Latest news with #WYATTEGRANTHAM-PHILIPS
Japan Today
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Japan Today
Can you ever expect privacy in public? Coldplay kiss camera saga tells us a lot about the answer
By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS FILE - Chris Martin of Coldplay performs during the band's Music Of The Spheres World Tour at D. Y. Patil Sports Stadium in Navi Mumbai, Saturday, Jan. 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Rajanish Kakade, File) When the 'KissCam' at a Coldplay concert landed on a couple who tried (but failed) to duck out of the spotlight, the internet immediately got to work. In hours, the clip was just about everywhere. Endless memes, parody videos and photos of the pair's shocked faces filled social media feeds. Online sleuths rushed to identify who was on camera. Artificial intelligence and software company Astronomer eventually confirmed that its CEO and chief people officer were in fact the couple in the video — and announced the CEO's resignation over the weekend. The incident's fallout has, of course, generated conversations about business ethics, corporate accountability and the repercussions that conflicts of interest among leadership can cause. But there are also broader implications at play in our increasingly online world — about the state of potentially being visible everywhere you go or tracked through 'social media surveillance." Experts say it's more and more common for moments that may have been intended to be private, or at least reserved to a single physical venue, to make their way online and even go global today. So in the era of lightning-fast social sharing and when cameras are practically inescapable, does being in public hold any expectation of privacy anymore? Is every experience simply fodder for the world to see? It's no secret that cameras are filming much of our lives these days. From CCTV security systems to Ring doorbells, businesses, schools and neighborhoods use ample video surveillance around the clock. Sporting and concert venues have also filmed fans for years, often projecting playful bits of audience participation to the rest of the crowd. In short, the on-scene viewer becomes part of the product — and the center of attention. And of course, consumers can record just about anything if they have a smartphone in their pocket — and, if it's enticing to other social media users, that footage can quickly spread through cyberspace. Ellis Cashmore, author of the book 'Celebrity Culture,' proposes that the rapid fame of last week's KissCam moment probably answers a question many have been asking for years: 'Is the private life still what it was? And the answer is, of course, there's no such thing as the private life anymore,' he notes. 'Certainly not in the traditional sense of the term.' 'I'm not sure that we can assume privacy at a concert with hundreds of other people,' adds Mary Angela Bock, an associate professor in the University of Texas at Austin's School of Journalism and Media. 'We can't assume privacy on the street anymore.' Some version of the KissCam has long been a staple at big events — from timeouts during sports games to romantic songs played by artists at their concerts. It's easy to miss, but most venues have signs to inform the audience that they could be filmed during the event. What's been different in more recent years, experts note, is how quickly those moments can travel beyond the physical space where they actually unfold. That isn't only limited to what shows up on a jumbotron. Sometimes it only takes one person in the crowd to capture any interaction on their phone and post the video online — where it can zip around the world. 'It's not just the camera," Bock says. 'It's the distribution system that is wild and new.' Then there's the second ring of exposure — what happens after the video or photos spread. Experts point to growing instances of social media users rushing to publicly identify, or dox, the people captured on camera — much like how quickly the internet committed to finding those involved in the Coldplay moment, for example. The LinkedIn pages belonging both to Astronomer's now-former CEO and chief people officer remained disabled on Monday, and The Associated Press could not reach either for comment. But it isn't limited to company executives. Beyond someone simply spotting a familiar face and spreading the word, technological advances — including AI — have made it easier and faster overall to find just about anyone in an online post. This can happen with videos and photos shared on social media each day, even if it doesn't go viral, experts warn. 'It's a little bit unsettling how easily we can be identified with biometrics, how our faces are online, how social media can track us — and how the internet has gone from being a place of interaction, to a gigantic surveillance system," Bock says. 'When you think about it, we are being surveilled by our social media. They're tracking us in exchange for entertaining us.' And of course, such moments can also impact people who were not actually on camera. As easy as it can be to be identified online today, the internet is notorious for cutting a broad swath or not always getting it right. That sometimes produces harassment of individuals not actually involved. At last week's Coldplay concert, for example, many social media users speculated that a third person seen near the two caught on camera was another Astronomer employee — leading to swarms of posts targeting her. But the company later confirmed that she was not at the event and said no other employees were in the video circulating online. For the now-viral moment, 'we can talk about what's right and wrong, and whether they deserved it,' says Alison Taylor, a clinical associate professor at New York University's Stern School of Business. Still, it's a 'very frightening thing to get a lot of abuse and harassment online,' Taylor notes. 'There are real human beings behind this.' It's hard to think that that these kind of viral moments will ever go away — and there are few legal restrictions to stop users from sharing clips of interactions recorded from anything from a concert to the street widely online. But on an individual level, Bock says it can be helpful to 'think before you share' and question whether something's really accurate. 'Social media has changed so much,' Bock says. 'But we really have not, as a society, caught up with the technology in terms of our ethics and our etiquette.' Associated Press journalists Hilary Fox and Kelvin Chan contributed to this report. © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Japan Today
24-06-2025
- Business
- Japan Today
U.S. strikes on Iran add to global travel disruptions and flight cancellations
A row of aircraft belonging to Israeli airlines El Al sit parked along the apron of Cyprus' main airport in Larnaca. By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS The U.S. entry into Israel's war with Iran caused travel disruptions to pile up globally this week — with flight cancellations continuing Tuesday, even after President Donald Trump claimed a ceasefire was 'in effect.' Following unprecedented bombings ordered by Trump on three Iranian nuclear and military sites over the weekend, Iran on Monday launched a limited missile attack on U.S. forces at Qatar's Al Udeid Air Base. Qatar, which was quick to condemn the attack, had temporarily closed its airspace just over an hour earlier. Airports and skies throughout the region have been on heightened alert since Israel began the deadly war on June 13 with a surprise barrage of attacks on Iran, which responded with its own missile and drone strikes. And in the days following the escalatory U.S. strikes, more and more carriers canceled flights, particularly in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, which sit just across the Persian Gulf from Iran. After a ceasefire was announced between Israel and Iran, some of those disruptions eased. But the truce appeared to be on shaky ground Tuesday, with Trump accusing both countries of violating the deal — the terms of which remain unknown. Many airlines have halted select routes through the middle of the week, citing safety concerns. Mideast is worst affected The Middle East carriers were severely affected with cancellations and delays this week. Qatar Airways said its flights were suspended because of Monday's closure of air traffic in Qatar. Qatar Airways shared that it was working to restore operations after the country's airspace reopened — but noted that disruptions may continue through Thursday. Emirates suspended all flights to Iran and Iraq, including those serving Baghdad and Basra, through June 30. An unspecified number of other Emirates flights were rerouted but continuing to operate flights as scheduled, using flight paths well distanced from conflict areas, according to the airline, which added that some flights may be delayed. Etihad Airways, the other of the two flag carriers of the United Arab Emirates, suspended all flights between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv through July 15, and also announced several regional flight cancellations for Monday and Tuesday — including those connecting Abu Dhabi to and from Kuwait, Doha, Dammam and Muscat. Gulf Air, the carrier of the Kingdom of Bahrain, extended the cancellation of scheduled flights to Jordan and until June 27. Many other airlines cancel and delay flights Meanwhile, Singapore Airlines canceled some flights to and from Dubai starting Sunday and through Wednesday, citing 'a security assessment of the geopolitical situation in the Middle East.' And British Airways said it had suspended flights to and from Doha through Wednesday, adding that it 'will keep the situation under review.' Air India on Monday announced it was ceasing 'all operations to the (Middle East) region as well as to and from the East Coast of North America and Europe' until further notice. But the airline, which is separately still reeling from a plane crash that killed at least 270 people earlier this month, later said it was working to 'progressively resume' these routes starting Tuesday. In other developments earlier Tuesday, Dutch carrier KLM said that it would be suspending its flights to Dubai in the UAE and Riyad and Damman in Saudi Arabia until further notice. Philippine Airlines canceled several flights to the Middle East, including those to Doha, Dubai and Riyadh for Tuesday and one to Doha Wednesday. Japan Airlines said a flight from Tokyo's Haneda airport to Doha had to return Monday — adding that subsequently scheduled flights have all been canceled through June 27. And a Qatar Airways flight from Hong Kong to Doha was canceled on Tuesday. Air tracking data from FlightAware showed 495 cancellations worldwide just after 4 p.m. ET Tuesday, following 834 cancellations seen Monday. Safety comes first Such disruptions have snarled travel, particularly as central hubs in the Middle East often connect flights worldwide — but experts stress that these kind of airspace closures and flight diversions are critical to ensuring safety, especially if future escalation emerges suddenly. 'It is the responsibility of states, countries to ensure that their airspace is safe for passage of aircraft,' Hassan Shahidi, president and CEO of the Flight Safety Foundation. He added that on Monday 'the Qataris did the absolutely right thing to close their airspace because of the threat of conflict.' Beyond Qatari airspace, Flightradar24 reported that UAE airspace was also closed for several hours Monday. While the future is unknown, Ian Petchenik, director of communications at Flightradar24, noted that it's important to remember airspace closures and flight cancellations reflect that 'airlines, air traffic controllers and flight crews are doing their best to keep everybody safe.' Shahidi added that it's important for travelers to monitor government guidance — such as safety notices from the U.S. State Department. Still, lengthy disruptions could carry more widespread implications. Beyond snarling global flight networks, Shahidi stresses that it's very difficult for people who may need or want to evacuate countries impacted by the war to do so without access to commercial flights. At the same time, he adds, it's critical that state authorities focus on keeping their skies safe — pointing to past tragedies of passenger flights that were shot down by strikes. That includes Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which was shot down by Russian-backed forces while flying over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people. 'We are all praying and urging resolution to this conflict — and especially as it relates to protection of civilian air travel," Shahidi said. "We do not want to have an MH17, with innocent lives being lost in a missile strike ... We do not want to repeat that history.' AP Writers Yuri Kageyama in Tokyo and Kanis Leung in Hong Kong contributed to this report. © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Japan Today
16-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Japan Today
Fortnite says it's offline on Apple's iOS around the world
FILE - Shoppers look at Apple products in the Apple Store at the Walden Galleria in Buffalo, NY, on Saturday, Nov. 30, 2024. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar, File) By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS and MICHAEL LIEDTKE Fortnite says it's now unavailable on Apple's iOS globally because the tech giant blocked a bid to rerelease the popular video game for iPhone users in the U.S. and Europe. 'Apple has blocked our Fortnite submission so we cannot release to the U.S. App Store or to the Epic Games Store for iOS in the European Union," Epic Games-owned Fortnite wrote on X early Friday — claiming that Apple's move would now prevent the game's iOS availability around the world. 'Sadly, Fortnite on iOS will be offline worldwide until Apple unblocks it,' Fortnite said. In a statement sent to The Associated Press, Apple said it had specifically asked Epic Sweden to resubmit the app update 'without including the U.S. storefront of the App Store so as not to impact Fortnite in other geographies.' But, the company added, it "did not take any action to remove the live version of Fortnite from alternative distribution marketplaces.' Fortnite's exile from the iPhone app store is the latest twist in a yearslong feud between Apple and Epic. Back in 2020, Apple pulled Fortnite from its app store and Epic filed an antitrust lawsuit against the company in the U.S., alleging the technology trendsetter was illegally using its power to gouge game makers. After a monthlong trial in 2021, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled against most of Epic's claims, but ordered Apple to loosen its previously-exclusive control over the payments made for in-app commerce and allow links to alternative options in the U.S. for the first time — threatening to undercut sizable commissions that Apple had been collecting from in-app transactions for over a decade. After exhausting an appeal that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, Apple last year introduced a new system that opened the door for links to alternative payment options while still imposing a 27% commission on in-app transactions executed outside its own system. Epic fired back by alleging Apple was thumbing its nose at the legal system, reviving another round of court hearings that lasted nearly a year before Gonzalez Rogers delivered a stinging rebuke last month — which held Apple in civil contempt and banned the company from collecting any commission on alternative payment systems. That ruling cleared the way for Epic to finally return to the iPhone app store in the U.S., a reinstatement the video game maker was anticipating before Apple's latest move. Fortnite's availability in the EU, meanwhile, is under an alternative store for iPhone users — now called the Epic Games Store. Apple last year cleared the way for this last year under new regulatory pressures. As a result, Fornite and other Epic games had been available for download on iPhones using this store in the EU since August 2024. © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Japan Today
06-05-2025
- Business
- Japan Today
Trump threatens '100% tariff' on all movies produced abroad
Trump said he was ordering new tariffs on all films made outside the United States, claiming Hollywood was being 'devastated' by a trend of US studios working abroad By WYATTE GRANTHAM-PHILIPS President Donald Trump is eyeing Hollywood for his next round of tariffs, threatening to levy all films produced outside the U.S. at a steep rate of 100%. Over the weekend, Trump accused other countries of 'stealing the movie-making capabilities' of the U.S. and said that he had authorized the Commerce Department and the U.S. Trade Representative to immediately begin the process of implementing this new import tax on all foreign-made films. But further specifics or dates weren't provided. And the White House confirmed that no final decisions had been made as of Monday. Trump later said that he would meet with industry executives about the proposal but a lot remains unclear about how an import tax on complex, international productions could even be implemented. If imposed, experts warn that such a tariff would dramatically hike the costs of making movies today. That uncertainty could put filmmakers in limbo, much like other industries that have recently been caught in the crosshairs of today's ongoing trade wars. Unlike other sectors that have recently been targeted by tariffs, however, movies go beyond physical goods, bringing larger intellectual property ramifications into question. Here's what we know. Trump is citing national security concerns, a justification he's similarly used to impose import taxes on certain countries and a range of sector-specific goods. In a Sunday night post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump claimed that the American movie industry is 'DYING to a very fast death" as other countries offer 'all sorts of incentives' to draw filmmaking away from the U.S. Trump has previously voiced concern about movie production moving overseas. And in recent years, U.S. film and television production has been hampered between setbacks from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Hollywood guild strikes of 2023 and the recent wildfires in the Los Angeles area. Incentive programs have also long-influenced where movies are shot both abroad and within the U.S., with more production leaving California to states like Georgia and New Mexico -- as well as countries like Canada. But unlike other sectors targeted by Trump's recently-imposed tariffs, the American film industry currently holds a trade deficit that's in the U.S.'s favor. In movie theaters, American-produced movies overwhelmingly dominate the domestic marketplace. Data from the Motion Picture Association also shows that American films made $22.6 billion in exports and $15.3 billion in trade surplus in 2023 — with a recent report noting that these films 'generated a positive balance of trade in every major market in the world' for the U.S. Last year, international markets accounted for over 70% of Hollywood's total box office revenue, notes Heeyon Kim, an assistant professor of strategy at Cornell University. She warns that tariffs and potential retaliation from other countries impacting this industry could result in billions of dollars in lost earnings and thousands of jobs. 'To me, (this) makes just no sense," she said, adding that such tariffs could "undermine otherwise a thriving part of the U.S. economy.' The International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, which represents behind-the-scenes entertainment workers across the U.S. and Canada, said in a statement Monday that Trump had 'correctly recognized' the 'urgent threat from international competition' that the American film and television industry faces today. But the union said it instead recommended the administration implement a federal production tax incentive and other provisions to 'level the playing field' while not harming the industry overall. That's anyone's guess. 'Traditional tariffs apply to physical imports crossing borders, but film production primarily involves digital services — shooting, editing and post-production work that happens electronically," notes Ann Koppuzha, a lawyer and business law lecturer at Santa Clara University's Leavey School of Business. Koppuzha said that film production is more like an applied service that can be taxed, not tariffed. But taxes require Congressional approval, which could be a challenge even with a Republican majority. Making a movie is also an incredibly complex — and international — process. It's common for both large and small films to include production in the U.S. and in other countries. Big-budget movies like the upcoming 'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,' for instance, are shot around the world. U.S. studios frequently shoot abroad because tax incentives can aid production costs. But a blanket tariff across the board could discourage that or limit options, Kim said — hurting both Hollywood films and the global industry that helps create them. 'When you make these sort of blanket rules, you're missing some of the nuance of how production works,' added Steven Schiffman, a longtime industry veteran and adjunct professor at Georgetown University. 'Sometimes you just need to go to the location, because frankly it's way too expensive just to try to create in a soundstage' Schiffman points to popular titles filmed outside the U.S. — such as Warner Bros' 'Harry Potter' series, which was almost entirely shot in the UK. 'The cost to have done that would have like literally double to produce those movies under this proposed tariff," he said. Overall, experts warn that the prospect of tariffing foreign-made movies ventures into uncharted waters. 'There's simply no precedent or sense for applying tariffs to these types of creative services,' Koppuzha said. And while the Trump administration could extend similar threats to other forms of intellectual property, like music, 'they'd encounter the same practical hurdles." But if successful, some also warn of potential retaliation. Kim points to 'quotas" that some countries have had to help boost their domestic films by ensuring they get a portion of theater screens, for example. Many have reduced or suspended such quotas over the years in the name of open trade — but if the U.S. places a sweeping tariff on all foreign-made films, these kinds of quotas could come back, 'which would hurt Hollywood film or any of the U.S.-made intellectual property,' Kim said. And while U.S. dominance in film means 'there are fewer substitutes' for retaliation, Schiffman notes that other forms of entertainment — like game development — could see related impacts down the road. Others stress the potential consequences of hampering international collaboration overall. 'Creative content distribution requires thoughtful economic approaches that recognize how modern storytelling flows across borders," notes Frank Albarella, U.S. media and telecommunications sector leader at KPMG. "The question hanging over every screen: Might we better nurture American storytelling through smart, targeted incentives, or could we inadvertently force audiences to pay more for what could become a narrower creative landscape?' AP Writers Jake Coyle and Jill Colvin in New York, Aamer Madhani in Palm Beach, Florida and Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report. © 2025 AFP
