aespa's Winter reveals her brother was supposed to debut under SM Entertainment: 'Auditioned three times...'
Was Winter's brother supposed to debut under SM Entertainment instead of her?
Kim Min Jeong aka Winter recently appeared on the popular YouTube show Salon Drip 2, hosted by Jang Do Yeon. The episode featuring the aespa member was released on June 1. During her candid talk about her career, Winter revealed that it was her brother who caught the eyes of SM Entertainment initially.
'At a dance festival, the staff actually intended to cast my brother, who came with me. But I ended up doing better than him— though I still didn't make it at the time,' the aespa member shared.
Check out the full episode featuring Winter here
She revealed that SM was her dream company and she desperately wanted to debut as a K-pop idol under them. The Dirty Work singer recalled, 'I auditioned three times for SM.'
How did Winter finally get to debut as a aespa member?
After being rejected twice by SM, Winter played her last shot. 'I was in contact with someone at SM, and when I said I might go to a different agency, they invited me for one final audition," she said. It was during then, that her talent and charisma won over the auditioners.
After that, she signed with SM Entertainment in 2017 and trained for three and a half years, before debuting as an aespa member alongside Karina, Giselle and Ningning.
Winter's revelation about aespa's concept change
Winter said, 'Ningning and I were originally trained in pure and cute styles during our trainee days, and we ended up recording Next Level, which felt more like an OST remake.' It is absolutely different from aespa's current image as a group known for powerful concepts. The reason for the shift might be related to the group's evolution in style and music, adapting to the industry's trends and fan expectations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Song Hye Kyo reveals director tried to confiscate her passport after sensing she wanted to escape: ‘I was stuck for three years'
K-drama star Song Hye Kyo, whose career trajectory shifted massively in the past few years—from soft love stories to revenge-driven themes and darker roles, recently appeared for a rare one-hour interview on musician Jung Jae Hyung's YouTube show. During the interaction, she recalled a nearly decade-old incident during the filming of the Chinese biographical movie Grandmaster, where she was stuck in the project for almost three years. And even when Song wanted out, director Wong Kar Wai made sure she couldn't leave. During the interview, the host asked Song Hye Kyo about her early experience working outside Korea, steering the conversation to her 2013 movie Grandmaster. Song shared that back then, China was witnessing a massive Korean wave, and when she visited the country, she ended up meeting a lot of industry people. Director Wong Kar Wai, who was planning to visit Korea to promote one of his films, approached her and asked if she'd like to hangout for a lunch. That's how they became acquaintances. At some point, Wong offered her a role, saying, 'This might be short, but you'll like it.' Out of curiosity, and to understand what a Chinese set and director's style looked like, Song agreed. 'I thought it would be better to go and learn something rather than sit idle,' she said. Also read: Song Hye-kyo says she is 'happy' amid speculation surrounding Song Joong-ki's new relationship: 'I see the world in white…' She continued, 'I went… and then I was tied up for three years,' before adding, 'I barely even appeared in the shoot.' Song playfully remarked that no one, not even the cast, knew she was in the film, her screen time was that minimal. She recalled having so much free time on set that she'd play badminton with the staff all day and spend the rest of it lounging in her hotel room, wondering when her next shoot would be. The delay was probably because of the director's reputation for his time-consuming craft. During her free time, Song Hye Kyo said she would return to Korea, only to instantly receive a call asking her to fly back for a shoot. But once she arrived, she'd have to wait another week or so, and that's when the frustration kicked in. 'I want to leave. I don't want to be here,' she remembered thinking. She also recalled how the director somehow sensed she was ready to escape. One day, Song's interpreter, who was close to the director, got called in and was asked, 'Who has Hye-kyo's passport? Is it with Hye-kyo or you?' When the interpreter said it was with her, the director replied, 'Quickly get it from her. It seems she's going to slip back to Korea soon.' He told the interpreter not to return it until the shoot wrapped. Song laughed while recalling the moment, saying, 'That's basically how the filming went.' Also read: Song Hye-kyo in That Winter, The Wind Blows: An underrated gem, which outshone her role in Descendants of the Sun Grandmaster was a 10-minute-long film where Song Hye Kyo appeared for just 6 minutes. The movie starred Tony Leung, Zhang Ziyi, Chang Chen, and Zhao Benshan.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Bhagyalakshmi criticizes actor Tini Tom for ‘Baseless' remarks about Prem Nazir's final days - 'Deeply hurtful'
(Picture Courtesy: Facebook) Veteran actor and dubbing artist Bhagyalakshmi has publicly condemned actor Tini Tom for his recent claims about legendary Malayalam actor Prem Nazir . In a heartfelt video shared on social media, Bhagyalakshmi said she was disturbed by Tini's suggestion that Nazir had spent his final days 'crying at the houses of Adoor Bhasi and Bahadoor' due to lack of film opportunities. 'For those of us who worked with him in Madras till 1985, who knew him closely and experienced his generosity, this is painful,' she said. 'I personally met him shortly before his death at Edappazhanji in Thiruvananthapuram. He was happy and surrounded by his family. That was one of the most peaceful phases of his life.' "You cannot repeat everything you hear" Bhagyalakshmi stressed that public figures must exercise caution when speaking about others, especially someone of Prem Nazir's stature. 'Even if Tini heard this from someone else, he should not have repeated it without verifying the facts,' she said, calling the claim misleading and harmful. Celebrating Prem Nazir's birth anniversary She pointed out that many YouTube channels today share unverified stories about late actors for views, but it's not acceptable for someone from the industry to echo such narratives. 'Tini Tom wasn't even active in cinema when Nazir sir was alive,' she reminded, adding that such remarks discredit the truth known to those who actually spent time with the legendary actor. "Nazir sir was never that man" Bhagyalakshmi recalled how Prem Nazir would often turn down roles saying, 'Let someone else do it... call him instead.' She described him as a generous host whose Madras home was always open to fellow artists from Kerala. 'He never cried for roles. He never sought pity. To paint him as someone who begged for work in his final days is a disservice to his legacy and hurtful to his family.' Her message to Tini Tom was clear: 'If you believe that about Nazir sir, it's time to change that belief.'
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
YouTube pirates are cashing in on Hollywood's summer blockbusters
After spending about $100 million on 'Lilo & Stitch,' a live-action remake of a 2002 animated film, Disney had plenty to celebrate. The film pulled in $361 million worldwide on its opening weekend in May and bested 'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning' at the box office. But the company also had cause to be concerned. In the days after the Disney film's opening, a pirated version of 'Lilo & Stitch' proved to be a hit on YouTube, where more than 200,000 people viewed it, potentially costing Disney millions of dollars in additional sales, according to research from Adalytics, a firm that analyzes advertising campaigns for brands. The findings of the research shed new light on the copyright issues that once threatened to upend YouTube's business. They also show how advertisers have unwittingly supported illicit content on YouTube, and they provide rare data about piracy on the platform. YouTube has long tried to tamp down piracy, but users who upload stolen films and television shows have employed new tactics to evade the platform's detection tools, the research showed, including cropping films and manipulating footage. YouTube then recommended the uploaded videos to users on its homepage, promoting pirated streaming of box office releases like 'Lilo & Stitch,' or movies exclusively available on streaming platforms, like 'Captain America: Brave New World,' according to screen recordings compiled by Adalytics and an analysis by The New York Times. YouTube, which is owned by Google, may also have generated revenue from some stolen videos, though it's unclear how much money it may have made. The company has a program known as Content ID to identify videos protected by copyright. It allows copyright holders to block the videos, share in advertising sales of the videos or receive data about who views the videos. Over the years, YouTube has paid billions of dollars to rights holders. YouTube reported flagging 2.2 billion videos last year and said rights holders permitted about 90% of those videos to stay on the platform. Jack Malon, a spokesperson for YouTube, said the company does not analyze the less than 10% of videos it removes at the request of copyright holders and does not track how many of those videos may be recently released, full-length movies. The channels that uploaded the videos of 'Lilo & Stitch' and 'Captain America: Brave New World' were terminated for violating YouTube's policies on spam, Malon said. He declined to say whether the company had profited from commercials shown in copyrighted videos that evaded detection by Content ID or racked up views before rights holders asked that they be taken down. At YouTube's request, Adalytics and the Times provided 200 videos for YouTube to review, most of them full-length films. YouTube analyzed the videos but declined to provide insight into what percentage of the films their rights holders had permitted to stay up or had required to be removed. 'To frame these videos as 'illicit' without first reviewing the specific choices made by each rights holder misunderstands how the media landscape on YouTube works today,' Malon said. While 'mistakes do occur' on YouTube, he said, he dismissed the Adalytics report as an effort to get companies to sign up for the firm's services. Holders of copyrights for the videos, including all the major film studios, did not respond when asked for comment by the Times. The founder of Adalytics, Krzysztof Franaszek, who conducted the research, said he had observed 9,000 examples of possible copyright violations, 'including full-length movies that were in theatrical release, Netflix exclusives such as 'Extraction 2,' TV shows such as 'Family Guy' and live NCAA college football games.' The videos collectively had more than 250 million views. More than 100 of these uploads were also reviewed by the Times. Movies from every major film studio were found on YouTube in unofficial streams uploaded from last July to May, Adalytics found. When briefed on the research findings, Larissa Knapp, the chief content protection officer of the Motion Picture Association, a trade group for movie studios, said she found them concerning. At one point, the anti-piracy work between the studios and YouTube 'did work,' Knapp said. 'But now it seems like some of the stuff may have gone off the rails if illegal content is being placed with ads.' The research recalled a time in YouTube's history when Hollywood accused the platform of profiting from its stolen content. In 2007, Viacom sued YouTube, claiming it engaged in 'brazen' copyright infringement by allowing uploads of the media company's material without its permission. In 2012, YouTube won the suit by arguing it was shielded from liability by the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which exempted YouTube from liability for hosting copyrighted work. The law shifted the burden for protecting a copyright from the platform and video creators to rights holders, said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. Without the rule, he said, 'the internet would not be able to exist in its existing format.' YouTube has tried to work with film studios, television networks and streaming services to combat piracy. Google, YouTube's parent company, developed its Content ID technology to recognize copyrighted videos, and YouTube became more aggressive at policing its platform for piracy. Copyright holders gained the right to either have the content removed or collect a share of the advertising revenue the videos generated. The box office in the United States and Canada routinely loses $1 billion each year to piracy, which is roughly 15% of its annual haul, according to the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, a trade group of 50 entertainment companies that tries to reduce piracy. Franaszek began the research after his advertising clients noticed that as much as 60% of their ad spending on YouTube went to videos or channels that were labeled 'no longer available.' After digging deeper, he found that his clients had paid to support content that YouTube later removed because it violated company policies against nudity, violence or hate speech, or because of other offenses. When videos are removed from the platform, YouTube scrubs advertisers' records so that they can no longer see the name of the video. Advertisers have to go to the link for the removed video to see if it was removed for a copyright violation, Franaszek said. He added that the platform did not fully reimburse the advertisers for the cost of commercials in those videos. Erich Garcia, a senior vice president at which lets consumers compare insurance offerings, said his company's ads routinely ran with videos that had disappeared, limiting his insight into the effectiveness of his promotions. Malon said YouTube advertisers could get more insight into those videos by asking their account representatives for more information. Representatives can provide advertising credits. Ads from Disney, Hulu, HBO Max, Focus Features and dozens of other companies from various industries were found alongside unauthorized film and television uploads, Adalytics said. Pirates deployed a range of deceptive tactics to evade YouTube's anti-piracy algorithms. Some uploaded and voluntarily removed copyrighted videos on the same day, racking up viewers before being caught. Other pirates mirrored the videos to reverse the images, or cropped the frames in an effort to trick the Content ID system. Still others placed clips of regular people at the end of a Hollywood blockbuster video to further cover their tracks, Adalytics and the Times found. Franaszek said Adalytics clients who paid for advertising in videos that were removed over copyright issues had a simple request: 'to have visibility into what content their YouTube ad dollars are funding, and where their ads appear.'
