• Two internet relics are rising from the dead this week: Friendster and Vine.
• DiVine, backed by Jack Dorsey, launched a decentralized version of the short-form video app, Vine.
• Friendster, an early social network, is back with a new founder and a different experience.

It's time to welcome back two social networks we once loved: Friendster and Vine.

After shutting down in the 2010s, the two social media platforms are rising from the dead this week.

Both of the apps, however, are Frankenstein versions of their predecessors. Neither is being resurrected by its original founders, and the app design and experiences differ from the original platforms.

Nostalgia for a simpler internet, especially for those who remember the early days with rose-colored glasses, is partially fueling this resurgence.

Evan Henshaw-Plath — who goes by Rabble — is the early Twitter employee behind the Vine reboot, DiVine.

He said that "people look back" at the era of social media before everything got so darn big. People not only miss the features and feel of these old apps, but also that time period.

"It's very telling that in the beginning of the year, people were looking back to 2016," he said, referring to a social media trend of people romanticizing that year.

Vine officially shut down in 2017 after being acquired by Twitter in 2012, paving the way for the rise of TikTok and other short-form feeds.

Its remake, DiVine, revived hundreds of thousands of old Vine videos from digital archives. Users can post new Vine-style six-second videos. The content must be filmed directly within the app, and DiVine has a firm anti-AI-slop stance. The project is also decentralized and built on Nostr, an open-source protocol not owned by a single company.

DiVine is funded by And Other Stuff, a nonprofit that received a $10 million grant from Jack Dorsey.

Meanwhile, Friendster, a social network that predated Myspace and Facebook, was rebuilt by startup founder Mike Carson as a no-frills mobile social app for your real-life friends. For example, users can only add new friends by tapping their iPhones in person. (So far, I have a grand total of one friend: Business Insider's Katie Notopoulos, who told me she was an OG Friendster fan.)

Carson told Business Insider that he paid about $30,000 for the Friendster domain and trademark.

After being overtaken by the rise of Myspace and then later Facebook, Friendster rebranded as a gaming company in 2011. By 2015, it shut down its website.

The new app — which doesn't resemble the former version much other than its shared name — quickly jumped to No. 12 in Apple's App Store social networking category on Thursday.

Unlike DiVine, the new Friendster doesn't have access to any of the prior version's data or content.

What's old is new again on the internet

I'm not old enough to be on the original Friendster, but I remember the Vine days well. I'm also not alone in feeling nostalgic for the earlier days of the internet (or particularly, the 2010s).

Carson wrote in a Medium post this week that while today's social networks "foster a lot of negativity," he remembers the original days of Friendster as "a positive and enjoyable experience."

DiVine and Friendster aren't the only internet relics that have been resurrected recently.

Last year, Digg, once a rival to Reddit, was revived by its original cofounder, Kevin Rose, and Alexis Ohanian (a cofounder of Reddit). In March, however, the company said it was downsizing its team and rethinking its strategy.

Building any new social platform is an uphill battle, even if you have a recognizable name from a previous era.

People are loyal to the platforms they've already dug their heels into, and getting them to migrate can be challenging, Digg's CEO Justin Mezzell wrote in a letter shared to the platform's website.

Friendster and DiVine could face similar challenges.

What's abundantly clear is that there's an appetite among founders to build alternative social platforms — especially those that strike a nostalgic chord. Newer startups, like Perfectly Imperfect or Cosmos, are leveraging nostalgia to build platforms that feel reminiscent of Tumblr.

The big question: Can they actually build a community?

Tech founders can build new spaces, or reimagine old ones, but getting users to stay, return, and create a culture is what gives an app life (or breathes life back into one).

"It is not the software, it is not the founder, it is not the team," Henshaw-Plath said. "It is the community of users that makes these things work."

Joni Ernst invoked Business Insider reporting about singer Chris Brown's use of a $10 million federal grant to urge passage of a bill that would give fraud investigators more time.

• The annual press dinner was canceled after a shooting on Saturday night.
• It was initially unclear what happened to the 2,600 unserved meals of lobster and steak.
• The host said Monday that the hotel donated them to two shelters for abused women.

The lobster and steak dinners that went uneaten after a shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner this week did not go to waste.

The Washington Hilton, the site of the annual gala, donated the 2,600 meals to two shelters for abused women and their children.

That's according to Weijia Jiang, the CBS News correspondent and president of the journalists' association that throws the so-called "nerd prom."

"They freeze dried the steak and lobster for longer shelf life," Jiang said in a post on X on Monday. "HUGE thank you to the staff that worked through the night under terrible circumstances."

A Hilton spokesperson said in a statement that "the hotel regularly donates unused food from events to support local organizations."

"Food from this weekend is being donated to our local community partners, and remaining produce items were composted and will be sent to farms for agricultural use," the spokesperson said.

After the shooting, social media was abuzz with people wondering what would happen to the sumptuous suppers slated to be served to the media and political elite.

A member of TMZ's new Washington bureau went to the hotel on Monday in search of the leftovers, going so far as to inspect some dumpsters for signs of them.

The $350-a-seat dinner was halted Saturday night after shots rang out during the salad course while President Donald Trump was onstage for his first appearance at the event while in office.

Prosecutors say Cole Allen, 31, traveled from his home in California to the nation's capital and checked into the Hilton with two guns and three knives before trying to crash the party and kill Trump.

A Secret Service agent was shot but saved by his protective vest, and Allen was arrested at the scene.

• The government filed charges on Monday against Cole Allen, the WHCD shooting suspect.
• He was charged with attempted assassination of the president, which could land him life in prison.
• Prosecutors included an email Allen sent before the alleged shooting explaining his actions.

Federal prosecutors on Monday charged 31-year-old Cole Allen, the suspected White House Correspondents' Dinner shooter, with attempting to assassinate the President of the United States.

That rarely used charge carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

The seven-page criminal complaint also includes two gun charges: transportation of a firearm and ammunition in interstate commerce with intent to commit a felony, and discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence.

The complaint said that at the time of his arrest, Allen possessed a 12-gauge pump action shotgun and a Rock Island Armory 1911 .38 caliber pistol. He purchased the shotgun in 2025 and the pistol in 2023, according to prosecutors.

Jeanine Pirro, the US attorney for the District of Columbia, said at a press conference on Monday that there "will be additional charges as this investigation continues to unfold."

Allen's lawyer, public defender Tezira Abe, didn't return a request for comment. In court on Monday, Abe said Allen has no prior arrests or convictions and "is presumed innocent at this time," NBC reported.

The dinner, an annual toast to the First Amendment attended by journalists, politicians, and the occasional celebrity, was disrupted on Saturday after shots rang out in the lobby of the Washington Hilton, the hotel where the event was held.

The president and senior administration officials are typically at the dinner as well, though this was the first time Trump attended as president. Saturday night's incident was the third known assassination attempt that Trump has faced.

Since the incident, Trump and some of his allies in Congress have said that the shooting makes it all the more important that the new White House ballroom in the East Wing be built, given the higher security.

Tim Röhn, the senior editor of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network, wrote that the security protocols at the event was "surprisingly lax," entailing simply flashing a screenshot of an invitation and passing through a metal detector before entering the ballroom.

Prosecutors say in the criminal complaint that Allen sent an email, likely pre-scheduled, shortly before 8:40 p.m. on Saturday, when he approached the security checkpoint at the Hilton.

That email included a message in a .txt file called "Apology and Explanation," along with his "sincerest apologies for all the trouble I've caused."

He signed off on the email "Cole 'coldForce' 'Friendly Federal Assassin' Allen," according to the complaint.

Here's the full text of the message Allen sent to family:

Hello everybody!

So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused. I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for "Most Wanted."

I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)

I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.

I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure. I don't expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies.

On to why I did any of this:

I am a citizen of the United States of America.

What my representatives do reflects on me.

And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.

(Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I've had to do something about it.)

While I'm discussing this, I'll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I'm not military so too bad.)

Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest

Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated nonlethally if possible (aka, I hope they're wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who *aren't*

Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)

Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security

National Guard: same as Hotel Security

Hotel Employees: not targets at all

Guests: not targets at all

In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)

I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people chose to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn't come to that.

• Donald Trump owns his own social media company.
• But Truth Social isn't where to go if you want a lot of people to see you attack Jimmy Kimmel.
• So Melania Trump made sure her demand that ABC do something about Kimmel appeared on Elon Musk's X, too.

Melania Trump says ABC should "take a stand" over Jimmy Kimmel, because she doesn't like a joke the talk show host made last week.

First things first: The first lady calling on a media company to do something about its employee because she doesn't like what that employee said is a bad thing. It's an attempt to use the power of the White House to silence speech that the White House doesn't like.

And it's just as worrisome as it was last September, when Brendan Carr, Trump's pick to head the Federal Communications Commission, told ABC owner Disney to "take action, frankly, on Kimmel" because Kimmel had made a joke about Trump supporters and Charlie Kirk. Disney suspended Kimmel for a few days and then reinstated him after public outcry.

There is a difference between Carr's demand and Melania Trump's demand on Monday, since Carr is a regulator with direct oversight over parts of Disney's business, and Melania Trump doesn't have any formal power over … anything. But she's still using the power of the White House to try to control speech, and that should alarm anyone with any common sense. (I've asked her office for comment.)

Let's see how new Disney CEO Josh D'Amaro responds to this one.

Much less important, but still interesting to me: The first lady's choice of platform to make her demand/threat. Melania Trump used Elon Musk's X, the site formally known as Twitter, to post her thoughts on Monday, using both her official First Lady of the United States account and her own personal account.

Trump also posted the same statement on Truth Social, the social media site owned by her husband. But that one seemed obligatory. Not in the way it's literally obligatory for Donald Trump to post at least some of his thoughts on his own social platform before he puts them anywhere else. But in the way you're supposed to tell your significant other you think they make the best pasta, when what you really crave is Olive Garden.

The numbers make it clear why Melania Trump chose to use X to make a splash: Her post on that platform has 230,000 likes, and that number is skyrocketing. Her Truth Social post has 6,500 likes and is traveling at a much more leisurely pace.

All of which is a reminder that while Truth Social is the Trump-owned Twitter alternative Donald Trump uses, it remains a minor-at-best platform. One that won't tell you how many users it has, and one that managed to lose more than $700 million on revenue of $3.7 million in 2025.

None of that is news, nor does it seem to matter to Trump, who still owns a company worth nearly $3 billion, even after a stock plunge and the departure of its CEO — perhaps because the company's current plan is to merge with a nuclear fusion company.

It also doesn't matter where Donald Trump truths or posts or spouts off — he's the president of the United States, so just about anything he says that's noteworthy gets instantly transmitted through the global media ecosystem. Like what happened on Monday afternoon, where he piggybacked on his wife's post and explicitly called on Disney and ABC to fire Kimmel.

But for the rest of us — including the first lady of the United States — where you post a message matters. Which is why she's using the one that helped her husband get into the White House in the first place.

• President Donald Trump called for comedian Jimmy Kimmel to be "immediately fired."
• Trump and first lady Melania Trump took issue with a sketch Kimmel aired on Thursday night.
• Kimmel joked at the time that Melania Trump had "the glow of an expectant widow."

President Donald Trump is reigniting his long-simmering feud with Jimmy Kimmel — and his pressure campaign on ABC and parent company Disney to part ways with the late night host.

"Jimmy Kimmel should be immediately fired by Disney and ABC. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" Trump wrote in a Truth Social Post on Monday afternoon.

Trump's call puts a potentially fraught issue on Disney CEO Josh D'Amaro's plate after the executive took over for Bob Iger just months ago.

Hours before Trump's post, first lady Melania Trump similarly expressed outrage over Kimmel's Thursday night monologue, in which the comedian gave a faux-White House Correspondents' Dinner speech to lament the decision to not have a comedian deliver a routine during the dinner, as is usually tradition. The correspondents association, an organization for reporters who cover the White House, elected to have a mentalist provide the evening's entertainment instead.

During the sketch, Kimmel said, "And, of course, our first lady Melania is here. Look at Mel — so beautiful, you have the glow of an expectant widow."

"Kimmel's hateful and violent rhetoric is intended to divide our country," Melania Trump wrote on X on Monday morning in a rare public statement. "His monologue about my family isn't comedy- his words are corrosive and deepens the political sickness within America."

Trump, for his part, wrote that he appreciated that "so many people are incensed by Kimmel's despicable call to violence, and normally would not be responsive to anything that he said but, this is something far beyond the pale."

In his post, the president said that Kimmel, "who is in no way funny as attested to by his terrible Television Ratings, made a statement on his Show that is really shocking."

"He showed a fake video of the First Lady, Melania, and our son, Barron, like they were actually sitting in his studio, listening to him speak, which they weren't, and never would be," Trump wrote.

As part of Kimmel's sketch, the comedian showed clips of Trump and other well-known figures reacting to his jokes. The footage appeared to be from previously recorded events, including Trump's State of the Union. Among the celebrities depicted was wrestling icon Hulk Hogan, who died in July.

On Saturday evening, just as the annual dinner was about to begin, a gunman tried to rush through security. Authorities have said the suspect, Cole Allen, shot a Secret Service officer in their protective gear before being arrested. Allen is expected to appear in federal court on Monday.

Trump, the first lady, Vice President JD Vance, and other members of the Cabinet were rushed out of the ballroom where the dinner was occurring. Trump later told reporters at the White House that he wanted the dinner to resume but was told that for security reasons that it needed to be canceled.

ABC suspended Kimmel last fall for comments he made following the assassination of conservative podcaster and organizer Charlie Kirk. Democratic and even some Republican lawmakers criticized FCC Chairman Brendan Carr for jawboning local ABC affiliates to stop broadcasting Kimmel as criticism spread over the comedian's remarks.

Ultimately, Kimmel was reinstated days later and experienced a brief surge in ratings as fellow late night hosts railed around him.

In December, Kimmel signed a one-year contract extension with ABC to continue "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" through May 2027.

• ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel has provoked another political controversy.
• Kimmel joked that Melania Trump "had a glow like an expectant widow."
• The first lady said on social media that Kimmel "shouldn't have the opportunity" to "spread hate."

Jimmy Kimmel is back in the middle of a political firestorm.

The ABC host drew the ire of Melania Trump after joking Thursday on his late-night show that the first lady "had a glow like an expectant widow." Kimmel told the joke days before a gunman entered the building hosting the White House Correspondents' Dinner on Saturday night.

"Kimmel's hateful and violent rhetoric is intended to divide our country," Melania Trump wrote on X on Monday morning. "His monologue about my family isn't comedy- his words are corrosive and deepens the political sickness within America."

The first lady added that "people like Kimmel shouldn't have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to spread hate."

"Enough is enough. It is time for ABC to take a stand. How many times will ABC's leadership enable Kimmel's atrocious behavior at the expense of our community," Melania Trump's post continued.

President Donald Trump seconded his wife's anti-Kimmel sentiment by encouraging Disney to cut ties with the comedian.

"Jimmy Kimmel should be immediately fired by Disney and ABC" Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Monday afternoon.

ABC suspended Kimmel's show last fall for comments he made about Charlie Kirk's killer, which drew the condemnation of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. Kimmel was reinstated by ABC days later following an outcry from free-speech advocates.

Nexstar and Sinclair, which each own hundreds of local TV stations, initially refused to air "Jimmy Kimmel Live," though they eventually agreed to let their ABC affiliates show it.

Leaders at ABC and Disney, its parent company, now must decide whether to take any action against Kimmel and risk another boycott, or stand behind the comic.

It's the latest challenge for new Disney CEO Josh D'Amaro, who's already dealt with his company's OpenAI deal falling apart and the shelving of a controversy-plagued season of "The Bachelorette."

• The Sunday print edition of the Times made no mention of the White House Correspondents' dinner shooting.
• Some critics online called the omission intentional.
• The Times said it sent its Sunday edition to press at 8 p.m. on Saturday night, before the shooting took place.

At 8:36 p.m. on Saturday night, shots were fired outside the ballroom of the Washington Hilton, where the White House Correspondents' Dinner was well underway. It marked the third time in three years that President Donald Trump faced the threat of assassination.

That news, however, did not make The New York Times' Sunday paper.

The Times covered the shooting extensively on its website. For its Sunday print edition, however, the next day's news had already been set when the shooting occurred, setting it up for a backlash from its critics, who believed it was intentional.

"This seemed so outrageous (even for the NYT) that I wanted to verify it," Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire wrote on X alongside a photo of the Times' Sunday paper. "I went and got a physical copy and took this photo. The shooting was at 8:34pm ET on Saturday night. Is this not enough time to get the story in print?"

While some news outlets can make changes to their print editions until late at night, or even the early morning, the Times said in an X post responding to the backlash that its Sunday print edition "goes to press at 8pm Saturday."

A spokesperson told Business Insider that there are no more Sunday print editions and that the shooting will be featured on the front page of Monday's print edition.

"The print edition is an anachronism for old fogies like me who still like newsprint," one X user responded to Maguire. "If you want the latest news, you know where to go."

• A suspect in the White House Correspondents' Dinner shooting is in custody.
• Photos of the suspect posted by Trump appear to match those on the LinkedIn profile for Cole Allen.
• Allen is a Caltech graduate, an indie video game developer, and a teacher, according to the profile.

Photos of the White House Correspondents' Dinner shooter posted online by President Donald Trump on Saturday night appear to match the LinkedIn profile of Cole Allen.

Multiple outlets, including the Associated Press, have reported that Allen is the suspect now in custody. Business Insider was not able to independently confirm the suspect's identity. Authorities have not yet publicly identified the suspect by name.

Trump told Fox News on Sunday that the suspect left a "manifesto" that called for the targeting of Trump administration officials.

Here's what we know so far.

Allen, 31, is a resident of Torrance, California. Police conducted a raid on a home in Torrance overnight. Allen describes himself on his LinkedIn as a "mechanical engineer and computer scientist by degree, independent game developer by experience, teacher by birth."

His current job is listed as part-time teacher at C2 Education, which provides "personalized support designed to improve test scores, strengthen academic skills, and help students reach their full potential."

Allen has been in the role for six years, according to his LinkedIn profile, while also independently designing and building video games, including one he calls "Bohrdom." Allen described the game online as "a skill-based, non-violent asymmetrical fighting game loosely derived from a chemistry model that is itself loosely based on reality."

He graduated from the California Institute of Technology in 2017 with a degree in mechanical engineering. He then earned his master's in computer science from California State University, Dominguez Hills in 2025, according to his LinkedIn profile. He also held a summer student fellowship at NASA in 2014, where he worked at the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Jeffrey Carroll, the interim chief of the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, DC, said during a press conference after the shooting on Saturday night that Allen was armed with a shotgun, handgun, and knives when he tried to bypass a security checkpoint at the event.

In a video Trump posted to his TruthSocial account, the shooter can be seen running at full speed past security officers.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told Margaret Brennan on CBS's "Face the Nation" on Sunday morning that the shooter traveled from Los Angeles to Chicago to DC by train. Blanche also said that the shooter was not cooperating with law enforcement.

Jeanine Pirro, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, said the defendant has been charged with two counts of using a firearm during a crime of violence and one count of assault on a law enforcement officer using a dangerous weapon. He will be arraigned on Monday.

• The suspect traveled from Los Angeles to Washington by train with two guns, an official said.
• President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance were evacuated and are safe.
• The accused man will be formally charged in federal court on Monday.

The suspect in the shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner traveled from Los Angeles to Washington by train and checked into the hotel where the event was held — with two guns and a plan to target Trump administration officials, the nation's top prosecutor said on Sunday.

"We know that there were some writings, and we've already spoken with several witnesses who knew him," Todd Blanche, the acting US attorney general, said on NBC News' "Meet the Press."

Blanche stressed several times during the interview that the information about the suspect, widely identified by media citing law enforcement officials as Cole Allen, was "very preliminary."

Blanche said the suspect will be formally charged in federal court on Monday morning and faces at least two felonies — assault on a federal officer and discharging a firearm during that assault — that relate to a Secret Service agent who was shot at but protected by his armored vest.

No one else was injured during the chaotic incident at the Washington Hilton, where hundreds of journalists and government officials — including Trump, the first lady, Vice President JD Vance, and House Speaker Mike Johnson — were gathered for the annual celebration of a free press.

The shooting has raised questions about the level of security at the event, which Trump boycotted in his first term and last year. He was quickly hustled off stage and evacuated to the White House after the shots rang out.

A security video posted by Trump on Truth Social hours after the shooting showed an individual running past security officers outside the main doors of the event. Officers in the video could be seen trying to grab the man, then drawing their weapons and pointing their guns at him.

In a press conference following the incident, Trump said a Secret Service agent was shot in his bulletproof vest and said that "he's in great shape."

What we know about the suspect

Photos of the shooter posted online by Trump on Saturday night appear to match the LinkedIn profile and other photos of Allen. Authorities have not publicly named him, and Business Insider has not independently confirmed his identity.

Allen, 31, of Torrance, describes himself on his LinkedIn as a "mechanical engineer and computer scientist by degree, independent game developer by experience, teacher by birth."

His current job is listed as part-time tutor at C2 Education, which provides "personalized support designed to improve test scores, strengthen academic skills, and help students reach their full potential." He graduated from CalTech in 2017 and earned his master's in computer science from California State University, Dominguez Hills in 2025.

Jeffrey Carroll, the interim chief of the Metropolitan Police Department, said in a press conference following the president's remarks that the suspect was armed with a shotgun, handgun, and knives when he tried to bypass a security checkpoint at the event.

The suspect was not struck by gunfire and was transported to a hospital for evaluation, Carroll said.

In remarks after the incident, Trump described the suspect as a "sick person" who had been "totally subdued and under control."

Inside the room when the shooting occurred

The incident occurred after 8:30 p.m. Friday night, shortly after Trump took his seat.

There was suddenly shouting in front of the stage, according to Tim Röhn, the senior editor of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network, who attended the event. Business Insider is part of the network.

Röhn reported that pushing and chaos broke out, people started running, guests threw themselves to the floor, and hid under tables. From behind the curtains onstage, heavily armed officers emerged and pointed their rifles at the crowd.

Guests needed a screenshot of an invitation to gain access to the premises and the building, Röhn reported. Photo ID wasn't required. Inside, Secret Service agents patrolled in some areas with dogs, and there was an airport-style security checkpoint in front of the ballroom. Jackets did not need to be removed for security checks.

CBS senior White House correspondent Weijia Jiang, the president of the White House Correspondents' Association, said law enforcement had requested that everyone leave the premises "consistent with protocol," and that Trump "insists" the event be rescheduled within 30 days.

Röhn reported that, following Jiang's remarks, attendees started leaving the venue.

Suspect to be arraigned on Monday

Blanche said law enforcement had worked through the night to piece together information about the suspect and had obtained warrants to examine his devices in their search for a motive.

"We believe he was targeting administration officials in this attack," Blanche told "Meet the Press," adding, "Obviously, President Trump is a member of the administration."

He added, "It does appear he did in fact set out to target folks who work in the administration, likely including the president, but I want to wait and not get ahead of us on that."

Jeanine Pirro, the US attorney for the District of Columbia, who was at the dinner, said at a press conference that her office would consider terrorism charges if the investigation revealed evidence sufficient to sustain them.

Responding to reporters' questions during his press conference, Trump advocated for the man to be sentenced to life in prison.

'Praying for our country tonight'

Until the start of the event, it was unclear when Trump would appear and how long he would stay.

Though Trump appeared as a private citizen and media personality in 2011 and 2015, he boycotted the White House Correspondents' Dinner during his first term.

The Washington Hilton hotel, long the site of the annual dinner, is where President Ronald Reagan was shot and wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt, just steps outside the hotel after addressing a labor gathering.

Trump was the target of two assassination attempts during his 2024 campaign, including a shooting at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, that left him injured, and a separate incident at one of his Florida golf courses in which a suspect was apprehended and later sentenced to life in prison.

• Senior Editor Tim Röhn was among the attendees at the White House Correspondents' Dinner.
• He described the fear and panic in the room after hearing someone shout, "Shots fired."
• He was struck by how "lax" security was at the event throughout the evening.

Just after 8:30 p.m. on a Saturday night, chaos erupts in the ballroom of the Hilton Hotel in Washington, and a wave of fear sweeps through the room. I am seated at one of roughly 200 tables when I suddenly hear dull, thudding sounds cutting through the loud music.

Barely a second later, people begin throwing themselves to the floor — first in the center of the room, near the stage, then everywhere. I hear someone shout something like "Shooting" or "Shots fired."

I drop down as well, crouching, my eyes fixed on the stage. President Donald Trump, who had arrived only minutes earlier, is rushed away. From behind the curtain, heavily armed officers emerge, pointing their weapons toward the crowd. Secret Service agents sprint through the ballroom, vaulting over tables and chairs. Glass shatters. High-ranking politicians are pulled to safety and ushered out of the room.

It feels like a movie — but this is not Hollywood. This is reality: the storied White House Correspondents' Dinner, with Trump attending as president for the first time, suddenly transformed into the scene of a crime.

Was Trump the target? It wouldn't be the first time. The thought flashes through my mind in those seconds. I think about gun violence in the United States (I moved here only 8 months ago). Shootings happen constantly, everywhere — so why not here, at the Trump dinner? I am shaken, but not surprised.

No all-clear is given, yet after a few minutes, people slowly get back on their feet. Somehow, things must go on. Phones come out; people film, text, try to make sense of what just happened. It remains completely unclear what occurred — only one thing is certain: no one is allowed to leave the ballroom.

When word spreads that a "shooter" has been apprehended in the lobby, I feel a sense of relief. Twice, an announcement follows that the event will resume shortly. But it never does. Trump himself invites the press to the White House for a briefing; the dinner is over. Guests are asked to leave the hotel.

On my way out, I think about the security precautions — or lack thereof — that had struck me as surprisingly lax throughout the evening, given the presence of Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and several cabinet members.

A few hours before, traffic outside the Hilton had ground to a halt, and I had jumped out of my taxi about 500 meters away and walked the rest.

Right outside the hotel, there are shouting Trump opponents, some of whom harassed and insulted dinner guests. All it took to gain access to the premises — and the hotel — was flashing a screenshot of an invitation while passing by. Only those heading into the ballroom on a lower level had to pass through a metal detector. No need to remove a jacket. No request for a passport or ID. Once, even activists managed to slip onto the red carpet to protest Trump.

Is that adequate security for such a high-profile event? I wouldn't presume to deliver a final judgment — but I am certain of one thing: it will be debated.

A spokesperson for the Washington Hilton directed Business Insider to the US Secret Service, which it said "served as the lead security organization for this event." Business Insider has also contacted the US Secret Service for comment.

Tim Röhn is the senior editor of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. Business Insider is part of the network.

• Livestreamer N3on pays an army of "clippers" to post snippets of his content on social media.
• Clipping is one of his top expenses: He paid out over $1.4 million in a recent five-week period.
• The clipping economy can expand a streamer's audience and also incentivize inflammatory content.

You may have never tuned into N3on's livestream. Thanks to "clipping," he might have popped up in your social feeds anyway.

The top-10 Kick streamer, 21, belongs to a group of livestreamers who have gained mainstream attention in recent months thanks to clipping, where people are paid to post grabby moments from longer videos or podcasts on social media platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram.

An hourslong stream might only get 40,000 live viewers, but a successful clip can fetch millions of views, helping a streamer land partnerships with brands and celebrities.

Streamers like N3on have helped create an elite class of professional clippers who command high prices. Clipping is one of N3on's largest expenses. In a recent five-week period, he paid out over $1.4 million to 303 clippers, according to a document his team shared. In any given month, he estimated that he's paying at least one clipper upward of $100,000.

"I feel like my life is clipping now," he said.

N3on, whose real name is Mikyle Rafiq, said he has a network of around 1,000 clippers. About half belong to a group he and fellow streamer Adin Ross built. The rest are paid by Kick.

Other top creators also have clippers who post on their behalf. YouTuber MrBeast has his own clipping platform, Vyro, that helps promote his content.

Rates for clippers can vary depending on factors such as a streamer's level of fame. Rafiq pays clippers on the higher end of the market for a big Kick streamer — $40 per 100,000 views, or $50 if he especially wants to incentivize them.

Clipping has its defenders and critics

Clipping can help a creator reach a wider audience that might not be watching their livestream or podcast — and get them into the center of internet discourse.

On the other hand, the clipping economy can incentivize creators to create inflammatory moments and stretch the truth.

"A lot of it is staged," said Mustafa Aijaz, VP at SoaR Gaming, a digital entertainment company and creative agency. "Audiences will call it out as clip farming. But people will still watch it."

Rafiq, who's been trying to reform his negative public image, said he used to do "crazy stuff" and even paid clippers to post bad PR about him to keep his name relevant.

He said sometimes eye-catching clips can come from subpar streams.

One of his most-viewed clips came from a stream he and former rapper Iggy Azalea did from a yacht that ran into technical problems and was barely seen.

"The clippers made it seem like it was this insane, crazy stream," Rafiq said. "No one actually watched the stream. They just saw the clips, and they're like, 'Wow, N3on and Iggy had a great time on this yacht.'"

• MrBeast's next growth act may come from AI-produced videos.
• Jimmy Donaldson's company is looking for someone to lead a production team with AI at the foundation.
• MrBeast has been expanding his company while looking for ways to save.

YouTube's biggest star, MrBeast, is looking for a leader to help his company create "AI-native" productions.

A job posting says that Beast Industries wants to build a new production capability in which AI is "not a tool but the foundation."

It calls for someone who can help define "what AI-native entertainment looks like, develop original formats, and build systems that enable content to be conceived, produced, and scaled with AI at the core."

MrBeast, whose real name is Jimmy Donaldson, wouldn't be the first creator to delve into AI. Fellow superstar creator Steven Bartlett has been making fully AI-animated shows since last year.

Still, as YouTube's top creator with 479 million subscribers, Donaldson's moves in the space will be closely watched by the entertainment community.

Many production studios are adopting AI across production, marketing, and visual effects, and startups are raising millions on the promise of helping legacy Hollywood transition to the AI era.

So far, entirely AI productions are largely the realm of animation, podcasts, and short-form video.

In the micro drama space, apps including TikTok's Pine Drama and Vigloo have character-driven dramas generated by AI. These AI dramas account for 10% of Vigloo's library, a spokesperson said. The Beijing-based startup StoReel recently raised $34 million to make AI micro dramas.

AI-driven productions would solve some problems for Donaldson.

He is famous for his viral, high-budget challenge and giveaway videos, though the company has been tightening up spending. One of the job's listed expectations is to use automation to make more content, faster.

Making AI-driven videos also directly addresses the risk any creator faces when they build a company that relies on their time and persona. As Donaldson expands his company to consumer products and services, it limits his bandwidth to star in his own videos. He recently hired former NBCU unscripted executive Corie Henson to head his studio division and is looking to broaden the company's video franchises. He said this week his company now has 750 employees.

Donaldson himself has shared concerns about AI's risk to his industry.

After OpenAI released Sora 2 last fall, Donaldson mused on X about what AI's advancement will mean for creators, adding, "Scary times."

He also released — and then removed — a tool that used AI to generate video thumbnails last year, after receiving backlash from creators.

• AI has turned a corner in Hollywood as studios adopt it for production, marketing, and visual effects.
• Elsewhere, startups are raising money to tackle every stage in the production cycle.
• Check out nine pitch decks AI startup founders shared with Business Insider.

AI is starting to transform Hollywood, whether filmmakers and audiences are ready or not.

AI has turned a corner in Hollywood as major studios increasingly adopt it to gain efficiencies in production, marketing, and visual effects.

Elsewhere, AI startups have been raising millions of dollars from venture capital firms on the promise of changing the legacy Hollywood film and TV business.

The tools they are building are being used across the production cycle. Some, like Moonvalley, are enhancing special effects. Others are promising to help with marketing, content distribution, and content discovery.

It's a challenging time for Hollywood. Budgets generally aren't what they used to be, and studios know they need to do what they can to make projects faster and cheaper. Enter AI.

Netflix and Amazon have talked about how they're using AI to pull off elaborate special effects and improve the viewing experience. Lionsgate is partnering with startup Runway to train an AI model on its library. Others in Hollywood are using AI but not talking about it.

At the same time, many are worried about tech giants using AI to appropriate their IP. Studios have taken issue with OpenAI's Sora generating videos that encroach on their copyrighted characters. Disney and Universal sued Midjourney, accusing it of using tech to rip off Star Wars, Minions, and more.

Studios must also be sensitive to talent's fears of being supplanted by AI as well as audiences' attitudes. A YouGov survey in early October found viewers were mixed on the use of AI. People were most accepting of AI being used to translate subtitles into other languages (64% for), but least accepting of the idea of AI characters replacing human actors (65% against).

How are AI founders pitching investors and Hollywood insiders on their vision of the future?

Business Insider has interviewed the founders of startups behind tools to disrupt traditional TV and filmmaking. They shared the pitch decks they used to raise capital.

Read 9 pitch decks AI startups used to raise millions to disrupt Hollywood:

Series B

• Moments Lab, a French company whose tools index studios' video libraries and create new videos from raw footage: $24 million
• Neosapience, a synthetic voice and video platform: $21.5 million

Series A

• Papercup, a startup that promised to scale dubbing: $20 million

Seed

• Wonder Studios, a UK firm that uses AI to extend IP and create original works: $12 million
• StorReel, a startup that's making short dramas with interactive AI characters: $9 million
• Metaphysic, which uses AI to make realistic deepfakes: $7.5 million
• Filmustage, which uses AI to analyze scripts and do other pre-production tasks: $1.5 million

Pre-seed

• Strada, a platform that promises to streamline the production process: $1.9 million

Other

• Fable Studio, which landed Amazon backing to let creators make their own animated shows: undisclosed

• TikTok advertising executive Khartoon Weiss is leaving the company.
• Weiss, who spent almost six years at TikTok, oversaw its North America ads business for the past year.
• Weiss is one of several advertising and marketing execs to leave TikTok this year.

TikTok's advertising team is undergoing another big shake-up.

Khartoon Weiss, the lead exec for TikTok's North American ads business, is exiting the company, four people familiar with the matter told Business Insider.

Weiss, who pitched TikTok's suite of ad products to marketers onstage at its NewFronts event last month, joined the company almost six years ago from Spotify. She oversaw TikTok's global agency and accounts teams before being promoted to lead the North America division of the global business solutions team in March 2025, following the departure of advertising head Blake Chandlee.

Digiday first reported on Weiss' exit.

Weiss' exit is the latest in a string of advertising and marketing team departures at TikTok.

Zuber Mohammed, TikTok's global head of consumer marketing, left the company in March. Sofia Hernandez, the global head of business marketing and commercial partnerships, and Rema Vasan, who headed up business marketing in North America, left the company last quarter.

Other teams at TikTok have also seen leadership changes this year, including the company's content division, which lost its global head of creators, Kim Farrell, in January.

Some of the executive exits have shifted control of North America teams to leaders from Singapore or China. When Chandlee left last year, oversight of the sales team, known as global business solutions, moved to Singapore-based executive Will Liu, for example.

TikTok's US team restructured in January while forming a new joint venture to transfer certain work, like US user data management, to a separate group that includes Oracle and investment firms MGX and Silver Lake. Its advertising and marketing teams remain under the control of parent company ByteDance.

As part of the structural change, Adam Presser, a trust and safety executive, became CEO of the US joint venture. Presser appeared alongside Weiss at TikTok's March NewFronts presentation to assure advertisers that the company's ads experience would not be disrupted amid internal changes.

• Micro dramas, the Asia-born craze that's exploded in the US, has a new fan in Hollywood.
• Franchise producer Tommy Harper has a new app that he's pitching as the "HBO" of micro dramas.
• Read the pitch deck, shared exclusively with Business Insider.

Micro dramas are entering their Hollywood phase as new players aim to give the format the star treatment.

The latest example is Tommy Harper, a prolific film producer whose credits include "Star Wars" and "Top Gun: Maverick."

Harper is going small for his next act. He's launching VeYou, an app for the made-for-mobile soaps that originated in Asia and have taken off among women viewers.

Harper raised an undisclosed amount of seed funding for VeYou from lead investor S32, a venture firm led by Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, whose other investments have included 23andMe, Impossible Foods, and Nest.

Harper wants to make VeYou the 'HBO' of micro dramas

Micro dramas — also called verticals and mini dramas — are known for being low-budget productions with wild plotlines.

Newer entrants like Harper are trying to evolve the format, using AI-driven special effects to lend a cinematic feel.

VeYou plans to offer action, romance, and drama titles, both licensed and originals made by Harper's own studio, Tiny Verticals. The first original will be "Love Under Fire," an action romance starring vertical drama star Kasey Esser, who wrote the series alongside Harper.

"We're going to ramp up the quality level and the storytelling," Harper said. "We're going to be your HBO in the space."

VeYou has secured distribution on Google TV and Google Play, with distribution on Apple's iOS to follow. It'll also use marketing channels like TikTok and Meta's platforms to attract audiences.

VeYou is adopting the low-cost, viewer-pay model common in the vertical space. The series will cost $100,000 to $250,000 to make. Harper said licensed series will cost viewers $4.99 apiece and originals will be $10.99. Other payment options and advertising will follow.

How VeYou plans to compete

Harper is aware of the challenges facing micro dramas. They cost a fraction of a traditional feature-length movie, but often lose money because of the high cost of marketing. VeYou is a startup without massive financial backing.

"I'm competing with the big Chinese companies that are throwing tons of money at this, so we have to be very, very strategic, and we have to make things that are good quality," he said.

Harper plans to work with people with large social followings to help market VeYou. He's also in talks with brands to fund verticals and help market them in exchange for product placement.

Other Hollywood players have delved into micro dramas, which streaming consulting firm Owl & Co. estimates generated $1.4 billion in the US in 2025. Fox Entertainment invested in Holywater, a Ukrainian company behind the micro drama app My Drama, while Disney gave micro drama app DramaBox a spot in its accelerator program.

Harper sees micro dramas as a chance for more Hollywood jobs

Harper said he was excited about verticals' ability to test concepts that could turn into TV shows or films, while helping employ talent as traditional Hollywood work becomes scarcer.

"It is extremely hard for young talent to get involved in TV and film right now," he said. "And this is a place for them to do it."

Harper knows some in Hollywood look down on micro dramas. He said he got similar reactions when he started working in TV. He believes attitudes will change as new players get involved.

"I had people call me going, 'I don't understand why you're doing television. You know, you do big movies,'" he recalled. "I know we have to make better stories on this platform. That's what we're going to do."

Here are select slides from the pitch deck Harper used to raise his seed round, shared exclusively with Business Insider:

VeYou wants to elevate the micro drama format.

Its pitch deck lays out the opportunity.

VeYou says micro dramas are poised to become a $26 billion industry globally by 2030.

VeYou says micro dramas have an image problem.

The slide reads:

The format works, but the stories don't fit the culture.

Dramatic storytelling drives compulsive spending — but 57% of viewers say there's too much violence.

The content carries a real stigma and social sharing is low because of that.

VeYou wants to expand the format's appeal.

Founder Tommy Harper has had a successful career in Hollywood.

The slide calls Harper one of Hollywood's highest-grossing producers, with films that have made more than $4 billion at the global box office and include some of the industry's biggest franchises.

VeYou plans to use AI to improve its series.

This slide lays out the VeYou formula:

Premium content at scale: Made for a global audience with our network of production partners. Licensed series, dedicated studio & producer partners, and originals with AI-assisted production

Discovery: Free episodes get fans invested
Existing fan communities, talent & social media, Google TV + app store feature + distribution deals

Watch & binge: Episodic: Unlock · Share

AI learns: Scene analytics inform marketing, UX & greenlight decisions

Franchise IP: Expansion for breakout properties — films, TV & books

• Michaeleen Doucleff, author of "Dopamine Kids," wanted to wean her daughter off screens.
• She said the key was to replace screens with activities that genuinely motivated and excited her daughter.
• She also cut back on buying ultra-processed foods by having her daughter bake cookies from scratch.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Michaeleen Doucleff, the author of "Hunt, Gather, Parent" and "Dopamine Kids," released on March 3. This story has been edited for length and clarity.

Around the time my daughter, Rosy, was 4, we went to the beach. It was a really beautiful, sunny day, and I realized I couldn't enjoy it. She was having a great time building a sandcastle; I was sitting there checking my email, texts, and social media.

I felt this little hum of anxiety. Was she going to grow up without me being able to enjoy our lives together?

I started examining my own relationship to dopamine, the brain systems involved in reward and motivation, whether it is related to screens or ultra-processed foods. I realized that for me, these products were reclaiming the pleasure in our lives.

My life started to change when I set limits on screen time and processed snacks, swapping them for other activities and whole foods.

Then I wanted to help Rosy, who was 8 at the time.

I learned that a lot of the advice out there didn't work for me because it was based on research from 20 to 40 years ago. I kept trying things that I would read in parenting books, like "let children be bored." If I told Rosy to go to her room and play without screens, I'd just create a struggle. She'd crave screen time even more.

The truth is, parents are up against a lot. Apps, games, and ultra-processed foods are designed to keep us coming back. Research suggests that if parents don't have a clear mission for their families, it's much harder to keep impulses under control.

Luckily, research also suggests ways to change your child's relationship with screens. Here's how I got my daughter to swap them for activities that she enjoys.

I made a 'family dream list' to guide us

The first step is about taking back the wheel. That came with deciding what I wanted for my family. What was my dream?

Exploration is a fundamental need for my child, and I didn't want her to fulfill it with video games and social media. Instead, I wanted Rosy to enjoy being outside with her friends and going on adventures.

So one day, I said, "I'm going to teach you to do something you've been dying to do," which was riding a bike by herself to the market. We spent a few nights biking around everywhere until she felt comfortable on her own. Instead of watching YouTube videos of cartoon characters biking around, she could now do it herself.

Now that she's 10, biking is one of Rosy's favorite activities. She bikes to piano lessons and soccer practice. Sometimes, on Saturdays, she'll spend six hours biking with her friends, then come home exhausted and happy.

Leaning into her natural motivation

Dopamine plays a key role in motivation; it makes us seek out things that feel rewarding. To compete with screens, it helps to ride the motivational wave.

Once, we were in the cookie aisle of the grocery store. Rosy started begging for cookies because foods like that light up the brain's reward system. Instead of saying no to the cookies, I wanted to cultivate her desire to create a new habit.

I said, "OK, you can have the cookies, but you're going to bake the cookies all by yourself." I'd help her get started, and she learned how to use the mixer and oven.

When she finished baking the cookies, she ate only one or two. She wanted to save the rest because they were so precious to her. To this day, she's an amazing baker. A couple of months ago, she made a whole lasagna for dinner.

It turned out to be a great swap we made, both for cutting down on store-bought snacks and on screen time.

Micro-celebrations kept her going

The internet uses micro-celebrations: The little "ding" when you send a message, the hearts, the emojis. They seem very simple, and like they're not doing anything, but they're triggering a tiny bit of pleasure in our brains. It's the superglue that keeps us attached.

As a parent, I wanted to give Rosy similar micro-celebrations. When Rosy and I were first starting to bike around the neighborhood, every now and then I'd say, "Wow, this is really fun. I love this. This feels so good." It's just about sprinkling in a little bit of excitement.

Another really powerful micro-celebration parents can use is having the kid present what they made to you, whether it's a drawing or a craft. It creates an emotional payoff for the child, making them feel like they've done something important. It'll make them want to keep doing it more and more.

I set a price for screen time

Products like TVs and tablets are what I call "dopamine magnets"; they're incredibly hard to resist. We can't rely on willpower alone. Instead, we need very clear, simple rules that never change.

Almost every Saturday afternoon, Rosy would ask to watch a movie. Finally, I agreed, but with one new rule: She had to write a two-page summary of the last movie she watched, and present it to me.

At first, I was blown away. She ran to go do it — she was really willing to work to get this movie. Still, after a few times, she stopped asking for Saturday movies. She decided they weren't worth the price.

By then, we had other activities to replace the movie. On top of riding her bike, she was making a lot of crafts — embroidering, crocheting, and paper quilling.

Creating screen-free environments

What many people don't realize is that the pull happens before you use the device. Usually, there's some cue in your environment, such as the sight of your phone or the places you typically use it.

For example, a child might associate getting into the car with playing games on a tablet. Instead, you can change that to another activity. We bought a CD player for Rosy so she could listen to audiobooks on drives. It forces her to wait and listen to the book again, instead of us immediately buying a new one.

Without changing cues, parents may have to fight to pull their kids off screens or to police what they eat.

By using these behavioral principles, you can set up routines that help kids rely less on willpower alone. Over time, those pathways stick.

• Netflix just raised prices again, following in the footsteps of Disney+, HBO Max, and Peacock.
• Steady price increases from paid streamers may be helping fuel the growth of free services like YouTube.
• Netflix will still deliver viewers solid value on a cost-per-hour basis after the hike.

Netflix is fully aboard the stream-flation bandwagon.

The streaming giant just raised prices for its three plans, a little over a year after it last asked subscribers to pay more.

Netflix's standard ad-free plan now costs $19.99 a month, up from $17.99, while the premium 4K plan also got a $2 increase to $26.99 a month. The ad-supported Netflix subscription rose by a dollar to $8.99 a month.

While Netflix customers may complain about higher prices, most other major streamers have also steadily gotten more expensive.

Disney+, HBO Max, Peacock, and Apple TV+ all raised prices last year following Netflix's January 2025 hike. Disney has raised the price of its flagship streaming service in each of the past four years.

Hollywood is trying to squeeze more money out of each streaming subscriber to improve or achieve profitability.

However, there are signs that consumers are sick of stream-flation.

Free streamers like YouTube have become increasingly popular in recent years, growing in viewership share on US TVs, as measured by Nielsen. Increased costs could be driving some consumers toward free streaming services ranging from the Roku Channel to Fox's Tubi.

The good news for Netflix is that it still looks like a solid deal for consumers after its latest round of price hikes.

Netflix's ad plan is cheaper than comparable plans for Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max, and Peacock (it's the same price as Paramount+ and the stand-alone version of Amazon's Prime Video).

Netflix also offers a far larger library than most of its rivals and is watched more frequently than its peers. That made Netflix the best value by hours watched, UBS analysts wrote last year.

Still, the new price hike won't quiet the critics who said Netflix's failed pursuit of WBD was a sign the streamer was running short on avenues for organic user growth.

• A court dismissed a lawsuit by Elon Musk's X that had accused advertisers of illegally boycotting the platform.
• The Texas federal judge cited a lack of jurisdiction and X's failure to state a claim.
• The defendants included Mars, Lego, and Nestlé.

A court tossed out a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk's X that accused big advertisers like Mars, Lego, and Nestlé of illegally boycotting the platform.

A US District Court judge in Texas dismissed the case, citing a lack of jurisdiction and X's failure to state an antitrust claim.

X sued several major brands in August 2024, alleging their participation in an ad industry initiative called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, GARM, was tantamount to a conspiracy to "collectively withhold billions of dollars in advertising" from X after Musk's takeover of the company, then known as Twitter. It later added other brands to the suit.

X claimed the alleged boycott made it less competitive than other platforms in winning advertisers and user engagement.

Other plaintiffs named in the suit were the World Federation of Advertisers, CVS Health, Ørsted, Twitch, Abbott Laboratories, Colgate-Palmolive, Pinterest, Tyson, and Shell.

WFA shut down GARM, its initiative, after the suit was filed, citing limited resources.

The suit was partly spurred by an investigation by the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan, into whether advertisers were illegally banding together to demonetize conservative platforms and voices in violation of antitrust law.

The plaintiffs fought back, calling the lawsuit "an attempt to use the courthouse to win back the business X lost in the free market when it disrupted its own business and alienated many of its customers."

X's relationship with advertisers has been fraught since Musk bought the platform in 2022. Advertisers left en masse as X loosened moderation and account-verification rules and reinstated the banned accounts of some provocative figures.

EMARKETER, Business Insider's sister company, estimated its revenue would reach $2.2 billion in 2026, below its pre-acquisition level of $4.5 billion.

X has tried to win back advertisers by underscoring its commitment to brand safety and promoting its use of block lists that let advertisers avoid showing up around certain topics.

X did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Meta and YouTube were found negligent in a landmark social media addiction trial.
• The case centered on a woman who said social media harmed her mental health from a young age.
• The case is viewed as a key test of how juries may see dozens of similar pending lawsuits.

Meta and Google were found negligent in a social media addiction trial in Los Angeles on Wednesday, potentially setting the stage for dozens of similar lawsuits that have been brought against Big Tech companies.

The case centered on a 20-year-old woman, identified as KGM, who said her use of social media from a young age was detrimental to her mental health and accused the companies of knowingly engineering their products to addict kids.

After nine days of deliberation, the jury found Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, and Google, which owns YouTube, negligent. In a 10-to-2 vote, the jury also ruled that the two companies knew their design was "dangerous" but failed to warn the plaintiffs.

The jury awarded the plaintiff $6 million. That's $3 million in compensatory damages and an additional $3 million in punitive damages.

The jury determined Meta was responsible for 70% of the harm, while YouTube was responsible for 30%. That means the total damages owed by Meta is $4.2 million, while YouTube owes $1.8 million.

The plaintiff's lead counsel, the Lanier Law Firm, called the verdict "a referendum" in a statement. "For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features," the statement said.

Spokespeople for Meta and Google both said the companies disagreed with the verdicts and plan to appeal.

"Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app," a Meta spokesperson said. "We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online."

"This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site," the Google spokesperson said.

The Los Angeles state court trial has been viewed as a bellwether, offering a key test of how juries may see similar personal injury lawsuits brought by over 2,000 individuals. Meta has said potential damages in certain cases could reach into the "high tens of billions of dollars."

TikTok and Snapchat were also defendants, but settled the lawsuit before the trial began.

Meta executives testified at the trial last month, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Head of Instagram Adam Mosseri, drawing large crowds of media and concerned parents, including some involved in other social media addiction lawsuits. YouTube's VP of engineering, Cristos Goodrow, also testified.

The companies have argued that plaintiffs' struggles are due to myriad reasons and can't necessarily be linked to social media.

During Meta's closing argument at the Los Angeles trial, Paul Schmidt, one of the company's attorneys, said the plaintiff needed to prove that if Instagram were taken away from KGM, her "life would be meaningfully different."

"The evidence has shown just the opposite," Schmidt said.

In January, Meta warned investors that its mounting legal battles related to youth safety could "significantly impact" its 2026 financial results. Attorneys for more than 100,000 individual arbitration claimants have "sent mass arbitration demands relating to 'social media addiction'" since late 2024, the company said in a 2026 10-K, specifically noting the case in Los Angeles, as well as a separate case in New Mexico.

The New Mexico case, which occurred at the same time as the Los Angeles trial, addressed different legal and technical issues.

On Tuesday, a jury in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay $375 million after a verdict came down in the state's lawsuit against the company about sexual exploitation.

Meta said it would appeal the case.

• Savannah Guthrie opened up about her emotional struggle over her mother's disappearance on "Today."
• Guthrie told her "Today" show co-anchor Hoda Kotb that her family is in "agony."
• Authorities believe Savannah Guthrie's mom, Nancy Guthrie, was abducted from her Arizona home.

"Today" show host Savannah Guthrie has opened up about her family's "agony" during her first interview since the disappearance of her mother more than seven weeks ago.

"It is unbearable," Guthrie told her co-anchor Hoda Kotb through tears during a preview of the emotional interview that aired on the "Today" show on Wednesday.

"And to think of what she went through. I wake up every night, in the middle of the night, every night. And in the darkness, I imagine her terror, and it is unthinkable, but those thoughts demand to be thought, and I will not hide my face, but she needs to come home now," Guthrie said of her mom, Nancy Guthrie.

The rest of the interview is set to air in two parts on Thursday and Friday on the NBC morning program.

"As you'll see in the coming days, she talks about so many things. She talks about the investigation, she talks about her faith, and she talks about how she's getting through," Kotb said Wednesday.

Savannah Guthrie has been on hiatus from the "Today" show since her mother's disappearance. A "Today" show spokesperson has previously said she plans to return to co-hosting the morning show at some point.

Authorities believe that the 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie was abducted from her ranch-style home just outside of Tucson, Arizona, in the middle of the night.

The woman was last seen on January 31, when she was dropped off at her home after dinner at her daughter, Annie Guthrie's, house, authorities have said.

Local law enforcement and the FBI have been working to identify the masked and armed man who was captured on footage from Nancy Guthrie's missing Nest doorbell camera the night she vanished.

Early on, investigators found drops of blood on Nancy Guthrie's porch that were later confirmed to be hers.

Last month, the Guthrie family offered up a $1 million reward for the return of Nancy Guthrie, which is on top of the $100,000 that the FBI has already offered for information related to her disappearance.

In an Instagram video post announcing the reward, Savannah Guthrie acknowledged her mother may already be dead, saying, "We also know that she may be lost."

• "Clipping" marketing, a practice where creators get paid to repost video clips, is taking off.
• Top-tier clipping creators can now earn thousands of dollars a month, with guaranteed pay.
• Clipping has gained popularity among podcasters, Kick streamers, and YouTubers like MrBeast.

There's a new class of creators moving from side hustlers to in-demand pros.

Dubbed "clippers," these creators are paid to post snippets of podcasts, livestreams, movies, or songs on TikTok and other social apps, creating the impression that they're trendy.

Even if you haven't heard of "clipping," you've likely seen this emerging social-media strategy in the wild.

YouTubers, podcasters, and Kick streamers are early adopters of the tactic, which is performance-based and usually only pays out if a video gets significant views.

The clipping community is filled with side hustlers who are happy to earn $200 from a viral video. However, as the category has matured and attracted larger budgets, a new professional class of high-performing clippers has emerged. These clipping all-stars can still get performance-based pay, but they're also being offered guaranteed retainers of $500 to $1,500 a month to ensure they get to work, according to one "elite clipper" application viewed by Business Insider.

"An elite clipper is someone who runs hundreds of pages, and across those hundreds of pages, multiple have millions of followers or a minimum 100,000 followers," said Evan Stanfield, cofounder of the clip-marketing agency Clipping Culture. "If we're paying a monthly retainer, we can ask them to post 20 or 30 times a month, instead of whenever they feel like it."

These "top 1% of clippers" can earn five figures a month, Stanfield said.

Clipping is gaining popularity at a moment of flux in the world of social media marketing. As algorithmic feeds become more personalized, hiring influencers to post sponsored content doesn't necessarily translate into views (unless you're a superstar). Marketers who post clipping campaigns only pay when their content performs.

YouTuber MrBeast recently launched his own clipping platform, Vyro, which he uses to promote his channel, according to the company's website.

"The clippers that we're talking about are not like influencers," said Johnny Cloherty, CEO of the marketing-agency Genni. "You're getting people that are like you and me, or maybe some college kids that are just looking for some extra dough."

Clippers can sign up for campaigns in Discord servers, side-hustle sites like Whop, or marketing platforms like Genni. While they're often paid to clip footage, at other times the task is to add a brand's logo to a viral video clip or to embed a song beneath a post.

They're typically offered between $1 and $4 per 1,000 views, marketers told Business Insider, though some agencies offer higher rates when creators reach thresholds like 100,000 or 1 million views.

To promote the launch of Beast Land, MrBeast offered creators $2 for every 1,000 views on clips they posted about the pop-up theme park, for example. A Vyro promotion for a November boxing match between Conor Benn and Chris Eubank Jr. offered the same rate. One of Clipping Culture's recent briefs asked clippers to promote footage from Sabrina Carpenter and María Becerra's Lollapalooza Argentina appearance for around $1 per 1,000 views.

"It is a little bit of a roll of the dice for the clippers, but it's a super low lift for them," Cloherty said. "These clippers have become an ecosystem and a community out there that kind of know what they're doing, and know the pros and cons of it."

• YouTuber Caleb Hammer drags people for their poor financial decisions on his show "Financial Audit."
• He revealed the one mistake he sees people make the most — and why it's not entirely their fault.
• He also shared what he splurges on, having paid down his own debt.

YouTuber Caleb Hammer has built a career digging into people's poor money decisions on his show, "Financial Audit."

He says there's one mistake he sees most consistently.

"It's the cars," he said during a wide-ranging interview with Business Insider. "People are obsessed with getting whatever big truck or SUV that has the new year on it. And they say it's the safety features, because, you know, we were making cars one year ago that were just killing everyone. So you've got to get the 2027 Ford F-150 Turbo edition."

Hammer, who also sells a budgeting app, Dollarwise, and financial education courses, conceded that it's not entirely people's fault that they fall into the car trap.

"You need to have a car to have a job, and you need to have a job to have a car," he said. "We have that endless loop because we have horrible public infrastructure in this country. We built everything around the car. So people are stuck in that loop."

Still, he said, people will also try to justify spending beyond their means on their "dream car."

"It doesn't make sense," he continued.

Hammer, 31, speaks from experience. He once racked up $120,000 in debt by paying for college, a car, and some impulse buys. He taught himself about money management, which inspired him to start his show.

Now, he has a mortgage and a modest amount of debt, and has shifted his priorities. He spends on the occasional dinner out, his dogs, and hiring good people for his company.

"I still love McDonald's," he said. "I try not to get it, and my girlfriend doesn't want me to because it's bad for me. But at least I can afford it."

Hammer said he doesn't see the financial situation of everyday Americans improving anytime soon, especially with the rise of buy-now-pay-later services.

"With Klarna being baked into everything and Afterpay, unfortunately, I have a feeling the show's going to be going till I'm done," he said.

Read our full interview with Caleb Hammer here.

One morning in January, Gracie Nielson was scrolling TikTok when she discovered something that made her skin crawl.

The fashion, lifestyle, and beauty influencer with over 600,000 followers noticed a comment on one of her videos that directed her to a clip of a woman wearing low-slung blue jeans and a yellow crop top. Her face didn't resemble Nielson's, but the exact same outfit was hanging in Nielson's closet, and even the woman's body struck a familiar pose. Nielson realized it was a shot-for-shot replica of a video she'd posted months prior, down to the backdrop — a corner of Nielson's home in California. Intrigue quickly devolved into unease.

"That's so crazy. This is my house. This is my body, just with somebody else's face," Nielson recalled thinking. "It's just a really uncomfortable feeling."

The other woman in question may not be a woman at all, but a digital echo: Sienna Rose, aka @siennarosely, describes herself as a neo-soul singer who has over 1.5 million monthly listeners on Spotify. Her TikTok page is filled with uncanny videos where the star smiles and vamps — but never talks — to the camera. Though she's been plagued by accusations that she's AI-generated, Rose has never performed live; AI detection tools used by the streaming service Deezer have flagged Rose's music as AI-generated. Emails I sent to the address listed in Rose's TikTok bio went unanswered.

It's Nielson's job to make videos, so she made another TikTok to share her reaction to the discovery. "I'm so scared, you guys," she said, comparing her video to Rose's since-deleted one. The TikTok quickly went viral, amassing over 2.4 million views to date — confirmation that Nielson's shock had reverberated far beyond her usual audience.

"I even had a friend text me that day, and she was like, 'I did not know Sienna Rose was AI,'" Nielson said. "She's like, 'I have listened to her music before, completely not knowing that this is not a real person.'"

AI influencers are here, and if Nielson's case is any indication, you may not have even noticed. As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly sophisticated and accessible to the average person, employers, companies, and brands have begun investing in the technology to reduce labor costs. Number-crunchers aren't the only ones who are being replaced — creatives are feeling the heat, too. Now, there's AI music on the Billboard charts, AI used in Oscar-winning movies, and, of course, AI all over our social media feeds.

Just as influencers once stormed the internet — harnessing the then-new technology of social media to draw eyeballs, score paid sponsorships, and rake in advertising dollars previously reserved for traditional celebrities — digital avatars are now poised to flood the same market.

Ally Rooker, a part-time content creator with nearly 190,000 followers on TikTok, described having AI imitate real-life influencers to hawk products as nothing short of labor-busting.

"When I see influencers promoting generative AI video tools, I'm like, 'You don't understand the reason that you have a career,'" Rooker told Business Insider. "You don't understand how fragile what you're doing is, and how fragile your revenue is. Because you're promoting your replacement."

The multibillion-dollar creator economy was built on aspirational influencers who can promise their followers that a better life — or at least clearer skin, or a life-changing haircut, or a dream vacation — is just a swipe away. So what happens when a new crop of competitors is aspiration, personified: influencers who don't suffer from hormonal acne, bed head, or debilitating jet lag? Friendly, almost-human faces who don't need to eat, sleep, or even get paid?

AI influencers are already making money from brand deals

In a social media landscape where real people already use beauty filters and Photoshop, brands are going all in on artificiality. A 2025 survey of about 1,000 senior marketers in the UK and US from the social and influencer marketing agency Billion Dollar Boy found that roughly 79% said they are increasing investment in AI-generated creator content. Grand View Research estimates that the global virtual influencer market will reach $48.88 billion by 2030.

Real influencers fear that could translate into a lot of lost income.

"Why would Maybelline pay a real person if they can just pay an AI person that looks essentially the same?" Rooker said, using the popular beauty brand as an example. "The person scrolling Maybelline's Instagram doesn't need to know who it is in the video. They just have to think it's a real person."

Right now, "think" is the operative word. Disclosure requirements for AI influencers remain murky, and lawful uses of AI vary from state to state in the US. While many AI influencers are labeled as such in their bios — Aitana Lopez, a pink-haired fitness and fashion influencer calls herself a "digital soul," while Olivia Brand, a blonde Alex Cooper knock-off who generates inspirational podcast clips on TikTok, calls herself an "AI it-girl" — casual scrollers on their FYPs can easily remain oblivious to the fact that they've encountered AI at all.

Even if someone like Nielson could make the case for a right of publicity violation — alleging that a third party has taken her name, image, or likeness and used it for a commercial purpose without permission — lawsuits are expensive, and a worthwhile payoff isn't guaranteed.

All of this raises questions about how human influencers can continue to make a living if brands begin to favor their visually pristine, easily programmable counterparts. Those fears aren't unfounded: The Clueless, the Barcelona-based agency that created Aitana Lopez, among other hyper-realistic AI "stock models," pivoted away from hiring humans in the pandemic, citing their unpredictability and inconsistency as motivating factors.

Now, Aitana has three full-time partnerships, including one with a Spanish salon chain. She was recently used in a Black Friday campaign for Amazon. The Clueless creative director Andy García estimated that Aitana's assets — including her brand deals, paid posts, and bespoke "skincare" brand, Vellum, which is actually a software program to enhance the skin texture of AI avatars — generate about $75,000 to $100,000 a month. Other AI influencers also boast thriving careers: Lil Miquela, one of the original digital avatars, has partnered with Prada and Calvin Klein; Xania Monet landed a multimillion-dollar record deal; and Shudu, marketed as "the world's first digital supermodel," has starred in campaigns for Balmain and Hyundai.

García doesn't see her company's creation and other AI influencers as job-killers, but rather hurdles real humans have the tools to overcome.

"Right now, AI influencers are really not a threat to real influencers," she said. "It's like any opportunity, to which real influencers can adapt."

Many people still prefer to follow humans over robots

While brands may enjoy the control and cost efficiency digital avatars afford, when confronted directly with the question of AI, many consumers remain unconvinced.

Comment sections online are full of backlash against AI-generated ads and digital avatars, particularly those that seem designed to blend in with real people. Sienna Rose has inspired numerous sleuths to comb through her videos for copy-and-pasted details. (Suffice it to say that Nielson isn't the only creator whose backdrops and body movements appear to have been cloned on Rose's page.) Others have gone viral for protesting AI creep in daily life, from bots replacing customer service agents to stumbling across fake influencers on their feeds. When they're not being fooled by AI, many are irritated by it.

Cameron Mackintosh, a part-time content creator based in Nashville, said she was shocked and dismayed when she was briefly duped by an AI influencer on Instagram — and, even worse, when she noticed that people she knew in real life were following the account. Her video about the revelation blew up, amassing over 1.7 million views and hundreds of passionate comments.

"I would never want to read a story written by AI. I would never want to read a book written by AI. I wouldn't want to consume a painting that was created by a computer," Mackintosh told Business Insider.

As Business Insider reported in October, consumer backlash to AI accounts is causing some brands to retreat from the tech. In February, The New York Times compared the AI boom unfavorably to the "dot-com boom," citing a 2025 YouGov survey in which more than a third of respondents said they were "concerned that AI would end human life on earth."

Allison Fitzpatrick, an attorney in New York with experience in advertising and influencer marketing, told me that concerns about intellectual property and copyright infringement — not to mention the demand for real-human relatability that made influencers a force in the first place — have translated to a lack of interest in AI influencers among the brands that she works with.

"I think the human audience, the followers, are smart enough to know that between an influencer who is human and can actually taste the product or go on vacation and stay at the hotel or fly in the airline," she said. "You're going to take the human influencer's endorsement far more seriously than an AI influencer who's done none of what I've just described."

Influencers are ready to fight back

Influencers like Nielson aren't giving up hope yet. They say leaning into reality, not realism, will be key to staying in business.

"A lot of content creators, people like to follow them because they are relatable — people sharing skin issues or insecurities, for example," Nielson said. "That wouldn't really happen using an AI avatar because it's not human. It's not real."

Emily Higgins, a North Carolina-based content creator who also runs a social media consulting business, told me that as high-production-value content becomes the norm, she expects to see a renewed embrace of scripting hiccups, grainy footage, and other deliberate imperfections.

"If something's too highly produced or too perfect-seeming, then immediately, it can be dismissed as AI," Higgins said. "We're going to see people trying to create more flaws in their content. We'll see more human, emotional, raw kinds of elements."

Some brands are already leading the charge. Dove and Aerie have vowed not to use AI in their marketing materials, using slogans like "Real People Only" and "Keep Beauty Real." Aerie, which stopped retouching its models in 2014 — putting stretch marks, blemishes, and body diversity front and center — earned its most popular Instagram post in a year thanks to its anti-AI promise. Meanwhile, Heineken and Polaroid have explicitly mocked AI and Big Tech in recent ad campaigns.

Influencing is often dismissed as a low-effort profession, but at its core, it's an act of vulnerability. To broadcast your face and feelings to hundreds, thousands, or even millions of strangers requires nerve and resilience, neither of which AI can reproduce.

As a result, Mackintosh said she expects people to begin seeking out creators and brands that put visible effort into the creative process.

"There's this novelty about human creation, and I don't think that will ever go away," she said. "I always think it will be appreciated. I just think there will be less and less of it because, economically, it will be easier to fake."

• Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos wants AI to help Hollywood make "better" movies and TV shows.
• Sarandos said AI won't move the needle by just making content faster and cheaper.
• Netflix recently acquired Ben Affleck's AI editing company, InterPositive.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos doesn't think AI slop will rule the entertainment world.

"I don't think faster and cheaper matters if it's not better," Sarandos said of using AI in a new interview with POLITICO, which, like Business Insider, is part of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. "This is the most competitive time in the history of media. So you've got to be better every time out of the gate."

AI startups building tools for entertainment companies and creatives — from special effects to content generation — have been a growing presence in Hollywood.

For instance, Netflix recently acquired InterPositive, an AI startup that develops tools for filmmakers, founded by actor Ben Affleck.

"My focus is that AI should be a creator tool," Sarandos told POLITICO. "The same way production tools have evolved over time, AI is just a rapid, important evolution of these tools."

Sarandos said that while AI can be useful for editing and production, good content "still requires writers and actors and lighting techs."

One category where Sarandos said AI hasn't been able to replace human talent is voice acting.

"The one thing that we find to be the most important part of dubbing is the performance. So good voice actors really matter," he said. "Yeah, it's a lot cheaper to use AI, but without the performance, which is very human, it actually runs down the quality of the production."

Still, he sees an opportunity in the voice category.

"I think what will happen is you'll be able to do things like pick up lines that you do months and months after the production," he said. "You'll be able to recreate some of those lines in the film without having to call everybody back and redo everything, which will help make a better film."

• Netflix's co-CEO said the streamer boosted YouTuber Mark Rober's product sales.
• Ted Sarandos said that Netflix's podcast and creator content push is showing promise.
• He said the model for talk shows has changed with the decline of large broadcast TV audiences.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos says the streamer's push into podcasting and YouTube-born content is bearing fruit.

Sarandos specifically called out science educator Mark Rober's show as an early success. He stressed that Netflix was both allowing the YouTube star to reach a larger audience and also sell more of his science kits.

"What he saw was a big increase in his consumer product sales after this first week on Netflix, even though he reaches an enormous audience around the world," Sarandos said in a new interview with POLITICO, which, like Business Insider, is part of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network.

On "Mark Rober's CrunchLabs," which launched in November, the former NASA engineer stages science experiments and competitions in his backyard.

Sarandos said he was also bullish on Netflix's Pete Davidson interview show, as well as its official behind-the-scenes podcasts about popular shows like "Bridgerton."

"I think a video podcast is just the evolution of talk shows," Sarandos said.

YouTube, already the top US streaming TV service, has solidified its position as the No. 1 destination for podcasts. Netflix has been looking to challenge YouTube by luring some of its star creators like Rober and preschool educator Ms. Rachel. Netflix also rolled out a slate of video podcasts early this year, including Bill Simmons' show, Charlamagne Tha God's "The Breakfast Club," and Barstool Sports fare.

Some creator reps have wondered whether Netflix can turn its viewers into habitual consumers of video podcasts, and whether leaving YouTube will cost creators in audience and revenue. Netflix has sought video exclusivity with many of its podcast deals, while some YouTube creators' deals, like Rober's and Ms. Rachel's, have been nonexclusive.

Sarandos said Netflix was seeing "promising numbers" from its podcasts, which focus on subjects like comedy, sports, and true crime, areas that already do well on the platform. He didn't share specific figures.

As broadcast TV audiences have shrunk, viewership for traditional talk shows has declined, and Sarandos acknowledged the difficulty of porting the format to streaming services. Netflix has had some growing pains with talk shows, which often haven't drawn huge audiences.

"We have tried to and failed at many talk shows over the years," Sarandos said. "Much smaller audiences tune into multiple shows in the form of a podcast every day. It's a deeper relationship than it is a broad one. So, instead of trying to make one show for the world, you might have to make hundreds or thousands of shows for the whole world."

• Netflix's co-CEO said he's asked President Donald Trump to avoid tariffs on foreign-made films and TV.
• Ted Sarandos said he thinks tax incentives are a better bet to boost US production.
• Global filmmaking has been a key differentiator for Netflix in the streaming wars.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos doesn't think tariffs are the right way to boost US movie and TV production — and he thinks he's gotten through to President Donald Trump on the issue.

"He has brought up tariffs for the movie and television industry many times, and I've hopefully talked to him the way out of them," Sarandos said in a new interview with POLITICO, which, alongside Business Insider, is part of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network.

Trump has been keen on using tariffs to encourage more filming in the US. In May, he announced on Truth Social a plan to impose a 100% tariff on films produced outside the US. He hasn't implemented it so far.

Trump's plan to add tariffs on foreign movies stemmed from a desire to slow production declines in Hollywood and other areas of the US that "are being devastated" by filming incentive programs abroad, he wrote in his May announcement on Truth Social.

Los Angeles production work has been dropping off for years, and the city's media professionals are feeling the pain. Overseas filming hubs like London have been courting production work by offering big cost-saving incentives.

Sarandos said he'd prefer the US use similar tax incentives to bring filming back home.

"Healthy incentive programs attract a lot of production, and you've seen a lot of them move from California to Georgia to New Jersey," Sarandos told POLITICO. "Having the incentives versus tariffs is much better."

The tariff structure for a movie, which isn't a physical good, isn't entirely clear. A White House spokesman said in a statement shortly after Trump's announcement that "no final decisions on foreign film tariffs" had been made and that the administration was "exploring all options to deliver on President Trump's directive to safeguard our country's national and economic security while Making Hollywood Great Again."

A fee on foreign productions could become very expensive for Netflix, which has released a slate of international films and TV shows over the years, including "All Quiet on the Western Front," "Squid Game," and "Adolescence."

Netflix's global reach and its ability to turn a South Korean or German drama into a global hit have been key differentiators for the company, which is expected to spend as much as $20 billion on content this year.

• Looksmaxxer Clavicular and other controversial personalities have drawn attention to the livestreaming service Kick.
• Clavicular says he's made more than $100,000 in a month on Kick, known for light moderation and big payouts.
• Kick says it believes in freedom with limits and has increased its moderation "tenfold."

The livestreamer Clavicular — who was once filmed running into someone with his Cybertruck — is the kind of provocative creator most major brands won't touch.

That hasn't stopped him from making serious money.

The 20-year-old says he's pulled in more than $100,000 a month on Kick, his primary streaming platform, where he's known for "looksmaxxing," or going to extreme measures to maximize attractiveness.

Clavicular, whose real name is Braden Peters, isn't alone. Kick has become a haven for some creators who are fed up with — or have been banned from — other platforms, particularly Amazon-owned Twitch.

Kick's payouts are a crucial revenue source for these creators, unlike the brand deals that serve as the backbone of the broader creator economy. A 2025 survey found that brands fund nearly three-quarters of creators' revenue, making Kick a lifeline for those considered "unsafe" by mainstream brands.

Australia-based Kick, founded in 2022 by the owners of the crypto gambling site Stake.com, features lighter content moderation than some rivals and a generous pay structure: a 95/5 subscription revenue split, compared to rival Twitch's default 50/50 split. Kick says it may permit some violence depending on the context, for example, while Twitch says it has a "zero-tolerance" policy.

Kick also makes direct payments to creators based on their viewership. The platform said it made $182 million in these payments between August 2023 and the end of February.

Its audience is growing fast, too: Kick nearly doubled its share of hours watched to 12.4%, or 4.5 billion hours in 2025, according to a Stream Hatchet report. That made it the third-largest live-streaming platform by share of hours watched, behind Twitch at 52% and YouTube Gaming at 24%.

Kick says it believes in freedom within limits. The platform, which is trying to smooth the way for ad deals, told Business Insider that it's increased its human moderation team "tenfold" since 2022 and that it responds quickly to creators in its live support chat. (Kick briefly suspended Clavicular in December 2025, after the video in which he ran into someone. Police investigated the scene and didn't file charges.)

Kick has also begun signing more brand-safe gamers and organizing events for creators, sponsoring a Formula 1 team last year.

"Kick has started to legitimize itself," said Mustafa Aijaz, VP at online gaming organization SoaR Gaming, which has multiple players using the platform alongside Twitch.

The manosphere is thriving on Kick

Clavicular wasn't always on Kick.

He started his rise to online fame by posting on Looksmax.org, a forum where people rate each other and ask for advice on improving their appearance before going out. He now runs a paid online academy that provides looksmaxxing advice and guides to picking up women, which he refers to as "targets" and "slayables," Rolling Stone reported.

Clavicular, who has said he eschews politics, has gotten attention for associating with the likes of far-right influencer Nick Fuentes and self-described misogynist influencer Andrew Tate, and for being filmed partying to the Ye song "Heil Hitler." Clavicular shrugged off the incident, calling it "just a song."

Mariel Barnes, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor, describes Clavicular as part of the manosphere, a loose collection of media outlets and influencers she characterizes as advocating anti-feminist ideology. Manosphere influencers have found fertile ground on Kick, where the top 10 streamers are usually men, typical of other livestreaming platforms.

Barnes said they often get their start through broadly palatable causes, like self-improvement or fathers' rights, before turning to darker fare like overt misogyny.

Clavicular's behavior and views have made him a wider symbol of the plight of young men. California Gov. Gavin Newsom talked about him in a late February interview and bemoaned that "these are the guys raising our kids."

Clavicular reposted it, replying, "The brand is strong."

From gaming and self-improvement to extreme politics

Some other boundary-pushing livestreamers on Kick started in gaming before shifting into politics and pop culture, widening their audience and impact. Many of the more popular streamers fall on the right end of the political spectrum; others are harder to pin down politically.

These streamers' chats become the wellspring of communities that often attract impressionable kids, said Ryan Morrison, the CEO of esports-focused Evolved Talent Agency, who did Canadian streamer xQc's deal with Kick.

Some of the discourse on Kick can be toxic and attracts "people who are lonely and helpless," Morrison said.

Overall, Kick hosts more than 500,000 creators, who can stream and post clips. Scroll through the app, and you might find people playing casual games like Pokémon next to a video of someone playing slots.

You'll also likely come across videos from Adin Ross, 25, who ranks as Kick's second-most popular streamer, according to Stream Charts. He has said his deal with Kick pays him five figures per hour he streams. He rose to fame by streaming NBA 2K and GTA V before moving into long, unfiltered interviews with celebrities like LeBron James and Logan Paul.

In 2024, he gave then-candidate Donald Trump a Cybertruck and tried to grow his support among young men. Ross buddied up with Tate and has streamed with Fuentes.

Ross was banned by Twitch in 2023 for not deleting multiple racist and antisemitic comments in his chat. Ross has said he takes accountability for the behavior of his fans. He also apologized after a clip of him making what appeared to be a Nazi salute circulated on X.

Another prominent Kick streamer is Harrison Sullivan, or HSTikkytokky, a 24-year-old British influencer who started with a focus on health and fitness and has since built his brand around flirting with and insulting women.

Sullivan, who has been suspended from Kick multiple times, including for using homophobic slurs and showing sexually explicit content, now has 242,000 followers on the platform, where he often streams about gambling and women.

His views are sometimes hard to follow. For example, in one video, he denied being homophobic and racist in response to an earlier video where he maintained he was homophobic as well as antisemitic. He recently gained wider exposure as a subject of the new Netflix doc, "Louis Theroux: Inside the Manosphere."

Then there's N3on, 21, whose real name is Rangesh Mutama. He started streaming as a teen gamer and has since shifted to real-life streaming marked by outlandish and inflammatory stunts — like faking his own death. He has nearly 500,000 followers on Kick, where he's also faced at least one suspension.

He's gotten some mainstream attention by hanging out with the ex-rapper Iggy Azalea, creating content with other rappers, and going on "The Breakfast Club," where he was called out for people leaving racist comments in his chat. N3on responded that the chat wasn't representative of his community, and he said he was evolving from a person who used to say whatever he wanted.

Kick isn't alone in platforming controversial streamers who have been barred from other sites. Ross also streams on YouTube. Kicked off mainstream platforms, Fuentes streams to nearly 700,000 followers on Rumble.

Streamers span the political spectrum

Kick is home to provocative streamers of many political and ideological persuasions.

Steven Bonnell, aka Destiny, is a political creator who built a following with his debate-focused streams. The 37-year-old advocates for some liberal policies, but isn't easily pigeonholed politically. He said he was suspended from Twitch in 2018 after using homophobic and racist language, then permanently banned in 2022. He's also streamed a generally friendly discussion with Fuentes. Today, Destiny streams to 133,000 followers on Kick.

There's also prominent streamer xQc, whose real name is Félix Lengyel. XQc, 30, gained online celebrity as a pro Overwatch player before getting an up to $100 million payday from Kick in one of the platform's biggest deals.

While not overtly political, he's called people who voted for Trump a slur for the developmentally disabled. Early in his career, he made a widely criticized homophobic remark, for which he apologized. Years later, he expressed disapproval of homophobic remarks by fans in another online personality's stream. Morrison, xQc's manager, said he is "loud and crazy" but added that he has "not a sliver" in common with the alt-right.

Whatever the politics or nature of their controversies, a common thread among many top Kick streamers is behavior that pushes the boundaries of social acceptance.

"Kick is like the Wild West of streaming," said Eric Harper, CEO of esports firm GG Talent Group. "Some of the biggest names on the platform have been ostracized from the rest of the gaming community because of hateful views, hateful actions. The TLDR is, there's a huge brand risk, which is why a lot of streamers don't stream there."

• Many tech leaders say they're ditching screen time limits, though some still use them.
• Instead, they're focused on how their kids are interacting with technology, prioritizing creativity.
• Short-form video and social media remain major concerns for many parents.

These days, parenting means navigating a seemingly endless parade of decisions about technology. Can your toddler watch "Sesame Street" on an iPad? Does FaceTiming the grandparents count toward screen time? Should your teen have access to social media just because "everyone else" seems to?

Parents are more cognizant than ever about the pitfalls — and potential — of technology, so it's natural to wonder how the people leading tech companies handle this with their own kids. Paypal cofounder Peter Thiel and Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel have both said they limit their young children (all 8 or under) to an hour and a half of screen time per week. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has said that he wants his kids to use screens for communication, not passive consumption.

It turns out, tech leaders, for the most part, are like the rest of us: trying to balance screen-free time and critical thinking skills, while also giving their kids access to the world that technology can unlock.

Here's how seven tech leaders are handling technology decisions for their families.

Finding the middle

Kate Doerksen is the co-founder and CEO of Sage Haven, an app that helps parents monitor their kids' messaging. Her kids, who are 7 and 9, get an hour per day on their iPads or Nintendo Switch, plus additional time if the family is playing a video game together. She plans to delay smartphones and social media, but her daughter has an Apple Watch with messenger (which Doerksen monitors).

"Like most things in life, the right answer feels like it lies somewhere in the middle," Doerksen says. "It's not tech abstinence, and it's not unlimited, unfettered usage. It's moderate usage on non-addictive apps and games with boundaries."

Learning and creating

As the chief learning officer at the online education company Stride, Niyoka McCoy, sees tech as a normal part of life, but she's still intentional about how her children — who are 14 and 2 — use it.

"We believe technology should be a tool for learning and creativity first, and entertainment second," she says. Her kids don't have hard-and-fast screen time limits, but McCoy aims to avoid them passively consuming content.

"When kids spend too much time scrolling or watching instead of creating, learning, or building something meaningful," she says, "that is when technology stops being beneficial."

Focusing on well-being, not screen time

Three years ago, Hari Ravichandran's daughter, who was then 13, went through a tough time — one that he believes her access to a smartphone contributed to. He had given her a phone at 13, but now believes that was too young, so he decided to take the phone away and delay access until 15 or 16 for her as well as his three younger children.

"I knew we couldn't just send her back into the same digital environment that had amplified those issues," said Ravichandran, the founder and CEO of online security company Aura.

At the same time, "What I think is overblown is the idea that technology itself is the enemy," Ravichandran says. "Cutting it out completely doesn't solve the root problem and can actually limit kids' independence and digital literacy."

Today, he focuses on how technology impacts his children's mood, sleep, self-esteem, and overall well-being.

"For us, it's less about strict bans and more about awareness, accountability, and open dialogue," he says.

Making sure values align

Tim Sheehan, co-founder and CEO Greenlight — which provides debit cards for children and teens — gave his four kids access to smartphones at 12, and social media at 15. His kids now range in age from 17 to 26. When they were younger, he watched their tech consumption closely, knowing how impressionable they were.

"My goal is to make sure the outside influences in their lives support the values we're trying to instill," he says.

Limiting short-term video

Justice Eroline, chief technology officer at the software development firm BairesDev, has a blanket rule of 1 hour of screen time for his kids, who are 8, 10, and 12. Even within that, he pays close attention to the type of content they're watching.

"I don't allow short-form content for the kids as it affects their attention span," he says.

Ahu Chhapgar, chief technology officer at fintech company Paysafe and dad of two (ages 10 and 13), says short-form video worries him more than anything else.

"When kids get access to it, they almost enter a trance," he says. "That level of stimulus is not how the brain evolved to process information, and I do worry about long-term effects on attention and impulse control."

Allowing AI, and gaming

Unlike some parents, Eroline is much less concerned about gaming.

"Video games can teach kids a lot of different things: teamwork, reaction time, problem solving, grit, dealing with defeat," Eroline says. "The content of the video game might be questionable, but there are plenty that can work for different age ranges."

Chhapgar won't let his kids have access to smartphones until they're 14, and social media until they're 16, but he does encourage them to use ChatGPT for 20 minutes each day.

"No one has all the answers about AI yet," he says. "So I'd rather they explore, build, and experiment responsibly instead of just passively consuming technology."

Controlling the interaction

Nik Kale, principal engineer with Cisco Systems, makes sure that his 3-year-old isn't given a screen when she's upset.

"I don't want her building a dependency where the first response to discomfort is a device," he explains.

He also ensures that he or his wife — not an algorithm — are choosing what their daughter sees.

"I don't let automated systems make unsupervised decisions in my production environments at work," he says. "I'm not going to let one make unsupervised decisions about what my three-year-old's brain consumes either."

That, to him, is much more important than seemingly arbitrary screen time limits.

"Parents are adding up minutes like it's a toxicity dosage," he says, "when the real variable is whether a human or an algorithm is driving the experience."

• Demarre Johnson, 23, appeared in a viral photo shoot published by Interview magazine last week.
• PwC on Friday confirmed Johnson had left the company, saying he departed in mid-February.
• A person familiar with the matter told Business Insider his exit wasn't related to the magazine pictorial.

One of the "finest boys in finance" — whose splashy magazine spread last week was the talk of Wall Street — is no longer with his firm.

In a statement to Business Insider, PwC confirmed that former associate Demarre Johnson is "no longer an employee and left the firm in mid-February."

Johnson went viral last week after he and three junior bankers were featured in designer clothing in an Interview magazine photo shoot published March 4. A person familiar with the matter said his departure was not related to his magazine appearance.

The 23-year-old, who spoke with Business Insider twice after the magazine story, didn't comment when a reporter reached him on Friday.

The Babson College graduate talked to Business Insider last week about being chosen for the spread, saying he knew it would make headlines because "controversy sells."

"My initial reaction was, 'Oh, they're going to clown us because we think we're pretty,'" Johnson said. "That's exactly what happened."

The photo shoot generated instant discourse among Wall Street insiders who took to social media to vent about the stereotypes they said it portrayed and the unofficial rules it broke — including not outshining your bosses.

Bankers buzzed about whether the participants — who also worked at Goldman Sachs and Barclays — got approval from their employers before going in front of the cameras. Goldman said that "media relations did not approve these interviews." The other firms didn't comment at the time.

Johnson, who has a vibrant social media presence, said on Monday that he's been careful about social media posts he's made about his job. "If I built the multibillion-dollar bank business, I would hate if one of my associates formed my company's image with one video," he told Business Insider.

Other participants in the shoot have avoided the spotlight since its release, but Johnson reposted feedback about the story on his social channels.

"I'm viral on twitter," he said in one post, with four crying emojis.

• Young tech startup founders are having a moment in the AI era.
• From teenagers to 20-somethings, these founders are raising millions.
• Take a look at the pitch decks some of these founders shared with Business Insider.

Tech is no stranger to young founders.

Steve Jobs was 21 when he cofounded Apple in 1976. Mark Zuckerberg was 19 when Facebook launched. Whitney Wolfe Herd was 25 when she unveiled Bumble.

Many of today's startup founders are still young and scrappy. And in the age of AI, they're even more empowered to barrel ahead.

Some are following the footsteps of tech titans before them and dropping out of college. Others are opting out of the undergraduate experience altogether, with a few ditching high school to pursue careers in tech.

Arlan Rakhmetzhanov, founder of AI coding startup Nozomio, told Business Insider that he dropped out of high school in Kazakhstan after getting accepted into the competitive startup accelerator program, Y Combinator (YC). At the age of 18, he raised $6.2 million for Nozomio.

Rakhmetzhanov isn't the only teenager finding success in AI. There's also Toby Brown, a UK teen who raised $1 million for his AI project. There's also Zach Yadegari, the teenage cofounder of Cal AI, a nutrition app.

College-aged founders are also building companies and raising capital, such as the Yale students behind Series AI, a new social networking startup.

The median age for YC participants is now 24 years old, compared to 30 in 2022, YC's Pete Koomen told The New York Times in August.

Business Insider has interviewed the founders of 12 startups who are 25 years old or younger and have raised millions in funding since 2024 about the pitch decks they used to impress investors.

Read 12 pitch decks founders who are 25 years old or younger used to raise millions:

Note: Founders were 25 or younger when Business Insider published the following articles.

Series A

• Posh, an events platform, raised a $22 million Series A when its founders were 23. Read the 12-page pitch deck it used.
• Clyx, a startup trying to connect people via in-person events, raised a $14 million Series A when its founder was 25. Read 22 pages of its deck.

Seed

• Ditto, an AI dating startup founded by UC Berkeley dropouts, raised $9.2 million when the founders were 23 and 24. Read its 12-page pitch deck.
• Lyra, an AI video call startup, raised a $6 million seed out of YC when its founder was 23. Read the 8-slide pitch deck it used.
• Nexad, an AI adtech startup, raised a $6 million seed after wrapping up A16z's Speedrun accelerator. Nexad's CEO was 25. Read the 10-page pitch deck.
• Orange Slice, a YC-backed sales tech platform, raised $5.3 million when its founders were 23. Read the 7-page pitch deck.
• Golpo, a generative AI video startup, raised a $4.1 million seed out of YC when its founders — who are also brothers — were 19 and 20. Read its 7-page pitch deck.
• Bluejay, an AI agent startup, raised a $4 million seed coming out of YC when its founders were 23. Read its 9-page pitch deck.
• Novoflow, an agentic AI startup building tools for medical clinics, raised $3.1 million when its founders were 18 and 19. Read its pitch deck.
• CodeFour, an AI police tech startup, was founded by two 19-year-old MIT dropouts and raised $2.7 million coming out of YC. Read the pitch deck.
• Cerca, a dating app that connects people with mutual friends, raised a $1.6 million seed when its CEO was 23. Read the 10-slide deck.

Pre-seed

• Series, an AI social networking startup, raised a $3.1 million pre-seed when its founders were 21.

This story has been updated with additional examples.