Remember in Jurassic Park when they put the goat in the pen with the T-Rex?
I don’t know that Oklahoma State Senator Nathan Dahm (R) is getting enough out of his decision to try and match wits with Jon Stewart in the above segment on gun control from the latest episode of Apple TV+’s The Problem With Jon Stewart. On one hand, it’s a bigger platform than he might have if he was just sticking to conservative media, but he’s not exactly being exposed to an open-eared audience as he tries to shill his gun-rights-above-all-others shtick. He’s not exactly making a compelling argument, either. Dahm keeps presenting his little anecdotes and pro-chaos talking points like a kid showing off their epically bad macaroni art, and Stewart keeps putting it in the paper shredder (but wouldn’t the macaroni gum up the shred… Shut up, I’m working here.)
This should feel pretty routine by now. Jon Stewart has made a career out of telling truth to power, sometimes with eloquence and sometimes with a bluntness that is a real crowd-pleaser. Politics as sport is bad news for everyone, and it’s not like these takedown videos ever change anything, but I’m still pumping my fists when Stewart asks when we’ll have enough guns to see things switch to safe, as opposed to the current state of being where people are all of the time — hoping today isn’t the day while at the grocery store or waiting for our kids to come home from school. I guess that small kernel of a good feeling is the gain for anyone watching who feels passionate about the issue and frustrated by the lack of even minor, we-should-all-agree-on-this protections. Easy wins like the ones this guy whose name I’ve already forgotten is fighting against with talking points pinned to his collar by the NRA.
This really is vintage Stewart, rising in restrained fury as Oklahoma blah blah minimizes the deaths of 50,000 people and sits expressionless as Jon wrecks him with blitzes that he just didn’t see coming, swiping away his weak jabs and calling out hypocrisy when it comes to “protecting the children.” It’s pretty embarrassing for this dude who, I swear to goodness, is fading from my memory like a fart in a wind tunnel, but he still managed to get on TV. Is it worth it? Maybe. These guys keep playing the volume game — showing up, shouting out, and getting talked about. All we get is a little pop of joy from seeing them leave a stain on Jon Stewart’s knuckles. Is that a fair trade? Question for the ages, that is.
In this week’s episode of Indiecast, Ian and I looked ahead to the next three months and picked our most anticipated albums, tours, and trends! That’s right — we hashed out future trends this time. It was quite an experience.
But before that, it’s the banter segment: Ian and I had very different experiences with live music this week. I went off to see the English prog-rock band Muse for the first time, and came away thinking that 1) The concert felt like a video game; and 2) There were a ton of metalheads in the audience. Ian meanwhile went to the World War Tour featuring hardcore bands Show Me The Body, Zulu, Scowl, and Jesus Piece. Though at his show, he also encountered some metalheads. Metalheads rule the world!
Then, in the meat of the episode, we talked about whether upcoming albums by Blondshell and 100 Gecs will live up to expectations this spring. Then we looked at the “Indie Rock Road Trip” tour set for June that has an interesting assemblage of bands: Weezer, Modest Mouse, Future Islands, Spoon, Momma, Joyce Manor and White Reaper. Is this the solution to the over-saturation of the live music market? Should we expect to see more traveling festivals that package together sort-of-but-not-really-alike bands?
In Recommendation Corner, Ian talked up A New Tomorrow by hardcore band Zulu, while I raved about Girl In The Half Pearl by avant-R&B artist Liv.e.
New episodes of Indiecast drop every Friday. Listen to Episode 128 here or below and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. You can submit questions for Steve and Ian at [email protected], and make sure to follow us on Instagram and Twitter for all the latest news. We also recently launched a visualizer for our favorite Indiecast moments. Check those out here.
Donald Trump hasn’t appeared on Fox News since he announced his 2024 campaign, and it’s raised questions about whether or not the former president is banned from the network amidst reports that Rupert Murdoch is done with Trump’s antics. His last interview was in September when he infamously told Sean Hannity that he could declassify documents just “by thinking about it.” Since then, the network has noticeably given him the cold shoulder, and there’s reportedly a reason for that.
“Everyone knows that there’s this ‘soft ban’ or ‘silent ban,’” one source close to Trump told Semafor. “It’s certainly — however you want to say, quiet ban, soft ban, whatever it is — indicative of how the Murdochs feel about Trump in this particular moment.”
According to Semafor, Fox News has been elevating potential primary challengers to Trump including Nikki Haley and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. While Haley has announced her 2024 run, DeSantis has not, but that hasn’t stopped Fox News from propping up the Florida Republican, which Trump has definitely noticed. He’s been lashing out at Fox News on Truth Social and calling the network “Fake News.”
Those attacks have only increased as court documents revealed that Rupert Murdoch doesn’t buy Trump’s stolen election claims and set out to make him a “non-person” following the January 6 attacks.
“If Rupert Murdoch honestly believes that the Presidential Election of 2020, despite MASSIVE amounts of proof to the contrary, was not Rigged & Stolen, then he & his group of MAGA Hating Globalist RINOS should get out of the News Business as soon as possible,” Trump wrote on Truth Social this week. “Because they are aiding & abetting the DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA with FAKE NEWS. Certain BRAVE & PATRIOTIC FoxNews Hosts, who he scorns and ridicules, got it right. He got it wrong. THEY SHOULD BE ADMIRED & PRAISED, NOT REBUKED & FORSAKEN!!!”
Now, she’s back with “Still Alive,” a blazing song for the Scream VI soundtrack that she teased last month. It’s an anthem about perseverance: “Still alive / I don’t wanna just survive / Give me something to sink all my teeth in / Eat the devil and spit out my demons,” she sings in the chorus.
Holy Fvck also dealt with her struggles with survivor’s guilt. About the track “Dead Friends,” she said in an interview with Apple Music’s Zane Lowe, “I’ve made friends of all ages. I’ve lost friends that were around my age, and those hurt so deeply because we’ve been in the trenches together. I had a lot of survivor’s guilt after my overdose because […] right after that, Mac Miller died, and it just put everything into perspective for me of, ‘That could have been you, that almost was you, and how are you going to live your life now?’ And it affected me a lot.”
Seattle rapper Lil Mosey has been found not guilty of rape after a two-week trial, according to XXL. The trial, which began on February 22, concluded with the rapper cleared of all charges, which were brought in 2021 when the then-18-year-old rapper was accused of having intercourse with a woman who was passed out during a party with Mosey and a pair of associates, Joshua Darrow and Francisco Prater, who will be tried in separate cases.
Mosey pled not guilty in 2021, but was still ordered to stay away from the alleged victim. If convicted, he could have faced life in prison and up to $50,000 in fines. According to the victim’s statement, the rapper and his friends invited the woman to a cabin party in 2020 (when Mosey was still 17) and passed out from alcohol consumption. When she came to, she said that the men had taken the opportunity to have sex with her, although she could not give consent.
Today, Mosey wrote in an Instagram post, “Spent 2 years of my life going thru the storm and I’m happy to say that God finally brought the truth to light. Thank you.” Meanwhile, his defense attorney, Shane O’Rourke, gave a statement to XXL in which he said the rapper had been “completely vindicated.”
Bomani Jones isn’t into poses. Earlier this week, he told us that being disingenuous in front of your audience actually offends him. With HBO’s Game Theory (back tonight on HBO at 11 following a brief hiatus), Jones is here to consider the oft-colliding worlds of sports culture and the news of the week, ask questions, and make cases. Not takes, cases. There is a difference. One is more challenging than the other, demanding discipline and dedication. Jones craves the challenge.
For most, the results of this approach don’t come fast; sometimes they don’t come at all. But for Jones, whose show is in the middle of its second season, it seems like everything is coming together as he cuts through the noise, popping up in your feed when he stands in against a Jake Paul tantrum and when he casually reminds the world about Karl Malone’s tainted legacy. He’s also opening up discussions about Overtime Elite’s compensation model for teen athletes and the effect of the NFL’s activism. These moments, in particular, speak to the style and substance of Game Theory, a show that he’s trying to turn into an institution.
Uproxx spoke with Jones about those efforts, the marketplace of ideas in sports media, his reaction to Paul’s loss last Sunday, whether the destruction of the Brooklyn Nets will cool teams on the notion of super teams, and why he is all in on owners actually spending money in baseball.
So, how’d Jake Paul do?
It was funny, man. Walking through the office with the fight coming up and people telling me like, “Oh, you going to watch the fight?” I’m like, “Of course not.” Like, I’d never watched this dude fight before. I have no interest in watching him fight, and I don’t have an emotional attachment enough to want to watch him lose. But yeah, it did not go in an unexpected fashion, shall we say.
I enjoyed it afterward when the excuses just came down like rain for why he didn’t make it. “I was sick. My arm hurt.”
Yeah. You know what’s funny about it is, as much as he can talk about (how) he makes money regardless and all of that, which is absolutely true, in the end, nobody wants to get their ass kicked on television. And when that happens, you kind of need to explain it. And so he did what anybody else would do in that situation, whether they’re making the money or not.
Very true. So that interview (with Paul) was a moment, obviously, and then the Karl Malone thing obviously blew up. Is it starting to become clearer to you how much of an impact on the conversation you’re having? That it’s continuing to climb. What’s it like when that happens?
It’s interesting because I don’t really traffic so much in the TikTok space. But that Karl Malone video got something like four and a half million views specifically on TikTok, a couple million more on Twitter. And the part that gets me is I don’t have a great handle on what the thing is going to be that people are really going to latch onto and decide it’s going to be the one. Because with that, if you go back and watch me and the way I sound in there, it’s not like I’m giving some passionate screed. I guess maybe the observation that the NBA probably thought it would be safer to have them show up than not have them come there, maybe that’s uniquely insightful, but when those things happen and people are like, “Oh, man. It’s like a new Hannibal Buress moment,” I’m like, “Ah, that’s interesting.”
I think to answer your question, I come back around and start asking myself, “Wow, was this thing really such a thing?” And I mean, I guess it’s not my place to decide, but I mean, I did figure out a long time ago that it’s different when I say things than it is for a lot of my colleagues. I know who the people are that get nervous when they hear that I’m talking about something that they’re into. I’ve seen people put out releases because they’ve seen me put stuff out. And it’s just always weird because I’m like, “Dude, does what I say matter that much?” And I guess to some people on some days, it does.
Why is it different, in your opinion?
People respect where I come from, and I think they respect my sincerity when it comes to these matters. And so not everybody obviously, but there are going to be some people that when they hear that I am talking about something, it takes on a different importance because they don’t think I would talk about it in those terms if it wasn’t something that was important.
You’re not saying things just to get attention. Like you said with the Karl Malone thing, you weren’t making a play for it. It was just an off-the-cuff remark that kind of blew up.
I don’t believe in the idea that attention is good for its own sake. What are you looking at me do when I do this thing for attention? And I’m just not shameless enough to be in a place to be like, “Ooh, watch, once I say this, everybody’s going to be all over it.” No, I’m actually looking for the least hot way to look at something possible because I’m trying to find a space where the discussion gets to the things that are inarguable, as opposed to the things that there are for us to fight about.
Because of your view on that, do you have a harsher view towards people that are more inclined towards attention for attention’s sake?
I have a harsher view towards them depending on what it is that they’re willing to do in order to get that attention. So for my colleagues, once you’re willing to say something that you don’t believe, I’m out. That’s the biggest thing. I’m never going to say anything that I don’t actually believe. And yes, I do incredibly harshly judge the people who say things they don’t believe because I believe that that’s disrespectful to your audience. You don’t believe this. I will never make an argument to people that I, myself, would not believe. And once you do that yourself, I just feel like you are patronizing the people who consume your product in a way that I just find to be offensive.
Do you feel like you have an innate or learned ability to pick up when that’s happening with your colleagues?
Well, I mean, it’s not hard to figure out who doesn’t mean it, right? People can say whatever they want about Skip Bayless. Skip Bayless means every word that he says. There’s nothing that he says on television that he does not absolutely mean. My buddy, Nick Wright is in the same space. He gets out there and he says what he’s talking about. He means the things that he says. It’s not that hard when you listen to somebody to figure out like, “Oh, man, they’re just doing a routine.” They think this is the thing that’s going to get them over. The thing that’s so ironic about that to me is nobody has made their career off of that one thing they said, but plenty of people have broken their careers off of that one thing that they’ve said, and I wouldn’t be willing to take that risk.
Skip might be a little choreographed when he does the jersey burn video with Dak Prescott. I feel like that might have been two or three takes.
Now, that part I think is fair. I think that some of the antics are certainly choreographed, but the sentiment, he means it.
HBO
So, one thing that came out before the All-Star break was obviously Kyrie going to the Mavs, Durant getting traded to the Suns. What’s the legacy of whatever happened in Brooklyn with the super team (with those moves) and GM Sean Marks almost losing his job? Is this a ghost story to scare teams off from trying this kind of thing?
Nah, it’s a ghost story to scare teams off from Kyrie. Look, there isn’t a single general manager who if given the opportunity to get three players as talented as James Harden, Kyrie Irving, and Kevin Durant, isn’t going to do it. There isn’t a single one, and anyone who wouldn’t should probably be fired. If there’s a lesson to be learned from it that is larger, it’s not about the assembly of the team. It’s you got to rein it in early when you feel like you got somebody like Kyrie who actually thinks he’s in charge here, and he told you from the very beginning that he thought he was in charge, and they didn’t do enough to hold that up. They just kept crossing their fingers and being like, “Hey, it’s talent. Hopefully, it’ll all pan out in the end.” And so the vaccine thing comes around, “Hey, we’re going to cross our fingers, hope that the law changes and everything else,” and at every turn, they probably should’ve let him go.
Now, maybe they did not because they didn’t want to offend Kevin Durant, and that’s where these things get to be extra tricky. But this is without question the biggest failure that any NBA franchise has ever embarked upon. I don’t think there’s any other way to look at that, but I don’t think it’s in such a way that it’s going to change the direction of basketball. Now, Kyrie Irving and his general tendency to not want to play games and not show up to work and everything that came with that, oh, that’s going to come up in the collective bargaining agreement. Stephen A. Smith has been saying that for a long time, and I’m inclined to believe him when it comes to these matters, and I think he’s probably right. But just the particular idea of the super team, nah, people going to keep trying to get as much talent together as they possibly can. I mean, Phoenix just went and got Kevin Durant to put him with Chris Paul and Devin Booker. Nobody’s turning down good players.
I know you’ve got an episode coming up where you discuss the economics of baseball and Steve Cohen’s spending on the Mets’ payroll. I’m curious, we always see the details for every single player contract, but with ownership, we don’t know a thing about revenue and what owners make. How much do you think that influences the narrative where people get pissed when a player makes a bunch of money, but don’t really seem to have much reaction to owners pocketing revenue sharing and not spending?
Oh, I think it influences everything, especially since owners are good to pretend like they’re losing money. The thing that owners very often pass off, and it happens right when you see a collective bargaining thing come up, is the, “Well, we’re actually not making any money right now” play. And of course, that’s accounting tricks and the lies, and people generally understand the idea of accounting tricks, but I don’t think they really know them by and large.
And so yeah. If people knew just how much money these leagues were bringing in… And what’s interesting is there is a way for people to get a pretty good idea of this in the NFL, and it’s because the Green Bay Packers are publicly owned and therefore have to put out an annual report. And that is how you get an understanding of what their revenue figures are because you can go and work backward from there. But I also think that part of the discord comes up that people in this country inexplicably just side against labor. They tricked them far enough back in the past into believing that the unions were the commies, and then it just all carries out from here. It just blows my mind at every turn when these things happen, they root against the players every single time. And I think part of it is they feel like rooting for the owner is like rooting for the team, and they do in fact have an affection for the team.
It’s just shocking to me that fan bases aren’t more up in arms when owners don’t spend money to improve the product.
And that’s where Cohen and (Padres owner) Peter Seidler come in. They become interesting in this case, because what I love about Cohen and what we want to explore is the rest of these owners are so threatened by the idea of Steve Cohen. And I think the threat in that is not even because they’re like, “Oh my goodness, we’re not going to have any chance to win.” Even Cohen understands that once it gets to the postseason, it all gets randomized, basically. Nah, he’s just going to embarrass them. He is going to shame them, and he has so much more money than them that I think it just tweaks at their egos, the fact that he’s willing to put all this money in. And when I look at Cohen it’s fair to ask the question, is this him angling to try to get himself a casino, is this him trying to rehabilitate his image after what he got busted for with all the white-collar crime stuff? But in the end, why would you own a baseball team if you didn’t want to blow money on it? If you’re worth as much money as Steve Cohen is worth, why do you get this other than to blow money on it? Right? The idea that I’m going to buy a baseball team because I want to make money from it seems like the dumbest thing in the world to do if you don’t need the money. I am just all here for baseball owners who just decide, “You know what? I want to spend a lot of money and have fun with this baseball team.” Which again, is what you see happening in large part in San Diego.
It’s just fascinating how long these (other) owners can continue to game the system, put money in their pockets, and not spend this money. Or they commit to the rebuild. I will never, ever understand fan base enthusiasm for the idea of a rebuild.
It’s basically the Ricky Bobby philosophy. If you ain’t first, you’re last. And so people just believe, “Well, if you’re not winning at all, then you might as well just bottom out.” And I don’t know. Myself as a sports fan, it’s definitely bitter when your team loses, but there’s a lot of fun to be had along the way. It doesn’t necessarily have to be that. And so for me, it’s wild when you look at the Astros, now, part of this was when they had trouble with their cable provider, their cable deal, before they got this thing back on track, they were turning in literal zeros on ratings, where nobody in the city of Houston was watching the game on television. But bless their hearts, when the time came, they had a plan and they figured out how to turn that around. But I would not want those awful years. I just don’t know if that’s a fair trade.
It’s just, I look at baseball like an entertainment product, and it’s like, I wouldn’t want to watch a TV show that was like, “You know what? The next three seasons, we’re going to take all the lead actors out of the mix. It’s going to be a bunch of unknowns. The scripts are going to be terrible but have faith. We’ll get better.” I don’t understand why would I invest my time or money in that?
It’s interesting. I grew up with the terrible Braves, and then one day they were the good Braves and they were good for 15 years. It was only one championship that came in that run. There was never a point at which I was mad that there wasn’t another. Right? There were just the years, I was like, “Oh, man, it looks like we might get another one here.” You know what I mean? But you didn’t, and then you go on from there. So to me, the idea that the only thing that matters is the championship is ridiculous to me. The thing that I would want to have is a sustainable team. Sometimes we’re going to be pretty good, sometimes we’re going to be fairly bad. Sometimes we’re going to win a lot. Just take the ups and downs and go with it.
Every so often, a bit of Hollywood drama surfaces to whet our gossip-hungry appetites and remind us of why celebrities exist. In the past few months, there’s been an abundance of ridiculousness happening in the tabloids and on the red carpet, the kind of blind item buffet better fit for early 2000s culture, when stars still existed and influencers had yet to be birthed from the pits of hell.
But few celeb feuds invoke the kind of early aughts nostalgia and Tiger Beat whimsy that comes from learning Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber’s wife are arguing on Instagram. This kind of low-stakes drama brings back the good ol’ days, when Mischa Barton and Paris Hilton were papped leaving Hollywood nightclubs like Les Deux and Guy’s Bar at 4 am on a weeknight and Lindsay Lohan was fighting with Hilary Duff over Aaron Carter.
If you haven’t been following the mess because you have things like “hobbies,” or disassociating from reality is not something you feel the need to do on a daily basis, here’s an explainer for what’s going on with Gomez and one Hailey Bieber.
January 2023: Hailey Bieber Posts Then Deletes A TikTok Fans Claim Was Aimed At Selena Gomez
Though Gomez and Bieber publicly buried the hatchet some time ago, a TikTok Hailey posted featuring herself, Kendall Jenner, and Justine Sky is what’s believed to have reignited the bad blood between the pair. The video features the trio mouthing the words to a popular voice-over saying, “And I’m not saying she deserved it, but God’s timing is always right.” The clip was posted soon after Gomez addressed the online trolls who body-shamed her recent vacation photos.
A couple of days after the video was taken down, Bieber doubled down on the post saying it was “a random TikTok sound for fun” and it was “not directed at anyone.”
February 2023: Kylie Jenner Enters The Chat
In early February, Gomez shared a TikTok where she jokes with fans about over-laminating her eyebrows. Shortly after, Kylie Jenner snaps a pic of her own brows with the caption “Was this an accident?” that’s shared to her Instagram story. She then posts a screengrab of her Facetime call with Bieber where the two focus the camera on their brows.
I could be reaching, but it definitely feels like Kylie Jenner’s IG stories were towards Selena Gomez. Especially the screenshot of her facetime call with Hailey Bieber. This feels very HS
Fans began labeling both Jenner and Bieber “mean girls” for the apparent dig but Jenner defended herself, commenting on a TikTok video rehashing the drama by writing, “This is reaching. No shade towards Selena ever, and I didn’t see her eyebrow posts! u guys are making something out of nothing. this is silly.”
Gomez backed up Jenner’s comment saying, “Agreed @kyliejenner. It’s all unnecessary. I’m a fan of Kylie.”
February 2023: Selena Gomez Resurfaces An Old Video Of Hailey Bieber Dissing Taylor Swift
After the TikTok hype prompts fans to recover an old video of Hailey Bieber making a gagging motion when Taylor Swift’s name is mentioned during an awards presentation, Gomez comments on it saying, “So sorry, my best friend is and continues to be one of the best in the game.” She then hosts a TikTok Live where she confirms she’ll be taking a break from social media.
“I’m gonna be taking a second from social media because this is a little silly,” Gomez said. ” And I’m 30, I’m too old for this, so…but I love you guys so much! And I will see you guys sooner than later, I just… I’m just gonna just take a break from everything.”
Of course, before Gomez officially logged off she managed to comment on multiple TikToks slamming Bieber, thanking fans for supporting her.
March 2023: TikTok Conspiracy Theories Begin Circulating
After the back-and-forth between Gomez and Bieber, fans on social media began pulling old photos and videos they claim prove Bieber had been “obsessed” with Selena and Justin’s relationship before she ever met the singer. A side-by-side clip of Gomez giving an interview and Bieber appearing on a late-night show depicts Bieber using similar language to Gomez when answering a question about her personal life. Fans also accused Bieber of copying Gomez when she launched her Youtube series “What’s In My Kitchen?” two years after Gomez’s HBO Max show Selena + Chef premiered.
The latest conspiracy theory though involves the go-to church of the Hollywood elite.
TikTok users pointed out that Gomez has a lower-case cursive “g” tattooed behind her ear. Gomez got the tattoo in 2015 in honor of her younger sister. Weirdly enough, Bieber also had a lower-case “g” inked behind her ear later that same year. According to Buzzfeed, Bieber said she got the tattoo as “a tribute to the daughter of Zoe Church pastor Chad Veach” whose name is Georgia. Still, fans found the placement and the style of the tattoo suspicious.
And thanks to all this drama, Gomez has now dethroned Kylie Jenner as the most-followed celebrity on Instagram, gaining nearly 15 million fans during this whole mess while Jenner reportedly lost 1 million followers and Bieber may have lost as many as 800,000.
Let’s say you’re on a TV show hosted by or starring your childhood crush. Would you, or to personalize it, would I try to shoot my shot with Natalie Portman? Absolutely not. For one thing, she’s married. Also, she’s Natalie Portman and I’m blogging from my couch while wearing a Jackass hoodie.
But Dan Oxman is a braver man than me — the Jeopardy! contestant professed his admiration to host Mayim Bialik while appearing on the game show.
While introducing Oxman during the High School Reunion Tournament, Bialik said, “I don’t really want to talk about what we’re going to talk about, but apparently I was your celebrity crush growing up?” The college senior from South Orange, New Jersey, replied, “This is a long time ago, Mayim, but you know, when I was a little kid, I saw you on TV and I really admired how you played, like, a super awesome scientist [on The Big Bang Theory]. And then I found out you were a scientist with a doctorate in real life. And then I was just like [mind blown noise].” Oxman added, “And you haven’t aged a day.”
What a smooth talker. On a related note, Natalie Portman, if you’re reading this, you haven’t aged a day.
Sheeran has found collaborative partners across genres, even some unlikely pairings, as well as a few beloved match-ups. But when it came time to begin working on his forthcoming album, – (aka Subtract), the musician revealed that despite being known for his openness to collaborating with fellow recording artists, there was one person who initially didn’t feel comfortable working with.
In a touching post uploaded to Instagram, Sheeran admitted he was hesitant to work with Aaron Dessner, founding member of the rock band The National. The reason? Dessner’s recent work with their mutual friend Taylor Swift on her 2020 albums Folklore and Evermore.
The post reads, “So in 2021, I got a message from Taylor Swift to link me up with Aaron Dessner. She thought he and I would make something great together. I have to be honest, I was a bit reticent to work with him that soon after folklore and evermore because I felt that was Taylor’s thing, and they had both been done so perfectly.”
Continuing, “But we met for dinner, chatted about life and music, and he promised to send me some instrumentals for me to write over whenever inspiration hit. As soon as I got them, I loved the whole overall vibe of it and knew that one day I would write to them, but at the time I was finishing up what I thought was Subtract, so would put them on the back burner for a bit.”
Sheeran took it a step further, adding, “Then, as I said in my announcement post, a lot of things started happening in my personal life that I just felt the need to vent about on song and write diaristically about them. I had Aaron’s instrumentals, so just started writing, and writing, and writing. He flew over to the UK, and we recorded it in a week by the seaside, and its just been the most incredible process, and an album I’m so bloody proud of.”
He closed the post by thanking his collaborator, writing, “Thanks to Aaron and Jon for the insane amount of hard work and dedication you put into this project, and bringing out a side of me I had put on mute for so long. And of course, thanks to Swizzle [Taylor Swift], as always, you rock.”
This post comes after Dessner shared with his followers on the platform that he and Sheeran recorded over 30 songs in just a week for the forthcoming project.
– is out 5/5 via Atlantic. Find more information here.
Ed Sheeran is a Warner Music artist. Uproxx is an independent subsidiary of Warner Music Group.
Have Ghostface spottings been happening in your town lately? Well, don’t worry. It’s probably the marketing team for Scream 6. After several social media posts went viral where the Scream movie killer can be seen just moseying around the neighborhood, an insider on the film has confirmed to Variety that, yes, it’s a promotional stunt. If that seems like the type of thing that could easily backfire, you’re right. Concerned citizens have already called the cops as one does when they see the killer from a horror franchise walking around in real life way past Halloween.
In the weeks leading up to its release on March 10, the franchise’s notorious slasher Ghostface has been spotted in various U.S. cities, including Sonoma (the stand-in for the franchise’s fictional town of Woodsboro), New Orleans and St. Louis. Given the state of the world, and those demonic clown sightings in 2016, it’s hardly surprising that the seemingly random presence of a costumed killer has reportedly prompted 911 calls from disturbed bystanders.
According to Variety, Paramount Pictures has declined to comment. Granted, as the old saying goes, there’s no such thing as bad publicity, plopping random Ghostfaces all over the country is sure to freak people out as seen below where one of them made the news:
The people of Sonoma got a bit of a scary surprise on Monday when a person wearing a “Scream” costume stood motionless at the Sonoma Plaza. The first film in the franchise was shot at the Sonoma Community Center, just a block away. VIDEO: https://t.co/p9rtvw1FbQpic.twitter.com/JMkjDbX6Zt
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
