Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 26, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:40

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1129

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello there, and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters, episode 1129.
	I'm your host Harry, joined today by Josh.
	Hello! And we've got some right slop for you today.
	We're going to be talking about the Trump war leaks, and whether they're legitimate or not, and what they mean.
	The unexpected, the most unexpected thing ever, being that Snow White flopped and Assassin's Creed is bad.
	And we're going to finish off by talking about Netflix's adolescence, a...
	True false story that's being used to allow for more surveillance state in Britain.
	And propagandising children as well.
	I mean, that's all television's ever been for.
	That's true.
	That's true.
	Including if you're a grown adult watching television, you are a child being propagandised too.
	And with that, I think that's all I need to say.
	Let's get into the news.
	Okay, so this fellow is Jeffrey Goldberg.
	He is the editor-in-chief at The Atlantic, and he was seemingly, and I say seemingly, accidentally added to a group chat where the top brass of the Trump administration discussed their upcoming bombing campaign in Yemen.
	And apparently he found out about key details of this operation two hours before they happened.
	And this guy is also very much a Zionist, and that is worth mentioning when it comes to the person who accidentally added him.
	So he wrote this article about it, because of course that's what you do when you get invited into a secret government chat, is you write a mainstream article about it.
	To be fair, if you're the editor of The Atlantic, then yeah.
	But also, he does claim to have omitted key details of national security significance, as well as certain people who held Secret Service positions.
	So some of the stuff that he's apparently seen, we don't know about.
	So we're just going to have to believe him, take him at his word for some of it.
	So, supposedly this guy, Jeffrey Goldberg, moved to Israel to work as a prison guard in the IDF before returning to his career in journalism in the US.
	So, that is important because the person who was in charge of this group chat, Mike Waltz, is known as being particularly hawkish.
	It could be that they share a foreign policy agenda.
	I don't know.
	I would imagine that...
	I mean, you'll go through the article, I've not read it, but I would imagine he must be in favour of strikes against the Yemen and Houthis, right?
	Yeah, it seems like it.
	It'd be pretty shocking if a former IDFA member wasn't.
	It would be very strange, wouldn't it?
	And this Mike Waltz guy, you know, I respect his service in Afghanistan.
	He did multiple combat tours and he received four bronze stars, which have received for bravery, but...
	In terms of his politics, he was defence policy director for Bush and counter-terrorism advisor to Cheney.
	So this might give you a little bit of an idea about how he views foreign policy, which might explain why he might have accidentally invited this guy in.
	Accidentally on purpose.
	It's possible.
	Yeah. So most Trump supporters have been calling Goldberg a liar, from what I've seen.
	There have been a few that have taken what he said at face value.
	And I can see why, given his track record, because, Both he and Trump have been critical of one another, and he often writes things that are critical of Trump.
	So the fact that he can't necessarily be trusted I think is fair.
	But he has provided screenshots, and it's not been denied as fake news by anyone involved.
	I believe it was confirmed as true by one of the agencies, correct?
	I'm going to get to that.
	I'm going to read the exact quote.
	Often see J.D. Vance as well posting about stuff, because I've seen him do this on a couple of occasions while there's been a mainstream story doing the rounds.
	He did this about when he said a lot of European countries haven't fought a war in 40 years.
	He said, listen, obviously I didn't mean Britain and France, because they have, and I know that.
	And quite often he corrects stuff, and he's not done that in this instance, which makes it more likely, I think, that it's genuine.
	I think the nail in the coffin for the fact that it's all made up is the fact that, and this is a quote from the article, so if you take this at face value, so be it, but Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, responded two hours later to him reaching out to them, saying he's been added to this chat because he messaged the people involved, like, what the hell is going on?
	Confirming the veracity of the signal group, this appears to be an authentic message chain and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain.
	So that doesn't sound like they're denying it exists.
	It seems genuine.
	And that's a confirmation.
	Yeah, I would say so.
	And I'm just wondering, you don't accidentally add the main editor of The Atlantic to a chat of lots of senior politicians in the executive branch of government?
	Accidentally. Seems like a pretty major cock-up.
	He either has very, very fat thumbs, or there has been speculation that he might have done it on purpose.
	And although I'm more willing to take this sort of thing as just an accident, personally, it is possible, and I'm going to walk through the arguments, obviously make up your own mind, you don't have to agree with me.
	Because if this was done on purpose...
	Surely it makes basic security at the current administration seem completely incompetent.
	It does, and I think that that's one of the major arguments against it, is why would they do something that makes them, first and foremost, look incompetent?
	It doesn't make sense to me that they would do that.
	And also shows them actively bad-mouthing their European allies as well.
	We'll be getting onto that.
	So there's a couple of things that I think it...
	Obviously, there's potential similarities between the person who added him and the guy himself in foreign policy agenda.
	We can't necessarily know for certain.
	I haven't seen a sit-down conversation with the two people talking it over, so it's a certain amount of conjecture.
	But what it does do in leaking this is that it sells to the MAGA base that they're authentically America first because they complain about Europe not dealing with the rebels.
	Never mind the fact that previously in the conversation, if it's to be taken as genuine, they admit that only 4% of US trade goes through the Red Sea, that little gulf.
	Yes. That's where the US are attacking.
	That's right, yeah.
	Basically, American ships and those countries that are aligned with...
	It's America and Israel, basically.
	And Israel, which is interesting because they're leaving a lot of European ships alone because most of them aren't.
	Exactly. And 40% of European trade stands to be interrupted by the group.
	But they point this out as if to say we're doing this for Europe but also Europe's not having their ships attacked because of our either neutral stance or actively siding with the Palestinians.
	I'm not saying our as in this is what I think.
	I stay out of it.
	The government's position.
	Exactly, yeah.
	And so...
	The reason the US is intervening, I think, is because it's interrupting their trade and Israeli trade.
	And, of course, they wouldn't want that, would they?
	And this should really be the elephant in the room of this story, is that they're sort of misrepresenting it, even in their own internal chats, as we're helping Europe, but Europe isn't being...
	Bothered by this thing.
	It's bothering America and Israel.
	And so...
	I mean, surely America's biggest complaint with Europe is how much they're putting into NATO.
	Yeah. It shouldn't really relate to Houthis.
	Yeah, I think it's a separate thing.
	And although we, you know, we should be protecting our own trade routes and the Houthi rebels, I'm certainly no friend of them either.
	I think it's a weak argument because it's not interrupting our trade and it's very far away and there isn't the same appetite in Europe for foreign adventurism as there is in the US government.
	And this is something that US citizens are of course going to have to foot the bill for.
	So I'm not having a go.
	I'm actually kind of annoyed on your behalf that they're going out and interfering, not learning the lessons of post-2000s wars.
	But here we are.
	I'd also argue that one of the main beneficiaries of this bombing campaign are the Saudis, as well as Israel.
	Israel benefits the most out of all of them, I think, because they're Iran-backed.
	But of course, the Saudis and Israel are both opposed to Iran.
	And so, by the US doing this, they're basically saying to their allies, look, we got your back.
	Putting pressure on the Iranians, basically making sure their resources are wasted and they don't get more influence on the Saudi Arabian Peninsula.
	So that's what I think is actually going on here, which isn't necessarily part of this leak.
	It's just the operation that it concerns.
	And the second point about this, why it could possibly be linked, other than showing that America is...
	Being guided by America First people, although you could argue they're wasting money here, is that it solidifies Vance as an anti-war candidate as he voices his objections in the chat to all of it, despite everyone else seemingly in agreement.
	I've seen the same thread that you're going through right now.
	Yeah. Now, Vance is obviously the favourite for 2028, and I think that that much is, you know, the reason he's been appointed is that he's like a mini-Trump.
	And that's what Trump wants, is he wants someone to carry on his legacy after he steps down.
	Yes, and Trump was very vocally in 2015 an anti-war candidate.
	Exactly. Very critical of the Democrat and former Republicans' wars.
	And he sort of...
	Remains untainted by the justification for the strikes that the others make, and so he has this clean reputation that, you know, OK, hey, I've got this unblemished record of not being in favour of any foreign intervention, therefore you can trust me.
	Which I think is a plausible argument, because it's the best of both worlds for Trump.
	He still gets to do what he wants, without necessarily tainting his successor.
	Which, of course, if we look at Kamala Harris, she had to carry the burden of look at what Biden did whilst he was president, and you were part of that.
	And so there's a very real concern there.
	But I think that it could also just be an accident, and it's worth mentioning as well, to call them war plans is very strong.
	That's how it's presented in this title here, in the headline.
	But as with many headlines in mainstream outlets, it's a bit...
	Misleading, because as many of the people involved in this chat have said, this wasn't necessarily discussing classified information.
	It was just us coordinating with each other about various things.
	But none of the top secret stuff was really in that chat, despite what he's claiming.
	Which I can believe, actually, because you wouldn't...
	There are lots and lots of different protocols in place to make sure that this sort of information doesn't leak, and you're not supposed to talk on Signal about these sorts of things, and so my guess is that they were sort of talking about it in a more informal way.
	I mean, I've seen the leak of Mike Waltz with his fist American flag fire emojis, so yeah, that seems pretty informal to me.
	It does, and I think that...
	I wouldn't like to know that there's top-secret classified documents going around communicated by emojis in the American administration.
	Yeah, my read of the situation is that it was a genuine chat, and he was probably added accidentally, but I don't know for certain, but it's just my guess, and that it was just more informal and it's been exaggerated to drum up a good and interesting article for The Atlantic, which I...
	I think it's the most likely, but it's not impossible that it could be the other things I've discussed, which is why I've brought them up in the first place.
	It's difficult to know.
	Again, it does seem to be a major screw-up to even an informal chat with these people, because it also had people like Stephen Miller and others in it, to add a journalist, and not just any journalist, a head editor of a hostile publication to your own administration, and then not notice that that's what you've done.
	It would be interesting to see whether there's any sort of discipline handed down from the top in the executive because...
	I think they are treating this like a legitimate mistake.
	That's the sort of word.
	Although there have been sort of attempts to deflect it and say it's not genuine to try and brush it off.
	But it does seem to be genuine at the very least.
	But it is worth mentioning as well that a lot of the bombing campaign had already been planned before the guy was even added to the group in the first place.
	So all of the Marshall stuff was probably not dealt with in Signal chats as far as we're aware.
	I would hope so.
	I would hope so as well.
	But he...
	Basically just saw behind the scenes about what they fought, and a lot of it is stuff that if you know the people involved in the administration, you probably would have guessed that they would have fought these things anyway.
	It's just solid confirmation.
	Some people have been saying things like this.
	Why didn't you just delete the messages or let them know you were incorrectly added to the chat?
	Sounds like you're more interested in publishing a salacious story than doing the right thing.
	I think that this criticism is fair, but I think it misses the interesting parts.
	I'm sorry.
	No journalist, right or left, if you realise that's what you've been added into, is going to do that.
	Because I think in the article he explains this to his credit.
	He says, I thought at first it was some sort of trap trying to get me to...
	Potentially do something silly.
	I forgot what he called it, the specific term, but basically like a trap for journalists to make them say something stupid and then you publish it and show the world, like, look at how stupid they are.
	That's why he stayed in it.
	He was sort of observing it to see what the nature of the thing was, which, to be fair, if I were added to a chat like that, I'd probably do the same.
	You just added into a random group chat out of nowhere with a bunch of people who were some of the most powerful people in the world.
	Oh, sorry, my mistake.
	I'm gonna go now.
	Yeah. You're not gonna hang around and see what they're talking about.
	So, maybe that's dishonest of me, but if you don't think that you'd do that, I think you're being dishonest with yourself.
	Lots of people point out that he has played a key role in peddling for the American war machine, the Iraq WMDs, Ukraine, Russiagate, Ansi Marni.
	I'm not sure what that one's referring to.
	I probably should know.
	And loads of other things as well.
	Here's another article that he's wrote.
	Trump, Americans who died in war are losers and suckers.
	So he's just trying to...
	Smear Trump's name, isn't he?
	It's pretty obvious.
	And he's also...
	Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda are working together.
	Again, they're mentioning the Russia collusion.
	And Trump said veterans are suckers and losers.
	And I think that last one is very difficult to sell, but it's all part of the throwing mud at a wall and seeing what sticks.
	So yes, obviously...
	Lots of people are cynical of this guy taking his word because look at his track record.
	It's about as bumpy as it could possibly be, right?
	And let's have a look at some of the screenshots from this.
	This is the stuff that he did share because some of it he didn't.
	Here's JD Vance tagging Pete Hegseff.
	If you think we should do it, let's go.
	I just hate bailing Europe out again.
	Let's just make sure our messaging is tight here and if there are things we can do up front to minimise risk to Saudi oil facilities, we should do it.
	Sounds fairly reasonable.
	And then Hegseth says to Vance, I fully share your loathing of European freeloading.
	It's pathetic.
	But Mike is correct.
	I think, I'm not sure which Mike that is.
	We are the only ones on the planet, on our side of the ledger, who can do this.
	Nobody else is even close, sorry.
	Question is timing.
	I feel like now is a good time as any.
	Given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes, I think we should go.
	But POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.
	So this isn't exactly top secret, but there is a certain degree of coordination going on with their, sort of, more their messaging.
	And then when it sort of happened, it was just them saying, good job.
	And there's John Ratcliffe there.
	I think MAR is Marco Rubio.
	There's not a lot there when you actually see the screenshot proof that things were going around.
	And then we have the article itself here.
	It's a very long article.
	They always are in the Atlantic.
	And it goes on and on and on and blah blah blah blah.
	That's all stuff we touched on.
	Let's start here.
	This is where Pete's Hegseth and I come in.
	On Tuesday March 11, I received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz.
	And it goes on to explain what Signal is.
	You know what Signal is.
	It's a messaging app.
	I assumed that Michael Waltz in question was President Donald Trump's national security advisor.
	I did not assume, however, that the request was from the actual Michael Waltz.
	I've met him in the past and though I didn't find it particularly strange that he might be reaching out to me, I did think it was somewhat unusual given the Trump administration's contentious relationship with journalists and Trump's periodic fixation on me specifically.
	I love the way he phrases that, like he's completely innocent of anything.
	Why would he pay attention to little old me?
	I know.
	It immediately crossed my mind that someone could be masquerading as Waltz in order to somehow entrap me.
	It's not all uncommon these days for nefarious actors to try to induce journalists to share information that could be used against them.
	Is entrap the word that you'd been looking for?
	I think so.
	I then accepted the connection request, hoping that it was the actual National Security Advisor and that he wanted to chat about Ukraine or Iran or some other important matter.
	Two days later, Thursday, at 4.28pm, I received a notice that I was to be included in a signal chat group.
	It was called the Houthi PC Small Group.
	And, yeah, it goes on and on, and he just lists what they were talking about.
	A lot of it is quite uninteresting, unsurprising.
	There's a lot of just coordinating with one another about...
	Small things.
	And there's not really that much to it, to be honest.
	But if you want to read the article, go ahead.
	I'm not going to go through it all because there's just too much.
	And it's a lot of boring slog detail.
	But the gist of it is that they were probably discussing things that should have been kept private.
	And I think that that's a fair characterisation.
	However, it's not nearly as bad as it's made out to be.
	From the headline, as is always the case.
	And here is the press secretary for the White House saying this.
	Jeffrey Goldberg is well known for a sensationalist spin.
	Here are the facts about the latest story.
	No war plans were discussed.
	No classified material was sent to the Fred.
	The White House Council's Office has provided guidance on a number of different platforms for President Trump's top officials to communicate as safely and efficiently as possible.
	And they're looking into how he's inadvertently added.
	So, complete confirmation here.
	But they're saying similar things to me, really.
	That it's not as big a deal as it's being made out to be.
	But at the same time, it's still a bit of a mistake.
	It's still a bad look.
	Which I can believe.
	It makes your administration look stupid.
	It does.
	And there are a couple of memes that I'm going to end on because they're fun.
	I do enjoy this.
	That's quite funny.
	Of course it has to be Big Fat Baby Vance as well.
	I'm sorry, JD Vance.
	You've not really put that many feet wrong so far, but the edits of your face are funny.
	I know you're watching, of course.
	And then another one here.
	This was actually replied to the post of the article.
	Anxiety. What if you're not good enough?
	Depression. Everyone hates you.
	Hoofy PC small group.
	Fist bump emoji.
	American flag emoji.
	Fire. They've got my back.
	And finally, the reaction in Europe hasn't necessarily been about the leaks themselves.
	It's been about how the top team rips into America's European allies, saying how they loathe having to bail out the pathetic freeloaders.
	So obviously it's being presented as sensationlessly as possible, as is the media's way.
	And also I think that...
	The European media in particular is pushing massively for a rift with the United States and there's a massive amount of intersecting agenda here for this to happen and so this has been capitalised on by lots of those forces.
	But yeah, that's my sort of two cents on it.
	This leaking basically serves to strain the relationship between the US and Europe more generally and even further than it was already.
	It might spur on more European independence, which I wasn't personally offended by what they were saying.
	It's sort of like, Europe's not standing up for itself, and they need to be more independent.
	It was strange that they were having that discussion in reference to the Houthis, which, as we've discussed, isn't really as much of our problem.
	Yeah, and I think in other domains it's a lot more legitimate, like NATO, although I don't think NATO should exist.
	If it is to exist, it's an...
	Fair enough that America could object to being disproportionately contributing to that, I suppose.
	And, yeah, it strikes me as sort of a non-story to a certain extent, but it's important enough to actually talk about because I think there's been a lot of smoke and mirrors about the whole thing and just breaking it down and looking at it slightly rationally.
	It's a good way of seeing that it wasn't a big deal.
	It's slightly interesting.
	But yeah, I think the Trump regime is going to carry on.
	It's not a deal-breaker for them.
	And yes, also, if you didn't know America was bombing Yemen, now you do.
	There you go.
	America's always bombing somewhere.
	It's got to be done, according to them.
	Engaged few.
	This leak, while undoubtedly embarrassing, clearly wasn't a serious security breach.
	We know this because if it had been, we would have disappeared into Gitmo before ever writing this article.
	He would have disappeared, sorry.
	That's true.
	Yes, we pretty much agree on that one.
	And also, he covers those sorts of things and so understands what he can and can't publish, which probably helps.
	And again, if this had happened during a...
	President Hillary term, he would have committed suicide by shooting himself twice in a park that most lifelong DC residents have never heard of.
	Yeah, did you see actually that Hillary Clinton commented on this when the article came up on Twitter and she put, are you kidding me?
	And it's like, you Hillary?
	Emails Hillary?
	Emails on a private server or anything?
	No, I guess nothing, you know.
	She never did nothing wrong.
	Inxio says, Trump isn't a Muppet.
	This would have been done on purpose.
	He's been playing everyone this entire time.
	Well, hopefully that's the case.
	Again, personally, outside of some very, very potential benefits that they could get that you were...
	Talking about nearer the beginning of the segment, what do you get?
	Well, it might serve their agenda to cut further ties with Europe, seeing as they seem to want to pull out of Europe as soon as the Ukraine war is over.
	To be honest, that's not something I'm completely against.
	I do think that Europe needs to be able to stand on its own.
	Yeah, I agree with what they were saying, in a way.
	And I don't think that American influence has been particularly positive for Europe since the end of the Second World War, outside of working together in the Cold War, of course.
	So there's that, the Vance anti-war stance.
	That seems like a bit of a stretch to me, because that relies on a lot of interpretation from the people who are actually reading the article and looking at the messages.
	It's a very esoteric way to go about it, if that's what they were doing.
	And in most of the messages that have been, the screenshots that have been shared about, So most people are only going to come into contact with stuff that doesn't really push that.
	So, I mean, I'd be interested if this is some kind of 4 or 5D chess move.
	And it does seem very, very stupid.
	But again, ultimately, it just makes them look stupid and incompetent.
	It does, yeah.
	And I think that it probably is genuine.
	I can understand why people would think otherwise.
	Anyway, so, moving on to something a bit lighter.
	The most unexpected thing ever happened, which is that media that hated its audience and had actors and producers and directors who actively said that they hate you hasn't done very well.
	And also, Assassin's Creed Shadows is getting somewhat of a mixed response.
	So I'll go over those two things, which is Snow White has flopped, Assassin's Creed Shadows is...
	Has not yet caused a second Pacific War.
	But we'll see how it goes.
	But first, you missed out.
	If you've not bought Islander 3 yet, too bad.
	There is no yet.
	You don't get it.
	You're done.
	It's over.
	You lost.
	It's gone.
	It's gone forever.
	Alright? No reprints.
	No reissues.
	It's done.
	You missed out.
	You loser.
	But... You can still buy a shirt.
	And isn't that a nice consolation prize?
	You know, it's not something that anybody's going to be congratulating you for.
	It's not like you'll actually have Islander 3 or anything.
	But you will have a nice t-shirt so that you can kind of cozy up and pretend like you're one of the...
	Cool, influential people that did buy Islander 3. And if you did get Islander 3, you know what?
	A shirt would go perfect with it, wouldn't it?
	So buy them.
	Buy them now, freeloaders.
	Pathetic. Anyway.
	So... So Snow White's done terribly.
	Big surprise, right?
	Was anybody looking forward to Snow White and the Seven, um...
	Unidentified human beings.
	I think they did eventually make them dwarves again, but I still remember Peter Dinklage trying to pull up the stepladder behind him when he was very angry and salty about it, so they tried to replace the dwarves with a diverse and representative cast of other people.
	You know what they say, once you have a meteoric rise to fame and stardom, you've got to remind yourself of the little people.
	There you go.
	That's one for the clips out there.
	So, yeah, unsurprisingly, it had a ridiculously large budget, $250 million, which just seems to be the go-to budget for...
	Overpriced films these days where they go, right, we want to make something where we have to make at least half a billion dollars to make our money back.
	It's like its own marketing ploy is how much money they've spent on it, which is...
	I wonder how many backhand deals are going on there and if anybody's shifting money around.
	That's just...
	The only thing being done with hands in Hollywood offices.
	For God's sake!
	Backhandy deals, yeah.
	Anyway, so...
	Yeah, it's a $250 million budget.
	Again, as always, double it for marketing.
	That's the rule of thumb.
	So let's say it needs to cross $500 million in pure revenue to even break even.
	Okay? It made globally $87 million over its first weekend.
	Well, they went wrong at the first hurdle.
	It's called Snow White because of the complexion of the protagonist.
	And of course, metaphorically, her purity as a character.
	She can get the birds and bees to sing with her.
	They've sort of gone for Snow Latina, I believe.
	Yeah, not only that, but this woman, Rachel Ziegler, Werner Ziegler, was very, very annoying in the lead-up to it.
	She didn't come across great in all of the interviews where she was saying things like, Prince Charming basically stalked Snow White in the 1937 original.
	This isn't a film where she's just worried about what kind of man's going to come and marry her.
	She's worried about her future.
	Basically, I'm going to make Snow White a girl boss, because that's all Snow White was ever about, right?
	There is the weird thing of she's asleep in the woods and he comes up and kisses her when she's unconscious.
	It's a fairy tale.
	It works on romantic logic, not like your Saturday night's logic.
	What? I'm objecting to it.
	Yeah, yeah, great cover, mate.
	But there's also the fact of, like...
	Disney's been doing this for a while now.
	They've been doing the big remakes since at least Alice in Wonderland when Tim Burton did it, which was a big hit for some reason.
	I really didn't like that film.
	But since then, they've been ramping it up and they're starting to really get to the bottom of the barrel.
	They did Dumbo, because everybody was really eager for...
	Wasn't it Guy Ritchie?
	Did Guy Ritchie do Dumbo or Aladdin?
	I don't know.
	I'm a grown man.
	It doesn't matter.
	It doesn't matter.
	But now they get to Snow White, which is a classic.
	One of the original, big animated films that Disney put out.
	People weren't really looking for a remake of it, were they?
	No. In fact, no one wants remakes anymore.
	I think the audience have been, as in the film audience, have been pretty clear that remakes are not doing good anymore.
	Especially when they all end up having the same tone, the same look.
	For films that are so expensive, in all the screenshots and clips that I see from them, they all look really cheap as well.
	Do you remember Will Smith as the genie in Aladdin?
	That looked absolutely terrible.
	But they did it anyway, they inflate the budget, and then they act shocked when...
	After a terrible marketing campaign that everybody said, this looks terrible, it doesn't make the money back.
	So in the US, it had $43 million over the first weekend, and they were actually estimating $50 million.
	So it didn't even reach that.
	One of the most scathing reviews came from The Guardian, of all places.
	A film made by people with cartoon dollar signs for eyes, and not even the tiniest glimmer of art in their souls.
	I agree with the Guardian.
	I know.
	Pop that out of context.
	That's a pretty good insult to them then.
	And another critic said it was a misguided and hollow attempt at modernizing the classic tale, while a third said the reimagined take was missing charm and depth.
	Copy and paste those reviews for every Disney remake.
	Remember when they did The Lion King, which was a really charming 90s animated film, and then they decided to use CGI.
	Remember, live action, CGI the entire thing, so they just look like normal lions.
	So they can't emote.
	So you're just looking at cats pulling blank faces.
	I tell you what I really dislike as well, that anything that tries to give human speech to animals, I find it annoying.
	I don't know what it is about it, but there's something about it.
	Even in the original animated, 2D animated versions as well.
	No, because it's animated.
	But if it's like a real-life lion, and they've got its mouth moving, and it's talking like a human, It's a bit tacky.
	Yeah, it looks rubbish.
	I don't know why I'm whispering.
	They're not in the room.
	Disney's waiting.
	What's his name?
	Who's the guy in charge right now?
	Bob Iger.
	Bob Iger.
	That's the name.
	The guy who forced Twin Peaks to reveal the murderer early.
	That's right.
	He's got a kill squad outside the studio right now.
	No, no.
	He's got his knuckle dusters on.
	Samson's got him waiting in the hallway just for you once we're done with this.
	So what's it looking like in Rotten Tomatoes?
	Well, surprisingly, here...
	I'm going to assume that the critics are actually more on the money than the audience because the critics have given it 42% Rotten Tomatoes.
	The audience have said 74%.
	I don't know if this is because there are a load of Disney shills on Rotten Tomatoes giving it positive reviews to try and bump up the score.
	The number of people who will suckle at the teat of Disney slop is worrying.
	It is.
	Grown men, young Gen X and millennials.
	I remember someone said to me once that an adult woman being into Disney films is up there with being a feminist for making a woman be undateable.
	Which is so true.
	If they're into the modern ones, then yes.
	Even more so.
	Absolutely. But what does IMDB have to say?
	1.7 out of 10. That is one of the lowest scores I've ever seen on that website.
	I wonder what The Room got on IMDB.
	I reckon it'll be higher.
	It probably will be.
	I'm gonna look it up.
	Yeah, The Room has actual...
	Rewatch value and actual funny parts to it.
	I just want to take a look at some of the user reviews.
	3.6, so The Room has almost double the rating.
	Almost double.
	It has over double the rating, in fact.
	So The Room, by the classic genius auteur, Tommy Wiseau.
	Is that how it's pronounced?
	Close enough.
	It's about twice as good as Snow White.
	I would actually argue it's probably about a thousand times better than Snow White.
	And also, you can find it free on YouTube.
	But also, so let's take a look at some of the reviews.
	Giving shoutouts to Tommy Wiseau films now.
	Tommy Wiseau's great, man.
	You can't hate the guy.
	Oh no, of course.
	You can't hate the guy.
	Come on.
	And he's a talented fellow.
	So, 1 out of 10, poisoned apples all round.
	1 out of 10, rooting for the apple.
	1 out of 10, a hollow and inspired reimagining.
	2 out of 10...
	Being a bit generous there, aren't you, mate?
	Soulless Unnecessary Remake.
	1 out of 10. Sleepy Dopey and Now I'm Grumpy.
	2 out of 10. And it just goes on.
	Those are very creative titles, actually.
	Yeah, you've got to appreciate the IMDb users.
	They're more creative than the film.
	They are, actually.
	A very mirrored movie.
	Oh, that one was trying to be a bit too clever.
	Be a bit too clever.
	As well as the terrible reviews, terrible performance, you can get an idea for just how terribly it's doing in the cinema by the fact that people have been sharing all over on social media.
	Here's the latest screening of Snow White.
	Empty Seats.
	So sleepy.
	Here is it again.
	There's the film on the screen.
	Empty seats.
	Empty seats.
	Almost all of the seats for Snow White were empty.
	There's every single one of these pictures.
	Oh yeah, here's one, this guy.
	Opening Friday night for Disney's Snow White in IMAX.
	One person bought tickets.
	There he is.
	Ever wanted an IMAX cinema to yourself?
	Yeah, I've never thought it would be possible, but apparently you can if you go to see Snow White.
	That's the only drawback.
	Yeah, Snow White will be playing in the background.
	I could watch The Lord of the Rings in a cinema like that.
	That would be another thing.
	That would be nice.
	That would be a rich man kind of thing.
	When we're rich, then you can hire out an entire IMAX for yourself and just sit there.
	Dead before I'm rich, I think.
	Yeah. But they say the crisis, blah, blah, blah.
	Poor opening weekend.
	Empty cinemas.
	Meanwhile, in mainland China, which we know Disney likes to try and rely on for profits, the film made less than one million dollars.
	In its first three days.
	Womp womp.
	The senior vice president at the box office company has said, while it's been a disappointing opening weekend, we can't write off the film's performance until we see how it holds up in the coming weeks.
	Well, given that the film box office drop-off from opening to second weekend tends to be about 50%, and then exponentially after that.
	That's not going to be great.
	It's over, yeah.
	It's completely over, and that was massive, massive cope.
	And it's just part of this trend.
	As I mentioned at the beginning of this, one thing that this article brings up is just that the budgets for these things are ballooning, completely out of control.
	So obviously, they made a lot of money from some of the early ones, like Alice in Wonderland made $1 billion.
	So that, especially given the fact that it probably would have been a smaller budget than this had, would have been a big success for them.
	They could have possibly, you know, doubled or more than doubled their money.
	But then you get films like Pinocchio and Dumbo, and they don't really make the money back unless they have a really small budget.
	Even the Little Mermaid remake opened to a $118 million weekend.
	Domestically, so that's just in the US, over the four-day Memorial Day weekend in 2023.
	It finished with $569 million globally, but was not considered a major success because of its $250 million budget.
	Again, double it, and you've made, what, $69 million back.
	Which is, sounds big for us, but for a major motion picture studio like Disney, it's not enough.
	My thoughts about this is that even if they are sort of a roundabout making their money back, they can stick it on their streaming service and sort of pad out the shows available on there and justify the rolling subscriptions to a whole ton of people.
	So it can just be another bit of slop that people scroll past.
	While they're taking two hours to decide what they're going to watch on streaming that evening.
	That will probably help make up a decent amount of money for them, at the very least.
	It makes you wonder why they even bother releasing them in the cinema in the first place.
	But then again, if you're not going to do that, why bother even throwing $250 million into it?
	Well, I think the whole company should dissolve, personally.
	They've had their time.
	It's over.
	Absolutely, but I tell you what is a big success.
	What's a huge success?
	According to the company themselves, Assassin's Creed had 2 million players surpassed the launches of Assassin's Creed Origins and Odyssey.
	Thank you for joining the journey in feudal Japan.
	Now, we actually covered the launch of it, or at least on launch, you went through the entire background of all of the controversies leading up to the release of it.
	With the ultimate message, don't buy it.
	Alright? So if you're looking for all the context of Assassin's Creed Shadows, we've already covered it in great detail.
	Go to the video from last Thursday for the proper context of it.
	I'm gonna cover how it's been doing since then.
	Since it came out.
	Well... First of all, Grums has been doing a lot of posting about it.
	So, Assassin's Creed Shadows did about 27.5% worse than Dragon Age Veilguard, the latest terrible Dragon Age game, on Steam, which already was not amazing for Dragon Age.
	So they got 89,418.
	That was the all-time peak.
	Yeah, peak players concurrently, isn't it?
	Yeah, and the all-time peak for Assassin's Creed Shadows over its opening weekend was...
	64,825 players.
	So that's not great.
	And as a result of this, the Assassin's Creed Twitter page decided to do exactly what you do if you're having a good day.
	And your game is doing great and everything is nice and successful, right?
	Which is you start to get into fights with Elon Musk and Grums himself.
	So this is in response to Hassan doing a paid ad for Assassin's Creed Shadows to come watch him play it on Twitch, I would assume.
	Does Hassan even play video games on Twitch or does he just sit there?
	Does he even sit there on Twitch or is it just an empty chair still?
	That's what I need to know.
	Those nuggies aren't going to eat themselves.
	Elon Musk responds, Hassan is a fraud.
	He's a sellout, actually.
	And then Assassin's Creed official Twitter account decides to be...
	You know when those brands decide that they're going to be nice and sassy on Twitter?
	They get nice and sassy at Elon Musk.
	And then when Grumms responds to them, they get sassy again.
	And that's how you know that we're not desperate.
	We're not butthurt.
	I'm not owned, alright?
	Okay? Brand account.
	I'm not owned.
	We're doing great.
	But the thing is...
	What's Metacritic looking like?
	Okay, critics loved it.
	The Irish Traveller, or whatever it was called.
	Irish Independent.
	A gypsy reviewing.
	They love it.
	They absolutely love it.
	But the Irish Independent gave it 100 out of 100.
	Perfect game.
	We got this, whoever these...
	We got this covered.
	Gave it 100 out of 100.
	Game Informer, 85. Out of 100, okay?
	Amazing game.
	Now, the best I've got in terms of actual people giving me experience of their time is that Samson, for some reason, has decided to give his money to Ubisoft.
	I have already whipped him for this, don't worry.
	And has spent 20 hours playing it.
	And so far, the best that he's given me is...
	It looks nice.
	It looks nice.
	The art direction's nice.
	Character models aren't very good, but it looks nice, and the art direction's good.
	And... It plays like Assassin's Creed, so that's kind of just fine.
	He said he would give it a nice 5 or 6 out of 10. That's generous.
	And he's not got to the part where you play Yasuke yet.
	But let's take a look at the user reviews if we want a better consensus.
	And it is, for a 5.9 mixed or average user score, as you would expect, straight down the middle.
	0s, 1s, and 2s, or 8, 9s, and 10s.
	That's it.
	Look at these.
	0, 9, 9, 3, 0, 10, 0, 9, 10. So it's either 1, 1, 3. You either love it or hate it, basically.
	Yeah, it's just, well, it's not just that you love it or hate it, it's that you're on one side of the aisle or the other with it, right?
	You have to love the game because it pissed off all of the anti-woke chuds, or you have to hate the game because it's woke.
	So partisan lines are now dictating game reviews.
	Wonderful. I'd just rather not play it at all.
	As some of the top two reviews...
	I just don't want to play video game.
	The thing is, there are plenty of things, by the sounds of it, to complain about with the game.
	And some of the Steam reviews, this one in particular...
	Seems to be going into a little bit more depth than the war that has broken out in Metacritic.
	Some of the Steam reviews are very, very well written.
	Particularly the ones that get voted for the top, like this one.
	I think this is a particularly good Steam review.
	This is one of the top two.
	Just saying, Microtransactions in a single-player game with $70 price tag.
	Why? Reasonable question.
	Assassin's Creed games have been doing this ever since Origins.
	Remember I showed you that thing about how they were...
	Discussing with shareholders how to extract as much money as possible from the game.
	Yep, there you go.
	Ubisoft themselves responded to this one, saying, in order to bribe the best visibility of our teams, we should strongly encourage to share your feedback on one of the following.
	Basically saying, do not put these reviews on Steam.
	This makes us look bad.
	Put it somewhere where we can control who can see this or not.
	Please, this makes us look terrible.
	This will get shared around.
	But, this is a good question.
	Why is it that one of the first things that you can find...
	Samson did this by accident, actually.
	He told me he just got into the game, accidentally hit the select button, and the first thing that pops up on his screen is this microtransaction store.
	Look how much there is that you can buy.
	In this damn thing.
	This is at the launch of the game.
	Yep. They've created stuff and deliberately paywalled it to go out when the game has launched.
	And it's all just like cosmetic skins.
	Oh, you get a magical horse.
	Oh, you get some silly eyes.
	You get some really cool armor that's cooler than all the base armor that we put in the normal game.
	With all of these sorts of microtransactions, they always look like they're marketed towards children because it's like, oh, you get a shiny sword.
	You get a horse that's a ghost.
	I mean, if you're an adult, this stuff's not going to appeal to you.
	You're not going to want to spend money on this stuff.
	Unless you really like the game.
	I think part of it is as well, obviously, you can buy resources in it.
	So you're able to buy resources that you can then use in the actual gameplay itself.
	So that's an incentive for people.
	If you're lazy, not necessarily a child, but if you're a lazy gamer...
	Or, as was one of the big problems with Odyssey, the game is intentionally set up to mean that if you're not buying the microtransactions, it's a huge grind, and you'll actually halve the time it takes to level up in Odyssey if you buy using real money.
	You're not buying a game, then, are you?
	You're buying, basically...
	Access to a slot machine of some kind, really.
	You're buying a resource extraction machine that's designed to funnel money.
	It's designed to drain money from you.
	But it's really scummy.
	It's basically the same thing.
	I mean, look at this.
	They do this in all of them, but if you don't feel like exploring the whole map and unlocking the map that way, like you do in...
	Lots of games.
	Like in Elden Ring, for instance, you have to find the map fragments, and then you open up the map to yourself, and it's a really great and rewarding bit of exploration in that game.
	Assassin's Creed, you can just buy it, spend $10, and get the full map for yourself.
	You don't even have to play the game anymore.
	You can just buy the game, and then you just keep spending more and more money until you win.
	The thing is, as well, the game's so simple.
	You're basically paying to get yourself out of the misery of playing it.
	It's like, buy our game, and you've got to pay to have shortcuts so you don't have to play it as much.
	That's a bad game, by definition.
	And it's something that's completely pervasive throughout lots of games.
	Which is why I'm just not interested in most games that come out these days, especially like AAA studio ones.
	Well, there's an incentive here to make a bad game because you can pay to skip the boring bits.
	And if you have to...
	Pay to skip it.
	It shouldn't have been made that way in the first place.
	No, I agree completely.
	And what else have we got?
	Well, of course, they say they've got 2 million people playing the game.
	I would assume that's across not just Steam, but all platforms.
	Apparently, it set some record except for Valhalla on the PlayStation Store, because Valhalla was the biggest release that they've ever had, because it was right in the middle of lockdown.
	So, of course, it was going to be.
	But it's not...
	Showing up to be that much of a hit.
	And this is probably due to all of the controversies.
	Ubisoft triumphantly announced a couple of days ago that 2 million players have already picked it up.
	Today it's been reported by VGC that in terms of sales revenue, it's achieved the second biggest launch in the series behind Valhalla.
	By being available on Steam on day one, it's also now the leading game in the series on Valve's platform.
	Assassin's Creed Shadow Steam sales also pale in comparison, though, to some of 2025's true mega-hits.
	Three days after launch, Shadows has apparently sold 310,000 copies.
	In a similar timeframe, Split Fiction, not heard of it, shifted 882,500 units, and the gargantuan Monster Hunter's version of the game.
	I had to double-check this number with Samson because he's been playing that recently.
	I needed to check this because this just didn't sound like a real number for a game like this.
	Monster Hunter's hugely popular.
	I need to actually give it a go myself.
	Sold almost 10 times better than Shadows, with 3.7 million units sold.
	I'm not surprised.
	It's a popular, much-beloved franchise.
	It is huge, but I've just never played it, so I just hear that and I go, okay, maybe I should give it a go.
	A few of my friends play Monster Hunter quite a lot, but I've never really got...
	Samson is shaking his fist at me for some reason.
	Oh, he's giving me a thumbs up.
	Oh, okay.
	Have you played Monster Hunter World?
	Was that the one that came before?
	I think so.
	I can't remember.
	I only played it for about five hours, and then...
	I played something else.
	I mean, it does look kind of awesome.
	It looks like you're exploring a massive world where every encounter is a boss fight with a gigantic dinosaur monster.
	Sounds a lot more interesting than any Assassin's Creed game, if I'm honest.
	But Ubisoft are having to send out emails saying, like, listen, listen, don't compare it to Valhalla, okay?
	Don't compare it to Valhalla.
	We're doing great.
	Everything is fine and perfect.
	But also, the founding...
	Guilemot family, who founded Ubisoft, are currently, because of all of the high-profile flops, layoffs, studio closers, and game cancellations in the run-up, are currently in talks with Tencent.
	To sell it to the Chinese.
	And other investors on a buyout deal to let it preserve control of the company's intellectual property, but they need some cash revenue coming in.
	They need some cash flow.
	And that's probably because, one of the things that would spur them along to do all the microtransactions as well, we don't have a...
	Clear, perfect idea of how much the game cost to make, but we do know that the delays that were started in 2024 cost an extra 20 million euros, and so the estimated budget of the game overall is between 250 to 350 million dollars.
	That's pretty big.
	That's a lot of money.
	I hope they're losing a lot.
	That's a lot of money to have to make back as well.
	Again, all of the high-profile controversies, all the marketing that goes into it, that's going to add up as well.
	And you wonder, how does a game end up costing that much?
	How does a game end up costing that much?
	Well, I've got an idea.
	Bloat. Massive amounts of bloat.
	We won't sit through the full thing, but this is not a joke.
	This is the credit sequence for Assassin's Creed Shadows, and it is two hours long.
	This is actually the most interesting part of the game.
	It certainly is, especially when you get to the Indian branch and see how much of it was made there.
	But seriously, do you need that many people developing the game, most of whom it's going to be not necessary?
	And then, what's this?
	Is this just almost half an hour of credits dedicated to all rights reserved credits here?
	20 minutes of it.
	Good god.
	But you shouldn't have to have two hours of credits for your video game when, for instance, Rockstar is able to make GTA with, what, a thousand staff members?
	Yeah, there are some fantastic games that have been made by a handful of people.
	There are games that I play.
	Like, Manalords, for example, was made by one guy.
	I'm pretty sure that that has had more concurrent players on launch than Assassin's Creed did as well.
	Guess how many employees FromSoftware has?
	250. 423.
	Okay. I was giving them too much credit there, but it's only because I love them.
	That's it.
	And they were able to make Elden Ring, Sekiro, Bloodborne...
	Presumably those older games when they had a smaller studio as well, which are all critically acclaimed.
	They've been given the video game mandate of heaven though, haven't they?
	In that they just unequivocally make great stuff.
	I can't think of a bad FromSoftware game.
	Whereas as far as I'm aware, right, Ubisoft development team, Assassin's Creed, I'm just going to see how many.
	Ubisoft, how many are there?
	How many employed?
	Because I think it's in possibly tens of thousands.
	Okay. Initially had around 2,000 developers working on Assassin's Creed with plans to increase this to around 2,800 by reallocating personnel from other franchises.
	It's too many.
	You don't need that many to make a game, especially when it causes bloat, it causes a lack of vision.
	If you have a smaller, tighter team, you can make smaller, better games.
	They don't even necessarily need to be that much smaller, as From Software showed with Elden Ring.
	But yeah, still...
	Glad it's flopping.
	Well, I'm glad it's causing so much division.
	It probably will turn out to be a financial flop, or at least not a mega smash like they're hoping for.
	Maybe they're hoping that the microtransactions will make up any shortfall in the profits, but don't buy it.
	Got a few rumble chats.
	There we go.
	Occupant42, anyone know how many people Notch had helping him develop Minecraft?
	Wasn't it just him?
	I don't know, actually.
	That's a random name.
	The first Ass Creed was made by fewer than 100 people.
	Same thing for every single one of those classic games from the 2000s.
	Also, Harry on Should Cast Wet.
	I mean, if you have me on, I'd happily go on.
	It was interesting because I actually caught some of his Assassin's Creed shadow because I was on a proper horror show stream.
	Somebody told me that he'd actually watched.
	Some of the video that we did on stream, so I managed to catch him watching the Super Chats near the end.
	So that was really interesting.
	I was in the chat myself, but I got lost in the...
	got lost in the flush.
	Scanlines. Arcades used to make games difficult to get you to pay more for extra lives.
	Now we pay more to skip the boring padding because we have lives.
	Yeah. Yeah, certainly with something like this, the whole point of wanting a game to be set in feudal Japan is that you can imagine yourself in the setting, in the shoes of that character.
	This may be an out-of-date take, but when I...
	Play a game or watch a film or a TV series about another culture.
	I don't necessarily need a white man insert to be able to be interested in it.
	I didn't need it to be a white man insert in Sekiro to enjoy it.
	No, and in fact, lots of things.
	I prefer it to be authentic to itself and speak of reality.
	When I go back and play GTA San Andreas, it's refreshing to be like, wow, I really feel like a drug addict, and I really feel like a drug dealer right now.
	I'm a scumbag.
	So anyway, I'm going to go to KFC.
	It's clucking bell in those games, actually.
	That's true, actually, yeah.
	You can tell they were made by Brits, can't you?
	With little jokes like that.
	Anyway. So, you might have heard about the series Adolescence, which, if you live in Britain, it would be impossible not to.
	Everyone's talking about it, and it's annoying.
	And people who are talking about it, such as Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, he's apparently worried about toxic masculinity after he watched a drama on Netflix.
	Okay. Starmer, I don't think you have anything to worry about regarding masculinity.
	So it deals with things like toxic masculinity, knife crime, online radicalisation and Andrew Tate.
	All of the favourites of the British establishment.
	All, of course, excuses to regulate perfectly legitimate online activity.
	And it's all just a smokescreen for further government control of the internet.
	You've not watched it, have you?
	Oh, God, no.
	Because I have had random people I've encountered in my day-to-day life raving about it to me, but all they're actually talking about is how technically impressive it is that it's all apparently shot like it's in one big long take each episode, which, you know, fair play.
	Yeah, I mean, it can be badly...
	The messaging can be bad and the production can be good.
	This is possible.
	That's the funny thing, is when I've been talking to normies, all they care about is talking about the fancy production of it.
	The message isn't getting through.
	It's big and shiny, therefore how can it be bad?
	Yeah, look at the jangling keys!
	Look at them jangle!
	Ooh! It's basically that, isn't it?
	It's insulting to your intelligence to enjoy that sort of thing.
	If I see a sleek production now, I'm so programmed by the way the media is, I just assume I'm going to hate it.
	It's actually surprising when something looks good and I like it.
	Which sounds very spiteful.
	My favourite one take is still the one at the end of that episode at True Detective.
	Oh, that's...
	Brilliant, isn't it?
	Episode 4. Yes, you're correct.
	That's one of the ones that I really appreciate.
	But the show's great despite that as well.
	Yeah, the whole show is fantastic.
	It doesn't need to have the one-shot for it to be an amazing show.
	That is very true.
	And let's remind ourselves of the original case that this show is based on.
	It was a black adult who stabbed a 15-year-old girl.
	And this has been changed to a young teen boy, because of course it is, because obviously they're not going to present the reality, because they're not going to show black people as violent criminals, because that's never shown for some reason, despite the statistics on it, as the reality of the situation.
	And if you point this out, I found this article, you are racist, and excuse a little tangent here, because I just couldn't believe it.
	Pointing to the real-life case that part of it's based on and saying, why have you made him white and not kept him black, is racist.
	Apparently so.
	Says, I thought we're all about representation.
	Adolescents, Netflix's new hit show that has the nation in a chokehold.
	What doesn't come to my mind, however, is an agenda to demonise white British boys and men.
	Well, you've not been paying attention to British politics for the past 30 years.
	And yet, despite the series' growing critical acclaim, countless social media users are in uproar over the series' depiction of a very young white male murder suspect, with some even stating it should have been a black boy instead.
	The series' true message of preventing gender-based youth violence is at risk of being hijacked by reactionary rhetoric.
	At no point in this, by the way, was it mentioned that the original case that it's based on, the true story, Was presented that way.
	It's just making them sound like racist cranks.
	And why was this?
	You might ask because this was the person who wrote it.
	No ethnic interest whatsoever in misrepresenting reality there.
	And it all comes at the same time as the UK's Online Safety Act takes effect, which is interesting because the people who...
	Made the show.
	We're invited into Parliament, which is weird.
	It's kind of like a seal of approval for, you made good propaganda, come and join us in our cesspit of evil.
	It's almost like it was made in tandem with this legislation.
	Brings to mind the phrase manufactured consent, doesn't it?
	But there we go.
	And what I am going to talk about is the Lotus Eaters merch, because unlike...
	That show, that Netflix show, we don't have governments batting for us.
	We don't have people out there supporting us, other than you, dear viewer, because we're entirely audience-supported, and we rely on you to sign up to our website to support us.
	You get lots of premium content in return, and also buying our merch.
	We have lots of nice t-shirts for sale, because Islander has sold out.
	Can't speak, as usual.
	And, yeah.
	That's all you've got left.
	But they are cool t-shirts.
	I like a nice simple t-shirt with just a stylised logo.
	Check them out if you want to support us, get something in return.
	Other than that, you can sign up to the website.
	But with all of that out of the way, all of this huffing and puffing about how great this show is has made it across the pond.
	To America, here's NBC News saying how toxic masculinity, Andrew Tate, and the online manosphere inspired Netflix's adolescence.
	No, actually, it didn't.
	The case of a black man murdering a teenage girl did.
	I mean, he did say it was based on two cases, and that's one of them.
	I don't know if we know what the other one was, so maybe it was some incel rage Andrew Tate fan murdering somebody.
	As is common in London.
	That's the people doing the knife crime.
	All those drill rappers are just really frustrated about their lack of access to women, apparently.
	And they're all white English as well.
	That's definitely true.
	And they definitely don't wear balaclavas and have those little effeminate man bags that they carry around with them.
	Yeah, we know who's doing the knife crime.
	It's not white people.
	You've actually looked into the statistics on this.
	I have, yes.
	Shockingly similar to the American statistics as well.
	Yeah, despite being 14% of London's population, I believe it was over 60% of both knife attacks and gun murders.
	Or the other way around, knife attacks and something like that.
	But either way, gun crime and knife crime is majority.
	You posted about this, so I'm just going to search up despite under your name.
	I should do it.
	It will come up, actually.
	So yes, it's also gone around Europe as well.
	Here's Euronews talking about it.
	And so lots of other governments and countries have clocked on to the fact that, hey, this is a good way of propagandising our population.
	We've done quite a few despite tweets, actually.
	You're saying that like you're surprised.
	Yeah, you've got, despite making up 0.05% of the UK population, Albanians make up 1.6% of all prisoners.
	Yeah. Interesting.
	32 times overrepresented, if I remember off the top of my head.
	Exactly. Hey!
	That's my own statistic, so no wonder I can remember it.
	But anyway, my despite statistics aside...
	This is something from The Guardian.
	From the police to the Prime Minister.
	So it's also being paraded around the police as well.
	They're trying to target toxic masculinity.
	I found it, by the way.
	Okay, tell me.
	Black Londoners make up just 13% of the population but are responsible for 61% of knife murders and 63% of gun crimes.
	Okay, so it's that way round.
	I think it's important to always mention with these things as well that the victims of that will always be disproportionately black themselves.
	Overrepresented on both perpetrator and victim.
	So just a completely unnecessary tragedy going on in our capital city every day.
	Funny thing is, when I posted that, I did have some black Londoners saying, thank you for sharing this.
	You know, dealing with the problem is admitting it.
	And they were in a very, very small minority of people.
	Most people say, that's racist.
	It's government crime statistics.
	I'm sorry.
	But anyway, yes, the police have seen it as well.
	And also...
	Elon Musk has been blasted for spreading concerning misinformation about the show.
	What is this concerning misinformation?
	Well, I think Ian Miles Chungus posted something saying it's basically an anti-white piece.
	Actually, for once, he's saying something that I agree with.
	I'm shocked that Ian Miles Chungus could even bring himself to type out anti-white.
	I know, yeah.
	And then one of Elon's Indians said wow in response to it.
	And that's the extent of it.
	So... Is that just what we're assuming now?
	Well, obviously...
	He's got a farm of Indians using his Twitter account.
	Of course he does.
	Yeah, no, I know.
	There's been lots of speculation that some of the turns of phrase are sort of suggesting that there's an...
	The grammar has not been fantastic if English is your native language.
	I mean, it's not to say Elon isn't potentially illiterate.
	There is that possibility.
	He might be drunk or on ketamine.
	That's true as well.
	But yes, there's also this, that MPs were calling for action against toxic masculinity.
	What a concept that you created yourselves.
	We need action against this.
	What are we going to do?
	If you're over a certain size of musculature, you pay extra taxes.
	I don't know.
	I'm screwed.
	I'm not.
	I can't farm taxes out of this body.
	I'm running it in just so that I don't pay additional tax in the future, out of spite.
	Yeah, that's your excuse.
	Any old excuse, really.
	And there's even this, where video games can't escape their role in the radicalisation of young men.
	The Guardian's gone so far left that they've become the Christian right in the 90s.
	We've wrapped around to Jack Thompson.
	Yeah, I don't think it's violent video games.
	No. I don't think the urban youths are playing...
	I don't know.
	I'm trying to think of a violent video game now.
	Call of Duty.
	Assassin's Creed Shadows.
	Well, they might be playing that.
	They might be playing that, yeah.
	Their target demographic, the protagonist.
	So yes, there's been ridiculous about it.
	And The Guardian's also been talking about this.
	Terrifying truth.
	Smartphones are poison for young boys' minds.
	Girls apparently unaffected, but I do think that children shouldn't be allowed smartphones until they're old enough to have the responsibility of having the ability to access the internet.
	And people are giving them to them far too young.
	I agree with that.
	And I think that that's down to the parents being responsible.
	It's not for the government to decide these sorts of things.
	But maybe schools could be a bit harsher on it.
	Who knows?
	I had to hand my phone in.
	When, you know, I had a big brick phone that you couldn't really do anything at all, and I had to hand it in at the reception desk in primary school.
	This is when I was like 11, about to leave.
	I think that's reasonable, given the environment, you don't want to be distracted by things.
	I think the school should have the right to be able to say, these are the rules, stick by them.
	But back then, no one texted or called me except my own mum, so...
	It's not going to be distracting me at school.
	It's not exactly as bad as that other school that we were looking at last week, was it?
	That's true.
	So, speaking of schools, actually, schools are giving children anti-misogyny lessons, apparently.
	Oh, no, this is...
	There we go, that's what I was looking for.
	I'm sorry, is this basically like they're finally implementing that old feminist tagline of they said, we need to teach men not to rape?
	Or stab, apparently.
	Or be an incel, or watch Andrew Tate.
	Or be a boy.
	Or be a man, as in grow up to be one.
	Because the whole point of the toxic masculinity is it's just a way of demonising masculinity.
	Yeah, well, it's such a sort of ill-defined term that anything that's basically associated with men is now made bad.
	Well, here's what it is.
	Anything that upsets hormonal women is toxic masculinity.
	Okay, long walks and waking up early.
	Yeah, productivity, ambitions.
	A slightly curt message.
	Having a social life.
	Sorry, enough of us whinging.
	There's also this, schools to give boys anti-misogyny lessons to stop toxic masculinity in wake of Netflix hit adolescence.
	So it's explicitly cited as the reason.
	And I've been provided with some of the things that have been presented to kids.
	So, due to the response from schools and professionals regarding the recent Netflix miniseries called Adolescence, we have created this fact sheet for awareness about the content that was raised during the show relating to incels, misogyny, and the manosphere.
	And now, allow me to point something out.
	If you're talking about children, them being involuntarily celibate is sort of a good thing.
	I hate to break it to you, but that's not something they should necessarily be doing if they...
	Particularly young.
	If you're teaching a class of 10 and 11 year olds, incel is not the appropriate insult to throw at them.
	Unless you're in Liverpool, maybe.
	Yeah, they're different standards.
	So it says Manosphere.
	The Manosphere is a collection of website, blogs and online forums promoting toxic masculinity, misogyny and opposition to feminism.
	It's also equating all of those things.
	I'm not necessarily a misogynist, but I am opposed to feminism.
	I would like to think of myself as non-toxic, but apparently now if you're opposed to feminism, you're all of those things and more.
	What they're basically saying is you're one step away from being a murderer.
	Pretty much.
	While the Manosphere used to be limited to dark corners of forum websites like Reddit and 4chan, which is...
	You think Redditors were participating in the Manosphere?
	You do realise how left-wing they are.
	But anyway, even 4chan's getting left-wing these days.
	It's terrible.
	It's now permeated regular social media with Manosphere commentary present and popular on Instagram and TikTok.
	Let me tell you that the Manosphere is more diverse than even Britain.
	There's a lot of swarthy gentlemen in it.
	It's not necessarily a white person phenomenon.
	And in fact, many of the incels are surprisingly diverse.
	I spoke to one person who was a researcher, a psychologist, looking at them.
	And he said that black men and Indian men were massively overrepresented in the incel community.
	And lots of other minorities as well.
	Also, the manosphere is itself, again, an incredibly broad term, where there are loads of different people with different views giving different kinds of advice.
	Yeah, you get pickup artists as well.
	You also get men on forums who are saying, ah, my relationship's not going that great, I've been drifting away from my wife.
	Can you guys help me figure out how to reconnect with her a bit?
	You mean there's some nuance here, Mike?
	I know, right?
	I know.
	And some of them are also just young men going, I need to learn how to talk to women.
	Is there any way that you can give me some advice on how to talk to women?
	Where they're not just saying, just pick her up and steal her.
	They're saying, here, here's how you can talk to women.
	It can be a supportive atmosphere for a lot of young men who society has otherwise abandoned.
	Case in point.
	There certainly are some unsavoury figures in that domain, but there is also legitimate stuff, as you rightly point out.
	They go on to toxic masculinity here.
	Toxic masculinity is a term that refers to gender stereotypes associated with how a man should act.
	Some of these stereotypes say that men can't cry, or they're expected to provide for their family.
	Sorry, sorry.
	It's toxically masculine to provide for your family.
	Shut up.
	Who put that expectation on us in the first place?
	Biology. Women.
	Do you think a woman's gonna respect you if you're a leech to the household?
	I'm sorry.
	Give it a try if you want.
	You, if you're a man, doubt it, but if you're a man who wrote this fact sheet, tell your wife.
	Tell your wife.
	You know what?
	You know, you are the girl boss.
	You wear the pants in this family.
	You're right.
	I'm gonna quit my job.
	I'm gonna stay at home and look after the kids.
	You can be the breadwinner.
	See how long it lasts.
	See how long it lasts.
	Simple as.
	Also, the reality is that you see all of those posts about men saying, well, you know how we're told about opening up to our girlfriends or whatever?
	Then I opened up to her and I cried and now she doesn't want to see me anymore.
	Now she doesn't respect me.
	Many such cases.
	And it's not to say that you can't have an emotional life, but people rely on you to be strong.
	And it's not that you need to be emotionally shallow and not acknowledge your emotions.
	Actually, I think it's very important to do that and to be in touch with them.
	But also, you've got to be strong enough that when it's necessary, you can ignore them and get on with the task at hand.
	Because that's what is expected of men.
	Because it's biological.
	They go, ew, that's gross.
	Because it's not a behaviour of a high-status man.
	And people are attracted to signs of people who are high status.
	That's biologically programmed into you.
	Also, you can habituate yourself into depressive behaviours.
	If you ruminate too much on negative emotions, those negative emotions will become the primary drivers of your actions.
	Whereas if you try to work past them, and this is something you can do with many things, you can just try and be productive, try and work on a goal, go to the gym, lots of different things.
	That will habituate you into more positive behaviours which will reflect on your mental state.
	Yeah. Here's a little trick for you.
	Just pretend you don't have the problems and...
	Tackle life with a fresh face, and you'll be surprised how much just a slight change in mindset helps.
	It's helped me, you know, even with all of my psychological expertise, sometimes simple tricks like that are the best.
	I thought you were going to say, even with all my psychological problems.
	I'm surprisingly psychologically healthy, despite...
	You were pretty low on the dark triads when everybody did them.
	And when I did the Big Five as well, my neuroticism was quite low.
	The only thing that I did poorly on is I'm quick to anger, which, given this job, I mean...
	I've seen it happen before.
	He's a terrifying man.
	It just snaps.
	Don't mention pay in front of him.
	These kinds of stereotypes are harmful to men and boys' mental health.
	This is because they might feel like they have to keep their feelings to themselves, struggle to talk about their struggles, or like they can't ask for help.
	Not necessarily, but it's just talking about an ideal.
	If you fail to live up to the ideal, it's not the end of the world.
	But you can't pretend that there's not an ideal, because there is, and everyone has it.
	Misogyny is a form of online hate that targets women and girls.
	It's promoted in different communities online where influencers promote a narrative that women should be treated as less than men.
	Okay. And then it goes on to talk about incels and Andrew Tate.
	This was interesting to me.
	He believes that women should belong to men.
	Men shouldn't...
	They shouldn't drive and shouldn't leave the house.
	Where do you get that belief from?
	Is that an Islamic belief or is that a misogynistic belief?
	He has also said women should bear responsibility for their own sexual assault.
	He has said stuff like that.
	I don't know how serious you should take him but he is a scumbag.
	I mean, I don't like the guy.
	He has spoken out in favour of Russell Brand.
	Is that really the thing that they go to to condemn him?
	Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and the Nazis questioning whether they were really the bad guys in World War II.
	I mean, I've seen his tweets talking about that.
	That is true, but I think there are better things to condemn him for, like being a pimp.
	Yeah. That's probably better.
	It even suits the theme of what you're saying here more, rather than putting in left-wing talking points.
	Yeah, rather than where he just trolls and stirs shit on Twitter.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And then there's more.
	It talks about the red pill.
	Looks maxing!
	Yeah. No!
	Also, keep mewing, brothers.
	You know your title, Sigma Sisson.
	Apparently that was toxic masculinity, because alphas, betas, and sigmas are now, that's an incel term.
	Well, that just goes to further prove that Harry Sisson's our guy.
	He's our top guy.
	He's an inside agent.
	Sorry, it's now common that the term maxing is now applied to things, ironically, i.e.
	If you get your 10,000 steps in, you're walk-maxing.
	So what's wrong with looks-maxing?
	You're just trying to be attractive.
	While this term may have originated in the incel community, it is often used ironically in ways entirely unrelated to incel.
	Okay, so what's the point?
	Who cares about any of this?
	Also, the red pill emoji mentioned in Netflix's adolescence is indeed a reference to the 1990 film The Matrix, although it has now become incredibly convoluted and warped by the manosphere.
	What? No, it hasn't.
	It's not associated with the manosphere.
	It's associated with politics.
	To be fair, I think red pill...
	It does come from Manosphere, potentially, originally.
	I don't know if it...
	Yeah, but it's used sort of ubiquitously by most of the online right now.
	Yes, that's true.
	It's not specific to that.
	It's just about being aware of the way the world works, isn't it?
	That's what it's meant to mean.
	I hear people talk about red pill influencers, and I still know that they're basically talking about, like, pickup artists or people in the Manosphere.
	Yeah, and then they show the emojis and explain what they mean.
	A dynamite which refers to an exploding red pill means that someone is an incel.
	Some of these are like brass-eye level misunderstandings.
	Incels have long used a coffee cup emoji to express disdain for women, often on its own or with the word women.
	Have you seen that meme?
	The Team Fortress 2 meme?
	I think so, yeah.
	Where they go, ah, women, and then sip the coffee.
	Are they really upset?
	Does this need to be on a fact sheet?
	There are a bunch of...
	All these different hearts mean different things.
	Apparently it's to do with your opinions on sex for some reason.
	I've never come across this.
	Maybe it is.
	I'm 30 this year, so I don't know what young kids are doing.
	How do they develop this incredibly complex code?
	Some of these are correct, like the aubergine.
	They've understood that one.
	The peach.
	And the water and the peach and things like that.
	But some of these are very convoluted.
	Is that a brain for Oros?
	I don't know.
	But the one that made me laugh was the eyes used when sending or receiving news.
	Which is not true at all.
	From my...
	I don't really use emojis because I'm an adult.
	But when I've seen them used...
	The eyes are like, ooh, this is awkward.
	You're like looking side to side.
	Just like, ooh, what's gonna happen?
	There's something about to go down.
	It's not anything to do with that.
	Oh, I don't care what any of these are supposed to mean from this fact sheet.
	Also, like, a magic wand is used to refer to sexual activity.
	Is it?
	I don't know.
	Maybe this is also the eyes with that in the middle.
	A response that means it is what it is, apparently.
	Which is not true.
	I've seen people respond with that to surprising news.
	It's a way of saying, what?
	But who cares?
	Also, the hourglass used when someone has an hourglass body shape.
	I use it to signify one of my friends is taking a long time to get ready and I'm annoyed that I'm waiting.
	It's like, come on.
	Normally accompanied with a snail.
	I know I said I don't use them, but only ironically to annoy people.
	Which is allowed.
	But yeah, we get the gist of this.
	This is so out of touch.
	It's obviously just propaganda.
	It's pathetic.
	And I can tell you, it's going to be a one-hour special class that they get instead of form time at school or something.
	Everybody's going to be bored.
	Everybody will be laughing at this.
	Yeah, and I think the actual reality of this is it's going to have more of a reaction than people actually listening to it because they're children, right?
	Anyone who's susceptible to any of the things they're worried about is going to have this stuff approach them and they're going to find it hilarious and ridiculous because they know what these things mean because they are the generation that's trying to be understood.
	And now Toby Young actually had a pretty good perspective on this.
	He's saying, I think one of the reasons it's met the series, that is...
	What's it called?
	Adolescents. It's been met with a course of approval by the mainstream media is that because it's just repeating back to the liberal metropolitan elite what they already think about knife crime and then they use it in a loop as citing it as evidence.
	Like there's this thing and he points out that Keir Starmer accidentally with a slip of the tongue referred to it as a documentary and I think that that's how they view it, isn't it?
	That this is actually...
	Evidence that this is the way the world works when actually it's not look at your own crime data look at the ethnicities responsible and You'll have a more reasonable view and speaking of a reasonable view If you're a young boy watching this is a better way of looking at what a man should be doing Biology has endowed you with a role in society.
	It is basically Your foremost role is to be able to protect people, to be able to defend them because, as you may be aware, your physical prowess is the determining factor by how social hierarchies are determined in men.
	This has been the case forever and will never go away because it's so entrenched in our biology.
	You should be able to provide for your family, which you create through procreation.
	And the idea is, you have a family, you provide for them, you are stable, you're able to protect them, and then there are lots of virtues, like courage, honour, resolution, industry, as in you are productive, you are self-reliant, and you've mastered the things that you put your mind to.
	This is a much healthier way of looking at male psychology, I think, and I much prefer this because it basically gives people a purpose that is pro-social and good, and doesn't...
	Deny the biological realities of how men operate and function.
	And this would do a lot better, actually, if you wanted to guide boys and young men off of the straight and narrow into a healthy life.
	But a female schoolteacher might tut at you.
	Yeah, well, funnily enough, you don't exist for the approval of female schoolteachers, and in many ways them henpecking you only makes you stronger.
	Alright then, have we got any video comments, Samson?
	And we've also got a rumble rant for you.
	Okay. Glee777 says, It's true, I've been radicalised by Thomas the Tank Engine.
	Well, to be fair, the Reverend Audrey was quite a radical, even in his day.
	I mean, I like the lesson that you don't even talk to the trucks.
	Like those underclass types, you don't even talk to them.
	See, I always thought that you were trying to emulate the fat controller.
	Ah, well.
	I've been going for his body type.
	I've just been trying to emulate his wealth.
	Yeah, spirit and body as well.
	I like his top hat as well.
	Very Victorian.
	Yes.
	I'm trying to read what it says backwards.
	Robo-waifus like the Islander 3. Hey, there you go.
	Very glad to hear it.
	I'm looking forward to our future robot dystopia now because they're all going to be fans of Islander magazine.
	This is great.
	Great news.
	You've saved us.
	Josh is secretly hoping for his robo-waifu.
	At least she'll do the dishes.
	She's... I'm sorry.
	I can't hear anything, but it's a nice little chipmunk.
	Is there any audio for this one, Samson?
	Okay, there's no audio for this.
	Yeah, that's lovely.
	Like the video.
	Look at that thing.
	That's so cute.
	The urge to pet is overwhelming.
	It's like a grey squirrel, but better.
	Cuter. Less invasive.
	Well, probably would be very invasive, but still.
	That was very sweet.
	Thank you, Jen Habit.
	I needed that.
	That was a knife palate cleanser.
	There we go.
	I think that's all of the video comments.
	Okay, so, George Happ says, While the so-called war plan might not be final, Trump should be aware of the war hawks in his administration, especially when it comes to a certain country in the Middle East.
	I have no idea what you're on about.
	Also, I think Trump probably shares their views on that country.
	Yeah, I think, if anything, the policy coming out of the White House is Israel first, America second, but hey.
	I wouldn't necessarily say that, but to be fair, I'm not.
	I mean, I know that Trump has said that Israel should finish it up as quickly as possible with Gaza.
	It's like a dad who's just walked in on his son and his girlfriend, just like, oh, just finish up.
	Get it over with.
	And then he can build a, basically, New Vegas strip where Gaza was.
	Horrifying. Thomas Howell says Trump is burdened by what has been.
	Vance is not.
	That is true.
	And I suppose I'm going to read out this name.
	Josh Firm, lover of married women and bane of single mothers.
	If by that you mean I like women to be married and don't approve of single motherhood in the abstract, sure.
	But I have never...
	Had any altercations with married women before?
	Altercations? Got into a fight with them in the street?
	That's the wrong word.
	I've never punched a married woman.
	Only the unmarried, apparently.
	I've never punched a woman before.
	He walks past women standing by themselves with prams in the street and he's overcome with rage and he must beat them.
	Well, to be fair, I am because I'm thinking to myself, I'm paying for this.
	Fair. Tim Pool argues these plans were leaked on purpose to a journalist thinking they would write an article about it and in the process explain to the masses about who's getting bombed so the American people know it's not some random act of aggression by America.
	It's possible, but I don't think it's likely.
	That's a very roundabout way of getting that information out to the people.
	Lord Inquisitor Hector Rex says Ubisoft has allegedly been caught inflating player numbers in Assassin's Creed shadows.
	I mean, they only said that they had two million players, which doesn't seem to match up with the Steam sales, or probably the PlayStation sales, or the Xbox sales, so it seems like they just pulled that number out of their arse.
	You were a Shadow's denialist.
	Perhaps I am.
	I better not visit Germany any time soon.
	Geordie Swordsman says, Sure would be a shame if anyone were to mention the cheat engine tables that let you unlock the entire MTX store in Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla.
	I hope nobody would be so awful as to say they're called Inventory Editor.
	That would just be terrible.
	Not that I'm saying that you should steal it.
	It would be really terrible if you heard about Inventory Editor, wouldn't it?
	It would be really terrible, inventory editor.
	Hear, hear.
	And that's a very good attitude.
	Yeah, some fuzzy toaster.
	Assassin's Creed peaked as a series with black flag.
	Microtransactions are really buggering up the games industry.
	It's not that they exist.
	It's that incentivizing in-game purchases shouldn't be a thing.
	Cosmetics only.
	Remember when Oblivion Horse Armor was an outrage?
	Yeah, Oblivion Horse Armor really started this whole thing.
	But yeah.
	Todd, it all comes down to you.
	Basically, developing the game and the gameplay to incentivize in-game purchases is one of the most scummy business practices I've ever seen in my life.
	And why you should honestly just boycott any game that gets involved in that kind of business practice.
	I always avoid it.
	On a matter of principle as well.
	Samson, by the way.
	Yeah, good point actually.
	Boo. Everyone boo.
	Everyone boo Samson.
	No, don't boo Samson.
	He's doing a very good job.
	So... North FC Zuma says, Starmer now has a favourite TV show.
	That's true.
	I have watched and approved of current media.
	And then finally, Justin B says, I used to teach English.
	Do not use grammar structure as any indication of ethnicity.
	I actually had one English child argue that saying, Twas bare good was appropriate grammar for a CV.
	I take it it was more of an urban environment that you were in.
	Twas bare good.
	Were they trying to get a little bit of the old Renaissance poems in there or something?
	I got told off in school for using too many 19th century words.
	It's like, no one will understand you, Josh.
	That was the school system beating you down.
	Imagine how toxicly masculine you could be right now.
	They had their boot on your neck.
	No wonder you ended up the way you are.
	Going to be Victorian maxing soon enough.
	Maxing? Oh my goodness.
	Oh no!
	We've got an incel over here, folks.
	Anyway, that's all we've got time for today, folks.
	Thank you very much for joining us.
	We'll be back again tomorrow at the usual time.
	So see you then.

▲