Controversial Fake News Law, Shane Dawson, Ace Family Backlash, Harvard’s Huge Ruling, & More


– Welcome back to the
Philip DeFranco show, I’m Nikita Dragun and lets
just jump into it, bitch. I’m charging extra for that one. Honestly, that one was so good. – Yet another PDS host I’m
having to fire, Nikita Dragun. There just weren’t enough
controversies around her. That said, despite Nikita’s firing if you’d like to listen
to our brand new podcast and conversation together
on, A Conversation With. You can listen to it
using the audio platform of your choice using that
anchor link down below. Or you can watch it on,
YouTube.com/AConvoWith Where I just, before actually
uploading this video, uploaded the video
there, which by the way, by the time this video goes up, I think we’re about to
pass 100,000 subscribers, so thank you. But yeah, been doing
these every Wednesdays, going to keep doing it. I love it. And this one with Nikita
was really interesting because I think no one would
expect me to invite her on, but I think that’s also
exactly why I did it, right. A new day, new people, new
conversations, new view points. But with all of that said, buckle up, hit that like button and
let’s just jump into it. And the first thing we’re going to talk about today is Harvard. A college, that of course, was
made popular by Daniel Conn, which is a reference
maybe four of you get. Not speaking to the
right crowd on that one, but we are actually talking about Harvard. As you might remember, we’ve
covered it on the show. There’s this lawsuit that says that Harvard discriminated
against Asian-American applicants We actually did a deep dive
on this back in December, if you wanna watch the full details, I’ll link to it down below. But to give you a quick summary, this lawsuit was brought
in 2014 by a group called Students for Fair Admissions. And it claimed that Harvard
was unfairly weighing race, when it came to the
university’s admissions process. By basically saying that they had used racial
balancing techniques to set a quota for different minorities. With the SFFA then alleging that Asian-American
applicants were being forced to meet higher standards. And that because they argued
that Asian-American students were consistently performing
better academically than other minority races. But when they looked at
the racial breakdowns between Harvard’s freshmen
classes for different years, they claimed that the percentage of admitted students from
different racial groups was about the same each year. That being around 20% Asian-American, 15% African-American, 12% Latino and the other rough half
of students being white. They also accused Harvard of
stereotyping Asian students in the university’s
personal rating system, which includes aspects like
the applicant’s background and their character. They claimed admissions officer’s had used stereotypical language
describing them as quiet, bland, or not exciting. And so ultimately they were asking Harvard to stop looking at race in
the admission’s process. Now on the other side of this, you had Harvard defending itself, saying that while it
took race into account, it was only one of
about 200 other factors. Some of those including
class year, gender, SAT, ACT scores, GPA, also intended career and whether or not your parents went to an ivy league school. And with all of that said
you had people saying that this could be a landmark case because the SFFA was essentially calling for an end to affirmative action. And so, the reason we’re
talking about this today is that a judge has now rejected
the SFFA’s claim, saying, the Court finds no persuasive
documentary evidence of any racial animus or conscious prejudice
against Asian-Americans. The judge also saying that the university shows commitment to recruiting who are, quote, exceptional across multiple dimensions and concluded the Court will not dismantle a very fine admissions program that passes constitutional muster solely because it could do better. With judge Allison Burroughs then saying that the university only ever
used race as a plus factor. Alright, so essentially
saying it only considered race to help students, not hurt them. You also had Burroughs
throwing out the claims of stereotyping in the
personal ratings section. Saying that she found no evidence that the admissions officer’s had looked at asian students
differently than other races. Adding that students from
multiple races had been referred to as quiet, shy, or understated. So all of that now means
that Harvard can continue to consider race to build diverse classes. But, of course, while Burroughs did note that Harvard’s admission
process isn’t perfect, perhaps the biggest conclusion that Burroughs reached was that race-neutral alternatives
are not sufficient. And in fact she says that race-conscious
admissions are actually needed to ensure diversity at Harvard. She rejected ideas, like Harvard admitting every
applicant with a perfect GPA, saying that the university would have to expand it’s freshmen
class by 400% each year, and reject every student
without a perfect GPA, regardless of athletic, extracurricular, or other academic achievements,
or life experiences. She was also skeptical
of other ideas like, looking at socioeconomic
status instead of race. Saying she feared such a process really wouldn’t be race-neutral. But yeah, that’s the story. It’s done, but of course, not done. The SFFA is expected
to appeal this ruling, which would send it to the
first court of appeals. With SFFA president, Edward Blum saying that he would appeal this
to the Supreme Court, if necessary. Which I will say is in no
way surprising, alright. This is kind of the, the expected path with things like this. Alright, because yes, this
case was about Asian-Americans, but you know, the entire topic concerns
affirmative action overall. Its been a massively
divisive topic for decades, but also, actually, to backtrack a moment, we’ve actually seen Harvard
make some changes since the SFFA brought the lawsuit. In the admissions process for
this year’s freshmen class, Harvard directed it’s
admissions officer’s to, quote, not take an applicant’s race or ethnicity into account in making
any of the ratings other than the overall rating. It also changes personal rating criteria, with officer’s now being asked to consider qualities of character. This including things
like courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, leadership, maturity,
genuineness, selflessness, humility, resiliency,
judgment, citizenship, and spirit and camaraderie with peers. And so with those changes, with the ruling that we’re now seeing,
it’ll be interesting to see what Harvard and, even also, what other schools do from here. But of course, with all of that said, I’d love to know your
thoughts on this one. From that, I want to share some stuff. I love today and today and awesome, brought to you by Keeps. And I will say, this was news to me, did you know that 2 out of 3 guys will experience some form
male-patterned baldness by the time that they’re 35? And so with Keeps they aim to help you stop your hair
loss before it’s too late with their scientific
and affordable approach. And with Keeps, you can
visit a doctor online, get medication delivered to your home, no more waiting rooms, no
more pharamacy checkout lines. And they say that Keeps treatments are up to 90% effective at reducing and stopping further hair loss. Right, they say that prevention is key. And with Keeps, they have
more five star reviews than any of their competitors and nearly 100,000 men trust in them for their hair loss prevention medication. Treatments start at
just 10 dollars a month and for a limited time, you beautiful bastards
can actually get 50% off. So, if you’re ready to take action and prevent hair loss,
go to Keeps.com/DeFranco or just click that link in the description to receive 50% off your first order. And the first bit of awesome is actually a quick shout out and thank you to Julien’s Solomolo-bingbong. Solomida. Thank you for sending
me this dope fanny pack that I am not cool enough to wear. Actually, one second, got an idea. How do you do fellow kids? Thanks buddy. Then Vogue gave us 24
hours with Maisie Williams. We’ve got Jonathan Van
Ness’ travel routine. We’ve got Cillian Murphy, breaking down his most ionic characters. We got the trailer for The Gentleman, We have Dove Cameron answering the webs most searched question. Then in a kind of heart warming video of the day we had The Rock surprising a 100 year old Grandma. And if you want to see the full versions of everything I just shared, the secret link of the day,
really, anything at all, links is always in the
description down below. Then, of course, briefly
I said we’d talk about it when it was released. Shane Dawson released the first episode of his new docu-series. Right in the beautiful
world of Jeffree Star, which actually, both follows Jeffree Star, as well as Shane Dawson. And there’s really not much
to say from this episode. It seems like its kind of
a, an establishment episode. Though, there were moments that appear to kind of tease kind of the same thing that the trailer teased. That there would be some sort of mention of the James Charles scandal. – [Jeffree Star] So,
you know, usually me and James Charles, Jaclyn
Hill, whoever’s free. – Yeah (inaudible dialog),
that’s who we like then? – [Jeffree Star] Yes. – Okay. – [Jeffree Star] Today. (laughter) – Got it. – Got it. – Right. – And kind of the most notable thing, I mean regarding news, is that the end of this video when they
tease the next episode, it appears that they’re going to go into the business of the beauty world. Which I would’ve personally
find fascinating. There appears to be at least a tease or talks about real margins on products. And if Jeffree does share real margins, I mean that could completely shake up the cosmetics industry,
which obviously is huge. That notable, not only
for creator to consumer, but even with the split, it would be between Jeffree Star and Shane Dawson on a project together. And I’m really fascinated in that because, kind of this mixture of personal relationships
with business proposals and business ventures, how
does that work together? It appears to be a world
just filled with accusations, so kind of any transparency
or insider look, I think would be amazing, but we’ll see. Shane and his shooter-editor, Andrew uh, they’re like masters of the tease. But yeah, I guess ultimately
we’ll have to wait and see and to those who actually watched the first episode, what are your thoughts? But, and it is another quickie, there was some YouTube backlash today. This time involving the
semi-frequent contestants that is the Ace family,
specially Austin McBroom and Catherine Paiz. And if I’m mispronouncing
that, I do not care. But there’s this now viral video of them that has been spread
around, I’ll let you see it. – Guys, we are literally
working right now. – Guys, we are literally
working right now. At a restaurant. – Yes we are. – Like, Austin has been
making food for the past hour and I’ve been taking orders. Do you understand how cool that is? – The main tweet of this video that went viral had the caption, LMFAO I fucking hate
millionaires, are you kidding me? People like Michael J Murphy tweeting, Ace family is the worst man. Drew Gooden tweeting: Imagine being so disconnected from reality that you get this excited about pretending to work in a restaurant for two hours. Even, a person I consider to be like the nicest person on YouTube, Simply Nailogical, Cristine tweeting, Wow what a challenge, working
a traditional job like 99% of your subscribers or their parents have! And here’s what I’ll say
based off what I’ve seen, cause they also ended up posting a much longer YouTube video around this. I understand that it’ll
probably get more views, some love for you, you bash
on someone that-that’s large. I, personally don’t think it’s that deep. Like I mean if the criticism is hate, look at these multimillionaires who, every video that I’ve ever
seen of theirs is kind of like look at our crazy
expensive, dope shit. That their disconnected
from the everyday person and their experience, yeah. Them experiencing a normal
person’s life is like if you went to one of
those old timey places and their like, we’re going
to churn butter today. You’re like, what! Other
people used to do this? But, out of all the things
to shots at them for, this is-this is arguably
one of the weaker ones. And well, yes they did
make this video for content and because they are who they are, they’re not gonna actually understand what it is to live this life everyday. I personally believe, and this kinda now less about their video and kinda more, just random advice, I know some young people watch me. Everyone at some point
should work a server job or kind of just a-a food
dealing with the public job. It taught me how to interact
with other human beings, it taught me how to
deal with irate people, how to get people to like
me more, read body language. Also, just the experience in general of serving someone else,
it kind of grounds you. I’m personally thankful that I had those experiences in my life. And then, lets talk about
this really interesting story coming out of Singapore. So today, a controversial
bill widely known as the Fake News law officially
went into effect in Singapore. Now the law, which is officially called The Protection from Online
Falsehoods and Manipulation Act was passed by Singapore’s
parliament back in May. And according to reports, it will now be illegal to spread what they call an false
statements of fact, that could potentially pose a
threat to public tranquility, and the friendly relations of Singapore with other countries. Right, so the idea sounds
pretty straight forward, but- and it is a big but, what makes the law
extremely controversial is the fact that it gives the
sole power to determine what is and is not fake news
to government ministers. And the threshold for determining what is fake news is rather low. And according to Channel News Asia, a minister simply needs to decide if something is a falsehood, which is defined as a statement of fact that is false or misleading. Then if that minister says
it is in the public interest to take action against the falsehood, they can order whatever
content they decide is fake news to be taken down or have a correction put up next to it. Government ministers can also
force tech companies like Facebook and Google to block accounts or websites that they say are
spreading false information. And well the government has said that anyone impacted by
the law can file an appeal and that appeals process
will be quick and cheap. The consequences of being found guilty of posting false information
are extremely high. Under the law, companies
that are found guilty of spreading fake news can face fines up to 1 million in Singapore dollars, which comes to around
$722,000 in US dollars. And for individuals who are found guilty, you can face up to 10 years in prison. With Singapore’s prime minister saying that the law is necessary, to quote, hold online news sources
and platforms accountable if they proliferate
deliberate online falsehoods. Adding, if we do not protect ourselves, hostile parties will
find it a simple matter to turn different groups
against one another and cause disorder in our society. But with this, critics
of the law have said that this is a clear attempt to stifle free speech and descent. With many arguing that it
gives way to much power and authority to the government
without providing oversight for government abuse and to that point, opponents appointed to
Singapore’s mixed record on protecting press freedoms
and political descent. For example, in the 2019
World Press Freedom Index, reporters without borders
ranked Singapore 151st out of 180 countries for press freedoms. Right, meaning Singapore was ranked in one of the worse positions for a country that considers itself a democracy. And notable, it placed
them below countries that are well known for censoring any kind of political opposition
like Russia and Myanmar. And so, the activist, experts, and rights groups who have
openly criticized this law worry that it will be used as a
political tool for censorship. Speaking to CNN, human-rights
watch Asia deputy director, Phil Robertson said that
the bill will be used for political purposes. Also noting the timing, that it’s coming right
before elections are set to happen in just few months and adding, The Singapore government
has a long history of calling everything they
disagree with as false and misleading. We also had the International
Commission of Jurists, a group of judges and
lawyers hitting on this and a statement before
the law was passed arguing that it would create a real risk that the law will be misused
to clamp down on opinions or information critical of the government. They even had members of
parliament speaking out against the bill, arguing that it was an
overextension of government power. With one opposition law maker saying, To introduce such a bill is
not what the government claims to defend democracy and public interest, it is more like the actions
of a dictatorial government that will resort to any means
to on to absolute power. You also have others arguing that it will give Singapore too much power over big tech firms that have a large presence in Singapore. I mean, places like Facebook, Twitter, and Google. Which all have their Asian
headquarters in the city state. And to that point, Amnesty International regional director for east and southeast
Asia said in a statement: This law would give Singapore
overwhelming leverage over the likes of Facebook and
Twitter to remove whatever the government determines is misleading. This is an alarming scenario. While tech firms must take all steps to make digital spaces safe for everyone, this does not provide
governments an excuse to interfere with freedom of expression or rule over the news feed. Which is why its also not surprising that Google and Facebook
have both opposed this law. Although, a thing to note here is that one of the most concerning parts of this law, to some, is that it doesn’t appear to just apply to post made publicly
on Facebook or Twitter, but rather it could actually be applied to closed private messaging apps and chat groups like WhatsApp, which is extremely popular in Singapore. Alright, so there’s
concern that not only will the government read
citizens private messages, but they could also potentially jail them for up to ten years for what they say. Ultimately, that is where
we are with this now and I wanted to share this story because, yes I know that 99.7%
of people watching this video they’re not from Singapore, but I think it’s incredibly
helpful to look outward, especially at a time where
people are constantly talking about the threat of fake news. We-we’ve seen the impact, there’s a constant conversation and well how do you crack down on it, while not cracking down on free speech. Alright, whose deciding
what is real or not? Is this situation going to be manipulated so governments can control their people and stifle free speech? I personally believe that is
what we are seeing in Singapore but ultimately that’s where
we are with this story. Now we’ll have to wait
to see what happens, but of course I’d love to
know your thoughts on this. And that’s where I’m
going to end today’s show. And hey, if you liked today’s
video, hit that like button. Also if you’re new here, you
want more of this in your life, be sure to hit that subscribe button and definitely tap that bell
to turn on notifications. Also, remember if you’re
not 100% filled in today, we have that brand new
conversation with podcast, with Nikita Dragun. Or maybe you just missed yesterday’s show, you wanna catch up, you can
click or tap right there to watch either of those. But, with that said of course, as always, my name’s Philip DeFranco,
you’ve just been filled in. I love yo faces and I’ll see you tomorrow.

100 thoughts on “Controversial Fake News Law, Shane Dawson, Ace Family Backlash, Harvard’s Huge Ruling, & More

  • The problem is that race could never only be a plus. For someone's race to be a plus, it means that someone of another race is not getting that plus because they are not the correct race and it is, therefore, hurting them. If you have two students that are similar in all other aspects and race ends up as the deciding factor, then the race of the one that does not get it was a negative for them.

  • The Shane Video is boring, it's literally the same thing as every single one of his docu series. Over dramatic music over acting the typical amateur film shit but I was really fucking high so I enjoyed it.

  • I think that the ace family is ridiculous for getting a minimum wage for fun, but I think that working server job will humble them. Because rude people won’t know and won’t care who they are and will verbally harass them just like they did me 😂 hopefully it’ll open their eyes to how difficult that work is and have more respect for their minimum wage coworkers.

  • I cant wait for my hair to thin out more, saves time shaving :p (im 31, shaved my head because of the heat, sun destroyed the follicles and its not as thick when it grows back)
    Why do men need hair? And why do men wear wigs? XD Just shave haha.

  • Imagine being so bitter and petty you pathetically take shots at rich people for having fun experiencing something they haven't before. If anything you should be happy I wish more people who are rich would do this more! People just wanna hate someone or something nowadays its so annoying.

  • NO! Harvard didn't consider race as a factor to admit students with lower scores than others… However… To keep a "diverse" class they should "help" non-asian people.

    Their heads are so far up their a^ses they can see through their mouths.

  • if we're going to legally punish people who diseminate harmful disinformation (Fake News, pseudoscience alt-medical scams, conspiracy theory falsehoods and other slander etc.)
    then the judicial system should at least need to demonstrate how the liar was knowingly lying, and not genuinely mistaken or deceived themself.

    Also some malitious intent should be required for serious punishment, since many unethical morons just weren't taught what's the harm of fooling people with *significantly* provocative photoshopped images or making up bogus stories just for an inside joke, at the expense of truth and the public's ability to reliably know what's real.
    Still idiot trolls like these should be discouraged with some consequences, but I think save the prison time for those using false information deceptions for serious manipulative purposes.
    Still there's the dilemma of Who exactly get's to determine the truth of the matter in cases when so much confusion and controversy has already been achieved…
    it can becomes an epistemological mind field if you're trying to remain fairly principled.

  • If you think it's a good idea to let the government decide what is false and what is not, then you truly deserve whatever happens to you under a tyrannical regime.

  • "Selecting based on race is baised agaisnt white people"
    "Ok and?"
    "Selecting based on race is baised agaisnt asians"
    "Now we cant have That"

  • Not sure about the entirety of the Harvard case but the claim that 'race is only a plus and not a minus' is so bs. If Asain applicants are considered as 'neutral' and other races are given a 'plus' that is the exact same as a 'minus' for all the Asian applicants. Your counting method doesn't matter when the end result is the same.

  • I get that in america they ask for your "ethnicity" to try to ensure a balance in quotas. For someone who grew up in Germany its just bizare though. We have been having problems with our "womens quota" 1) other genders 2) women arent getting more jobs because of it or higher pay, but a great deal of less competent or wrongly placed women in management.
    If anyone asked your "race" here for anything they'd have a lawsuit slapped on them so fast. 😂
    Just wierd. Plus if your "mixed" what does that entail? F1 children or more than 1/8?? How do you put that? How does it figure into anything? Just wierd for me sometimes. 😂🤔

  • How old was everyone when you learned "bland and quiet" were somehow racial terms about Asians? Cus I never heard of that shit before now.

  • Here’s the problem with quota filling: it fucking sucks. I would hate to get into a university or job because of my race/gender/sexual orientation. Why not hire people based on their merit, not what they look like.

  • I used to watch The ACE Family religiously because of many reasons. I stopped watching them all together after the lollipop situation. Now I just find them blocked from reality and just annoying. I feel they shouldn't have made the working video. Speaking from someone who literarily got spit on by the customer because they couldn't get a deal for chicken, I got pissed off by how they were so excited to "work" for a video. Honestly wtf were they trying to do?

  • i'm the 0.3% of viewers from Singapore and this video honestly open up my eyes regarding the situation. i've been aware that our government has most or even full control of our newspaper publications and such but i honestly thought this was regarding the satire articles, and now that you've mentioned the upcoming elections, it's starting to get me worried

  • Singapore is wrong in doing this. I think it is funny that Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren are praising moves like this. Benjamin Franklin said those that value safety over freedom deserve neither

  • Never heard of the ace family until today. Honestly they can go fuck themselves. I worked in a kitchen for 7 months. It was a bullshit apprenticeship so I only got paid £440 a month. We were often under staffed or because they'd hire anyone had a lot of incompetent staff so it felt the same. I had 3 breakdowns when I was there, did a lot of overtime, dealt with shitty entitled kids (it was a adventure camp kinda thing) and I knew someone who passed out because we were forced to work in rediculous heat. Now I got some rich brats telling me how cool it is to work. Sure if you're doing your dream job, but most of us don't get to do that.

  • https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045218
    Harvard having 22.9% of there admissions be for Asian Americans who only make up about 6% of the U.S. population is severely favoring Asian students, not discriminating against them. The Latino population which makes up over 18% of the population is the only group, aside from Caucasians, who are underrepresented compared to the demographics of the US as a whole.

  • Regardless of weather or not they were only "positively" looking into a candidates race it will always be problematic. I think they shouldn't even know an applicants race; why not make this equal opportunity instead of an artificially equal outcome. Smart people are smart regardless of coming from a minority race or not- racism will always be a thing so long as people keep mentally segregating us all into 'different' groups regardless if it's "for their benefit" or not.
    Race should never have been a factor in their admissions process.

  • Y'know I've argued with people on T_D before about why trying to censor "fake news" is a bad precedent to set for freedom of speech, and all I got was shouted down. Oh, and then got banned for being a "concern troll" despite have posted on the sub a good deal before.

    Fucking hypocrites.

  • Race can't be only a "plus" factor. You can think of white and Asian applicants as being the baseline, with +0 points and all minorities as having +X points, but it is exactly the same as considering the highest ranked minority as having -0 points and white and Asian applicants as having -X points. Clearly, if you consider the handicap points as being the baseline, then all other races are getting negative points relative to that.

  • Hey Phill, could you cover the whole situation that’s going in Peru? I feel like no one is talking about it

  • Why are margins on makeup brands a story? I'm pretty sure the people at Maybelline or Loreal are not worried about some guys on YouTube "exposing" their margins. It's getting pretty silly what is considered news these days.

  • Sadly, without being forced to maintain racial equality numbers…I think less minorities will make it into ivy league schools.

  • Re: the Singapore coverage
    I’m currently teaching a 3 yr old that’s moving there with her mother in a couple of months and it makes me worried and sad for her future.

  • How is it possible to look at race as only a positive? Regarding it as a positive for one is ipso facto a race based negative for someone else.

  • My facebook abit fake. I lie about where i am from. Will i get jail time? Wat does Phillip take on me. Proud moment when ine youtuber i know mention my country and notice the people from SG that watches his content. 😍 u got my respect. Better then keemstar fyi.

  • Hi Phil, I’m the 0.3% from Singapore! Didn’t even know this was a thing lol. What is a thing (that’s been blowing up among Singaporean’s) however is a university student getting away with molestation. You should check it out, Google “NUS molesting” and you’ll probably find more more than enough content to talk about.

  • don’t get me wrong Harvard is a very prestigious university but i think people put way to big of a emphasis on college i think most high school students don’t know what they want to do and should take a semester or year off to gather their though before diving in to debt.

  • isn´t a school something you have to be differently educated for depending on the school? like it should not matter what race you are?

    :sorry top tier smart student (asian). you can not enroll here because we need more black people, even if they are not qualified.
    to me that just sounds weird

  • 9:12 – 1000 times yes! Not only did my time in the service industry give me valuable experience in dealing with people and collaborative teamwork in an often stressful environment – skills that I continue to employ to this day; it also grounded me to the reality of the many fine folks whose hard work is both critical to the success of the service industry yet woefully underappreciated.

  • The Asian Coalition Lawsuit is literally the opposite of affirmative action, they're like; "We're smarter, we deserve the spot."… if they win they're taking over.

  • Oh that law in Singapore is not good…. Singapore is an EXTREMELY oppressive society to live in. They're second only to China in terms of how harshly you can be punished if you disagree with the government in any way, shape, or form. That's not even just a matter of the government being jerks, either. Socially, they are more concentrated on strict conformity and uniformity than Mormons. An unusual haircut or dressing out of the norm can be enough to lose you your job, get rejected by your friends, disowned by your family, and targetted and harrassed by police. It is suffocating.

  • Wait… So… "Only ever used race to 'help' applicants" is… but… with only so many slots available for students… wouldn't that be an admission that they were necessarily hurting some races? These schools don't have infinite admission capacity… I smell bullshit…

  • Those rich idiot youtubers/instagrammers…they desperately want to experience normal life …but as they can have everything they will never ever ever know what normal life is…the burden of the desperate rich.

  • Only using race as a plus is such bull crap. If you add from one or take away from another the difference (think subtraction) is the same

  • "Under the law, companies that are found guilty of spreading fake news can face fines up to one million singapore dollars. 722.00 U.S. Dollars" is what I heard, after laughing my ass off I listened a second time and heard the right amount… my version was funnier though.

  • Love the Jeffree star documentary!!!! So into the background of everything that I love and everything behind the scenes it’s soo cool

  • When did PD stop being a news show and become an YouTube version of Entertainment Tonight? I really don't care which youtuber is pissed off at which youtuber today. Can you get back to the news?

  • So….you don’t think it’s ‘that deep’ that these millionaires are flaunting the fact that they get to play at working minimum wage jobs, for a video that they then further monetised? It’s gross. The end.

  • Could you please do a recap as to what is going on for the impeachment ie. what facts do we have? I'd like to get a sense of it without partisan bias. It is hard to get accurate facts because people are emotional when either when a journalist are covering the story or comments from news anchor. I miss the days when journalists were truly impartial and gave you the facts and not their personal opinion. Hope you see my comment.

  • Asian Kids: Stop stereotyping all Asians as smart
    Also Asian Kids: We want more seats in Harvard because we all are smart

  • Wow look you at phill!

    Worried about Singapore's government having to much control over what they find "fake news" yet you want our government to control health care, gun laws, immigration etc

    Hypocrite

  • The ace family is not working that job to learn all the things you learned from actually working a 9-5. Also imagine working that 9-5 and still not being able to afford rent because you make minimum wage

  • Your intro spiel was a full minute long and you never threatened to punch me in the throat. Some of us work 65 hour work weeks for the promise that your smiling fist will make an impact on my fragile neck. Please go back to threatening us or I will drop out of throat punch university (turns out it isn’t accredited…).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *