Midnight Opinions

Guidelines and Masterlist

Disclaimer

Do Not Spread Hate! This includes those discussed in my blog posts and those in this community. I do not care if you think your hate is justified, leaving hate or sending death threats for any reason is loser behaviour.

Gossip and Celebrity drama is something we engage in for a little fun, don't let it consume you and your life.

Substack: https://midnightopinion.substack.com/

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theinternetcommentarydesk/

Masterlist

USA Hockey Drama

"I Can't Respect Other Art Forms but People Have to Take My Ass Seriously"-Timothée Chalamet 

Meet the New Influencer Personality of the Month: Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy

Separating Scadal from Outcome During Awards Season

The Internet Will Move On, They Won't: The Problem with Profiting From Controversy

OSAP Cuts Are Creating Barriers: Who Really Pays the Price?

The Publishing World: Influence vs. Integrity

A BookTok Original Picture: The Ethics of Trademarking

Allie Rose Co. and why you can’t just trademark anything

Substack: https://midnightopinion.substack.com/

Introduction

Imagine you’re a small business owner, you work hard to create a business and products for the girlies of BookTok. Like many other businesses, you print popular BookTok phrases, such as “Hot Girls Read,” or references to popular tropes on your products to appeal to the community. But what would happen if one day a fellow small business owner trademarked one of these popular phrases, essentially making a large section of your inventory unmarketable? Well, that was the shocking reality many small business owners woke up to the morning after Allie Mitrovich, owner of Allie Rose Co. decided to file a trademark for the popular phrase “Hot Girls Read.”

On the surface, this may be viewed as a small business protecting its brand and products. However, when you take a deeper look into the ethical and legal aspects of this trademarking drama, it begins to feel less like an act of brand security and more like an unnecessary business tactic to create scarcity, ensuring that Allie Rose Co. was the only business allowed to sell products with the phrase “Hot Girls Read.”

Who is Allie Rose Co.?

Allie Rose Co. is a small business founded by Allie Mitrovich in 2020 after Allie was sent home from college due to COVID (Allie Rose Co, 2026). During this time of uncertainty, Allie decided to put her free time to good use and started creating stickers (Allie Rose Co, 2026). Eventually, she went viral on TikTok after posting a sticker tutorial, and her business took off from there. She has amassed more than 230,000 followers on TikTok and has expanded her business to sell everything from book accessories to apparel, mostly targeting the BookTok community (Allie Rose Co, 2026).

The majority of the merchandise on her website uses popular BookTok phrases like “Hot Girls Read,” often paired with colourful basic patterns, and this is the source of controversy we find Allie and her small business in today.

The Issue

Last week, Allie took to her business’s Instagram page to share the news that she filed a trademark for the phrase “Hot Girls Read” in the categories of bookmarks, stickers, notebooks, notepads, sweatshirts and t-shirts (Roeloffs, 2026). She asked that all businesses “please remove those listings from ur site as soon as possible with love !!!!” (Roeloffs, 2026).

As expected, this was met with a great deal of criticism, with many followers of the BookTok space and small business owners taking to social media to share their disappointment and anger with this decision. Many accused Allie of being greedy and targeting her competitors.

Of course, all of this controversy led to Allie releasing a statement on her story. She attempted to explain her reasoning for the trademark, claiming that she was simply trying to “protect my products from others copying it” since it had allegedly happened in the past. She stated that this was common business practice, and it was not her intention to come after small businesses.

Not only did this follow-up lead to more backlash, but it also raised questions about Allie’s ethics and the legality of trademarking a commonly used phrase that you did not create. When you look deeper into the origin of “Hot Girls Read” paired with the ethical and legal aspects of the trademark, Allie’s statement starts to feel like a meaningless cover for more selfish and profit-driven intentions.

Origins of “Hot Girls Read”

As with many popular sayings, “Hot Girls Read” originated from a song. In 2019, Megan Thee Stallion released the song “Hot Girl Summer,” and this re-popularized the “Hot Girl” movement we see today. Social media ran with the term and created different iterations of it to fit different communities, like “Hot Girl Walk” or “Hot Girl Shit.” The massive BookTok community decided to jump on the trend and coined the term “Hot Girls Read.” It was popularized during COVID and has been consistently used in conversation and on merchandise since.

However, some users took the detective work into their own hands and found actually that this phrase was used as early as 2009, long before Megan Thee Stallion’s song, and before Allie started her business (Hockey, 2026)

Considering that this was a phrase re-popularized because of a trending song, it is safe to say that Allie Mitrovich did not create it. She, like many other businesses, simply hopped on a trend and marketed their products to a massive audience. This raises questions about why her business was different from the hundreds of others that print “Hot Girls Read” on their T-shirts and bookmarks. At the end of the day, you cannot simply see a widely used phrase and say “it’s mine now” when you had nothing to do with its creation.

​And this is only the tip of the BookTok iceberg, because beyond questions of ownership, the trademark also raises serious ethical concerns around competition, exclusivity, and the impact it could have on other small businesses operating within the same community.

Impact on Small Businesses

While one small business may feel the need to protect its designs and ideas from massive corporations known for copying small creators, this situation is entirely different. When a trademark disadvantages other small businesses, it stops feeling like protection and starts feeling like ownership and greed. It is not ethically or morally right to take a widely used phrase within the book community and attempt to claim it as your own.

When Allie made the decision to trademark “Hot Girls Read,” it seems as though she either failed to consider or simply did not care about the impact this would have on other small businesses. Many of them rely on popular phrases and trends to market their products, and this trademark puts many of them in a difficult position. They are now forced to deal with the fallout and financial burden of a large portion of their inventory suddenly becoming unmarketable.

As a small business owner, Allie should have a clear understanding of how devastating this could be for other creators. This is not simply a small financial loss; small businesses often have no investors or external financial support and are instead funded personally by the owner through savings or loans. As a result, having a large inventory of unmarketable merchandise can lead to a severe financial hit. This is the consequence that many small businesses in this space are now facing due to Allie’s trademark, while she benefits from being the only business permitted to use “Hot Girls Read” as a marketing tool.

Competition and Exclusivity

As a small business owner, trademarking designs and phrases, even if they are not originally yours, is a smart move as it creates this exclusivity, where your business becomes the only place consumers can buy a given product or design. This is a concept known as exclusivity marketing, where a company uses scarcity and limited access to drive consumer interest and spending (Ketiku, 2020).

​While Allie claims she filed this trademark to “protect” her designs, it’s hard to ignore how this move benefits her business. By trademarking “Hot Girls Read,” she is essentially making it illegal for other businesses to use the phrase, clearing the way for her business to be the only one selling products with this popular phrase to the very large book community. She is making this common saying exclusive to her brand, forcing consumers to buy from her business if they want “Hot Girls Read” on bookmarks, stickers, notebooks, notepads, sweatshirts, or t-shirts. This is essentially eliminating any competition she has in favour of her own financial gain.

​The financial motivation behind this trademark becomes clearer when you take a look at the Allie Rose Co. website and find that the designs she was fighting so hard to protect are nothing more than commonly used patterns and colour palettes. Gingham, stripes, and polka dots are all widely used by both small businesses and large corporations. Her graphic designs feature tomatoes, seashells, palm trees, and more basics that have been used by countless businesses.

​Instead of finding unique and original designs, Allie Rose Co. seems to follow all of the same trends that other small businesses do. They see the designs and colours that are trending and use those to their advantage. Many of their products simply feature the phrase “Hot Girls Read” printed in basic font over popular backgrounds. This makes their products feel less like deeply personal intellectual property and more like curated Pinterest designs repackaged and marketed to the book community.

​While she wants everyone to believe that her designs need to be protected, that becomes hard to believe when her decision carries such a large financial boost for her business. Paired with her commonly used designs and colour palettes, it becomes clear that exclusivity and profits were at the forefront of this decision, and the “protection” defence was simply a response to backlash.

​While the impact on small businesses and ethical concerns are at the center of most of the discussion, questions about how this is legally enforced also have a place in this controversy, as it points to this trademark being unenforceable.

Legal Aspect

Many legal professionals have weighed in on this controversy, with the majority of them agreeing that this trademark would not hold up legally, as it can be challenged

​Imani. Law or the Imani Sisters was one of the many trademark attorneys who took to TikTok to share their professional opinion on the trademark. One-half of the sisters posted a video explaining the process many lawyers go through when filing a trademark. She highlighted that when filing a trademark, they don’t simply look at the trademarks that were already filed; they search the internet to see how commonly that phrase is used. She went on to say that when you search “Hot Girls Read,” you see that this phrase has been popular online for years, which becomes a problem because it shows that there was prior use. And since Allie was not the first one to use “Hot Girls Read,” her registration would be vulnerable because someone who used the phrase before her could come back and challenge her trademark, essentially making the trademark legally weak.

​From the perspective of a legal professional, this whole trademark situation seems unnecessary. If it could easily be challenged by any business that used the phrase before Allie did, then it seems as though it doesn’t provide the legal protection she claimed she wanted. In the end, it seems like an expensive waste of time that has only damaged public perception of Allie and, by extension, her business.

Update: The Trademark Filing Is Withdrawn

With all of the controversy surrounding the situation, Allie released a statement on TikTok, where she shared that she has decided to cancel the trademark filing. She went on to apologize to the small businesses that were impacted by her actions and admitted that this filing was a business strategy. Allie ended her statement by saying that all proceeds from her “Hot Girls Read” merchandise will be donated to charity.

Despite the apology, many social media users were not convinced. The comment section of her video was flooded with criticism from people questioning why she wanted to trademark something that was not hers in the first place. While others argued that her decision to cancel the trademark filing stemmed from the backlash and potential harm to her business.

Allie’s statement suggests that the motivations behind filing the trademark may have been more profit-driven than focused on protecting her designs. While she was initially willing to move forward with the filing, she only appeared to reconsider after facing significant backlash that threatened her reputation and business.

​While the future of Allie Rose Co. is uncertain, this serves as a reminder to other small businesses. In a time where consumers are hyper-aware of ethics, morals, and transparency, it is important to think before you act. Make sure that you weigh the pros and cons before making a major decision.

If the reaction from BookTok has taught us anything, it’s that people care, and they do not forget. When you make a decision that appears to be for financial gain, it forces customers to question your motives, and it could end in a loss of public trust, which is hard to earn back.

Conclusion

What started as a controversy surrounding a trademark filing quickly raised questions about ethics and ownership when it comes to commonly used phrases. After looking into the impact this situation had on small businesses and the ethical and legal aspects, Allie’s claims about protecting her business and products became hard to believe. After looking at the larger picture, it becomes clear that the driving motivator behind the initial trademark filing was profits and ownership. All signs point to Allie wanting her business to be the only one benefiting from the popularity of the phrase “Hot Girls Read” within the book community.

​This situation highlighted how the actions of one business can massively impact the livelihood of others. Trademarking a common phrase that was not yours to begin with does not serve to protect your business, as previously discussed; it only serves to create scarcity of products with the “Hot Girls Read” slogan, driving consumers to your website while other small businesses are forced to deal with the financial fallout.

The pursuit of profits and popularity may seem like everything, but once you start abandoning morals and ethics to achieve your goals, it becomes a slippery slope that can put you in the same position Allie found herself in, where it seems that she has lost all public trust, which will have the complete opposite impact on her business that she intended when filing this trademark.

​Additionally, the trademark being abandoned not only shows the power BookTok has, but also the power of consumers. When they see something they do not agree with and push back on it, companies are forced to listen, or they risk losing their customer base. This is important to remember in an age where corporations are taking advantage of their consumers. It is important to continue to call out behaviour that is considered immoral, because consumers deserve better; they should not be expected to just stand by while business owners continue to abandon their morality in the pursuit of profits.

​Overall, this controversy serves as a lesson in business practice. Profits and growth should not be the only things on your mind when making major decisions such as trademarking a commonly used phrase. These decisions need time and careful consideration of the impacts they may have on a larger community. It also serves as a reminder that consumers are not willing to overlook mistakes. As business priorities matter, and when consumers see something they do not agree with, it can be detrimental to a business of any size.

Sources

Allie Rose Co. (2026). An Update on the Hot Girls Read Trademark

Hockey, M. (2026, June 5). Allie Rose Co & The “Hot Girls Read” Trademark Drama, Explained. Marie Claire. https://www.marieclaire.com.au/life/entertainment/allie-rose-co-hot-girls-read-trademark/

Imani Law. (2026). “Hot Girls Read” Trademark Thoughts. In TikTok

Ketiku, S. (2020, December 21). Exclusivity in Marketing Campaigns; How It All Works. Big Field Digital. https://bigfielddigital.com/exclusivity-in-marketing-campaigns-how-it-all-works/

Mitrovich, A. (2026). Allie Rose Co. Allie Rose Co. https://allieroseco.com/en-ca

Roeloffs, M. W. (2026, June 8). Business Owner Who Trademarked “Hot Girls Read” Backs Down After Controversy. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/06/08/hot-girls-read-trademark-sparks-intense-booktok-controversy/

Opinion: The Quiet Shift From Learning to Copy-Paste Education

A look into the shift from all nighters to watching a ChatGPT write your essays for you in seconds.

Substack: https://junkdrawercommentary.substack.com/

Introduction: The End of the All-Nighter

Do you remember pulling an all-nighter to finish an essay before the deadline? Or sitting in a high school English class, writing a 1500-word essay by hand on “special” lined paper while your hand slowly cramped up? Or spending hours searching through journal articles just to find sources that actually supported your thesis? Regardless of where you went to school, most of us have experienced this. But after handing in your work, you could go home knowing every word was your own and reflected your understanding of the material.

Well, those days are gone. The pressure of worrying whether you would finish your rough draft in time is now shifting toward something entirely different as we step into an era where technology can produce entire essays in seconds.

With the introduction of AI tools like ChatGPT, students can now sit back while a chatbot does all of the work for them. All-nighters, stress, and academic pressure are slowly becoming a thing of the past with the rise of AI.

While this may seem like a sweet deal, it is important to remember what students are sacrificing when they make a deal with ChatGPT. It is easy to tell these programs what to do, look it over, and submit it, but most students have forgotten the purpose of these assignments: ensuring you understand course concepts and develop crucial skills.

It raises questions about how far this can go before students become dependent on AI and what can be done to curb its negative effects. I know I sound old, but bear with me, this is a real problem that needs to be addressed before we reach the point where students no longer know how to learn without technology doing the work for them.

Generative AI programs like ChatGPT are designed to produce human-like responses based on prompts entered by users. In academic settings, these tools can summarize articles, explain concepts, generate study guides, and even write full essays within seconds. While these features can be useful when used responsibly, they also make it incredibly easy for students to bypass the learning process altogether.

Since the introduction of ChatGPT in 2022, numerous studies and articles have explored the downsides of AI use in academic settings. Beyond the mental health and environmental concerns, constantly relying on these tools to complete assignments can create a level of dependence that leaves students unable to write or complete coursework on their own (Bakridi, 2025). And that is the core issue: students are beginning to use AI as a tool for avoidance rather than education.

In fact, studies have found that 70% of students now say they turn to generative AI for help instead of asking teachers or engaging directly with course material (KPMG, 2024). Even more concerning, 82% admit they submit AI-generated content as their own work, and 67% say they don’t retain as much knowledge when they rely on these tools (KPMG, 2024). This is not just about convenience anymore; it is becoming a pattern where students are outsourcing the very process that is meant to help them learn.

Before AI Entered the Classroom (The Good Old Days)

Before addressing how AI has worked its way into the academic world of every student, it is important to understand where we started. So let’s take a trip down memory lane as we explore the academic world before ChatGPT made its appearance.

I went to high school from 2016 to 2020 and university from 2020 to 2024. In high school, we mainly wrote essays in English or social science classes such as anthropology and social justice. Back then, essays were shorter, usually around 500–1500 words. And while that does not seem like much now that I am older, at the time it felt like the end of the world.

In English classes, we were forced to write our rough drafts on “special” lined paper provided by the teacher, and trust me, it was not fun. My hands have still not recovered from that experience. In social science classes, teachers were more relaxed and allowed us to type our rough drafts, but there was a catch: the documents were shared directly with teachers, meaning they could see everything through the document history.

Long story short, teachers saw everything. Whether they had a physical or digital copy of your work, there was really no easy way to get away with academic misconduct. If you decided to borrow a friend’s essay from when they took the class, steal one from online, or even have someone else write it for you, trust me, teachers would know. They had proof of what you actually wrote and would immediately question why your work suddenly looked familiar or read like it was written by a PhD candidate. And trust me most students, including myself, did not think it was worth it to risk suspension to avoid some coursework.

While this may sound horrible to the modern high school student, I choose to see this academic torture as a good thing. I gained valuable skills that are still useful today. Whether we were handwriting or typing our rough drafts, we were usually given 3–5 classes (3–5 hours) to plan, research, write, and edit before submitting the final version. While this process was a source of stress and anxiety, it also taught me valuable time-management skills. It forced me to learn how to research efficiently using keywords and journal databases while also teaching me how to build a cohesive argumentative essay. In the middle of all that stress, I adapted to the pressure, and although the anxiety never fully went away, I came out of the experience confident in both my writing abilities and my understanding of the course material.

As I graduated from high school and moved on to university, where all-nighters became a regular occurrence, I carried the skills I learned with me and continued developing them throughout my four-year program.

While punishments for plagiarism in high school deterred most students from cheating, they were not always effective since the consequences were often just a suspension for their crimes against academia. Universities, however, took it far more seriously. If you were caught plagiarizing or cheating in any way, you could face expulsion.

Thankfully, this was never a problem for me because I had no desire to get kicked out of school. Like most students, I simply did my assignments myself. Over time, I developed my research and writing skills and felt genuinely proud of the work I produced. And then we were all hit with something unexpected: the introduction of AI.

ChatGPT is Born

ChatGPT was introduced in 2022, but I was not familiar with it until the following year. By then, I was in my third year of university and had already developed a routine for writing essays and completing assignments. It was a system I had built over years of trial and error, and it worked for me.

Sure, digging through journal articles and writing 4000+ word essays was tedious and time-consuming, but at that point, I was used to it. I knew how to use course concepts and academic resources to build cohesive and convincing argumentative essays without relying on outside tools. It was just me, a few journal databases, and a dream to graduate.

I also had no interest in being expelled, so maybe that helped too.

​My school eventually introduced rules against using AI for coursework, mainly focusing on writing, since that was what most students were using it for. But the policy was not very effective because programs like ChatGPT were still new, and professors often could not tell what was written by a student and what was generated by a chatbot.

I know there were many cases of students using AI to write essays at my school, but most were first- or second-year students who were still adjusting to university life and probably wanted something to take the pressure off. I’m sure there were upper-year students using AI too, but I think it was less common.

Most of us in the later years had grown up in an education system where we were expected to complete assignments on our own. Sure, there were always opportunities to cheat, and some people definitely got away with it, but for most of us, it simply wasn’t worth the risk. By that point, we had worked our entire lives to get there, and most people were not willing to throw it away just to avoid an all-nighter. Or at least I wasn’t.

When ChatGPT Becomes the Student

Growing up in a world without tools that could write essays for you was beneficial. Students were forced to sit there, struggle through assignments, make mistakes, and learn from them. Because of that, I was able to genuinely understand course concepts and prove not only to teachers and professors that I knew what I was doing, but also to myself.

Long story short, I can write an essay or complete an assignment without AI because that is what I was taught to do. But students today are being introduced to these tools much earlier, and many use them incorrectly. Instead of acting as an assistant to learning, ChatGPT becomes the student (Bakridi, 2025). It completes the assignment while the actual student sits back and learns nothing (Bakridi, 2025).

There have been countless stories online from teachers, students, and parents discussing how far behind many young people are when it comes to essential skills like reading and writing. A lot of these kids grew up in what I like to call the “iPad generation,” where screens were shoved in front of them before they could even walk. The result is a generation with increasingly short attention spans and an inability to focus for long periods of time.

Many students now struggle to sit through lectures, concentrate on readings, or engage deeply with material. Attention spans are only one part of the problem that AI has amplified. Students who are already falling behind academically now have access to a tool that can do the work for them: ChatGPT.

To understand how embedded AI has become in education, a survey of 423 Canadian students found that 59% now use generative AI in their coursework, up from 52% in 2023 (KPMG, 2024). While the increase may seem small, it reflects how quickly AI is becoming normalized in academic settings.

More importantly, 63% of students report using generative AI a few times per week, with 10% using it daily. Only a small minority say they barely use it after trying it, meaning for most students, AI is no longer occasional support, it is part of their everyday lives (KPMG, 2024).

The Dangerous Cycle of AI Dependence

Students are already struggling with literacy and writing, and AI seems to have arrived at the perfect time to act as a shortcut around those problems. For many students, ChatGPT is no longer just a study tool, it has become a quick fix for a much bigger issue. A student who is already struggling to meet grade-level expectations will often look for the easiest way to pass, and when technology can generate an entire essay in seconds, the temptation is obvious. In this case, AI rears its ugly head as the devil on a student’s shoulder, encouraging them to take the easy way out.

For students who struggle with reading or writing, ChatGPT offers an immediate solution. It can summarize difficult readings, explain concepts in simpler terms, and even produce a university-level essay from a short prompt. While that may sound helpful, tools like this can slowly reduce a student’s motivation to actually improve the skills they are lacking (Bakridi, 2025). Over time, the mindset becomes: “Why struggle through this when ChatGPT can just do it for me?”

Students who heavily depend on AI miss out on developing their reading and writing skills, which could explain why so many of them are falling behind (Bakridi, 2025). They let a chatbot do the work for them; their only real involvement is typing a prompt and submitting whatever comes out (Bakridi, 2025). So who’s actually losing here? Not the teacher marking the assignment, and not ChatGPT, it’s the student.

It’s important to remember that assignments are more than just something for teachers to grade while they drink their morning coffee and wish they were anywhere else. The purpose of coursework is to teach students how to form arguments, analyze information, and communicate their thoughts effectively (Bakridi, 2025). Through feedback and repetition, those skills improve over time (Bakridi, 2025). But when students rely on AI to complete assignments for them, they skip that entire process (Bakridi, 2025). They may still submit the work, but that doesn’t mean they’ve actually learned from it (Bakridi, 2025).

That creates a dangerous cycle. Students who are already falling behind become more dependent on AI, and the more dependent they become, the less likely they are to improve the skills they are lacking in the first place (Bakridi, 2025). Eventually, this dependence follows them into university and the workplace, where strong reading, writing, and analytical skills are still expected.

At the same time, AI tools are evolving incredibly fast. ChatGPT can now help with research, studying, note-taking, and homework, while newer features like “study mode” are specifically designed to support students academically. While these features can absolutely be useful when used properly, they also make it easier than ever for students to avoid engaging with the learning process altogether.

That is what makes this issue so concerning. The problem is no longer just that students can use AI to avoid coursework, it is that these tools are becoming deeply integrated into education before many students have fully developed the skills needed to succeed without them (Bakridi, 2025).

AI Is Not Entirely the Problem

While I have painted this tool in a fairly negative light, it is also important to recognize AI programs as potential learning tools. When used properly, they can act as a helpful academic assistant. They can support research, and let’s be honest, we all know the pain of digging through journal databases and dense academic articles. AI can help by finding or summarizing sources, saving time and effort. Of course, you are still the one writing the paper, you’re just saving yourself a bit of time (and suffering) in the process.

It is not entirely bad. But like most tools, when there is little to no moderation, it becomes harmful.

So What Happens Now?

I’ve talked a lot about how AI can negatively impact the learning experience, as well as how it can also be a useful tool when used properly. So how do we bridge that gap and ensure students are actually using AI correctly?

I think part of the answer is education. AI is unfortunately here to stay and teaching students how to use it as a resource for research, studying, and summarizing could be genuinely beneficial. When you think about it, AI just appeared on all of our devices overnight. No one really taught us how to use it, we just explored it until we figured out what it could do.

If we taught students how to use AI the same way we teach them how to use journal databases or other resources, it could help them understand the difference between using it as a tool and relying on it to do the work for them.

While some people might argue that this would only introduce more students to AI and make the problem worse, I would argue the opposite. Students are going to be exposed to AI regardless of whether schools acknowledge it or not. It is here to stay, and we either adapt and guide its use or we ignore it and let the problem grow.

And personally, I’d rather do something about it than sit around and pretend the issue will fix itself.

In Conclusion…

​I do not know how far AI will go, and I do not claim to understand every aspect of it. But what I do know is that it is contributing to a growing problem where students are falling behind. They are not learning or developing the skills necessary to succeed in post-secondary education or life beyond it. Many are becoming dependent on technology to do the work for them, and something needs to be done before we reach a point of no return.

So I encourage everyone (including myself, don’t worry) to get acquainted with AI. Do some research and learn about its features and limitations. And if you are a parent, pay attention to how it may be impacting your child’s learning. Because we cannot address a problem we do not understand.

And if that still is not enough, think about the future, then ask yourself this: Do we really want people who relied entirely on ChatGPT to get through school to be the ones holding important positions and making important decisions? I don’t think so.

So do something, even if it is small, because doing something will always be better than doing nothing.

Thank You for Reading!

Sources:

Bakridi, R. (2025). The Growing Dependency on AI in Academia | Student Journal of Information Privacy Law. [online] Maine.edu. Available at: https://sjipl.mainelaw.maine.edu/2025/03/31/the-growing-dependency-on-ai-in-academia/.

Clugston, B. (2024). Advantages and disadvantages of AI in education. [online] University Canada West (UCW). Available at: https://www.ucanwest.ca/blog/education-careers-tips/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-ai-in-education.

KPMG (2024). KPMG. [online] KPMG. Available at: https://kpmg.com/ca/en/media/2024/10/students-using-gen-ai-say-they-are-not-learning-as-much.html.

Taster (2025). Are we teaching students AI competence or dependence? - Impact of Social Sciences. [online] Impact of Social Sciences - Maximizing the impact of academic research. Available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2025/10/17/are-we-teaching-students-ai-competence-or-dependence/.

James Charles: The Way Wealth Turns Influencers Against Their Audience

“Getting a Job Is Easy… At Least According to Someone Who’s Never Needed One”

Substack: https://junkdrawercommentary.substack.com/

Oh shit, here we go again. You know him, we all hate him, and somehow, he still has a career. I present to you everyone’s least favourite internet cockroach, James Charles, back once again with another out-of-touch opinion about the working class.

But this situation isn’t just about James Charles; it highlights a growing problem within influencer culture and how wealthy creators view their audiences. In their pursuit of fame, money, and relevance, many influencers become completely disconnected from the realities of everyday people. When you focus on how they speak about their viewers, you realize they only care when an issue affects them personally.

James Charles decided to post a video “calling out” a former Spirit Airlines employee who DM’ed him asking for financial support via a GoFundMe after they lost their job. Instead of ignoring the message or responding privately, as most creators would, James decided to publicly mock this person, and it did not stop there.

After his dramatic reenactment, he said, “You know what else would help you, getting another job.” He went on to call this person a “lazy piece of shit” and "entitled." He could’ve stopped there, but he didn't. He said that this person was not a longtime fan who had ever DM’d, followed him, or supported him, implying that it would mean something if they had.

In place of his deleted video, he posted another “apology” video, his hundredth I think, except this time he doubled down on his original statements. According to James, “people don’t have the make-it-work mentality anymore,” which is ironic coming from a man giving career advice while sitting in a mansion funded by social media fame. He then proceeded to lecture viewers on applying for jobs despite never having to navigate the realities of the current job market himself.

Unsurprisingly, this response did not go over well, and he deleted the video (again, coward). After that, he posted a second apology where he admitted he was wrong. But let’s be serious, he only apologized because he was getting torn apart online and wanted to preserve whatever career he has left. And once again, to no one’s surprise, the video disappeared.

Now, no one is saying that James is required to financially support anyone who DM’s him a link to their GoFundMe. But hundreds of people probably DM him every day with similar requests, so why did this person deserve such a public response? Whatever happened to ignoring the message? Or responding privately? None of these options was good enough for James because they wouldn’t allow him to go viral, and let's be honest, that’s all he cares about. What matters here is that he made a deliberate choice to film, edit, and post a video shaming someone who was struggling, and that alone says everything I need to know about him.

But this situation is bigger than James Charles. He is just one (annoying) fish in a sea of influencers who think and act this way. James’ reaction raises bigger questions about why wealthy influencers think it’s acceptable to shame people in poor socio-economic positions for “shooting their shot,” especially when they’ve built their entire careers doing exactly that. We’ve all seen influencers begging for invites to luxury trips, PR packages, and sponsorships. James himself did an interview with Cosmopolitan, begging to be “uncancelled.”

Personally, I don’t think influencers have much room to mock everyday people for complaining or simply sending a DM when they spend their careers asking for frivolous things that most people could only dream of. There’s a huge difference between asking for help after losing your job and a millionaire influencer begging the internet to like him again after he destroyed his own reputation.

James is not an exception to this, but a product of it. The attitude wealthy influencers have toward people who are not as financially “blessed” as they are stems from their overwhelming sense of entitlement. They have completely unplugged themselves from the struggles of everyday people because they are no longer impacted by them. In their world, where “everything is about me,” there are no people struggling to put food on the table or hold down a job. They believe finding a job is easy and financial stability isn’t an uphill battle; it’s a simple walk in the park.

Take James as an example. He gained popularity as a teenager for his makeup tutorials, and since then, he has been on a fast track to becoming fabulously wealthy. These influencers live in a world where everything is paid for through brand deals, social media revenue, and their own beauty brands. Once they cross over into the land of the 1%, they begin blaming people for their socio-economic positions when, in reality, the real culprit is the system they now benefit from and worship.

And just to be clear, this is not a defence or excuse for their behaviour. These are grown adults making conscious decisions. They refuse to educate themselves or even try to understand the realities their audiences face because, as long as the checks keep rolling in, none of it bothers them.

Honestly, that lack of empathy truly scares me. It paints an ugly picture of the growing divide between the working class and the wealthy. We already know wealth disparity is getting worse, and people with money will continue to exploit and ignore everyday people just to make themselves even richer. Then they turn around and act like struggling financially is some kind of personal failure instead of the result of a broken system.

And the worst part is that they are proud of it. They are no longer trying to hide how disconnected and ignorant they are. They will openly mock people for losing their jobs or struggling to afford rent while sitting in mansions built off the attention, support, and money of the same people they now look down on.

While this mindset seems common among wealthy influencers, it does not give James and others in his tax bracket the right to mock people for struggling in an economy where basic necessities feel like luxuries. Instead of showing empathy, James made the conscious decision to do what so many influencers do best: look down on the very people whose views, attention, and support funded their lifestyles in the first place. And that alone shows how vile he really is. No amount of good PR or makeup can hide that.

I, for one, hope that this is the last time I see James Charles online, because I truly believe the internet would be 1% better without him constantly trying to “come back” from his latest cancellation. I mean, aren’t we all tired of seeing the same cycle repeat over and over again, where he gets in with a younger audience who doesn’t know about his past, messes it up, and then waits for a new wave of users to leech off of? It feels like we’re unfortunately stuck with him for the foreseeable future.

But it is interesting to think that all of this came from a DM he could have ignored. I mean, seriously, he saw someone asking for money, and it got to him this much. Instead of just moving on, responding privately, or doing nothing at all, he chose to turn it into content. He decided this person deserved public verbal abuse and humiliation instead of basic human decency.

With that said, I would like to remind everyone that you are responsible for the content you consume. The only reason James Charles is still around is that people continue to give him attention. So maybe it’s time to critically look at the influencers you support and ask yourself a question: do these people actually care about the struggles of their audience, or are viewers simply a doorway to brand deals and success?

Personal Note: It is important to acknowledge that James Charles has been a long-running problem on the internet. Over the years, multiple minors have come forward claiming that James sent them inappropriate messages and pictures. Despite addressing and admitting to being at fault in a now-deleted apology video, James has shifted his PR strategy to denying and victim-blaming in a last-ditch effort to save his career.

Personally, I don’t believe that someone with a past involving being accused of inappropriate behaviour with minors should be able to maintain a large platform. And it’s interesting how inconsistent the internet can be when it comes to accountability. Think about Coleen Balinger. When she was exposed for her inappropriate messages to minors, the internet collectively decided that her career was over, regardless of what she said or sang in defence of her actions (rightfully so). But for some reason, James Charles can survive scandal after scandal with no real consequences. That’s some bullshit.

Beyond the allegations involving minors, James has attached himself to multiple scandals and problematic people. Including a known abuser. At some point, audiences have to say, "Enough is enough” and stop watching. Because trust me, this disgusting behaviour isn’t going anywhere.

One last thought: Why is he affirming that he still spends this much time in his DM’s? Did he learn nothing after the minors scandal?

I hope James Charles rots.

Sources:

Adularia-. “Reddit - Fauxmoi.” Reddit.com, 2026, www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1t6ui8m/james_charles_mocks_a_woman_who_messaged_him_her/. Accessed 11 May 2026.

Arora, Ashim. ““Nobody Owes Anybody Anything”: James Charles Alleged Deleted “INITIAL Apology” Video Doubling down on Spirit Employee GoFundMe Rant Goes Viral.” Primetimer.com, Primetimer, 10 May 2026, www.primetimer.com/news/nobody-owes-anybody-anything-james-charles-alleged-deleted-initial-apology-video-doubling-down-on-spirit-employee-gofundme-rant-goes-viral. Accessed 12 May 2026.

Godwin, Cody. “James Charles: YouTube Star Admits Messaging 16-Year-Old Boys.” BBC News, 2 Apr. 2021, www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56611614.

Holaday, Carsen. “Influencer James Charles Issues Apology after Backlash over Viral Video Mocking Laid-off Spirit Airlines Worker.” The Independent, 11 May 2026, www.independent.co.uk/life-style/james-charles-spirit-airlines-influencer-apology-video-b2974029.html. Accessed 11 May 2026.

Inequality.org. “Wealth Inequality in the United States.” Inequality.org, 2018, inequality.org/facts/wealth-inequality/.

Mendez, Moises . “How James Charles Became Entwined in Domestic Assault Case.” Out Magazine, 14 May 2025, www.out.com/celebs/james-charles-kayla-malec-evan-johnson-controversy.

Vulpo, Mike. “Watch James Charles Apologize for Sending “Inappropriate” Messages to Underage Fans: “I F--Ked Up.”” E! Online, E! News, Apr. 2021, www.eonline.com/ca/news/1254863/watch-james-charles-apologize-for-sending-inappropriate-messages-to-underage-fans-i-f-ked-up. Accessed 11 May 2026.

Young, Anna. “Influencer James Charles Torched after Blasting Canned Spirit Airlines Staffer as “Lazy Piece of S--t” over Donation Plea.” New York Post, 10 May 2026, nypost.com/2026/05/10/us-news/influencer-james-charles-torched-after-blasting-canned-spirit-airlines-staffer-as-lazy-piece-of-s-t/. Accessed 11 May 2026.

The Lipstick Lesbians: A Study on Innovation vs. Success

The only thing they innovated was rebranding market research to make a profit

Substack: https://junkdrawercommentary.substack.com/

We have breaking news: a new influencer makeup brand has launched, and as promised, it comes with all of the messiness you expect. In the pursuit of individuality and innovation, The Lipstick Lesbians have seemingly lost the plot. The once-beloved content creators, known for their thoughtful makeup reviews and recommendations, have built a following of over 1.2 million on TikTok based on educating their viewers about the behind-the-scenes of the beauty industry. As with most beauty influencers, they thought they could create a brand to “fill a hole in the market,” and that went just as badly as everyone expected.

Alexis Androulakis and Dr. Christina Basias-Androulakis have been together for over a decade. In 2023, they decided to create a TikTok page, The Lipstick Lesbians, to give viewers insights into the beauty industry, recommendations, and tutorials. Alexis has more than 17 years of experience in product development and uses her knowledge to share how products are created, designed, and developed. Christina has a PhD in education and uses her background to make the beauty world more accessible and understandable for all. Together, they are committed to pulling back the curtain on the beauty community, and as expected, many people were excited for this new perspective

Their strategy of being selective with brand deals and product promotion, along with their honest reviews, has not only given them a massive following but also an immense trust between them and their audience. And this had only further secured their long-term success and led to the creation of their brand, Leaked Labs, and as most influencer brands go, this is where the problems started.

Before I get into the brand launch, I want to make one thing clear: this is a critique of their brand rollout, not them as people. The focus here is Leaked Labs, specifically their strategy and product decisions. This is not an attack on these women personally, and I want to be very clear: I will not tolerate any hate directed at them based on their gender or sexuality. The criticism remains focused on the brand, not personal identity. Please keep that in mind when engaging with this piece. With that said, let’s get into it.

On February 27th, 2026, The Lipstick Lesbians announced the launch of Leaked Labs. The brand was advertised as a home for innovation, where Alexis and Christina would bring unreleased “innovative” products to consumers in “leaks.” According to their process, their network of chemists and innovators would develop experimental formulas using “never-before-seen technology,” then they would release the product to consumers in limited quantities, consumers would purchase and evaluate the product via surveys, and based on that feedback, they would determine where these formulas go next (if it becomes a mainstream product or remains a limited item).

​Something important to remember is that most of the time, brands do not have their own labs. In most cases, labs create a product and shop it around to see if a major brand picks it up. That is essentially what is happening here: Alexis and Christina are going around to labs, learning about products and attempting to sell the ones they find to be innovative.

The first leak dropped on March 6th, 2026, and the product went viral, for all the wrong reasons. They released their Amplify Flexi Powder, advertised as a water/setting spray-activated powder disk. This product was made to be picked up and directly applied to the face as eyeshadow, highlighter, or anything else you can do with a regular eyeshadow. It retailed for $34 USD and has four shades in a tin.

While some were excited, the tides quickly turned once customers started receiving the product. The complaints ranged from the brand strategy to the price and even the quality. Now this is a lot, this whole rollout has been a disaster and trust me, the response is no better.

​Beginning with the brand concept. Alexis and Christina marketed their brand as very consumer-focused, where the customer determines the fate of a given product. To many, this sounded familiar, almost like market research. When most brands release a product, they pay product testers to test the product and give them feedback, which they use to make necessary changes to the product before it hits store shelves.

Leaked Labs is essentially making customers pay to do market research. Their followers and makeup lovers alike are paying $34 to be a part of this “unique experience,” where they have “control” over where this product goes through feedback. This feedback is equivalent to a product tester reviewing a product and a brand taking that feedback into consideration before releasing the product in its final form.

Some may argue that this is simply a company taking customer reviews into consideration. You can believe that if it helps you sleep at night, but when a brand releases sample-sized products and states that consumer feedback is determining their future, it’s market research. The only difference is that the customer is paying to test these products, which is ridiculous.​

As a brand, you cannot use your audience to guarantee success. You cannot sell them experimental formulas and then force them to make the decisions for you. I understand wanting your audience involved in the process, but why approach it like this? They could have easily involved their followers in a focus group, where they are compensated for testing the products and giving feedback. Instead, they chose to profit off of their audience and use them to do the work they do not want to pay for.

If they wanted to take a risk and do what no brand has done before, why not release the full-size products? If they were so confident in these innovative products, then they should have been willing to come out and say, “Hey, we thought this was innovative and decided to take a risk and bring it to the market.” Even if it failed, people would have appreciated that more than whatever this is.

Moving deeper into the storm of detrimental decisions, why are they charging $34 for four shadows? An experimental product should not be sold for that much. They claim you can get roughly 70 uses out of each shadow, but when the product looks like thin sample-sized sheets, it’s hard to believe they’ll last that long. And when you are paying this much for innovation, you should be getting a sure thing that has already gone through rounds of market research and testing to ensure you are getting quality.

If you take a look at other brands, they sell similar shades for much cheaper; you can’t pick them up and wipe them on your face, but I think you can give that up to save some money. ELF Cosmetics sells its 10 shade palette for $14. On the higher end, Dior sells a 9 shade palette for $70, while Tarte’s 12 shade palette goes for $68. So, who would you pay $34 for for a sample-size product that has no clear direction, when you could spend your hard-earned money on a more reliable product? Consumers deserve better, especially with the current socio-economic state of the world.

Now, price isn’t everything; if the product delivers, people will overlook it. But alas, as the reviews started rolling in, it became clear that this was not the case. Numerous reviews went viral on social media with influencers, makeup artists, and everyday makeup lovers coming to the same conclusion: it’s not worth it.

Their complaints ranged from sanitation to shade range and quality. People didn’t hold back, and honestly, why would they? When you spend your hard-earned money on a product from creators you trust, and it falls short, criticism is more than fair; it’s expected.

Cleanliness and sanitation are clear concerns when a product is living on your face. The Flexi Powders come stacked on top of each other in a small tin. Considering that this product’s key feature is its versatility, being able to be picked up and rubbed on your face, people began to question its formula for preventing bacterial growth. Alexis and Christina did address this in a TikTok where they had a chemist explain how the product was designed with preservatives that prevent bacterial growth. Despite this, people were rightfully skeptical.

When you have a product that is designed to be picked up, sprayed with water/setting spray and stored in a small container, there has to be some room for bacteria to build a home. And I’m not the only one to think this, as many makeup artists have taken to TikTok to question the cleanliness of these powders.

Early in the rollout, professional makeup artist Jocelyn (@smilingjoce) described the powders as “not MUA-friendly.” She explained that most cosmetology and salon boards would not approve them for client use, as simply relying on built-in preservatives is not considered an acceptable sanitation practice. In a professional setting, that explanation wouldn’t pass inspection; it would get you shut down immediately.

I’m sure the keyboard warriors will argue these products are meant for everyday makeup users, but that raises a bigger question: if they wouldn’t meet professional or regulatory standards, why should the average consumer feel comfortable using them?

Even if you overlook the price and sanitation concerns, you’re still left with the most important question: Is the product actually good? Based on the flood of reviews across social media, the answer seems to be no. From shade range to pigment to overall quality, the issues are endless.

MannyMUA, a popular beauty influencer, reviewed the Flexi Powders, and even though he is a friend of The Lipstick Lesbians, he couldn’t put a positive spin on these new “innovations.” He began his review with a critique of the price, stating that it was “a little pricey for just four shadows.” He went on to question the packaging and why the products were stacked on top of one another. But the real complaints came when he actually used the products. He reported that he had to press very hard to get any pigment when the product was dry, and when it was wet, he claimed that the dry side actually offered more pigment, which is a problem because the product was advertised as a “more pigmented when wet” situation. Final thoughts painted the product as gimmicky and overall not worth it.

And he’s not the only one, as many TikTok users took to the internet to share their opinions on the product. Another user, Monica (monica.raviii on TikTok), shared her unique perspective as a woman of colour in the beauty space (Queen). She raised concerns about the limited shade range of the Flexi Powders, stating that she was curious about how it would look on darker skin. Monica said that the gold shade was her favourite as it looked good on her skin tone. However, when she swatched the other shades, they did not appear as pigmented on her skin as advertised. Monica said that she likes innovation in the beauty space, but this product simply was not practical.

This raises a concern about alienating some of your audience since the shade range limits who can use the product. If darker skin tones are only compatible with one shade, what’s the point of spending your money on this product? If you’re releasing a product, at least make it accessible to all; being an “early access leak” is not an excuse to be exclusive and incompetent.

On top of this, you have friends and the beauty community willing to forgo your friendship and influence to be honest and critical of your product. Usually, you’ll see the community rally around a new influencer brand, regardless of the quality. But when they take it upon themselves to stand up and say, “This is bad,” it tells me that there are no redeeming qualities. At this point, you have to look in the mirror and confront the problem: your product. Instead of doing this, Alexis and Christina took a page out of the influencer playbook and went on the defensive in their update/response.

As with most backlash, an influencer’s apology quickly follows. Your favourite controversial creator pulls out the apology starter pack, throws on a hoodie, wipes off the makeup, and gets ready to cry if necessary. It’s a whole production, and this situation is no different.

Alexis and Christina chose to film their apology in an airport, looking as dishevelled as possible. And before we even get into what they said, it’s worth addressing what this setup is meant to do.

In many cases, influencers believe that showing up unpolished creates the illusion of authenticity. The problem is that this trick has been done to death. Viewers know the formula. At this point, it doesn’t feel genuine; it feels rehearsed. When your “authenticity” starts to look like a calculated decision, it stops working before the video even begins. And this is made worse when the content of your video only serves to defend yourself instead of addressing valid criticism.

In their video, the first thing they choose to “address” is their absence from the internet. They claim that they have “disappeared” due to a conference for beauty innovation. Their excuses quickly fell apart as they were still posting content, and they had enough control to determine when their brand would launch. If you know you won’t have the time or capacity to respond to feedback, then launching a product, especially one that relies so heavily on consumer input, makes no sense. It comes across as poor planning at best, and avoidance at worst.

They go on to explain the purpose of their brand, like we haven’t heard it a million times. And this only makes it seem like they believe that their customers are stupid. They felt the need to essentially say, “Just to be clear, we’re going to explain the brand to you nice and slow.” Everyone knows what you want to do; it’s all “innovation.” What people wanted was an explanation. They wanted these influencers that they put their trust in to do what they claimed they were going to do, address concerns as they come up and listen to their audience, not sit there and explain their brand to us like we don’t get it.

When they were done listing their credentials and brand goals, they finally moved to addressing the criticism, starting with the price (three minutes into the video, by the way). Alexis, who took the lead in this video, claims that “the most innovative formulas cost the most until there are brands, other suppliers, and tools created to make it lower in cost.”

While that may be generally true, it does not address the issue at hand. People understand that innovation comes with a hefty price tag; their real issue is that Leaked Labs was marketed as accessible experimental beauty, and selling four little eyeshadow sheets for $34 does not align with that brand goal.

If a brand’s identity is tied to innovation with consumer input, pricing plays a major role. You cannot market accessibility and brand participation while simultaneously putting up a barrier to access. This creates a conflicting message between your products and brand identity. So no, a simple “it’s just the way it is” is not enough as far as explanations go.

Their dismissive attitudes continued to persist throughout the video when they addressed rumours that they were selling the data they were collecting from reviews to other companies. When your brand is built on listening to consumer feedback, I would assume that you would take more than 30 seconds to address something as important as this. Instead, Christina simply said, “It’s not true,” and they moved on.

I find this response to be disrespectful, because your customers put their trust in you, and when you simply deny selling their data with no further explanation, it only serves to show them that you don’t care about feedback as much as you claim to. Maybe next time they should explain what they’re doing with the data they collect instead of running away from the topic.

The rest of the video is them promising transparency and going into a word salad about their brand and “journey” in the beauty industry; they even pulled out the final tool in the apology starter kit and got emotional, but that doesn’t change anything.

At the end of the day, you can make all of the promises you want, but they don’t mean anything if you aren’t willing to take a step back and truly address the concerns of your audience. Their video seemed more like a “you don’t get it, let me explain,” instead of a video truly addressing the response to their brand. They invalidated everyone’s opinions with their dismissive demeanour because they want to control everything about the brand, including public perception. But you cannot simply lecture people and expect them to see your perspective. At some point, you have to turn down the volume on your ego and listen to people, you know, like your brand claims you do. Because a brand cannot survive like this, you can be passionate about makeup and innovation, but that means nothing if you cannot deliver. And the Lipstick Lesbians will let ignorance get in their way until they destroy themselves.

Leaked Labs is just another instalment in the world of influencer makeup brands. Everyone thinks they’re doing something different; they want to stand out, but maybe the status quo is the norm for a reason. While most can understand seeing something that others don’t, at some point, you have to ask yourself, “ Is it worth it? Are you willing to risk the trust your audience has in you? Can you truly handle the criticism? And can you put your ego aside when you have to? Because at some point, your credibility disappears when each response feels like a correction rather than a reflection. Whether it’s pricing, product design, or communication, the pattern points to two creators who believe they understand their audience better than the audience understands itself. And that kind of approach rarely ages well.

P.S: Alexis has posted a new video. She talked about pausing Leaked Labs for the past few weeks so they could take in all the feedback and make necessary changes. They are currently preparing for their next product release. And that’s about all I got from that, trust me, most of it was the typical word salad and over-explanation.

Thank you for reading!

Sources:

ELF Cosmetics. “Perfect 10 Eyeshadow Palette.” E.l.f. Cosmetics, 2024, www.elfcosmetics.com/en_CA/perfect-10-eyeshadow-palette/300224.html. Accessed 6 May 2026.

Jocelyn. “TikTok - Smilingjoce.” Tiktok.com, 2026, www.tiktok.com/@smilingjoce/video/7617536940039998733?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7600106738884920848. Accessed 6 May 2026.

Leaked Labs. “Leaked Labs.” Leakedlabs.com, 2026, leakedlabs.com/pages/about.

Mac Cosmetics. “Connect in Colour Eye Shadow Palette: Embedded in Burgundy.” MAC Cosmetics, 2026, www.maccosmetics.ca/product/13835/115812/products/makeup/eyes/eye-palettes-kits/connect-in-colour-eye-shadow-palette-embedded-in-burgundy?size=6.25_g_. Accessed 6 May 2026.

Ravi-Conway, Monica . “TikTok - Monica.Raviii.” Tiktok.com, 2026, www.tiktok.com/@monica.raviii/video/7618295240583122207?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7600106738884920848. Accessed 6 May 2026.

Shatzman, Celia . “The Lipstick Lesbians Are Turning the Beauty Industry on Its Head with Leaked Labs.” Forbes, Forbes, 2026, www.forbes.com/sites/celiashatzman/2026/03/06/the-lipstick-lesbians-are-turning-the-beauty-industry-on-its-head-with-leaked-labs/ . Accessed 2026.

The Lipstick Lesbians. “TikTok - the Lipstick Lesbians.” Tiktok.com, 2026, www.tiktok.com/@thelipsticklesbians/video/7623791926193556749. Accessed 6 May 2026.

---. “Unlocking the Science of Beauty: The Lisptick Lesbian’s.” Thelipsticklesbians.com, 2026, www.thelipsticklesbians.com/. Accessed 6 May 2026.

Vilensky, Sophie. “There’s No Gatekeeping with the Lipstick Lesbians’ New Brand.” Byrdie, 2026, www.byrdie.com/lipstick-lesbians-leaked-labs-launch-11919408. Accessed 6 May 2026.

Werner, Kaleigh. “The Leaked Labs Controversy Explained.” WWD, 24 Apr. 2026, wwd.com/pop-culture/culture-news/lipstick-lesbians-leaked-labs-controversy-1238929040/.

Alex vs. Alix: The Girls Are Fighting (Alledgedy)

Two millionaires firing subtle shots in the comments, one goes for the kill

This week’s prime-time social media fight is Alex Cooper vs. Alix Earle. In this corner sponsored by Unwell, we have Alex Cooper, the founder of the Unwell Network and host of Call Her Daddy. With 3.1 million followers on TikTok and more than 2 million on YouTube, Cooper has made a name for herself by talking to the girls about taboo topics like sex and partying. With her recent pivot to the celebrity interview space, her podcast pulls in millions of views per video. Safe to say, she packs a punch.

In the other corner, sponsored by Reale Actives, you know her for her storytimes and party content, everyone’s favourite Hot Mess, Alix Earle. She has amassed more than 8.5 million followers on TikTok and more than 337,000 on YouTube. She recently moved into the beauty space with her brand Reale Actives. She’s a worthy opponent.

So, tune in to your favourite social media platform whenever Alix Earle responds to see these two fight it out in the comment section and TikTok posts.

Now I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about why these two are fighting, but since social media seems to be insistent on pushing this feud onto everyone’s timeline, here we are. Like many famous feuds, the internet has resorted to the only thing it knows how to do: take sides and defend your position like there’s no tomorrow. Seriously, these people dedicate more time and effort to defending random millionaires online than they do to their own lives. While some may understand the need to insert themselves into this drama via TikTok defenses, I would just like to remind everyone that these people are millionaires. After this is all over, they’ll move on and thrive on the boost in popularity this tiff has gotten them. And while I think it’s okay to comment on internet drama, it sometimes gets to a point where it’s parasocial and unhealthy. So be safe out there. With that out of the way, let’s get into the “drama.”

Alex Cooper and Alix Earle were friends for a while before they got into business together. Alex Cooper’s podcast, “Call Her Daddy,” was started under Barstool Sports. After a fallout with her co-host, Cooper remained at Barstool and was eventually able to take the show out from under the Barstool umbrella and branch off to start her own podcast network, The Unwell Network (AKA the scene of the alleged crime).

After starting Unwell, Cooper signed on Alix Earle, which brought her podcast, “Hot Mess,” under the Unwell umbrella. Despite the podcast being extremely successful on its own, Earle decided that this was a good idea, and so their business relationship began. And for a while, everything seemed to be going swimmingly, until Alix Earle suddenly stopped posting new episodes of Hot Mess in 2025 (She recently rebranded with a new show). Shortly after this, Unwell released its rights to the show, essentially removing it from the Unwell Network. This was done quietly, and no official statements were released from either side.

As with all breakups, whether it be romantic, friendship, or business-related, the internet will do its thing and turn it into this week’s drama. So it did not take long for fans and foes of these creators to get on TikTok and throw their two cents onto everyone’s ForYou pages. There were rumours of Alex Cooper being a mean girl and unfair boss, while others claimed that Alix Earle was unable to keep up with the demanding work environment that is the Unwell Network.

Now it is important to note that while most of this started as speculation from social media users, Alix Earle did add fuel to the fire when she decided to start interacting with posts and comments that were shading Alex Cooper. This only served to rile the keyboard warriors up, as people anticipated a real statement or reason for the fallout. Well, that never happened. This feud was contained to the comment sections and “subtle” likes. That was until the opening weekend of the influencer Olympics (Coachella).

On April 13th 2026, Alex Cooper broke her silence when she posted a TikTok calling out Alix Earle for her shady behaviour. Cooper called out Earle’s “passive-aggressive reposts and likes,” and said that Alix was “going to have to get specific and just say what you gotta say about me.” Alix Earle responded in the comments with a simple “on it,” and social media caught on fire waiting for a response that would never come.

While I can appreciate a little internet drama, it is important to understand who these women are before we jump to conclusions. Before we rush to take sides in this flavourless feud, we should take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Beyond the superficial drama, these two, like many influencers, are simply rich, entitled, and often embroiled in controversy, whether they want us to see it or not. So before jumping on the internet to defend these people, ask yourself, are you choosing to ignore everything you know about these people in favour of some short-lived entertainment? And, at what point does one’s controversial past and present overshadow their carefully crafted PR image?

If you have no idea what I am talking about and just saw these two as the same person, don’t worry, I don’t blame you. But I would like to invite you to take a peek behind the curtain of PR focused branding, and see what these influencers want you to ignore, because at the end of the day, this feud is just the tip of the iceberg on these two.

Beginning with the ever-controversial Alix Earle, from allegations of racism to being a Trump supporter, Earle’s carefully crafted PR image has not been able to save her from herself. In 2024, screenshots of Alix’s Ask.fm account from 2014 resurfaced, showing her using a racial slur. She quickly released a statement apologizing for her behaviour, claiming she was young and did not understand the impact of what she was posting.

While she acknowledged that what she did was wrong, her apology did not come without added controversy. She addressed rumours that her lawyers sent two podcasters threatening emails about a post on a subreddit for their podcast, talking about the drama. Jesse Smiles and Lily Marston host the podcast “Do We Know Them,” where they commentate on internet and celebrity drama. As with many podcasts, they have fan-made Reddit pages dedicated to their show. One of these pages posted the screenshots of Alix’s Ask.fm page, and instead of contacting the redditor responsible for the post or the page, Alix Earle’s lawyer contacted Lily and Jesse. The lawyer claimed that they violated copyright because the screenshots were trademarked. While Alix denied all of this in her statement, I do not believe her. Her team probably saw that Lily and Jesse addressed all of this and provided proof, so instead of admitting they did something wrong and facing the backlash, they did the only thing PR teams know how to do: deny, deny, deny.

As for the screenshots themselves, I find what she did to be disgusting. Most people know the meaning and history behind the word she used, and the harm it causes. I understand being young and making mistakes, and I am glad she addressed it with an apology, but when you look at her more recent behaviour, one begins to question how much she really meant it. I mean, if you truly learned your lesson, you wouldn’t be caught supporting a known racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and overall horrible man, right?

Well, unfortunately for Alix, she could not hide her support for US President Donald Trump. In 2022, she posted an Instagram story featuring a “Trump 2020” flag. She rushed to explain this in a live stream when the backlash started rolling in, accusing her of being a Trump supporter. She stated that her political beliefs at the time were shaped by where she grew up and those around her. She claimed that she no longer supports Donald Trump and that she has grown. As for the picture, she said she took a picture of the flag on a boat and simply posted it without thinking.

While her “apology” was enough for some, I find it hard to believe. She only decided to post this explanation after she was called out, meaning she only cared to make it clear that she wasn’t a Trump supporter when it negatively impacted her brand. On top of that, she chose to go with the famous line seen in every influencer apology, “I didn’t know any better.” This is hard to believe, considering the fact that she was an adult when she posted that picture, and all of the information about who Donald Trump was and his beliefs were already out there.

Regardless of what you choose to believe, it is important to understand that she was not simply a republican, she was a clear follower of MAGA (trust me, those are two different beasts). When you post something in support of Donald Trump, no matter the size of your statement, you are supporting all of his racism, sexism, and oppressive policies. While some would say this does not make you a bad person, I would argue that the people you support and surround yourself with are a reflection of who you are. The reason most people support a politician or political party is that they align with their values.

It makes you question what her values were and if a few years is enough to completely change that. And was there really any change, or was this just an effort to save herself from losing her audience? While some may dismiss your Ask.fm posts as a youthful indiscretion, I think when you grow up to (allegedly) support a man like Donald Trump, it erases all of the work you claim you did to unlearn that past behaviour. And at some point, the controversies pile up, and it makes it hard to believe that you have grown as much as you claim.

That was a lot, but alas, we must move on to Alex Cooper. While she does not have the political and racism allegations often tied to Alix Earle, her reputation lends credit to the many claims on social media that she is a mean girl (how dare you make the keyboard warriors right). Not only that, but she has recently found herself in hot water due to the alleged behaviour of a man.

The Unwell drama with Alix Earle was not Alex Cooper’s first brush with a business breakup. In 2020, she was hosting Call Her Daddy under Barstool with her co-host, Sofia Franklyn. In the Spring of the year, Sofia would leave Barstool and the podcast due to a very public dispute over contract negotiations regarding the show’s ownership and intellectual property (IP). They were offered the chance to stay at Barstool for another year to obtain the show’s IP, but Sofia turned down the deal and departed, leaving Alex to host the podcast alone. She was eventually able to gain ownership and take the podcast out from under Barstool the following year.

This resulted in the years-long feud between Alex and Sofia, with Franklyn constantly discussing the drama while Cooper has chosen to stay silent and move on. While I will admit that I find Sofia Franklyn insufferable, she does have a right to be upset. In a way, she was betrayed by the company and the co-host she was loyal to, and that would leave a stain on any friendship. But I will say that at some point, you do have to move and do your own thing, and that I hope she does.

Speaking of Call Her Daddy, the podcast started as a show for women in their 20s, where the host(s) discussed sex, relationships, and life. This was the format that shot the show to the top of the charts and grew its ever-loyal audience of listeners. However, in recent years, the show has pivoted as the personal feel of a morning-after debrief has been swapped for the glamorous world of celebrity interviews. While there are still episodes that are reminiscent of the early Call Her Daddy days, the show’s main focus has shifted, and it is clear that Cooper has grown out of the old format. This would not be a problem if viewers were being delivered quality content that gave them an insightful look into these celebrities, but alas, we should have kept our expectations low for influencer-hosted interviews.

Think about a red carpet interview hosted by a real journalist, with years of schooling and experience under their belt, it’s usually decent, right? Now think of one hosted by an influencer who got famous off their TikToks during the pandemic, usually a dumpster fire. There’s a clear discrepancy, and it has become a common complaint among viewers, who claim that these influencers don’t know what they are doing. They cannot ask hard-hitting questions, they do not understand the flow of an interview, and they cannot for the life of them pivot away from their pre-prepared questions to follow-ups that would make the experience even a little interesting. These shortcomings are not limited to the red carpet, as many influencers, Alex included, have gotten the idea that they’re the next Anderson Cooper.

Alex suffers from the same lack of skill that we see in other influencers. Most would consider a good interview with a celebrity as something that feels like a real conversation. It flows naturally, with the interviewer being able to go with the flow and improvise on the spot to get the best answers. These interviews are supposed to feel like an insight into this person, whether it be a light-hearted opinion or a deep conversation. The overall goal is to learn something, but when you watch Call Her Daddy, it’s hard to walk away from the experience feeling any sort of satisfaction for what you just watched.

In most interviews, Cooper refuses to dive deeper into the conversations she is facilitating. There will be moments when her subject says something interesting or scandalous, and instead of pressing further, Alex simply responds with a “no way” and moves on to the next question. The general formula for her interviews is: ask questions, get answers, move on. There are no follow-ups or interesting commentary; it’s simply a question-and-answer session. And while this may be great for the celebrity and their PR team, it’s bad entertainment for the viewers.

I am not saying that all influencers are bad interviewers. Look at Emma Chamberlain on the Met Gala red carpet; she’s able to keep a conversation going while asking questions. And while some of that may just be natural charisma, you have to admit that she puts in the work to deliver a good product. I just wish the same could be said for Alex, as she has access to some of the biggest stars in the world.

While facilitating bland interviews is not a crime, it is worth acknowledging because this is her job. She is not only providing her viewers with low-quality content but also making a profit from it. It makes one question whether this is something she is passionate about or simply a source of income. And trust me, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

While being a bad interviewer is not considered a crime, facilitating a toxic work environment is in many cases. A recent report from Bloomberg exposed that there was a great deal of employee turnover at Trending, the parent company of Alex’s Unwell Network and ACE Entertainment, a production company owned by her husband, Matt Kaplan.

Trending is marketed as a Gen-Z-focused media company that was founded by Alex and Matt in 2023. This was supposed to be the company that served as an umbrella for their media empire, but it seems all of this power has gone to their heads as reports of Matt’s explosive behaviour run rampant. Bloomberg reported that Matt Kaplan has been berating staff to the point where many of them have threatened to quit. One account detailed his behaviour during filming for Alex Cooper’s “Unwell Winter Games,” where Kaplan’s behaviour was so outrageous that it resulted in multiple formal complaints from staff.

Now I would just like to make it clear that Alex is not responsible for her husband’s behaviour; he is a grown man who should know how to conduct himself in a work environment. However, when you are the founder of a company, and you see your co-founder act in such a disrespectful, borderline abusive way towards your staff, you have a responsibility to do something about it. And before the keyboard warriors start, I am sure Alex is aware of Matt’s behaviour. As the co-founder, she has to be aware of the goings on within the company, and when there are multiple formal complaints against her husband, I find it impossible for her to be oblivious to all of it. Her husband’s behaviour has to be consistent for it to get this far. I am assuming that at some point, complaints fell on deaf ears, and nothing was being done to improve the toxic work environment. It probably got so bad that someone felt the need to make this story public and gave information to Bloomberg. Because trust me, employees don’t go nuclear unless it’s bad.

If my assumptions are correct, which I think they are, there’s no way she’s that oblivious; it means that Alex knew about all of this and chose to do nothing. It is troubling to know that she was most likely aware of this toxic behaviour and let it happen. As I said with Alix Earle, to a certain degree, the people you associate with are a reflection of who you are and what you tolerate. While she may not be the one screaming at staff, she’s still willing to tolerate it. And it shows everyone that while she may talk a big game in public, when it comes to standing up for people, in real life she is unable to rise to the occasion. This begs the question of what her true values are. Does she really care about those who work for her, or are they simply a means to an end? Is she truly the mean girl that everyone has painted her as? And did we really expect an entitled influencer to believe in treating people with basic dignity and respect?

Regardless of whether my assumptions are correct, Matt Kaplan’s behaviour is unacceptable. He is a 42-year-old producer who has been in the film industry for over a decade, meaning he should know better. Treating people with basic decency and respect is the bare minimum, and the fact that he cannot do that proves that he is simply another entitled man who has never been held accountable for his behaviour.

Like with Alix Earle, you can only be given the benefit of the doubt so many times. Eventually, when the controversies pile up, the rumours start to look less like speculation and more like a pattern. Your choices shape public perception, and no PR team can spin standing by your husband while he berates staff into something positive.

Now that we have taken a journey through the depths of hell to see who these two really are, this feud starts to look very different. It’s no longer just two influencers fighting on the internet; it raises a bigger question: why do we care more about flavourless drama than the people behind it? Why are we so quick to pick sides, yet so reluctant to confront the patterns of behaviour laid out in front of us?

At some point, we have to look beyond petty drama and see that these two are nothing more than two problematic influencers who would rather you comment on their surface-level feud than look deeper into who they really are. Because once you do, they lose the one thing that matters to them, their audience.

So, are you still taking sides, or are you choosing to dismiss this feud as a seasonless meal that promises drama and entertainment but cannot seem to deliver? Because at the end of the day, this isn’t just about them, it’s about you. You choose who you watch, who you defend, and what you tolerate. And now that we’ve seen what Alex Cooper and Alix Earle are willing to overlook, the real question is: what are you willing to tolerate for the sake of entertainment?

Thank you for reading!

Citations:

Baume, M. (2020, August 27). Donald Trump’s 8 Worst Attacks on the LGBTQ+ Community. Retrieved from them. website: https://www.them.us/story/donald-trump-worst-lgbtq-attacks

Coleman, O. (2026). Page Restricted. Retrieved May 2, 2026, from Pagesix.com website: https://pagesix.com/2020/04/27/battle-brewing-between-barstool-sports-and-raunchy-hit-podcast-call-her-daddy/

Huston, C. (2026, April 21). Alex Cooper Faces Reported Trouble At Work Amid Alix Earle Scandal. Retrieved May 2, 2026, from The Hollywood Reporter website: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/alex-cooper-alix-earle-rift-1236570593/

Leonhardt, D. (2018, January 15). Opinion | Donald Trump’s Racism: The Definitive List, Updated. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/15/opinion/leonhardt-trump-racist.html

Spangler, T. (2023, August 8). “Call Her Daddy” Host Alex Cooper Launches The Unwell Network, Inks Development Deals With Influencers Alix Earle and Madeline Argy. Retrieved from Variety website: https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/alex-cooper-unwell-network-alix-earle-madeline-argy-1235689592/

Thomas, M., & Wendling, M. (2024, September 15). Donald Trump repeats baseless claim about Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs in Springfield, Ohio. Retrieved from BBC website: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c77l28myezko

Zee, M. (2024, August 26). Alix Earle Addresses Past Racist Comments, Trademarking Claims. Retrieved from Variety website: https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/alix-earle-apologizes-racial-slur-resurfaced-comments-trademarking-claims-untrue-1236118808/

https://www.reddit.com/r/CallHerDaddy/comments/1f202ri/alix_earle_responds_to_past_use_of_racial_slurs/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AlixearleSnark/comments/zxzslt/alix_using_the_nword_on_askfm_when_she_was_14/

https://www.reddit.com/r/LAinfluencersnark/comments/1qpvu1u/alix_earle_is_such_a_loser_for_this/

https://www.reddit.com/r/CallHerDaddy/comments/1k19ig1/do_you_feel_like_alex_is_a_bad_interviewer_and_why/

Gender Disappointment: Kids Are More Than Their Gender

Having a kid is more than just the gender. If you’re worried about that, don’t have children.

Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Gender reveals, in most cases, are small gatherings of family and friends where an expecting couple announces their baby’s gender, and everyone celebrates. And sometimes they’re massive events that start forest fires, but that’s not the point. These parties are meant to be celebrations; they are a chance for family and friends to bask in the joy of the parents-to-be and their baby. At least that’s what I thought they were…

​Recently, there has been a wave of gender reveal videos on social media. Now, there is nothing inherently bad about recording and posting your gender reveal. I mean, it’s a happy occasion, it’s postable, as most major life moments are. However, it becomes a problem when the video you post depicts you, your partner, or both of you visibly being disappointed once the big reveal happens. Now I am not talking about the people who say, “Oh, I thought it was going to be a girl, guess I was wrong, oh well, as long as the baby is healthy.” No, that’s normal. Guessing the gender of a baby can be something fun, as long as you don’t take it too far. But, this is the internet, and the only thing people seem to know is taking it too far. They’ll post anything if it means getting views and attention, even if it’s negative. They don’t care about the message they’re putting out there, or if their child will grow up one day and find that video. There is no consideration for the fact that a child is so much more than their gender. And that is the main issue with some of these people. Now I’m not saying that they won’t love their child, but I am saying that placing all of this pressure and expectation on your unborn child is simply unhealthy.

At the end of the day, children are not vessels for your hopes and dreams. They are people, and they deserve to be treated as such. I don’t believe parents should place all of this hope on one gender and then act like it’s the end of the world when they don’t get what they want. I mean, some of them did understand that they have an equal chance of having a girl or a boy, right? So why are these people throwing tantrums about their baby’s gender? At the end of the day, people who choose to have a baby are usually passionate about being a parent, raising a child, seeing them reach their goals, and loving them along the way. In my opinion, gender doesn’t impact that; you can have this relationship with your child as long as you want it and put the effort into achieving it. So why are we not happy about the potential for that? Are people seriously out here getting pregnant for the sake of having a baby of a certain gender? That’s insane, and just proves that we are in the depths of hell.​

This goes beyond the toxic world of boy moms and girl dads; it leads to misogyny, as most of the videos I have seen have been of people finding out they are having a girl and being disappointed. I’m being serious, I’ve seen men get violently angry to the point where they are yelling, throwing things, or simply walking out. And it’s not just men, women do this too, where they find out they are having a girl and then get angry or upset. Why are grown adults throwing tantrums about their baby’s gender? In my opinion, when it comes to those parents who are disappointed in having a girl, it’s because of underlying misogyny.

There are many cultures that see boys as “more valuable than girls” (disgusting belief by the way). In some cases, people just have that belief all on their own, where they feel having a boy is going to be more “fun” or “rewarding” than having a girl. This belief permeates the lives of these parents, and it impacts how they treat their children (Yes, it goes beyond a simple gender reveal). In many cases, they will give their sons more freedom than their daughters. Think about being able to go out whenever you want or having the freedom to live your life with little restrictions or discipline. Sometimes, boys will get away with more than girls do; parents expect daughters to adhere to a different set of rules than their sons. While this is not the case for all cultures or parents with this philosophy, the core idea remains the same: the sons get treated differently, and oftentimes better, than the daughters.

And while I said this goes beyond toxic boy moms, I do feel it’s important to acknowledge that trend as well. We have all seen it, moms on the internet publicly stating that “the love I have for my son is just different than the love I have for my daughters” or “I’ll make excuses for my son and let him get away with whatever he wants.” These beliefs are rooted in the same misogyny that gender disappointment is, the belief that boys are worth more than girls. And while I am not trying to attack the women who think this way, trust me, there is probably a reason they do, whether it be culture or lived experience. I am simply trying to point out a pattern that extends far beyond a simple gender reveal and can have lasting impacts on these children.

When it comes to the men in these situations, as I said before, I have seen them lash out at the idea of having a girl. This is simply the result of the same societal and cultural idea that boys are “more valuable than girls,” again, a stupid belief. I’m assuming that these men see sons as vessels to carry on their last name and legacy. They give no value to the fact that girls can do that, small-minded thinking if you ask me. They reduce parenting to a legacy instead of a responsibility. Then there’s the toxic male mindset of “I can’t do this if I have a daughter” or “I need to have a son to teach him how to be a man, I can’t raise a girl,” or the other toxic ideas men have about children. These men need to understand that you are having a child to be a parent and raise them to the best of your ability. As I said before, having your mind set on gender creates a toxic mindset that often bleeds into how you parent. It is not fair to bring a child into the world and then treat them like a disappointment (I know I’m repeating myself, I’m trying to get my point across)

I would like to make it clear that I don’t believe all of these parents are abusing their children, as I know it can come off that way in some cases (Though abuse is present in some of these situations). But what I am saying is that they are treating them differently. And while they are still providing them with all the necessities, these differences don’t go unnoticed. Children are able to pick up on things, and they will notice being treated differently. The daughters in these households will grow up with the understanding that their brothers are more valued by their parents because they were awarded things the girls were not. And this could have a lasting impact on how these kids perceive themselves, and it can impact their relationship with their parents.

So ask yourself, is the potential damage to your kids worth it? Isn’t it easier to simply love all of your kids equally? The answer to these questions is easy for most people, even those who don’t have kids. Unfortunately, these parents seem to make the wrong choice over and over again.

At the end of the day, children deserve to grow up in an environment where they are wanted. They should not be a source of disappointment based on their gender. As a parent and grown adult, these people should know that having a child is so much more than gender. Don’t sit around saying, “I can’t do this because I had a boy” or “I can’t do this because I had a girl.” Get rid of that toxic mindset and understand that you can raise and love a child in whatever way you want. Ignore the toxic gender norms and teach your kids whatever you think is valuable and important. Because, at the end of the day, all that matters is having a happy, healthy kid, not their gender. And if you can’t do that, please don’t have children.

Thank you for reading!

Sources:

https://www.boredpanda.com/mother-disappointed-gender-reveal-result/

Gender Dissapointment

Gender Disappointment Compilation

Katy Perry and Ruby Rose: Allegations Should Be Taken Seriously

Why does discrediting women feel like our default response?

Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Disclaimer: This article discusses sexual assault and sexual violence against women. Please read at your own discretion. Resources are provided below.

Ruby Rose took to Threads to allege that Katy Perry sexually assaulted her. On April 12th 2026, Rose responded to a video of Perry critiquing Justin Bieber’s Coachella performance, stating that Katy Perry sexually assaulted her at a nightclub in Australia almost 20 years ago, so no one should care about what she thinks. This post received both support and criticism from social media users, with some praising Ruby Rose for speaking up about her experience. While others chose to attack her, citing her past to argue that she should not be trusted.

As this unfolded on social media, I asked myself, why is discrediting a woman our default as a society? There have been a number of posts bringing up Ruby Rose’s past behaviour, claiming that she’s a “known liar” and a “bad person.” Now I understand that many, including myself, do not condone Ruby’s treatment of certain people or some of her past behaviour. But two things can be true at once: she can be a person with a controversial past and a victim of sexual assault. We should not simply dismiss her claims because we do not like her. This dangerous pattern has been prevalent in our society for decades. And while we all like to claim that we are past the victim-shaming, discrediting, and ignorance of the past, it seems that all of that progress suddenly goes away when it’s someone we do not like. I am not saying you have to like Ruby Rose; I am saying that she, like other victims of sexual assault, deserves to have their allegations heard and taken seriously by the public and legal system.

As I have said, this attitude towards victims of sexual assault has been deeply ingrained in our societal belief system. For centuries, we have made a habit of dismissing women who have found the courage to speak up against their abusers. Why are we still trying to use a woman’s past to discredit her? This has been a long held belief in our society whether it be dismissing claims of sexual assault from sex workers because of stereotypes surrounding their profession or ignoring women who do not fit the profile of the perfect victim, we have constantly tried to discredit, ignore, and shame these women for having the courage to speak out about the horrific things they have suffered.​

This creates an environment where women hesitate to report their experiences. It fuels mistrust of law enforcement and society. When women fear being dismissed, many may never come forward, resulting in serious consequences.​ This mistrust and fear is why 9 in 10 women feel they would not be believed by police. 93% of survivors say they did not expect police to believe them, while 89% say their decision to not report was influenced by how they saw other victims treated by the legal system (Government of Canada, 2025).

Even in today’s day and age, we claim that we want to create a safe space for women, but then shame those we do not like or disagree with. When someone comes forward with an allegation of sexual assault, we have to understand how hard that must be. The assault itself is a deeply traumatic experience, and it may take women years to work up the courage and feel comfortable speaking up and making these accusations. On top of that, women are also facing the possibility of being dismissed by law enforcement or facing backlash from family and friends. And when these accusations are against a public figure, women face potential scrutiny from the media and the public. These are just a few reasons why only an estimated 6% of cases are reported to police in Canada (Government of Canada, 2025).

I think it is important to understand that, while there have been cases where people have lied about being sexually assaulted, these make up only a small percentage of reports, an estimated 2–4% (Government of Canada, 2025). Most women will not risk the possible ramifications of reporting a sexual assault for the sake of attention or money, so please do not spreading that ideology.

Instead of creating a space where women are judged based on who they are before they are taken seriously, we need to advocate for safe spaces for these women. They need to feel confident that law enforcement and the public will take them seriously and investigate their claims without judgment or dismissal for unjust reasons.

Ruby Rose’s situation is just another example of how quickly we are to dismiss allegations because of our personal opinions and biases. And that is the key takeaway from this. Not the “let’s take sides” nonsense the internet loves, but the gravity of this issue and the reactions to it.

We have to understand that these harmful ideologies surrounding sexual assault and women are still deeply ingrained in our society. Whether it’s law enforcement or the public, you can always find someone willing to dismiss an allegation and ready to put the alleged crime on the back burner while they dismantle someone’s credibility. Our default reaction should not be “who is this woman and how does her past shape how I view her allegations?” It should be more issue-focused because, as I said, anyone can be a victim of sexual assault, and whether you like them or not doesn’t matter, as everyone deserves to be heard.

Note: I understand that I have mainly focused on women throughout this article, but it is important to briefly touch on how men are treated when they come forward with their allegations. They are met with stereotypes that aim to discredit their stories. Many jump to the conclusion that a woman cannot sexually assault a man because since men are “physically stronger” than women, they can never be taken advantage of. Or they can easily fight off an attack from another man. This, like the many stereotypes outlined in this article, is harmful and makes these men and boys feel as though their experiences and feelings are invalid. And like with women, we need to create a safe space where everyone feels comfortable reporting these incidents.

Thank you for reading. There will be resources below.

Resources:

https://www.salalsvsc.ca/get-support/

https://endingviolencecanada.org/sexual-assault-centres-crisis-lines-and-support-services/

https://www.sadvtreatmentcentres.ca/other-services.html

https://rcmp.ca/en/relationship-violence/information-sexual-assault-survivors

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/vsd/vsd-navigating-impact-of-sexual-assault.pdf

https://yourchoice.to/

Citations:

Alberta Association of Sexual Assault Services. (2020). FACT SHEET: Sexual Violence Against Men and Boys Men and Boys are also Harmed by Sexual Violence. Retrieved from https://aasas.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Fact-Sheet_Sexual-Violence-Against-Men-_-Boys.pdf

Colchester Sexual Assault Centre. (2026). Myths About Sexual Violence. Retrieved from www.colchestersac.ca website: https://www.colchestersac.ca/myths-and-facts/

Government of Canada. (2025). Reporting to Police and Investigations - Canada.ca. Retrieved from Canada.ca website: https://www.canada.ca/en/office-federal-ombudsperson-victims-crime/sissa-essas/reporting.html

Reddit. (2026). Reddit - Ruby Rose. Retrieved April 16, 2026, from Reddit.com website: https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/1sl58tb/removed_by_moderator/

Scott, K. (2026, April 14). Katy Perry calls Ruby Rose’s allegations of sexual assault “reckless lies.” Retrieved April 16, 2026, from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/11800671/katy-perry-ruby-rose-sexual-assault-allegations/

Bloom: Where Undisclosed Ads Go To Thrive

They’ll Pay Anyone to Lie to You Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Bloom Nutrition is marketed as a “Women’s Health and Wellness Supplements" brand. They sell everything from energy drinks to multi-vitamins, but you may know them for their “Greens and Superfoods Powder Blend.” And if you're still sitting there wondering, “Girl, what are you talking about?” Well, just think back to your ForYou page for a minute. Have you ever seen an influencer start their video by mixing some green powder (not matcha, that’s made differently) into some water and taking a sip, while trying to pretend it tastes good? If the answer was yes, well then, congratulations, you, like the rest of us, have been exposed to the Bloom undisclosed ad hellscape (if the answer’s still no, there are pictures throughout this post).

​Bloom was founded by influencer Mari Llewellyn and her husband Greg. Mari stated that her inspiration for founding this brand was when she hit rock bottom and made the decision to turn her life around. With the help of her husband, she was able to lose 90 pounds, and now she wants to help other women achieve similar goals. She said she created these products to “help everyone bloom into their best selves.” Tacky, I know. Her products claim to help with gut health and bloating (I am not convinced, but do you?), and she claims they help with overall energy and wellness. 

Despite what I think, Mari has been successful with her green powders and energy drinks going viral on TikTok (aesthetics will sell anything, and trust me, she has the perfect colour scheme). Influencers and regular everyday people alike claim to use her products all of the time, and some say that they’ve seen real benefits (we’ll discuss this bullshit later, don’t worry). Clearly, this brand is successful, but what happens when you are exposed for paying influencers for undisclosed ads?

​A while ago, Kiki Chanel (the best YouTuber calling out influencers and their BS) made a video discussing Bloom, and I watched every second of it because she exposed something important. She provided example after example of influencers doing undisclosed ads for Bloom. Most of them are being paid to simply put the product in their videos; it doesn’t even have to be the star of the video, for all they care, it could be somewhere in the background. And I do agree with all of Kiki’s critiques; she's right to call this out. These influencers are blatantly lying to their audiences and need to be held accountable.

​This new strategy from Bloom strays from the traditional influencer brand deal. The brand deals we all know and sit through (or skip because let's be serious, I’m not buying any of that shit) follow the pattern of: influencer and brand make a deal, the influencer features the product in their video, discloses it as an ad, and praises it to no end, and they get paid. The crucial point here is that these brand deals were disclosed with a “this video is sponsored by (insert brand here),” influencers made sure that they were not breaking any laws (yes, there are laws) and that their viewers knew they were being paid.

​Bloom contrasts the traditional brand deal with their marketing strategy. In my opinion they believe that if consumers see their product enough, in the background of videos, it will do two things: make them believe the influencer really uses it, because they’re not directly advertising it, and give them enough exposure to the point where consumers will simply say “hey, I’ve seen this brand a lot recently, let me try it.” This creates an ethical and legal problem where this brand and its favourite influencers are misleading their audiences and losing public trust.

​In Canada (I’m Canadian, leave me alone) and the United States, there are laws in place (the Competition Act and the FTC) that clearly state that all advertisements must be disclosed by the advertiser. In basic terms, influencers need to explicitly say “this is an ad” or something along those lines to be in compliance with these guidelines. If they do not comply, it can result in large fines or further legal action. This seems to be something that’s easy to follow, but these influencers are willing to risk their whole careers and possible legal action all for a payout from Bloom (I truly wonder what their advertising budget is).

Not only is what they're doing technically illegal, but it's also unethical as they are voluntarily lying to their audiences. There have been many accounts of Bloom being “the best drink ever” from a variety of influencers, but let’s be honest, they’re lying to you. If you take a look at the product reviews under their most popular product, their greens powder, there are many reviews that outright say, it tastes awful. On top of this, there have been influencers themselves who say it tastes bad. And when it comes to the ones who are lying to you, I encourage everyone to take a close look at their faces the second they taste the drink; you’ll find that most of them seem to be trying so hard to pretend it’s good while their face tells a different story (allegedly, in my opinion).

Other reviews tell horror stories of consumers trying the product and then experiencing health complications. One customer said that while they felt good for a little while, eventually they experienced gastrointestinal issues and had to stop taking these supplements. They cautioned others, saying that while the product claimed to promote gut health, it could actually be detrimental to the gut. There are many of these reviews under the products, and while some can say that everyone reacts differently, it is still worth noting that these are the potential side effects of taking an influencer-made supplement.

Now, while we can read the thousands of reviews of this product and make general assumptions based on that, it’s important to look at what the experts have to say, since they have a more informed opinion than we normal folk. Diana Gariglio-Clelland, R.D., is a registered dietitian nutritionist who wrote an article about Bloom’s greens powder back in 2024. Her overall consensus was that it’s fine to take Bloom and that it can be a convenient source of fruits and veggies, but she also pointed out several issues with the product. One of her main concerns was that the greens powder uses proprietary blends, which means consumers don’t know exactly how much of each ingredient they are getting per serving, making it hard to gauge the actual benefits of the product. As a result, some ingredients may be present in amounts that are too low to effectively deliver what the product promises. On top of this, third-party testing results have not been published for Bloom’s products. This is a problem because while Bloom claims their products are tested, they don’t make the results public, which leaves consumers in the dark. There is probably nothing wrong, but it creates a level of secrecy that could easily be avoided if they just released the results. Lastly, and possibly the biggest thing to take away from this, is that these greens are not a replacement for a healthy diet. Paired with a healthy diet they could be beneficial, but they do not replace real fruits and vegetables. Overall, these issues led Diana Gariglio-Clelland, R.D., to conclude that Bloom is fine as a supplement, but nothing more, and that it isn’t anything necessary.

So while Bloom might be considered a decent supplement, it’s important to look at the company and the way the product is marketed. It’s not a miracle product, it won’t replace real food, and it’s probably not going to change your life. But if you only watched TikTok, you might think it would. And that’s the problem. Most consumers are not researching the ethics of a company or wondering whether the video they saw was secretly an ad; they’re just being influenced by social media and a company that may not have their best interests at heart.

So I would encourage everyone reading this to look a little closer the next time you want to buy something, just because you keep seeing it in the background of influencers’ videos. Because you might not just be seeing a product, you might be seeing a very carefully planned marketing strategy built on undisclosed ads. Stay safe out there.

Sources:

Gariglio-Clelland, D., & Gariglio-Clelland, A. D. (2024, September 16). Bloom Greens Review: Thoughts from an R.D. (2026). BarBend. https://barbend.com/bloom-greens-review/

Kiki Chanel: Why Are Influencers Still Promoting Bloom?

Bloom Nutrition

Euphoria: Was it Worth It, No it Wasn’t

Three seasons in seven years, just pack it up

Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Euphoria’s long-awaited season three is just around the corner, and, like many people, I have been asking, “Is it worth it?” Let’s be serious, no, it’s not. The show premiered in 2019, and since then, we have gotten two seasons, multiple delays, and some alleged cast drama. While this may be good publicity (apparently, any media attention is good for the show, since it’s been so long), it’s not the traditional way shows were run.

In this new age of streaming, this seems to be the gold standard, but does it keep audiences engaged? I guess when fans have to go back and re-watch the show, it’s a positive for executives, but how many people are going to do that? Are people still going to watch this? Maybe, for the storyline to see how their “favourite characters” turn out. But I think the real draw will be the behind-the-scenes drama, I mean, let’s be serious, bad publicity these days seems to be a marketing strategy that draws in audiences and convinces them to engage with a given show or movie. But in my opinion, if it takes you three years to write, produce, and release an eight-episode season, maybe it’s not worth it.

While some may not remember every storyline, I can guarantee that at least some fans of this show will be streaming the newest episodes on Sundays after seeing all of the alleged drama happening behind the scenes. From Sydney Sweeney turning into a MAGA sellout to her potential feud with Zendaya, and even the premier drama, it’s safe to say that this show has enough drama to sell itself (fitting considering the plot).

Beginning with Sydney Sweeney, her American Eagle ad promoted eugenics and white supremacy ideals, whether they intended to or not; it doesn’t matter; the harm caused is still significant. Her response was somehow worse than the ad. She said, “​​I think that when I have an issue that I want to speak about, people will hear.” Awful, I know. There was no excuse for what she said; she wanted to be ignorant and refused to understand the negative impact the ad had. As expected, she immediately faced backlash and later tried to walk back her claims, stating “I am against hate,” among other things that her PR team believed would paint her in a positive light. In reality, this doesn’t do much; you can’t jump back to being a liberal when pandering to republicans isn’t working out for you. She chose to go along with everything her PR team wanted her to do, she chose to say what she said, and in my opinion, that is what should be remembered.

Continuing with Sydney Sweeney (Cassie in real life), her rumoured feud with Zendaya, the star and producer of the show. Now, all of this is alleged, and we don’t know whether it actually happened or is just another made-up internet rumour. But it has been rumoured that the rift between these co-stars stems from Sydney trying to flirt with Tom Holland (Zendaya’s partner). As a result of this alleged flirting, Zendaya distanced herself from Sydney and refused to do press with her. The rumour gained more traction because Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney have not been seen together promoting the latest season of Euphoria. Now, do I believe that Sydney Sweeney would do something like this, maybe… Based on her past behaviour, I would not be surprised, but I will give her the benefit of the doubt to a certain extent, because you never know with internet rumours (I am on Zendaya’s side; if it’s true, she handled it well).

The premier created a new spotlight on potential issues behind the scenes. Zendaya left the premier after the red carpet. This caused some controversy. I think she simply fulfilled her contractual obligation and left. It really does seem like she’s ready to move on. She did what she had to do, greeted most of the cast and left.

In addition to this premier drama, Labrinth, the artist who did a lot of the music for Euphoria, quit earlier this year. In March 2026, he shared a post stating, “Fuck Columbia. Double fuck Euphoria. I’m out. Thank you and good night x.” In April, he explained this, saying, “People will comfortably lie in this industry and still call themselves honest people. So no cap, I decided to remove whatever music I had in it,” He went on to say, “I spoke to HBO, as far as I know, we are cool. I left because, last truth, when I work for someone, their vision is paramount to me, but I don’t let people treat me like shit.” Many people pointed their fingers at Sam Levinson, stating that he was the reason Labrinth left the production and whether or not that is true has not been confirmed or denied.

So far, the show has had a great deal of drama surrounding it with controversial cast members, rumours of on-set feuds, and now the main composer has left and made sure everyone knew why. With a show this dramatic on and off screen, I think it’s important to look at the man calling the shots.

I think the real problem with this show is its creator, Sam Levinson. He has a list of controversies regarding fostering a toxic work environment and his behaviour. In 2022, Sydney Sweeney and Minka Kelly both expressed discomfort with their characters’ nudity on the show. They were luckily able to negotiate different approaches to these scenes with Levinson that made them more comfortable. This is something I am happy they were able to do because many women in Hollywood often feel pressured into not speaking out when something makes them uncomfortable. However, I will say that he seems to have an obsession with nudity, as these actresses said he wrote in nude scenes when they weren’t necessary, and that it was worrying. I don’t want to accuse him of anything, but it’s hard to ignore that this has been a constant theme throughout his projects.

Despite that, let’s not forget that he produced “The Idol,” the disaster that was. There were rumours of a toxic work environment and lengthy delays. The story itself was an awful depiction of women. One source close to the production said, “It was a show about a woman who was finding herself sexually, turned into a show about a man who gets to abuse this woman, and she loves it.” The show depicted graphic violence and abuse. It featured a great deal of nudity, and while this could all be seen as “telling a complicated or messy story,” I chose to view it as glamorizing abusive relationships and men being overly controlling and toxic. The Weekend, who starred in the five episodes that were released, stated that the show focused too much on the feminist perspective and Lily-Rose Depp’s character. This was seen as the reason the original director, Amy Seimetz, left before the series was even completed. Levinson then took over as the director and gave audiences the romanticized abusive relationship that became the main story on “The Idol.”​ And trust me, this isn’t the only time he’s done this…

When looking at his work on Euphoria, I have always found the way he chose to portray teenagers strange. I understand that these are real issues that some teens experience, but I just find the way that Levinson chooses to tell these stories creepy. Like The Idol, this series has a heavy focus on nudity and sexuality. If these are supposed to be teenagers, why are they being sexualized this much? From the outfits to the situations these kids find themselves in, it makes me question if this show would be better if the characters were college-age. Because, in my opinion, there isn’t really a reason for them to be in high school. Aging them up wouldn’t significantly impact the story, as many of the storylines could still be impactful from that perspective. And yes, I know the actors are adults, but the fact that I am supposed to be viewing these characters as teens is uncomfortable, especially when you watch the show and see the things Sam Levinson writes for these supposed children. His portrayal of teenagers offers a look into his head and what he believes to be appropriate. These topics should be handled with a certain level of sensitivity, and based on what I have seen, that’s not happening.

While it seems that Sam Levinson can write a “messy story”, he has been called out for only being able to write from his own perspective and experiences. Barbie Ferreira left the show in 2022. She stated that it was a mutual decision between her and Levinson. Later, saying that they both felt that her character had run its course and there was nowhere else for her story to progress. She also stated that Sam Levinson writes about what he relates to, and her character, Kat, was not someone he was able to relate to, which makes you question why Nate is so fleshed out.

In my opinion, writers do like to write about something they can relate to; it’s a comfort zone where they feel they create their best work. However, you can only stay in this bubble for so long. At some point, you have to be willing to branch out and write characters from perspectives that are not solely yours. This is done through research and practice to hone your craft and expand your horizons. Sam Levinson has been a professional screenwriter and filmmaker since at least 2010. That’s 16 years; at some point, you have to be willing to branch out and explore other stories. When you don’t, you get situations like Euphoria, where some characters feel more developed than others. Or you get a series like The Idol, where everything seemed haphazardly thrown together in one big mess. ​

I think when you have someone like this at the core of a show, it naturally creates an environment where people are uncomfortable. His beliefs, attitudes, and world views seep into the show and the on-set environment. Based on how he writes some of these characters, it is clear that he is not just writing “hard to tell” stories; it goes deeper than that. And when you let someone like him gain traction in Hollywood, it only leads to disaster, and while this is not the main story of Euphoria season three, I think it’s important to acknowledge the man at the helm of this production.

Well, with the new season looming ever closer, the question in many people’s minds continues to be “will I be watching?” And while I do believe that this show will do well due to all of the publicity (positive or negative). All I can say is I hope this is the last season, and we don’t get any surprise season 4 announcement, because I don’t think people are willing to wait another three years for a new season. And I don’t think these actors are willing to put up with it either. This isn’t worth it.

Thank you for reading!

Citations:

Farmer, C. (2026, April 10). Zendaya and Sydney Sweeney feud sets social media alight: Euphoria fans go wild as video shows duo’s frosty red carpet snub - after MAGA Barbie “flirted” with co-star’s “husband” Tom Holland and political clashes. Retrieved April 13, 2026, from Mail Online website: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15718123/Zendaya-Sydney-Sweeney-feud-sets-social-media-alight-Euphoria-fans-wild-video-shows-duos-frosty-red-carpet-snub-MAGA-Barbie-flirted-stars-husband-Tom-Holland-political-clashes.html

Lopez Restrepo, M., Venkat, M., Summers, J., & Troop, W. (2025, August). The ad campaign that launched a thousand critiques: Sydney Sweeney’s jeans. Retrieved from NPR website: https://www.npr.org/2025/08/01/nx-s1-5487286/sydney-sweeney-american-eagle-explained-why-controversy-racist-eugenics-trump-bathwater-ad-klein-statement

Parkel, I. (2023, March 2). A timeline of Sam Levinson controversies, from Euphoria to The Idol. Retrieved from The Independent website: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/sam-levinson-euphoria-barbie-ferreira-b2293208.html

Sager, J. (2023, May 23). A Guide to “Euphoria” Creator Sam Levinson’s Many Controversies. Retrieved from Parade website: https://parade.com/celebrities/sam-levinson-controversy-euphoria-the-idol

Yana Grebenyuk. (2026, April 13). Why Is Musician Labrinth Slamming “Euphoria” Amid Season 3? Offscreen Feud, Drama Explained. Retrieved April 13, 2026, from Us Weekly website: https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/why-is-labrinth-slamming-euphoria-season-3-drama-explained/

Coachella: Music Festivals Have Taken the Plunge into Influencer Hell

How influencers and brands reshaped the modern music festival

Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Coachella season is upon us once again, and with that comes the beginning of the influencer Olympics. An annual event where influencers compete to deliver the best content, outfits, and overall aesthetics. Scored by an audience around the world, these influencers compete for likes, followers, and engagement. This year, a new event has been added to these yearly games: the begging contest. In this new competition, influencers compete to see who can humiliate themselves the most in the quest to be recognized by a brand and sent to the festival for free (even though they could afford to buy their own tickets). While this competition has already ended, you can watch reruns of it on TikTok, where you’ll find a bottomless pit of entries. Tune in this weekend to the influencer Olympics, available on any influencer’s social media page.

In all seriousness, I think it’s fair to say that music festivals are no longer events where music lovers can gather and enjoy their favourite artists. These once-beloved festivals have turned into corporate cash grabs, where it seems as though everyone is trying to sell you something. And people care more about appearances than the festival itself. Not to mention these events are no longer accessible to the average person, you would have to take out a loan to be able to afford a whole weekend, including tickets, accommodations, food, and more. While most of us grew up seeing our favourite YouTubers vlog their Coachella weekends, the problem with influencer entitlement only seems to be getting worse as we move further away from the festival’s roots and closer toward capitalism.

The first Coachella was held at the Empire Polo Field in Indio, California, all the way back in October 1999. It was founded by Paul Tollett and Rick Van Santen, who hoped to attract about 70,000 people with tickets costing around $50. The first headliners featured artists such as Beck, Rage Against the Machine, and Tool. The goal with these artists was to highlight multiple genres and attract a wide range of music fans. That first year, they only attracted about 25,000 people and, as a result, they cancelled the festival the following year. But they returned in 2001, and Coachella has become a staple since then, only gaining more traction as the years went on.

Now Coachella has a maximum capacity of 125,000 and has been almost sold out every year since 2010. The festival has seen a number of major artists grace the Coachella Valley over the years, including Beyoncé, Eminem, Bad Bunny, Billie Eilish, Blackpink, and many more. This year, the festival will see Justin Bieber, Sabrina Carpenter, and Karol G headline, which is exciting for those willing to pay the price of admission.

With the festival gaining more traction over the years, of course, they’re going to charge as much as they possibly can to maximize their profits and pay for these major artists. Ticket prices now range from $549-$649 for three-day general admission passes. VIP costs festival goers anywhere from $1,199-$1,399. Not included in these prices are accommodations and food, which can leave a serious hole in your wallet.

On-site camping can cost anywhere from $150-$400. Or you can spring for one of the many hotels or Airbnbs in the area. But you’d better act fast, because those get booked out quickly, and you should be prepared to pay exponentially more than you would on any other weekend, because, as expected, these places will price-gouge to make a quick buck.

Food costs vary, with some estimating it can cost about $30-$60 a day, but I think it’s far more, especially if you want to buy from a vendor inside the festival, where meals can cost anywhere from $20-$30 each, which is ridiculous. And that’s not to mention the cost of flights, gas, or other forms of transportation, which are all added costs to the festival experience. Over a weekend, it’s estimated that the cost for one person could range from $800 to over $3000, depending on your tickets and accommodation situation.

Regardless of the artists performing and the costs associated with putting on the festival, these prices are insane. Most people who attend these festivals are young adults, and I don’t know about you, but most of us can barely afford rent, so who is this really for? Attending Coachella requires serious saving, and even if you can manage it, is the experience worth the inflated prices and obvious corporate exploitation? I know, you can’t put a price on lived experiences, but maybe we should start, because what’s the point of a music festival if it’s only accessible to a select group few? Well, it seems they have solved this problem, as the goal of Coachella seems to now be a big corporate event disguised as a music festival. With advertisers everywhere, and influencers pushing products they don’t believe in down your throat.

It seems like every video or photo you see from Coachella is sponsored by a brand that sent an influencer there for free. Everyone is trying to sell you something. And while I don’t blame the festival for taking on sponsors, most of them do, I do question why brands have seeped into every facet of this festival. Seriously, it’s all about the ads and “which brand is going to pay for my Coachella this year?” It gets exhausting, especially when you have influencers who can afford to buy tickets like everyone else, begging brands to send them there for free.

Like clockwork, every year in the weeks leading up to Coachella, we see multiple influencers, big and small, get online and beg for free Coachella tickets. All of them say the same thing: “I have to go, I love the artists headlining, and I have to be there,” or “I’ll promote any brand that wants to send me to Coachella this year, I’ll post whatever you want.”

I miss when people had shame…

​Those defending these people would say, “You would do it if you had a following.” Yes, most people would love the perks influencers have, but what happened to DMing brands on the side? There’s no need to get on the internet and humiliate yourself; have some decorum. If you’re that eager to go, why not buy a ticket or reach out to a brand months ago? Why wait until the festival is weeks away and start begging? Entitlement, that’s why. These people feel as though they are entitled to this luxury. They think that they have to be accommodated because they have followers. Well, that’s not how it works. If you didn’t get a brand deal for the festival, tough luck. You can’t depend on brands to give you everything for free; at some point, you’ll have to dip into your millions to pay for something on your own. And that’s not even the most embarrassing part of all of this.

Not only are these influencers exposing their desperation for free accommodations and tickets, but they are also exposing that they are all sellouts. When you get online and say, “I’ll promote any brand that wants to send me to Coachella,” it tells everyone watching your video, including the brand, that you’re a sellout who will promote anything as long as it benefits you. You’re telling your audience that you’ll lie to them for some tickets to a music festival. It forces viewers to look at you in a new light, where they question your credibility. Do you seriously think your audience is going to trust a word you say after you willingly post something like that? No, they aren’t, they’ll see through your corporate sellout bullshit, and the worst part is you did this to yourself.

​Well, as I said before, Coachella season is upon us, and while you may have missed the pre-festival begging contest, you still have a whole weekend to look forward to, where your favourite influencers compete for the best outfits, pictures, and overall content. Are you ready to judge, or are you sitting this one out? If you do choose to participate, just remember, the lifestyle portrayed online may be deceptive, as most influencers refuse to show the downside of spending a weekend in the hot, dusty California desert. And don’t forget that while many will complain about the costs of things, they most likely got in there for free, and they make your yearly salary in a month. So buckle up, everyone, as we get ready for the annual influencer Olympics, exclusively broadcast on Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, or any other platform featuring desperate influencers.

Thank you for reading!

Sources:

Agate, S. (2026, April 10). How Much Do Coachella Tickets Cost? A Guide to the Massive Music Festival’s Prices, Crowds and More. Retrieved April 10, 2026, from Us Weekly website: https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/how-much-do-coachella-tickets-cost-guide-to-music-festival/

Braun, S. (2026, April 9). Has Coachella festival sold out? Retrieved April 10, 2026, from dw.com website: https://www.dw.com/en/has-coachella-festival-sold-out/a-76723989

Coffey-Behrens, K. (2025, April 12). Coachella Under Fire For Insane Food And Drink Prices, And “Freezing Cold” Cuisine. Retrieved April 10, 2026, from Yahoo Entertainment website: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/articles/coachella-under-fire-insane-food-203055265.html

Dambrosio, C. (2019, April 18). Coachella turns 20 this year. Here’s how the festival has changed since the beginning. Retrieved from Business Insider website: https://www.businessinsider.com/coachella-then-now-history-old-photos-2019-4

Festival Budget Team. (2025, September). Coachella 2025 Cost Breakdown Complete Budget Calculator. Retrieved from Neon Cowboys website: https://www.neoncowboys.com/blogs/news/coachella-2025-cost-breakdown-budget-calculator

Forrester, K. (2026, April 9). Coachella price gouging explodes as Airbnb host rents out LAUNDRY room for $1.3k ahead of Justin Bieber’s comeback. Retrieved April 10, 2026, from The US Sun website: https://www.the-sun.com/entertainment/16188706/coachella-ticket-airbnb-prices-surge-justin-bieber/

https://www.facebook.com/peoplemag. (2025). Coachella Attendees Stunned by Festival’s “Diabolical” Food and Drink Prices: “Miserable Money Trap.” Retrieved from People.com website: https://people.com/coachella-attendees-stunned-by-festival-expensive-food-drink-prices-11714432

Parkel, I. (2026, April 10). Every single headline act and lineup poster since the California festival began. Retrieved April 10, 2026, from The Independent website: https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/music/features/coachella-lineup-history-justin-bieber-2026-b2955419.html

The Rise of “SkinniTok”: Bodies Should Not Be a Trend

Diet Culture Never Died, It Just Rebranded

Full Article on Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Disclaimer: This article discusses diet culture, eating disorders, and body shaming. Please take care while reading and read at your own discretion. There will be resources below.

Scrolling through TikTok recently, you can’t miss the viral “girl dinner” remixes that have exploded across SkinniTok, with creators showing off their meals: a handful of popcorn and Diet Coke, captioned with comments like “that’s all you need to stay thin.” One post, for example, racked up over a million views as viewers debated whether eating only strawberries for lunch was “goals” or a warning sign. This is just one of dozens of trends from “Skinnitok,” a subsection of the internet that is obsessed with all things thin.

Influencers in the space promote disordered eating, “skinny” workouts, and a toxic attitude towards body positivity. Over the past year, many people have fallen for this growing trend of being skinny over everything. It seems that the popular look for the mid 2020s resembles that of what we saw during the 2000s, where being thin was considered “trendy” or “the only acceptable body type.” This “new” community on TikTok promotes the “skinny lifestyle” while subsequently shaming women who dare stray from this body type.

With the return of toxic diet culture and body shaming, it is important to remember that SkinniTok isn’t new; it’s just a rebranded version of early 2000s diet culture with Ozempic at the centre, and once again, women’s bodies are being turned into trends, monitored, and marketed for consumption.

Now, I would like to start by clarifying that I am not aiming my criticism against the general gym community on TikTok or those influencers who promote healthy, balanced eating. I am not attacking those who choose to lose weight for personal reasons. No, this is directed at those who choose to promote disordered eating, where women are expected to eat the fewest calories possible in order to achieve what has been deemed “the perfect body.”

The harm done by these recycled ideals will be lasting; it will follow around the young girls these “tips and tricks” are targeted towards for the rest of their lives. It will shape their perception of themselves and their self-esteem, and this is not a mindset that is easy to get rid of.

Read the Full Article on Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Resources:

Eating Disorders Unit (EDU)

Bulimia Anorexia Nervosa Association (BANA)

Sheena’s Place

eMentalHealth.ca Resources List

CMHA Resources List

Kids Help Phone

National Eating Disorder Information Centre (NEDIC)

Ontario Community Outreach Program for Eating Disorders

National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders

ANAD

Kanye West (Ye): Accountability Has an Expiration Date (Apparently)

Why can this man attempt a comeback?

Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

Kanye West, or Ye as he is now called, is attempting a comeback (I hate it here). This past weekend, he had two sold-out shows at California’s SoFi Stadium, which holds approximately 70,000 people. So, no, this was no small affair; he had a concert, and despite his controversial past, the masses showed up to support him. He made an estimated $33 million over the two nights, and many, including myself, are questioning whether everyone but us had their memories wiped. I mean, seriously, are we really going to let this man, who has uttered racist slurs, promoted nazism, misogyny, and more, come back as if nothing happened? We’re going to give him another chance to make himself rich despite all of the harm he has caused?

Before I get yelled at, I am not aiming my criticism at Ye himself (trust me, he’s too far gone). I am concerned about all the people, including celebrities, who have continued to support and enable him despite everything he’s done. I mean, you all saw his praise for Hitler, right? How about when he got banned from Twitter because of his anti-Semitic remarks? Did we not all witness him promoting “white lives matter” and white supremacist ideals? I could go on and on, but it seems like no matter what this man does, there seems to be a path to redemption ready and waiting for him to skip down while promoting his newest album. And that is the bigger issue at hand: we can choose what we consume, so why are people choosing to platform this? Why are men like Kanye West allowed to redeem themselves regardless of their controversies?

We are in the depths of hell…

​While I have alluded to Ye’s past controversies, I feel it’s important to give everyone a detailed recap of what he has done so we can all understand why this “comeback” is so outrageous (maybe it will knock some sense into some people, IDK). He was once one of the biggest artists in the world. Known for his influential and catchy music, his albums sold millions of copies, and his concerts were always sold out. Ye had a billion-dollar business and brand deals that one could only dream of. But this all came crashing down due to his own actions.

Now, before I get into this, mental health most likely played a role in his behaviour. He has been open about his bipolar disorder diagnosis and the symptoms he has suffered as a result. While this is not an excuse for his behaviour, it is important to acknowledge this aspect of life as it does play a role here.

​With that said, let’s discuss his past leading up to this comeback (thank you to the wiki for this information; I would be lost without it). His controversial past goes beyond his feud with Taylor Swift or his association with the Kardashians; he has continuously made comments that have caused irreparable harm, and those are things that need to be remembered.

In 2016, he defended Bill Cosby, who was accused of sexual assault by over 60 women, by tweeting, “Bill Cosby is innocent.” In 2018, he would have to apologize for comments he made about “slavery being a choice.” In 2022 (there was a lot in between that, but if I got into all of it this would be too long), at a fashion show for his brand Yeezy, he wore a “White Lives Matter” t-shirt and took the stage with the controversial conservative podcaster Candice Owens. That same year, he would get banned from Twitter for his anti-semitism. He tweeted that he wanted to go “death con 3 on Jewish people.” He continued his tirade against the Jewish community in interviews, going as far as to claim that Jewish people ran the media and were running a smear campaign against him. Pairing with his comments on Jewish people, he praised Hitler, denied the Holocaust, and identified as a Nazi. Ye spread the false narrative that George Floyd died due to a fentanyl overdose, while in reality, he was murdered by a police officer. In 2025, he released a song praising Hitler and selling shirts with Nazi symbols, including the swastika on them. In 2026, he would apologize for his statements, claiming his behaviour was the result of a mental health crisis, but, in my opinion, this does not erase the harm he caused over the years (Trust me, he’s done far more than what I listed).

Of course, Ye’s personal life and public behaviour intersected, and it is important to acknowledge his marriage to Kim Kardashian and the fact that none of this is her fault. She tried to get him help, but in the end, she could not live with him and his outbursts. And there is nothing wrong with that; she is not to blame for his behaviour or beliefs. He is a grown man with his own thoughts and autonomy, so do not get on the internet and blame a woman for a man’s behaviour.

As a result of his behaviour, he lost his billionaire status and relationships with brands/companies such as Gap, Balenciaga, CAA, and Vogue. Even Adidas, his partner for his Yeezy brand, dropped him because of his comments. All of this was well deserved and serves as a reminder that holding people accountable is important. These brands did not tolerate him; they refused to reward his behaviour, so why are you?

​We can all look at the list of things he has done and objectively say that all of it was wrong (at least I hope we can). His inflammatory statements spread hate, caused harm, and left a lasting impact on how he is perceived by the public, at least I thought it did. So why are people choosing to support him? It can’t be because of his music, because in my opinion, no matter how good an album is, it should never allow someone to overlook this disgusting behaviour.

​At the end of the day, we have a choice in the media we consume; we also have a choice in the media we do not consume. You read that right, we have a choice. So why are some people (over 140,000 of them) choosing to give him their hard-earned money to attend his concert? It seems as though these people are happy to live in ignorant bliss. To them, what he did doesn't matter as long as they get to have a fun night out at his concert. In my opinion, there is no excuse for going to this concert or listening to his music. The fact that people are willing to overlook Ye’s documented, publicized history tells me all I need to know about them and what they believe or tolerate. But honestly, why are we surprised? This is the same pass most men get when they are “cancelled.”

In most cases, men do not face the full consequences that ‘cancel culture’ often promises. They still have the ability to come back from their “cancellation,” often stronger than ever. These men are able to resume their careers regardless of what they did, and people jump up to support them and their new projects. Think about the many disgraced actors, directors, and musicians in Hollywood. What happens when they do something inexcusable? Whether it be saying something harmful or committing violent acts, they are often welcomed back to work within two years. They rebrand themselves and expect the public to forget their crimes, and unfortunately, in most cases, it works. All you have to do is release one good song or one good movie, and all of a sudden, everything is forgiven.

​Think about Brad Pitt. In 2016, he was accused of verbal and physical abuse by Angelina Jolie. Even after these allegations were made public, Pitt was still able to get major Hollywood roles. Three years after all of this came out, he starred in “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” alongside major stars like Leonardo DiCaprio (He sucks too) and Margo Robbie. A few years later, he was cast in a lead role in “Bullet Train”. Most recently, he was cast in the F1 movie (I’ve heard it’s not good, but I digress).

Don’t worry, I'm not just listing Brad Pitt’s career achievements. In this context, he is just one of many examples of men in the entertainment industry who have done horrendous things and were welcomed back with open arms (just to be clear, abuse and what Kanye did are not the same thing, and I am not trying to equate them). I mean, no one seems to care about Brad Pitt’s past now; he’s everywhere, and this is what will happen with Ye and those like him. These men will continue to be given chance after chance, while their past is repeatedly expunged from the record of public memory.

Let this be a reminder of the horrific things Ye has done. He should not become another example in the long list of men who have escaped accountability. You have the power to choose what you consume, and if you choose to support Ye and his new music, just understand that you are supporting his past behaviour to a certain extent. While you may not agree with the awful things he has said over the years, supporting him now says that you are willing to dismiss and tolerate his past in favour of his music in the present and future. You are what you tolerate and, to a certain extent, the media you choose to consume. It tells a story of who you are, whether you like it or not. So ask yourself whether this is the man you really want to support?

P.S: Love that the UK has banned him from entering the country; this is what I mean when I say hold him accountable.

​Thank you for reading.

Citations:

Mannie, K. (2024, April 5). Angelina Jolie says Brad Pitt’s abuse began “well before” 2016 flight. Retrieved from Global News website: https://globalnews.ca/news/10404882/angelina-jolie-brad-pitt-abuse-history-lawsuit/

Rosdahl, J. (2025). The celebrity halo effect: why abuse allegations against powerful men like Brad Pitt are so easily forgotten. https://doi.org/10.64628/aa.wxrw7mx9f

Shaw, L. (2026, April 5). Ye Just Made $33 Million in Two Nights. Will His Comeback Last? Retrieved April 7, 2026, from Bloomberg.com website: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2026-04-05/kanye-west-concert-breaks-records-with-18-million-night

Sundby, A. (2026, January 26). Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, apologizes for antisemitic remarks and cites brain injury. Retrieved from Cbsnews.com website: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kanye-west-ye-apologizes-antisemitic-remarks-brain-injury/

The Associated Press. (2022, October 5). Brad Pitt choked and hit his children, Angelina Jolie says in a court filing. Retrieved from NPR website: https://www.npr.org/2022/10/05/1126925040/brad-pitt-choked-and-his-children-angelina-jolie-says-in-a-court-filing

Wiki. (2026). List of controversies. Retrieved April 7, 2026, from Kanye West Wiki website: https://kanyewest.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_controversies#Comments_on_Bill_Cosby

Jenna Ortega: Celebrities Are Not What They Seem

She’s allegedly dating who? What does this tell us about celebrity culture?

Substack: https://theinternetcommentarydesk.substack.com/

So, Jenna Ortega is allegedly dating a controversial man. She has recently been linked to Elias Rønnenfelt, the frontman of Iceage (a band I’ve never heard of). Now, with most celebrity dating rumours, they are spotted, people speculate, some hate, while some are happy, and everyone moves on. But that's only the case if your internet background check is cleared.

Elias Rønnenfelt is the lead singer for Iceage, a Danish rock band. When internet sleuths started digging into his past, they found a number of disturbing things that made them question not only him, but Jenna Ortega for her association with him. Back in 2013, when Elias Rønnenfelt was around 18, he created artwork for his band that would later be linked to neo-nazism. While this could be dismissed as a youthful indiscretion, I don’t think it counts as one when the mistake is made repeatedly.

Around the same time, the band found themselves in more self-made controversy when they invited a band with a blatantly racist name to perform at a festival they were hosting. This, in my opinion, is inexcusable; this band had a known racist phrase in their name and Rønnenfelt and his bandmates were completely fine with it. And don’t come at me with that “this was a different time” bullshit, just because people were more accepting of racism back then does not mean all of the harm is erased. It does not make what they did okay. They still invited a band with a racist name to perform at a festival that they had full control over, so no, this is not a childhood mistake or an unknowingly stupid decision; all of the information was laid out for them, and they chose to go ahead with it. That tells me everything I need to know.

Now Rønnenfelt has expressed regret over his past, saying that the band does not support “right-wing” or "extremist" views. He fell back on the “we didn’t know " excuse for the behaviour of him and his band. Rønnenfelt claimed that they did not understand the issues at the time and were not aware of the impact of their actions. I don’t believe it, but okay. Now you can take this however you want; you can say that he “changed” and “grew from his mistakes.” But it is important to remember that this behaviour or way of thinking is very hard to unlearn and grow out of once you are an adult. Which is why I am skeptical of their apologies. Maybe I’ve been burned by too many celebrity “apologies,” but this sounds like the classic, “I am being called out, quick, let me say something before I lose my fan base.” Or it could be genuine (unlikely), but I don’t know them as a band or him as a person; these are just the highlights I’ve seen on the internet.

When it comes to Jenna Ortega, I think it is important to understand that, to a certain extent, you are what you tolerate, and you are who you associate with. Now, I am not saying that she believes in the same things this guy clearly did at one point, but I am saying that if you can tolerate and look past this behaviour, then maybe you aren’t the person your public persona claims you are. Most celebrities have very controlled public images; we see what they want us to. What they do behind closed doors is a secret that we are not privy to. And this is something important to remember when it comes to this issue: while we may idolize celebrities and think we know everything about them, we simply do not. A carefully curated image can hide what a person truly believes or is willing to tolerate. I mean, let's be serious. If she came out and said, “Yeah, I know about this guy's past, and I’m okay with it,” it would not go over well. She would lose support from fans and the confidence of Hollywood (probably not; they tolerate anything if it makes them money). So it’s better for her image to stay silent and keep her real thoughts to herself. And before anyone comes in defending her saying “she didn’t know,” first of all, you don’t know that and second of all, these people have teams that manage their image. You don’t think they did an internet background check on this guy, be serious.

​At the end of the day, it is crucial to remember that following someone's career, posting about them, watching all of their projects, or idolizing them does not give you an exclusive look behind the curtain. While you may know more about Jenna Ortega than the average person, you do not know who she is behind closed doors. Many celebrities have managed to pull the wool over their audiences’ eyes, and it will likely continue, as maintaining fame and financial success often takes priority over transparency. They will adopt any personality they need to, in order to maintain their fame and status, regardless of how far that may stray from who they really are.

A look at how parasocial relationships fuel unrealistic expectations of celebrities

The world of celebrity conspiracy theories can range from relationship rumours to claims about secret societies, mega-church influence, or alleged elite networks. In many cases, online conspiracy remains relatively harmless as it dies out over the course of a few weeks as the news cycle moves on. However, when these theories become a long-lasting internet discussion sustained by parasocial relationships, it creates a wider problem, where fan attachment takes the place of evidence, and these theories escalate beyond speculation.

Recently, Jim Carrey has become the latest target of the parasocial rumour mill, with some fans claiming he has been cloned. Listen, I know it sounds crazy to give attention to these rumours, but just bear with me for a few paragraphs because trust me, I’m getting to a bigger issue here. In this case, fans have taken minor changes in appearance and behavioural cues that diverge from the carefully crafted perception they have of Carrey and spun them into a full-blown Hollywood cloning conspiracy.

Now, some may ask, “What’s the big deal?” Well, cases like these reveal the extent to which parasocial relationships between a celebrity and a fan can reach, where fans feel they have a deep relationship and understanding of these celebrities, to the point where they believe they know everything about them. This feeling creates a sense of entitlement, leading them to believe they can determine what is “normal” for these famous figures.

Jim Carrey recently attended a French award show where fans noticed that he “didn’t look like the Jim Carrey they always knew.” Now, most people looked at him and assumed “hey, maybe he got some kind of cosmetic procedure done,” but some fans took it as far as to say that the person they were seeing on the red carpet wasn’t Jim Carrey at all. They claimed that this person was a clone because he looked “so different” and “wasn’t acting like Jim Carrey.” Now this is a clear example of fans taking it too far because they believe they know Jim Carrey. They think they can determine what is considered normal behaviour for him. Some say that “he would never get plastic surgery” or “I’ve been a fan for years and he’s never acted like this.” This parasocial attitude, where fans believe they know a celebrity deeply, becomes unhealthy and harmful to everyone involved, as these fans often not only end up contributing to online hate but also put so much mental energy into this campaign that it affects their own mental health.

Now, I'm not going to look at people and say that Jim Carrey looks the same as he always does. In my opinion, he probably got some kind of cosmetic procedure done (I don’t know which one, and I’m not here to start rumours), or he’s simply aging, you know, as most humans do. And I would just like to say it’s really no one's business if someone wants to get something done to make themselves feel better for whatever reason; they should be able to do that without clone allegations. As for how he was acting, while I do admit that I have not analyzed every moment in every interview he’s ever done (I don’t have time for that), he didn’t seem like he was outrageously different from the Jim Carrey everyone is used to seeing on screen (just my opinion, it’s not the rule of law or anything). However, I, like most people, don’t look at celebrities and automatically know what is “normal” behaviour and what is not. And if you are sitting at home overanalyzing every moment of his from the past year, I truly urge you to take a break and do some self reflection, because jumping over these logical explanations for noticeable differences and into the pool of conspiracy theories, just because a celebrity does not live up to the image you have built of them in your head through a parasocial relationship, is a level of unhealthy that I can’t even begin to describe.

Fans must understand that while they may have closely followed a person’s career or created a dedicated fan page for them, that does not mean they know them personally. At the end of the day, a celebrity’s public image, for the most part, is what they want us to see. We are only privy to the public aspect of their lives; we don’t have access to their life behind closed doors. This barrier is why fans can never truly know a celebrity or what is “normal” for them. Fans may truly believe that Jim Carrey would not get plastic surgery or act a certain way, but that is not because they genuinely know him as a person; it is because they have created an image in their head of who he is. They have assigned personality traits and belief systems to Carrey based on what they have seen online and in the media. And when Jim Carrey inevitably strayed from that carefully curated personality, it became too much for some fans to handle, and that led to dramatic conspiracies such as this one, where fans cannot accept that the person they have dreamed up in their head is not real, and they take drastic measures to rationalize it. In many cases, this one included, fans end up spreading hate by negatively commenting on appearances and behaviour. At that point, they are no longer simply fans; they have created parasocial relationships, and when their version of reality comes crashing down, they grasp at any straw they can to try to rationalize what they are seeing with their own eyes. It’s unhealthy, it’s hateful, and it needs to stop.

I understand that there will always be parasocial celebrity relationships; there is no stopping that. However, I truly hope that people can look at this as one of many examples where it goes too far. I hope people can reflect on these stories, look inward, and understand that putting all of this energy into celebrity culture and fanfare may not be reasonable. Taking a step back and re-evaluating how you consume pop culture content and follow celebrities online may lead to the realization that knowing someone online and knowing them personally are two completely different things, and that overblown responses to minor changes, such as the ones we’ve seen with Jim Carrey, can become too extreme. Idolizing these people and building a perfect caricature of who they are in your head only leads to harm on all sides. Taking a more relaxed approach to consuming pop culture content could create a healthier balance between being a fan and understanding boundaries.

Thank you for reading, besties! And remember to set healthy boundaries with your parasocial relationships, because not all of them are bad. Being happy for someone’s success is one thing, but when it reaches this level, maybe it’s time for some reflection.