Ex-Mumford & Sons guitarist criticizes music industry for silence after Boulder antisemitic attack
Speaking on "Fox & Friends First," Marshall called the attack "horrific" and "unsurprising," especially in light of the recent murders of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C. nearly two weeks ago.
"My frustration isn't just at the horrific things that we see, but the failure by certain parts of the country to acknowledge it's even happening…" he said.
"What do you think they mean when they say, 'globalize the Intifada?' If you have these big groups chanting this, then there will be individuals like this case in Boulder who will actually act on it," he said.
Egyptian national Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, was arrested by authorities on Sunday after he allegedly set his victims on fire as they peacefully rallied on behalf of Israeli hostages still being held by Hamas in Gaza. He was heard yelling "Free Palestine" and other anti-Israel slogans during the attack on victims ranging in age from 52 to 88.
Marshall criticized high-profile examples of what he sees as the music industry failing to condemn such violent acts while some embrace pro-Palestinian messaging.
In one recent case, rock band Imagine Dragons set social media ablaze after lead singer Dan Reynolds waved a Palestinian flag on stage during a concert in Milan, Italy.
Video clips of Reynolds picking up a Palestinian flag and waving it before draping it across his shoulders at the concert's end racked up millions of views and drew mixed reactions on social media.
He also kissed the flag and threw it back into the crowd.
"I'm disappointed by also the reaction in the music industry where I have spent my career so regularly," Marshall said.
"I should also note there are 58 hostages still in Gaza, 23 of whom are still presumed alive. Why is it that these protesters aren't protesting against Hamas? It is in their interests. If you are pro-Palestine, you should be anti-Hamas. If you're pro-Israel, you should be anti-Hamas. Hamas are literally killing Palestinians themselves. It seems like a complete moral inversion, and… I don't quite know how [to] get into that frame of mind because it's so twisted to me."
He went on to say the slew of antisemitic violence is "very dark" to see in America.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NFL players, employees fined for selling Super Bowl tickets: reports
More than 100 NFL players and dozens of club employees are to be fined or suspended for selling their allocations of tickets for this year's Super Bowl on secondary markets, US media reported on Friday. ESPN reported that players who sold allotted tickets will be fined one-and-a-half times the face value of the tickets sold and be barred from receiving tickets to the next two editions of the Super Bowl. Players amongst those caught will be given the option of purchasing tickets if their team reaches the Super Bowl in 2026 or 2027. Players who decline to pay the fines face being suspended, ESPN cited league and union sources as saying. ESPN quoted an NFL memo sent to teams which said employees and players had sold tickets to "bundlers" working with a ticket resale site. Tickets to the Super Bowl are consistently one of the hottest -- and most expensive -- tickets in North American sport, fetching as much as $10,000 on resale sites. "Our initial investigation has determined that a number of NFL players and coaches, employed by several NFL Clubs, sold Super Bowl tickets for more than the ticket's face value in violation of the policy," NFL chief compliance officer Sabrina Perel wrote in the memo. Perel cited "long-standing league policy" which "prohibits League or club employees, including players, from selling NFL game tickets acquired from their employer for more than the ticket's face value or for an amount greater than the employee originally paid for the ticket, whichever is less." Perel added that the league will enhance mandatory training before Super Bowl LX for all league personnel to emphasize the rules and "the broader principle that no one should profit personally from their NFL affiliation at the expense of our fans." The league, meanwhile, also planned to improve training to avoid a repeat, with the possibility of stiffer sanctions for future offenses. "No one should profit personally from their NFL affiliation at the expense of our fans," Perel wrote in the memo. rcw/js
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Meta Clashes With Apple, Google Over Age Check Legislation
(Bloomberg) -- The biggest tech companies are warring over who's responsible for children's safety online, with billions of dollars in fines on the line as states rapidly pass conflicting laws requiring companies to verify users' ages. Trump Awards $1.26 Billion Contract to Build Biggest Immigrant Detention Center in US The High Costs of Trump's 'Big Beautiful' New Car Loan Deduction Can This Bridge Ease the Troubled US-Canadian Relationship? Salt Lake City Turns Winter Olympic Bid Into Statewide Bond Boom Trump Administration Sues NYC Over Sanctuary City Policy The struggle has pitted Meta Platforms Inc. and other app developers against Apple Inc. and Alphabet Inc.'s Google, the world's largest app stores. Lobbyists for both sides are moving from state to state, working to water down or redirect the legislation to minimize their clients' risks. This year alone, at least three states — Utah, Texas and Louisiana — passed legislation requiring tech companies to authenticate users' ages, secure parental consent for anyone under 18 and ensure minors are protected from potentially harmful digital experiences. Now, lobbyists for all three companies are flooding into South Carolina and Ohio, the next possible states to consider such legislation. The debate has taken on new importance after the Supreme Court this summer ruled age verification laws are constitutional in some instances. A tech group on Wednesday petitioned the Supreme Court to block a social media age verification law in Mississippi, teeing up a highly consequential decision in the next few weeks. Child advocates say holding tech companies responsible for verifying the ages of their users is key to creating a safer online experience for minors. Parents and advocates have alleged the social media platforms funnel children into unsafe and toxic online spaces, exposing young people to harmful content about self harm, eating disorders, drug abuse and more. Blame Game Meta supporters argue the app stores should be responsible for figuring out whether minors are accessing inappropriate content, comparing the app store to a liquor store that checks patrons' IDs. Apple and Google, meanwhile, argue age verification laws violate children's privacy and argue the individual apps are better-positioned to do age checks. Apple said it's more accurate to describe the app store as a mall and Meta as the liquor store. The three new state laws put the responsibility on app stores, signaling Meta's arguments are gaining traction. The company lobbied in support of the Utah and Louisiana laws putting the onus on Apple and Google for tracking their users' ages. Similar Meta-backed proposals have been introduced in 20 states. Federal legislation proposed by Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah would hold the app stores accountable for verifying users' ages. Still, Meta's track record in its state campaigns is mixed. At least eight states have passed laws since 2024 forcing social media platforms to verify users' ages and protect minors online. Apple and Google have mobilized dozens of lobbyists across those states to argue that Meta is shirking responsibility for protecting children. 'We see the legislation being pushed by Meta as an effort to offload their own responsibilities to keep kids safe,' said Google spokesperson Danielle Cohen. 'These proposals introduce new risks to the privacy of minors, without actually addressing the harms that are inspiring lawmakers to act.' Meta spokesperson Rachel Holland countered that the company is supporting the approach favored by parents who want to keep their children safe online. 'Parents want a one-stop-shop to oversee their teen's online lives and 80% of American parents and bipartisan lawmakers across 20 states and the federal government agree that app stores are best positioned to provide this,' Holland said. As the regulation patchwork continues to take shape, the companies have each taken voluntary steps to protect children online. Meta has implemented new protections to restrict teens from accessing 'sensitive' content, like posts related to suicide, self-harm and eating disorders. Apple created 'Child Accounts,' which give parents more control over their children's' online activity. At Apple, spokesperson Peter Ajemian said it 'soon will release our new age assurance feature that empowers parents to share their child's age range with apps without disclosing sensitive information.' Splintered Groups As the lobbying battle over age verification heats up, influential big tech groups are splintering and new ones emerging. Meta last year left Chamber of Progress, a liberal-leaning tech group that counts Apple and Google as members. Since then, the chamber, which is led by a former Google lobbyist and brands itself as the Democratic-aligned voice for the tech industry, has grown more aggressive in its advocacy against all age verification bills. 'I understand the temptation within a company to try to redirect policymakers towards the company's rivals, but ultimately most legislators don't want to intervene in a squabble between big tech giants,' said Chamber of Progress CEO Adam Kovacevich. Meta tried unsuccessfully to convince another major tech trade group, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, to stop working against bills Meta supports, two people familiar with the dynamics said. Meta, a CCIA member, acknowledged it doesn't always agree with the association. Meta is also still a member of NetChoice, which opposes all age verification laws no matter who's responsible. The group currently has 10 active lawsuits on the matter, including battling some of Meta's preferred laws. The disagreements have prompted some of the companies to form entirely new lobbying outfits. Meta in April teamed up with Spotify Technology SA and Match Group Inc. to launch a coalition aimed at taking on Apple and Google, including over the issue of age verification. Competing Campaigns Meta is also helping to fund the Digital Childhood Alliance, a coalition of conservative groups leading efforts to pass app-store age verification, according to three people familiar with the funding. Neither the Digital Childhood Alliance nor Meta responded directly to questions about whether Meta is funding the group. But Meta said it has collaborated with Digital Childhood Alliance. The group's executive director, Casey Stefanski, said it includes more than 100 organizations and child safety advocates who are pushing for more legislation that puts responsibility on the app stores. Stefanski said the Digital Childhood Alliance has met with Google 'several times' to share their concerns about the app store in recent months. The App Association, a group backed by Apple, has been running ads in Texas, Alabama, Louisiana and Ohio arguing that the app store age verification bills are backed by porn websites and companies. The adult entertainment industry's main lobby said it is not pushing for the bills; pornography is mostly banned from app stores. 'This one-size fits all approach is built to solve problems social media platforms have with their systems while making our members, small tech companies and app developers, collateral damage,' said App Association spokesperson Jack Fleming. In South Carolina and Ohio, there are competing proposals placing different levels of responsibility on the app stores and developers. That could end with more stringent legislation that makes neither side happy. 'When big tech acts as a monolith, that's when things die,' said Joel Thayer, a supporter of the app store age verification bills. 'But when they start breaking up that concentration of influence, all the sudden good things start happening because the reality is, these guys are just a hair's breath away from eating each other alive.' (Updates with App Association statement in 24th paragraph.) Burning Man Is Burning Through Cash Confessions of a Laptop Farmer: How an American Helped North Korea's Wild Remote Worker Scheme It's Not Just Tokyo and Kyoto: Tourists Descend on Rural Japan Elon Musk's Empire Is Creaking Under the Strain of Elon Musk A Rebel Army Is Building a Rare-Earth Empire on China's Border ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Is 'E! News' Ending? Inside the Show's Cancellation and What Will Happen to Fan-Favorite Red Carpet Coverage
The nightly pop culture show is currently hosted by Keltie Knight and Justin Sylvester It's the end of an era for E! News. On July 24, PEOPLE learned that the long-running entertainment news program has been canceled after 34 years on air. Since its debut on Sept. 1, 1991, E! News has featured a rotating lineup of hosts, delivering pop culture updates to audiences around the world. Following original host Dagny Hultgreen, a number of familiar faces have stepped up to lead the show, including Ryan Seacrest, Giuliana Rancic, Jason Kennedy, Catt Sadler, and most recently, Keltie Knight and Justin Sylvester. The show's cancellation comes nearly three years after its 2022 revival, following its initial 2020 shutdown amid the pandemic. At the time, former host Lilliana Vazquez, who became co-anchor alongside Scott Tweedie in January of that year, said she was "thankful" for her time leading the program. "Thankful for this incredible adventure and I will miss this team and crew beyond belief," she wrote on Instagram. " the 4am call time." So, why was E! News canceled? Here's everything to know about the end of the longtime entertainment program. Why was E! News canceled? E! News is being canceled as part of the network's shift toward prioritizing digital and social content. The show's 11 p.m. time slot "no longer best serves the audience," who now prefer "real-time digital coverage," PEOPLE learned. While the broadcast is ending, E! News will continue as a digital brand, including its website, E! Online, and social series, including The Rundown on Snapchat, Hot Goss on Instagram and RE!CAP on YouTube. The announcement follows NBCUniversal's decision to split its broadcast offerings. NBC, Peacock and Bravo will remain under the original brand, while its other cable networks — including E!, USA Network, Syfy, CNBC, MSNBC, Oxygen and Golf Channel — along with websites like Fandango and Rotten Tomatoes, will move to a newly formed company called Versant. When will the final E! News episode air? There's still more E! News to come! The final episode of the entertainment news program will air on Sept. 25, 2025. What will happen to E! News' red carpet coverage? For those who follow the Hollywood scene from afar by tuning into E! News' red carpet coverage, don't fret! The network will continue its red carpet coverage with its signature show, Live from E!. Additionally, the 31st annual Critics Choice Awards will air on E! on Jan. 4, 2026. Will there be any other E! shows? E! will continue to air its original programming, including Botched Presents: Plastic Surgery Rewind and Honestly Cavallari: The Headline Tour, as well as its acquired content. The network also recently announced two new shows, Kimora: Back in the Fab Lane and E!'s Dirty Rotten Scandals. In addition to watching them on E!, the original programming can be streamed on NBC. Have the E! News hosts said anything about its cancellation? Current E! News hosts Knight and Sylvester have yet to comment directly on the show's cancellation. However, just after the news was announced, Knight shared a video on Instagram where she lip-synced the lyrics of Megan Moroney's "6 Months Later." "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger and blonder and hotter," the lyrics read. In the comments, followers offered support and speculated that the post was a nod to the show's end. "You were part of an incredible Hollywood legacy hosting E News! Part of history! I hope you feel so proud. ❤️," one fan wrote, while another user commented, "That's the sound of doors bursting open ❤️🔥." Former E! News co-host Vazquez also praised Knight and Sylvester's work. After writing that she was "sad but not surprised" on her Instagram Stories, Vasquez went more in-depth in a five-minute TikTok video. Read the original article on People
