A Pakistani man accused of killing a young TikTok influencer appears in court
Suspect Umar Hayat, 22, who also creates content on TikTok, was arrested Tuesday by Islamabad police in Faisalabad, an industrial city in eastern Punjab province.
He is accused of shooting Sana Yousuf, who had more than one million followers on social media. The killing earlier this week in Islamabad drew widespread condemnation.
TV footage showed Hayat with his face covered as he was brought to court, where police requested additional time to complete their investigation and file formal murder charges.
The judge ordered that Hayat be presented again on June 18 for pretrial proceedings.
Yousuf, originally from the scenic northern region of Chitral, was known for promoting traditional Chitrali music and dress through her videos. She also advocated for girls' education. TikTok has more than 60 million users in Pakistan, many of them young women and teenagers.
Hours before her murder, she had posted a photo celebrating her birthday with friends.
The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
21 hours ago
- CTV News
Warsaw archbishop asks Vatican to defrock Polish priest charged with the killing of a homeless man
A crowd gathers in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican, where newly elected Pope Leo XIV will deliver a blessing from the central balcony of St. Peter's Basilica on Sunday, May 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Domenico Stinellis, File) WARSAW, Poland — The archbishop of Warsaw, Poland, has asked the Vatican to defrock a priest charged with the killing of a 68-year-old homeless man who was beaten with an ax and set on fire. Prosecutors on Saturday charged the priest, only identified as Mirosław M. in line with Polish privacy rules, with murder with particular cruelty. He is being detained ahead of a trial and faces 15 years to life behind bars. Investigators say the priest and the victim, Anatol Cz., were together in a car late Thursday when an argument broke out, according to Aneta Góźdź, a spokesperson for the Radom District Prosecutor's Office. The fight stemmed from a donation agreement where the priest had agreed to provide lifelong assistance and care for the man, Góźdź said in a statement. The argument escalated over the homeless man's future housing. The priest allegedly struck the victim on the head with an ax, doused him in flammable liquid and set him on fire, the spokesperson said. The priest then drove away when he saw a bicycle light approaching. The bicyclist found the victim engulfed in flames and called for first responders, Góźdź said. 'An autopsy showed that the victim suffered burns covering 80% of his body and head injuries caused by a sharp-edged heavy object,' Góźdź said. Warsaw Archbishop Adrian Galbas on Saturday requested the Holy See to dismiss the priest from the priesthood, the highest penalty in canon law for a cleric. In a statement to the archdiocese on Friday, Galbas asked for Catholics to pray for the victim and his loved ones. The archbishop said he was 'devastated' by the crime and pledged to cooperate with investigators. The Vatican did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Associated Press
CBC
a day ago
- CBC
Dead or 'unalive'? How social platforms — and algorithms — are shaping the way we talk
You might be familiar with the terms "seggs" and "unalive" if you've spent time on social media platforms, like TikTok and Instagram. They're a part of what's called "algospeak," a kind of coded language used on social media to protect content from getting removed or flagged by algorithm-based moderation tools. For example, a commenter might write "seggs" or "unalive" to avoid using sex or kill — words that could be censored by moderation. Others might use the eggplant emoji in place of the word penis, or write "S.A." instead of "sexual assault." Similarly, the watermelon emoji has become a common way to show support for Palestinians and Gaza when discussing the Israel-Hamas war. Social networks have different guidelines outlining what's acceptable to post, leaving users to find creative workarounds. Adam Aleksic says people finding ways to get around publishing restrictions is nothing new. "What is new is the medium and the fact that this algorithmic infrastructure is in place governing how we're speaking to each other," he told The Sunday Magazine host Piya Chattopadhyay. Aleksic is a linguist and influencer known to millions as @etymologynerd. His new book, Algospeak: How Social Media Is Transforming the Future of Language, explores how algorithms and online creators shift the way people communicate. He compares the relationship between social media platforms and users to a game of Whac-A-Mole. "The algorithm is producing more language change in this kind of never-ending cycle of platforms censoring something and people finding new ways to talk about it," he said. In another example, Chinese internet users have taken to using the word for "harmony" as a way of describing government censorship online. It's meant as a reference to the Chinese government's goal of creating a harmonious society. When that and a similar-sounding replacement phrase, "river crab," were banned, people started saying "aquatic product," Aleksic said. The author also says that some content creators self-regulate their speech based on what they believe the algorithm will punish. Social media speech regulations Aleksic says content moderation systems and algorithms are programmed using large language models, but how those inputs are assessed remains a mystery. "The engineers themselves call it a black box because they don't understand what goes in," Aleksic said. "There's so many parameters that you can't actually say why it outputs something." Jamie Cohen, a digital culture expert and professor at CUNY Queens College in New York, says content moderation rules on social media platforms are intended to reduce harm and classify what's acceptable speech. Those safety guidelines are meant to protect users, he says, and removing them comes with consequences. Cohen points to X, formerly known as Twitter, which introduced less restrictive speech policies when Elon Musk bought the company in 2022, reflecting his self-proclaimed "free-speech absolutist" position. "Algospeak, or internet language in particular, it's about [reducing] harm," he said. "X is what a site looks like without algospeak, that's what it looks like when you remove the borders of forms of acceptable speech." Earlier this month, X's AI-powered chatbot Grok posted offensive remarks, including antisemitic comments, in response to user prompts. Musk said that Grok, following an update to its algorithm, was "too compliant to user prompts," and that the issue was being addressed. Culture and community Finding new ways to communicate is a human activity that neither robots or AI can do, Cohen says, adding that algospeak is a binary language where a word can have multiple meanings. "Communication requires knowledge, nuance and a complex understanding of other people's use of the language." Aleksic argues that language is a proxy for culture, which allows people to share common realities and foster empathy. He says algospeak influences the popularity of memes, trends and the formation of in-groups. "Children are using language as a way of building identity, of differentiating themselves from adults and forging a shared commonality," he said. Internet culture often overflows into the real world, Cohen says — and when users hear social media language used offline, it can help identify people with similar interests. Tumblr, a social network popular in the late 2000s and 2010s, played a big role in language formation, especially among women, he says. But Cohen pushes back against the idea that algospeak is a corruption of language. In fact, he celebrates it. "I find algospeak beautiful because it's not only developing community and support groups, but people will know that they share language."
Winnipeg Free Press
2 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Fringe at its gut-clutching best when it layers on the cringe
I have just laughed as hard as I have at the Winnipeg Fringe Festival in 20 years. Prodded in the gut until air escaped me in the most embarrassing way. The offending object was a play by Winnipeg performer Donnie Baxter called Shit: The Musical, which has its last show at 8:45 p.m. tonight. Supplied Shit: The Musical possesses a kind of gonzo spirit. My bright, witty peer Jeffrey Vallis gave it a one-star review in the Free Press last week. '(It) feels like a '90s after-school show gone horribly wrong — like if Barney sang about bowel movements instead of friendship,' he writes. 'Set in a university lecture hall, Dr. Eaton Fartmore teaches a class on the semantics of poop through stories and off-key songs that drag on like a bad bout of constipation.' All of this is essentially true — in fact, the play's narrative is perhaps even flimsier than this. But there's little accounting for taste — or for the tasteless things we savour. I will endeavour all the same. Imagine you are at the beautifully modern Theatre Cercle Moliere, named after France's most renowned satirist of its classical theatre. It's 11 p.m. on a Wednesday and there's a senior citizen singing tunelessly, 'Farts, farts, farts, always stink, don't you think? It's a shame, this awful name.' The awful name in question is his own, Dr. Fartmore, and this professor of linguists is riffing on Shakespeare's line about roses smelling as sweet by any other name. Groan? The audience of 30 assembled isn't laughing. Not yet. The fact they are not, only makes me laugh harder. It's as though we've all been ensnared in one of Ionesco's or Artaud's glorious trolls on audiences in their mid-century absurdist experiments. But for this to be funny for a few, seemingly it has to stink for many — including obviously Vallis, who does have a good sense of humour. I'm sure his bad review wasn't happily received by performer-playwright Baxter because at the end of the day, bad reviews are usually bad business. Fringe performers sink thousands of dollars and countless hours — staking not just their savings, but their reputations — on the chance to entertain us and hopefully break even. And they do it at a time when live theatre is said to be more endangered than ever, dulled by the narcotic pull of screen media: TikTok and Instagram memes, Netflix and the ever-churning algorithm. Believe it or not, we reviewers — as much as some may curse our names in the fringe beer tent — try to bear this in mind. But as Orwell's old adage goes, oddly fitting for the high politics of local theatre: 'Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.' All to say: Vallis's pointed, funny reaction to Shit: The Musical is as valid as the myriad bad, middling and good reviews we've issued through this festival. Still, in ultimately relenting to Baxter's routine I felt I was exorcising something. A resistance that reviewers like me can develop to a certain spirit of fringe that stubbornly eludes the star system. A gonzo spirit shared by another DIY artform supposedly destroying live art like theatre: internet memes. I mean especially those associated online humour styles that go by names like post-irony, shitposting, layered cringe. This is absurdist, often lowbrow humour that echoes older comedians such as Andy Kauffman, Tom Green, Eric Andre and Tim Heidecker. But otherwise, it's distinctly Gen Z — mocking those Millennials whose humour is still stuck in the era of YouTube, Vines and Jim Carrey movies when comedy meant straightforward skits, polished punchlines and mugging for the camera. Maybe it also owes something to a certain stubborn set of ideas still circulating in universities. Most liberal arts students, sooner or later, encounter the work of another French oddball who came after Ionesco and Artaud: Jean-François Lyotard, with his theory of postmodernity. This theory (stick with me) says we now live in a postmodern era — an age where 'grand narratives' have collapsed. Big, sweeping explanations such as Marxism or Christianity no longer hold sway. Instead, knowledge loops back on itself: science, ethics and meaning justify themselves by referencing other systems, not some fixed reality. Lyotard knew this would leave us ironic, skeptical, suspicious of truth claims — and he seemed basically fine with that. His critics weren't. They called it nihilism and accused him of corrupting young minds with moral relativism. Right or wrong about knowledge or modernity, Lyotard was strangely ahead of his time when it comes to understanding humour. So much of online youth humour feels postmodern today. It disdains narrative. Conventional storytelling jokes, unless ironically dumb, are old hat. Humour now is 'irony-poisoned,' as the phrase goes — self-referential, looping endlessly through layers of memes. But in being 'poisoned,' it's also frequently amoral, cruel even. This humour delights in mocking 'theatre kids' and older generations — people who crack earnest, dorky jokes and wear their sincerity a little too openly. Their guileless enthusiasm gets labelled 'cringe,' then enjoyed and recreated ironically for laughs. I am, despite these misgivings and my elder Millennial status, addicted to absurd Gen Z humour. Which leads me to wonder: is it possible I enjoyed the plotless Shit: The Musical and other one-star fare this year for unkind reasons? Was I laughing at Baxter, this 'theatre kid' in his 60s with juvenile but sincere humour who can't carry a tune to save his life, instead of with him? Maybe at first. But Baxter was also clearly laughing at us — trolling us like Eric Andre or an online shitposter, figures he may know nothing about, to test our prudish reflexes. Our lack of whimsy. And a certain point, about halfway through the play, it worked. The audience started giggling, going along with Baxter. Then roaring. So many fringe shows reach melodramatically for the universal in the most sublime and tragic things. Heaven and hell. Baxter's awkward, taboo stories about embarrassing trips to the bathroom on first dates and his surprisingly enlightening explanation of healthy stool shapes felt oddly more honest. I've had a lovely fringe festival this year. And reflecting back, I think the shows that have stayed with me weren't always the tight, touring shows I may have felt obligated to award high stars to. They weren't the shows with wham-bam, but ultimately safe, humour delivered with the finesse of new Simpsons or old Johnny Carson episodes. They were the ones that really took chances, lowbrow and highbrow. Shows that had at something at stake creatively, not just financially, even if they were messy. Especially plays such as Debbie Loves Bumblebee, The Apricot Tree, Brainstorm, Parasocial and Baxter's bonkers production. Most of which, for me, point in one way or another to throughlines between the wild theatre of modernism and the fringe and the chaotic DIY culture that proliferates online today. Shows that might also help to bridge the generational gap where live theatre is concerned, drawing in more young people to a festival that, let's be honest, skews towards an older audience. There's a couple of days left of the festival, and I hope more audiences take chances on the fringiest of Fringe shows — especially if me or my colleagues have panned them. — Conrad SweatmanReporter Conrad Sweatman is an arts reporter and feature writer. Before joining the Free Press full-time in 2024, he worked in the U.K. and Canadian cultural sectors, freelanced for outlets including The Walrus, VICE and Prairie Fire. Read more about Conrad. Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber. Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.
