fbpx

Category: USA

One year after the slap in the face at the Oscars, Chris Rock's scathing response to Will Smith

The comedian, who was punched live by the actor in the middle of the Oscars ceremony after making a joke about his wife Jada Pinkett Smith, returned to the episode with some anger in a show broadcast on Netflix

A year after being slapped by Will Smith in front of a worldwide audience, American comedian Chris Rock hit back on Saturday, unleashing his punches in a stand-up routine broadcast on the Netflix platform.

In March 2022, the American actor took to the stage at the Oscars and hit out at the comedian who had just mocked the very short haircut of his wife, actress Jada Pinkett Smith, who suffers from alopecia. A few minutes later, Will Smith received the Oscar for Best Actor for his role in King Richard. He later apologised to Chris Rock, but was banned from the Oscars for a decade.

The comedian refused to press charges and has remained virtually silent about the incident ever since. But on stage in Baltimore on Saturday, he came out swinging, accusing the Hollywood star of "selective indignation", and claiming that he had attacked a man shorter than himself because he was upset that his wife had cheated on him.

"Will Smith practices selective outrage," Chris Rock said during the show, which was broadcast live on Netflix. The comedian added that Will Smith was widely mocked after an episode of his wife's podcast in which the couple talked about her affair and how it affected him.

"It still hurts

"Why would you do that?" asked Chris Rock. "Everyone called her a slut. They called his wife a predator. Everybody called him a slut," he said, noting that he tried to offer his support after news of the affair became public.

"People (ask me), 'Does it hurt? It still hurts," he said, referring to the slap he received. "Will Smith is definitely bigger than me. Will Smith played Mohamed Ali in a film. Do you think I auditioned for that?" he quipped.

The comedian, who seemed angry at times during his performance, said that before the slap he had always liked Will Smith, first as a rapper and then as an actor. "He'd made some great films. I've supported Will Smith all my life." But now he says he sides with the slave master who beats up Will Smith's character in his latest film, Emancipation.

Text by Le Temps with AFP

"Mummy, I won an Oscar": Ke Huy Quan's incredible revenge

Awarded Best Supporting Actor for "Everything Everywhere All At Once", Ke Huy Quan, the child star of "Indiana Jones", had hardly made a film in 36 years.

Some revenges are more savoury than others. That of actor Ke Huy Quan, Oscar winner for Best Supporting Actor - it was his first nomination - at the age of 51, surpasses all others at this incredible 95th ceremony. For there were many thwarted destinies in Hollywood who finally received recognition during the evening. Like Brendan Fraser, a former leading man who was blacklisted following health problems and a sexual assault, who won the Best Actor statuette for his performance as a hyper-obese man in "The Whale".

He too was nominated for the first time, as were two of the actresses in the feature film that won the evening's seven statuettes, including Best Film, "Everything Everywhere All At Once": Michelle Yeoh and Jamie Lee Curtis. The former, at the age of 60, walked away with the Oscar for Best Actress, after a long and magnificent career previously ignored by the Academy. At 64, the daughter of Tony Curtis and Janet Leigh won the Best Supporting Actress award, again thanks to this crazy film.

But the man who has followed the most tortuous path in life - both personally and professionally - is Ke Huy Quan. As he tearfully recalled on stage at the Oscars: "My journey began on a boat". Born in Saigon in 1971, the young Vietnamese fled his country in precarious conditions with his parents and other "boat people" when he was just 4 years old. Taking refuge in the United States with his family, he was spotted by Steven Spielberg in California, where he was attending school, when he was just 12. The filmmaker gave him the role, adored by the public, of Half Moon, opposite Harrison Ford in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom", the huge success of 1984 that launched the now young actor.

"Mummy, I've won an Oscar!

The following year, he followed this up with another Spielberg production: "The Goonies". A few series followed... and that was about it. In the space of 36 years, Quan would only appear in five feature films, in minor roles, and three TV projects. Hollywood has forgotten him. But he wasn't about to give up film for all that. Armed with degrees in languages and cinema, he is also a specialist in taekwondo, a martial art to which he was introduced on the set of Indiana Jones. So, to earn a living, he became a behind-the-scenes actor, more precisely a stuntman and a stand-in, setting the highly choreographed scenes in action films thanks to his mastery of taekwondo on features such as "X-Men".

So he was almost surprised when the "Daniels", aka Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, the directors of "Everything Everywhere All At Once", asked him to play Michelle Yeoh's husband in the film. But they, who are such film buffs and pop culture aficionados, hadn't forgotten Half Moon. And they know that his martial arts skills will serve him well in the film's many action sequences. Since then, he and his new film 'family' have been living a daydream. In the space of a few months in 2022, the feature film that audiences have dubbed "EEAAO" has become the phenomenon that everyone in America is talking about. This has brought the team of Hollywood veterans even closer together, and two young filmmakers have been able to call on them.

It's easy to understand the emotion that gripped each of them in turn on the Oscar stage. Ke Huy Quan in particular. The boat-people child, who shouted "Mummy, I've won an Oscar", saw "EEAAO" announced as the winner of Best Film by Harrison Ford, the one-night winner, and Steven Spielberg, the unfortunate contender, was in the audience to witness Half Moon's belated triumph... A story that would make a fantastic screenplay, and one that Spielberg may already be thinking about...

Text by Le Parisien  Renaud Baronian 

NBA: LeBron James, a record for the ages

Stratospheric: LeBron James has become the NBA's all-time leading scorer. With 38,390 points, the Lakers player has overtaken Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's record.

LeBron James did it with 10:9 remaining in the 3rd quarter of the Lakers' 133-130 home loss to Oklahoma City. It was a successful turnaround shot that suddenly stopped time, the match and the breath of some 20,000 fans - including celebrities such as Jay-Z, LL Cool J, John McEnroe, Magic Johnson and wealthy people who paid up to 24,000 dollars for a seat - in a Crypto.com Arena in meltdown.

Still striving for excellence at the age of 38, 'King' James, the man with a host of other records and 4-time champion, achieved this long-term feat in his 20th season, scoring the required 36 points.

So it was time for a break to celebrate James' achievement, and he was overcome with tears as his family and friends came to share the emotional moment, immortalised by cameras and mobile phones.

He also thanked"Lakers faithful, one of a kind" . Not forgetting Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who came along to pass on the torch. " Being in the presence of such a legend means a lot to me. It's a great lesson in humility. Please give the captain a standing ovation!" .

A tough brand to beat

Last week, James agreed that he was aware that he was taking on ". one of the greatest records in sport in general, one of those that you think will never be beaten" . The facts prove him right, as the throne has only changed hands once since 1966, when Abdul-Jabbar overtook Wilt Chamberlain, now 7th on the all-time scoring list.

Text by RTS.ch agences/tai

American youtuber Mr.Beast helps 1,000 people regain their sight

The American content creator used his fame and colossal resources to produce a particularly moving video.

With 130 million subscribers, Mr.Beast is constantly coming up with ever more impressive concepts to entertain its community. And this time, he has set himself the challenge of enabling 1,000 blind people to see again, by funding the necessary operations.

Extremely positive reactions on the networks

The people featured in this video have been able to regain their sight thanks to a very specific operation. These are people whose crystalline lens has become opaque, a handicap that the surgeon treats by sucking out the material present in this part of the eye and replacing it with an artificial lens.

In addition to this already financially onerous operation, Mr.Beast also offered some patients in need large sums of money to finance their studies or help their families. He even went so far as to offer a Tesla to one of the young people taking part in the experiment.

The power of this video is that it shows a thousand people with corrected sight, who can finally see the faces of their loved ones and begin a simpler life. For some, this disability was an enormous burden in their lives, preventing them from pursuing their work or living life to the full.

Released two days ago, the video already has 44 million views and has received an extremely positive response on social networks:

Hopefully, more content creators with as much impact will follow suit and take part in this kind of initiative.

Text by radiofrance.fr 

Edward Norton discovers he is descended from Pocahontas

The "Fight Club" and "Glass Onion" actor was revealed on a programme that the Indian princess was his 12th-generation great-grandmother.

On Tuesday 3 January, host and historian Henry Louis Gates Jr revealed to Edward Norton that he was a direct descendant of the Indian princess Pocahontas. She is in fact his 12th great-grandmother.

 

The actor of "Fight Club" and recently "Glass Onion" knew that such a rumour existed in his family, explains CNN, but the historian told him that there were written traces of this lineage. He is therefore a direct descendant of Pocahontas and her husband, the colonist John Rolfe, whose marriage took place in Virginia in 1614. The couple had a son, Thomas Rolfe, in 1615, but Pocahontas died on her return from London in 1617, aged 22, probably of pneumonia or tuberculosis.

"It just makes you realise what a small... piece of the whole of human history you are," Norton remarked after the revelation.

The actor was less pleased to learn that his third great-grandfather owned slaves, including children. "It's uncomfortable to know that and there's a lot to be uncomfortable about. An 8-year-old child slave: you want to die reading that".

Cousin of Julia Roberts

Invited to the same evening, Julia Roberts also discovered that she had a slave-owning ancestor. And that she shared a DNA lineage with Edward Norton. "This means that you have inherited this shared DNA from a distant ancestor, somewhere at the heart of this family tree", explained the historian.

Text by Le matin.ch

AI in chess, the plug of discord

Chess player Hans Niemann has been accused of cheating following his victory over world champion Magnus Carlsen. The 19-year-old is alleged to have received instructions to move via vibrations emitted by an anal plug. This scandal reveals the tumultuous relationship between humans and computers in the world of chess, which stems from a 25-year rivalry.

On 4 September 2022, during the Sinquefield Cup chess tournament in the United States, the young Hans Niemann won his match against the world champion Magnus Carlsen. Carlsen suffered his first defeat for 53 games. Two weeks later, the two men met again. The match got under way when, suddenly, it was all over: Carlsen gave up. He turned off the camera that was broadcasting his moves, leaving the incredulous spectators with no explanation.

Accusations flew in the following days. Niemann was suspected of cheating: some professional players said they were astonished by his level, which seemed abnormally high given his record. "From the age of 17 to 19, you don't progress as quickly as that," said Eloi Relange, international grandmaster and president of the French Chess Federation. The young American earned his master's title at the age of 17, whereas the 12 other players under the age of 25 who are among the 50 best in the world attained this rank between the ages of 12 and 16.

In the absence of any material evidence, the Internet is full of theories as to the cause of the subterfuge. Rumours start with earpieces, then vibrating soles. Another hypothesis, which at first seemed incongruous, eventually emerged as a perfectly plausible explanation. Niemann is said to have inserted an anal plug before his game, in order to receive instructions via pulsations.

The player defends himself and proclaims his innocence in a way that borders on insolence. "I think Magnus Carlsen is disgusted to have lost to an idiot like me. It's embarrassing for a world champion. I feel bad for him," he declared without batting an eyelid in front of the Saint Louis Chess Club cameras. It's a real scandal.

The chess world was in an uproar. Reactions were swift, particularly from a certain Garry Kasparov, who was highly critical of Carlsen's attitude. In an interview, he said that it was "unacceptable" to leave a tournament in progress, even if there was evidence of cheating.

This speech is all the more resonant when put into perspective with the history of chess. Kasparov is indeed a monument of the discipline: he dominated it for fifteen years. However, if history remembers his name, it is also as the first world champion to have been beaten by a computer. That was 25 years ago.

A day to remember

In May 1997, chess champion Garry Kasparov played his second match against Deep Blue, a supercomputer designed by IBM. In the first encounter, fifteen months earlier, the Russian player had emerged victorious. This new face-off was to take a completely different turn.

During the first set, Kasparov was disturbed by an unusual computer move, the logic of which he did not understand. In the end, however, he won. The second round followed, and Deep Blue proved as unpredictable as ever. The Russian player lost his nerve and conceded the game. At the end of the sixth, he was forced to concede. It was a real thunderclap: for the first time, a world champion was defeated by an artificial intelligence.

Kasparov's reaction to Carlsen's attitude reveals the impact of this defeat on chess. The players were traumatised, and the artificial intelligence appeared invincible. In concrete terms, Deep Blue's victory had repercussions for the sport's economy: during the champion's tournaments following his defeat, sponsors were more reluctant than before to finance him. On the other hand, the indirect publicity from which IBM benefited is estimated at 500 million dollars. In the collective imagination, the computer is the real number one.

I think, therefore I am?

In 2006, world chess champion Vladimir Kramnik lost to a standard desktop computer. From then on, humans had to come to terms with the intellectual superiority of chess machines, and training with the help of algorithms became widespread among professionals. Garry Kasparov himself is considered to be the first person to have studied chess openings in depth using programmes.

Eloi Relange, who was just a promising young player in 1997, explains that the professionals only used computers to check their tactical errors. Today, the best players use artificial intelligence to "come up with ideas that will surprise their opponent", says the now President of the French Chess Federation at La Croix.

The main risk of such practices is that they smooth out the game. Players abandon their creativity to concentrate on more pragmatic assets, such as studying the moves listed. More than talent, it is now the hours invested in learning the different combinations that seem to lead to victory. The paradigms on which the discipline is based are undergoing a radical transformation.

While professionals used to prepare rigorously before their performances, grandmaster Matthew Sadler says that "the amount of stuff there was to remember just exploded" with the advent of the programmes. "The thrill came from using your mind creatively, and working on strategic problem solutions. Not testing each other to see who has the best memory," laments international player Wesley So in the media. The Atlantic.

As professionals rely more and more on rote learning dictated by machines, their autonomy as athletes is diminishing. The outcome of this development seemed logical, and the discipline was soon plagued by a major scourge: cheating. Hans Niemann hasn't invented anything.

To be or not to be

The situation is dauntingly simple. No matter how hard a human being tries, he will always be soundly beaten by a computer programme. Ironically, the same Vladimir Kramnik who was defeated by a computer was accused of cheating with algorithms during the tournament that crowned him world champion a few months before his defeat.

Fraud is on the increase among unscrupulous sportsmen and women. In 2015, Georgian grandmaster Gaioz Nigalidze was caught running programmes on his phone in the toilet during a tournament in Dubai. The International Chess Federation investigated, and the offender was finally banned from competition for three years. This event marked a turning point, as it was the first case in which the Anti-Cheating Committee applied a sanction.

Players are now required to leave their phones in the cloakroom, and competitions begin with searches. Now Hans Niemann has admitted to cheating in online tournaments. According to the website chess.com, which recently published a 72-page report, he "probably" played in more than 100 games on the Internet, some of them with prizes.

Cheating in chess is all the more petty because it is very difficult to identify, especially since the democratisation of online play. It is only exposed during major events, such as the confrontation between Niemann and Carlsen. Top player Kenneth W. Regan explained in an interview this month with LA TimesIt's a fact, however, that youngsters with incredible talent and situations comparable to Hans Niemann's often appear out of nowhere. In most of these cases, their sporting integrity is called into question.

Live and let live

Despite all these upheavals, chess has survived. Fraud does a lot of damage, but it is not the only innovation brought about by computers. First and foremost, they have made learning the game much more accessible, and therefore more democratic.

Artificial intelligence has also opened up new avenues for chess enthusiasts, enabling them to make moves that were once considered too risky. As a result, the possibilities of the game have been broadened and the discipline has evolved. In an interview for Le Time released in 2019, Garry Kasparov says that while his defeat by Deep Blue shocked him at the time, in retrospect he sees it as "a victory for humanity". According to the former champion, the future of mankind lies not behind the machines, but alongside them.

Finally, instinct and talent will always be important in chess. This is borne out by the rapid games, particularly those used to decide between opponents in the event of a tie, during which it is impossible not to make mistakes in view of the imposed timing. Although the programmes indicate the best openings to play, it is still up to the human mind to work out the best strategy based on this move.

According to the website chess.com, only 0.2 per cent of players cheat in online tournaments: a figure much lower than popular belief. The chess community seems particularly keen to revive what used to be the charm of the discipline: the thrill of a duel of the mind, the vertigo of the infinite possibilities allowed by 64 squares, and the creativity expressed on the board as a game that was born so many centuries ago is renewed.

Text by views.fr

Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp: a risk of backlash post #metoo?

Broadcast live on television, Johnny Depp's libel suit against Amber Heard unleashed a torrent of hate speech against the actress. Five years after #metoo, these reactions point to a backlash against victims who dare to speak out. Feminists and organisations fighting domestic violence are worried.

1 June 2022: the jurors in Fairfax District Court, near Washington, USA, deliver their verdict at the end of six weeks of legal wrangling between the defence of actress Amber Heard and the lawyers for her ex-husband, actor Johnny Depp. Both accused each other of violence and defamation.

Broadcast live on television and on the Internet, the trial turned into a grand unpacking of the couple's private life in full view of the general public. The extracts relayed on social networks gave rise to torrents of insults against Amber Heard and misogynistic messages that went viral, while Johnny Depp, who is 22 years older than his ex, benefited from a wave of "love". himpathy - a phenomenon that the Australian philosopher  Kate Manne describes it as " the inappropriate and disproportionate sympathy shown to men of power in cases of sexual assault, domestic violence, homicide and other misogynistic behaviour".

Did the 36-year-old actress defame her ex-husband in her column published in 2018 in the Washington Postin which she presented herself as " a public figure embodying domestic violence" without explicitly mentioning Johnny Depp's name? That was the question the jury answered, finding her guilty of "defamation with actual malice" against Johnny Depp. Amber Heard was ordered to pay him $10 million, plus $5 million in damages. The jury also ordered Johnny Depp to pay $2 million in damages, considering that he had also defamed his ex-wife in the Daily Mail. 

Settling scores

The legal and media war between the two ex-spouses dates back to 2016. Amber Heard filed for divorce, accused Johnny Depp of violence and obtained a restraining order - charges that were extinguished by a financial settlement. In 2020, the actor filed his first libel suit against the British newspaper The Sunwhich published comments made by Amber Heard accusing her of violence. The courts ruled that the actress' accusations were well-founded, even though Johnny Depp had also accused his ex-wife of violence. This was followed by an article by the young woman in the Washington Post leading up to the trial, which closes on 1 June.

On the one hand: Amber Heard presents evidence of bruises and scenes of violence, insults and threats, generally under the influence of alcohol, by Johnny Depp. On the other: the actor produced recordings of Amber Heard admitting to hitting him, and proof that she had already been arrested in 2009 for domestic violence against her ex, Tasya Van Ree. In the end, Johnny Depp claims that he accidentally headbutted Amber Heard while trying to stop her from attacking him. She justifies the violence she may have indulged in by describing it as self-defence.

Beyond the merciless settling of scores between the two parties of a toxic couple, the Fairfax trial, because it was delivered live to the public's vindictiveness, gave rise to a wave of hateful comments against Amber Heard, the woman who caused the scandal. And in turn against all victims of domestic violence who dare to speak out. Amber Heard put it this way when she expressed her disappointment at the verdict: " I am devastated that the mountain of evidence was not enough to stand up to the far greater power, influence and clout of my ex-husband.she said after the sentence was read out. I'm even more disappointed by what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback. It calls into question the idea that violence against women should be taken seriously." .

Toxic media coverage

Judge Penney Azcarate had decided to authorise the television broadcast of the hearings in this high-profile case, one of the most closely watched in the world, despite the opposition of Amber Heard's lawyers. It was " the worst court decision in decades for victims" says Michele Dauber, a law professor at Stanford University in California and campaigner against sexual assault on campus. A decision that reveals " a profound ignorance of sexual violence on the part of judges" .

Amber Heard had to " describing her alleged rape in graphic detail on television. It's shocking and should offend all women and victims, whether they agree with the verdict or not....", explains Michele Dauber. In fact, the trial has fascinated a global audience unaccustomed to watching allegations of sexual assault within a couple, since the last time a rape victim had to testify publicly was in 1983..

Whatever the opinions on the verdict, it's a problem: " I don't think our society yet understands the dynamics of domestic violence." Ruth Glenn, President of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV), told AFP. This context was not sufficiently explored during the court proceedings, she believes. For her, there is "no doubt" about the types of abuse that were revealed at the trial. " You have to make sure that the people present understand it. But until they do, don't show this sort of thing on television." .

Denigration, insults, mockery

"Every time Amber Heard has spoken out to detail the domestic violence of which she accuses Johnny Depp, her words, relayed on social networks, have immediately provoked mockery, sexist remarks and denigration, which have an undeniably disastrous effect on the objective of encouraging women to lodge complaints against violent spouses or public figures," writes women's rights activist Fatima-Ezzahra Benomar on Facebook. As is often the case in cases of sexist and sexual violence," she deplored, "the actress has been accused of acting when she cries, or on the contrary of not doing enough when she doesn't cry.... "

From now on " every victim will think twice before coming forward and applying for a restraining order or telling anyone about the abuse they have sufferedlaments teacher and activist Michele Dauber. Women are at risk of being injured or even killed because they did not call for help. This case is a complete disaster. It is potentially catastrophic" she concludes.

Misogyny in full force

The law professor also notes that public opinion was supportive of Johnny Depp, while his ex was the target of insults and jeers". openly misogynistic "on social networks. Amber Heard suffered " the metaphorical ordeal of tar and feathers" she asserted, while the ruling was welcomed by the American right. Her comments triggered an outcry of hate speech against Michele Dauber - slut, slag, criminal, shrew, etc. - to the point where one of her Twitter accounts was blocked.

Backlash after #metoo?

The media coverage of the Heard vs Depp affair raises the question of the future of the #MeToo movement, which since 2017 has encouraged women to denounce the perpetrators of sexual harassment and assault. Five years on, the irresistible tidal wave is marking time. " It's impossible not to see this as a backlash against #MeToo - women have gone too far. Ladies, we've listened to you and condemned a few men. Don't be too greedy" wrote one user on Reddit.

Others, like NCADV's Ruth Glenn, see it as a reminder of the work still to be done. For Tarana Burke, founder of #MeToo, "the movement is very much alive. It's the system that's corrupt". The instigator of #MeToo calls on us to focus on the courage of the millions of women who have denounced violence rather than on the legal battles, won or lost.

Tarana Burke's words are echoed by those of Anne-Cécile Mailfert, President of the Fondation des femmes en France, who reacted to the thousands, if not millions of insults from tiktokeurs who are making Amber Heard pay for having damaged the image of Johnny Depp, the "perfect male". For her, this backlash will not stop the movement, because "#metoo cannot be summed up in just one trial and is resonating around the world: there is no stopping it a movement whose time has come" .

Following the trial, Amber Heard's lawyer said that her client "absolutely cannot" pay the more than 10 million dollars in damages that she has been ordered to pay to her ex-husband. Believing that the actress had been "demonised" by the opposing party, she said she would appeal against the jury's decision.

Text by Terriennes Liliane Charrier

Johnny Depp in the court of public opinion

Unlike Amber Heard, the actor enjoys massive support, whether on social networks or outside the courtroom.

The defamation trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard comes to a close at Fairfax Magistrates' Court on Friday, and its outcome remains uncertain, but the "Pirate of the Caribbean" can count on widespread support in the street and on social networks.

The mutual accusations are heavy, however. Johnny Depp claims that his ex-wife ruined his reputation by claiming, in a column published in 2018, that he had been a victim of domestic violence two years earlier. He rejects these allegations and is claiming 50 million in damages.

Amber Heard, 36, has counter-attacked and is demanding double the amount, claiming she suffered years of violence, including a rape in 2015, and accusing her ex-husband of wanting to "ruin her career".

The public for Johnny

Every morning, several hundred people greet the actor outside the courthouse in this small Virginia town near Washington, compared to a handful of placards in favour of Amber Heard. On social networks, the advantage is also clearly in favour of the 58-year-old actor. Passions are running high on Twitter and TikTok, where with 15.3 billion "views" on Tuesday, the hashtag "Justice for Johnny Depp" far outstripped "I'm with Amber Heard" (8.4 million).

"Nothing surprises me about social networks and celebrities", and this case concerns "two major celebrities", Jason Mollica, professor of communications at American University, told AFP. According to Mollica, Johnny Depp is a world-famous actor who has always shunned the mundane and retained the "mysterious side" that fans love.

Amber Heard, on the other hand, is much less well known. Since the beginning of the trial, she has tried to appear "more normal and close to people", according to Mr Mollica, but her former assistant, Kate James, described her personality as "aggressive" and "theatrical".

Internet users "express their opinions without being experts in justice", says the former journalist. This trial has revealed "the flashiest sides of the case, but we may never get to the truth, buried in the muddy waters of social networks".

Hostility towards Amber

Hostility towards Amber Heard, the civil rights organisation ACLU's domestic violence ambassador, has a long history. The actress' career "was on the verge of a meteoric rise" after the global success of "Aquaman" released at the end of 2018, entertainment industry expert Kathryn Arnold said on Monday. But she suffered "a lot of negative publicity" after the op-ed published in the "Washington Post", she added.

The cyberstalking campaigns generally followed statements made by one of Johnny Depp's lawyers and surrounded the actor's first defamation lawsuit in London in 2020, according to Ron Schnell, an expert in social network analysis.

However, a Warner Bros studio executive pointed to the "lack of chemistry" between her and actor Jason Momoa during "Aquaman" to explain her limited appearances in the second opus, filmed in 2021. And in Hollywood, few stars have shown their support for Amber Heard, unlike Johnny Depp.

The future of #MeToo

In an opinion piece, the "New York Times" recently feared that the outcome of the trial, if the jurors did not find in favour of Amber Heard, could mean the "death" of the #MeToo movement against violence against women. "I don't think it will influence victims in their willingness or otherwise to report abuse", says Shana Maier, Professor of Criminal Justice at Widener University.

Similarly, she dismisses the risk of "backlash against victims or women's associations". She stresses that this trial has the merit of "highlighting the issue of domestic violence". "There will always be people who will say of Amber Heard: "Why did she say that if it didn't happen?" agrees Jason Mollica.

A precedent?

However, Mr Mollica believes that this case could influence other celebrity defamation cases, such as the one brought by singer Marilyn Manson, a friend of Johnny Depp, against his ex-girlfriend Evan Rachel Wood.

Jury selection could thus be complicated if one of the rocker's lawyers believes that "the jurors may not know all the facts, but they know the names Depp, Heard and Manson, and that alone prevents them from being impartial", says Jason Mollica. For Shana Maier, on the other hand, the Marilyn Manson trial "will be judged on its own merits".

Text by Le Matin.ch (AFP)

#Striketober, "big resignation": 5 minutes to understand the unprecedented social unrest in the United States

From factories to hospitals and restaurants, a wave of strikes is sweeping the United States, demanding better pay and status. It's a movement that is boosting local unions and putting the issue of quality of work back at the heart of the debate.

The start of the new school year swept away by a historic strike in the United States. Battered by the pandemic and frustrated by their employers' profits, tens of thousands of American workers have taken strike action this autumn, demanding better working conditions. From factories to film sets, hospitals and the catering industry, these "Great Resignation" movements, supported by a fringe of the Democratic camp, are affecting all sectors. And they could well inspire neighbouring countries. We take a closer look.

What happened?

Strikes have been piling up in the United States for several weeks now. Since Thursday, 10,000 employees of tractor manufacturer John Deere have left their factories to take to the streets. This action joins those of 1,500 workers employed by cereal giant Kellogg's in Pennsylvania and 2,000 nurses at Mercy Hospital in Buffalo, New York, who are demanding better working conditions.

Other sectors could in turn swell the ranks of strikers. Some 31,000 employees of the Kaiser Permanente healthcare group are preparing to stop work shortly in California. Anger is also spreading to Hollywood studios, where some crews were preparing to leave filming before a last-minute agreement was reached on working conditions.

As disparate as they are, these strikes, supported by the left wing of the Democrats behind the hashtag #Striketober, are demanding, depending on the sector, new recruitment, higher wages or, for some, "a guarantee that their jobs will not be relocated", explains Marie-Christine Bonzom, political scientist, journalist and specialist on the United States.

In what context?

Strikes may have intensified in recent weeks, but employees' frustrations are nothing new. "The pandemic was the trigger, but the dissatisfaction goes back a long way. It concerns low wages, company profits and the complicated access to social security, which depends on the employer", notes Nicole Bacharan, a historian specialising in the United States and author of "The Great Days that Changed America".

The end of the health crisis has seen an unprecedented wave of resignations. 4.3 million Americans have quit their jobs since August, according to data from the Department of Labour quoted by the Washington Post. This figure rises to more than 20 million if we count those who have left since April. For the most part, these departures have been in the sales and hospitality sectors, in jobs that are hard-working and often poorly paid.

All in all, the pandemic has reshuffled the deck for many workers. In all, 10 million jobs are thought to be unfilled across the country. A considerable lever for those about to hang up their boots. "Since employers can't find anyone to take on, employees are in a good position to negotiate pay rises or better status", Marie-Christine Bonzom points out.

What role for trade unions?

In decline since the late 1960s, trade unions now seem to be making a comeback in the country. President Joe Biden has made it one of his priorities to ensure that their rights are respected and to give them back their power. To date, the country has 11 % union members among its workers. A rate that is "low, but no higher than in France", notes Nicole Bacharan. Proof that the social struggle is gaining ground, employees of major firms such as Starbucks and Amazon have even tried to set up their own union in recent months. Sometimes in vain.

After all, trade union rights are radically different from those in France. "In France, union negotiations take place mainly on a sector-by-sector basis via collective agreements. Over there, everything is decided at company level, unit by unit. The right to join a union depends on a vote within the company", Marie-Christine Bonzom sums up.

While few Americans campaign for their rights, many do support the movement. "In the collective imagination, it's hard to associate the United States with the trade union struggle. But the unions have become much more popular in recent years. This support is now helping them to negotiate", points out Nicole Bacharan.

A domino effect?

Multiple strikes, a wave of resignations, a series of renegotiations... The movement of social anger and the labour shortage now extend beyond American borders. Germany is short of 400,000 skilled workers, according to Bloomberg. Similarly, China is reportedly facing mass resignations, with the emergence of a new generation of workers "disenchanted by prospects and put off by relatively low wages", notes the Washington Post.

For its part, France has been struggling for several months to recruit in the catering sector. Without talking about a worldwide strike, these successive observations testify to a "strong aspiration for better working conditions", according to Nicole Bacharan, for whom these mobilisations could lead to others. However, there is a nuance on the other side of the Atlantic: "For Americans, personal fulfilment cannot be detached from the value of work and professional success. In other words, strikes can happen on the spot, and the 35-hour week is not for tomorrow..." breathes Nicole Bacharan.

Text by le parisien.fr By Marie Campistron

Facebook Instagram Envelope Twitter
Copyright © 2024 Bar Crobar | By STXWEB