commons
as well on the front bench
and sitting right next to a female minister.
So the chief party whip investigating the claim,
an office spokesperson saying this behavior
is wholly unacceptable and action will be taken.
And unfortunately this whole shit storm,
it's not a new thing for parliament
or even conservatives, right?
Just earlier this month,
one of their lawmakers in Imran Ahmad Khan,
he was found guilty of sexually assaulting a 15 year old boy
and resigned.
Though, incredibly important to note,
the problems cross party lines,
but there being a 2018 report
that found that one in five people working in parliament,
either experienced sexual harassment themselves,
or they witnessed something inappropriate the year prior.
See you know, a little bit concerning,
and well of course I wanna know everyone's thoughts,
especially, to the Brits watching.
What are your thoughts on this?
And then we've gotta talk about the public flogging
of house minority leader, Kevin McCarthy
we're seeing right now,
because he made the cardinal sin
of privately not being a crazy person for three minutes.
So if you haven't heard "The New York Times"
just published audio from a private conversation,
four days after the insurrection.
Where McCarthy expressed concern
about far right members inciting violence
and even openly voicing support for censor them on Twitter.
These recordings are incredibly significant
because it shows Republicans
and Republican leadership genuinely concerned
about their far right members.
And acknowledging that members
of their party played a role
in stoking the violence we saw in January 6th.
Also emphasizing the vast difference
between what these people, specifically, McCarthy,
said behind closed doors and how they downplayed
and ignored the actions of their members in public.
One of the most notable elements
of this story is you have McCarthy
and others specifically saying names,
with the two most focused on being Mo Brooks and Matt Gaetz.
- [McCarthy] Tension is too high,
the country is too crazy.
I do not wanna look back
and think we caused something or we missed something,
and someone got hurt,
and I don't wanna play politics with any of that.
- [Phillip] With McCarthy and others,
talking about how Gaetz had gone on TV
to attack multiple Republicans
for being anti-Trump after January 6th,
and especially expressing concern
over his targeting of Liz Cheney
who was a member of the leadership team
and was already facing threats.
Others on the call also noting
that Brooks had spoken at the rally
before the insurrection
where he made incendiary remarks
and many of viewed his direct calls to violence.
McCarthy saying, "These actions have to stop,"
adding that he would call Gaetz
and have others also call him
to tell him this is serious shit
and to cut this out.
Which representative Steve Scalise,
the second ranking house
Republican responded.
- [Scalise] It's potentially illegal what he's doing.
- [McCarthy] Well, he's putting people
in jeopardy and he doesn't need to be doing this.
We saw what people would do in the capitol.
You know, and these people came prepared,
with rope, with everything else.
- Well, that's obviously pretty wild,
it's also not where it stops.
The people on the call
also mentioned in incendiary remarks
from others included.
Representatives Louie Gohmert,
Barry Moore, and Lauren Boebert with Cheney,
specifically flagging Boebert as a security risk,
noting that she had tweeted out incredibly
sensitive information about the movements
of top leaders like Nancy Pelosi
during the insurrection.
With McCarthy, at one point saying.
- [McCarthy] Our members have got to start
paying attention to what they say too
and you can't put up with that type of (beep)
- [Phillip] And then after people,
on the call read some especially wild tweets,
from representative Moore, he added,
- [McCarthy] Can't they take Twitter accounts away too?
- And beyond that these newly published
recordings come just days
after McCarthy flat out lied.
"The Times" have come out with a report saying,
that McCarthy told members after the insurrection,
that he would call Trump and urge him to resign.
McCarthy initially calling the report,
"Totally false and wrong."
Which "The Times' was like, "I bet."
With him shortly after that getting permission
from their source to publish the audio
where he can literally be heard saying that.
With McCarthy for his part trying to spin this story,
claiming that his denial was still true,
because he never actually followed through
and told Trump to resign.
You know, the classic "I'm lying pussy defense."
What's been really interesting
with this story are the reactions,
because I mean Trump himself,
just this weekend reportedly said
that he supports McCarthy for speaker,
according to at least one Republican member.
Though on Friday,
the former president didn't give a direct answer
when asked by "The Wall Street Journal"
but he made it clear he didn't like the tape,
but he's happy about McCarthy's reversal.
But that doesn't necessarily mean
that will be Trump's opinion moving forward.
And I say that because McCarthy has received a ton
of backlash from the far right of his party
and now more and more.
With numerous people coming out and slamming him,
multiple people expressing their hesitancy
about their support for him as a Republican leader
in the house saying they couldn't trust him.
Possibly one of the most important
conservative voices last night,
Tucker Carlson called McCarthy,
"A puppet of the Democrat Party."
With Gaetz saying of McCarthy,
"This is the behavior of weak men, not leaders."
And so the sense of being a situation
that's gonna be fascinating to watch,
"Of does Trump now fall in line?"
Does he now have to play catch-up?
Because to me, Tucker Carlson is at news,
he is an opinion maker.
He does less to inform people
about what's actually happening
in the world and he's informing them
of what their opinions are.
When it comes to conservatives, he's very good at that.
And so it'll be especially interesting
to see how Tucker's influence
on conservative base will affect lawmakers
who have been trying to support McCarthy.
Like for example, reportedly several people
who attended today's house Republican conference meeting
said the minority leader delivered a speech,
defending himself and talking about winning
back the house in November.
With that being met by a standing ovation.
So the question becomes, okay, is that everything?
Or are these big, big voices, going to have an impact?
Because if the past is any indication,
they can be very, very persuasive.
But Hey, time will tell
and in the meantime, I'd love to know your thoughts.
What do you thinks gonna happen with McCarthy?
Ultimately that is where that story and today show ends.
Whether it be just with this last story,
or anything else that stood out to you today,
I'd love to know your thoughts
and those comments down below.
But of course, as always, my name is Philip DeFranco,
you've just been filled in.
I love yo faces and I'll see you tomorrow.