Former CNN Commentator Made a Pro-Trump “Real News” Video

Last weekend, political commentator Kayleigh McEnany left her position at CNN and by Sunday, she hosted a news segment about President Donald Trump that was posted on his Facebook page. It claimed to be the “real news,” but it looks more like state-run media in countries that have limited press freedom–like Russia or China. “Thank you for joining us as we provide the news of the week from Trump Tower here in New York,” McEnany said at the start of the segment. She went on to list some statistics about the Trump Administration, like the recent unemployment numbers and what Trump has done for veterans. She also claimed that Trump should be credited with creating more than 1 million jobs since taking office; however, she failed to note that recent job growth mirrors the same trend that existed in the last six months of the Obama presidency.

Wow. Feels eerily like so many state-owned channels I’ve watched in other countries https://t.co/dqsLEfuLj8

— Michael McFaul (@McFaul) August 6, 2017

The video segment was filmed in front of a wall with the Trump campaign logo and most people thought it was pretty creepy. McEnany has also been named the new spokesperson for the Republican National Committee.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 8, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

DOJ Revives Policy that Allows Federal Law Enforcement to Seize Property

Yesterday, the Department of Justice revived a policy that allows federal law enforcement officers to seize people’s property and assets if they are suspected of a crime, but not yet charged. This is generally referred to as civil asset forfeiture. Probable cause is the only threshold needed to trigger it. Critics say that the policy, which was eliminated at the federal level in 2015, has been misused and has negatively affected innocent people. Some state governments have done away with similar policies as well, although it’s important to note that even in states that don’t allow civil asset forfeiture, federal officials may still be able to seize assets under the new policy change. The Washington Post reports that in 2014, federal law enforcement officers took more money from citizens than burglars did.

JUST IN: DOJ new asset forfeiture policy – police can seize property from people not charged w/crime even in states where it’s been banned. pic.twitter.com/P8K0g80m4E

— Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) July 19, 2017

But AG Jeff Sessions said that reinstating this policy will help weaken criminal organizations by taking away their money. “This is not about taking assets from innocent people,” said Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein yesterday. “It’s about taking assets that are the proceeds of, or the tools of, criminal activity, and primarily drug dealing.” But still, many conservatives spoke out against the policy.

Asset forfeiture is an unconstitutional taking of property without trial. It’s wrong and I call on the AG and the Adminsitraion to stop.

— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) July 20, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 20, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

A new season of the hit TV show “Veep,” starring Julia-Louis Dreyfus, will premiere this weekend. And given that politics in real life, with President Donald Trump in the White House, have become increasingly gaffe-worthy, many fans were nervous to see how the show would (or wouldn’t) change. It actually turns out that one joke, about a “golden shower,” had to be edited out, because it was just a little too on the nose given a story about Trump that broke just a few months ago.

A Hollywood Reporter guest column by David Mandel, the current “Veep” showrunner, described how it’s difficult to tell if people are still willing to laugh at politics after Trump’s election. After all, so many facets of the Trump Administration feel like they’re straight out of a “Veep” storyline. Look no further for example, than the New York Times story about how Trump staffers: “confer in the dark because they cannot figure out how to operate the light switches in the cabinet room.”

And after Press Secretary Sean Spicer recently made astonishingly stupid comments about the Holocaust, someone made a Spicer-“Veep” mashup that Dreyfus herself ended up tweeting out.

This feels like an Emmy winning episode to me.https://t.co/DU4o08Ot2P

— Julia Louis-Dreyfus (@OfficialJLD) April 12, 2017

But the new season of “Veep” will pick up with Selina Meyer, the main character, about a year after she lost her own election for president. And the writers and others involved in the show made it clear that they’re glad to have a “former president” storyline instead of spoofing a real-life Trump.

However, Mandel did write about one specific storyline that had to be edited out:

So much of Veep is often just sitting around thinking: “What’s the dumbest thing that could happen?” They’re doing stuff that we couldn’t invent if we tried. The only thing we did have to change –it sounds like a bad joke, but it’s true–was a ‘golden shower’ joke in one of the episodes where someone is yelling at Jonah [Timothy Simons] about a golden shower. We hadn’t filmed it yet, and we realized, ‘Oh, we need to change that’ [because of the Trump-Russia dossier]. Who knew we would literally have to change a Veep golden showers joke because of the real president of the United States of America? It doesn’t get any weirder than that.

So, while “Veep” will come back this weekend, the show may feel a little different (although likely just as funny!) And there’s only Trump’s real life comedy to blame for that.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A “Veep” Presidential Problem: Comedy in the Age of Trump appeared first on Law Street.

Anyone who has seen the HBO hit show “Game of Thrones,” (or read the books on which the series is based) would recognize the phrase “Winter is Coming.” A popular catchphrase for the show, “Winter is Coming” has been used on multiple advertisements and pieces of merchandise. And it has certainly made its way into fans’ vernacular–so much so that a 13-year-old British girl used the phrase in a piece of art, and then uploaded it to a few different artist sites. One is called Redbubble, and can be a venue for artists to sell their work. At that point, HBO, which owns the trademark to the phrase issued a takedown notice, and she had to take the art down. Her family is now upset, and many are outraged that the company took such a harsh action against a young girl’s work.

The girl’s father, Jeffrey Wilcox, told the Register:

My daughter, who happens to be autistic, was doing an art challenge called Huevember which consisted of doing a piece of art based on a different [color] as you worked your way round a [color] wheel.  She was uploading her pictures to a variety of sites and sharing them on Facebook. For this particular piece, she decided to title it ‘winter is coming.’ I do not believe she uploaded the picture to RedBubble to make any particular financial gain, she just thought it a sensible place to put it.

Wilcox also had some angry words for HBO:

My first reaction to the letter was FFS. HBO should get a life or stick something where the sun doesn’t shine. On further investigation, it appears HBO are doing this all over the place regarding this phrase. It seems to have upset a lot of people on Etsy and elsewhere who have had the same or similar letter.

The Register also uploaded a copy of the art to its site, with the caption, “the teen’s digital painting targeted by HBO … Come at us, bro.” See it here. 

Takedown notices based on trademarked phrases aren’t unheard of. Taylor Swift went after vendors on Etsy for the exact same thing. But HBO’s attacks on a young girl’s art may have crossed the line.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post HBO Demands Takedown of Girl’s Art that Uses “Winter is Coming” appeared first on Law Street.

Have you just recently recovered from the creepy news story about the urban legend Slenderman? Not so fast. The Wisconsin case, in which two 12-year-old girls tried to kill a third girl by stabbing her 19 times in 2014, is far from over. And a new HBO documentary features the trial, which has picked back up again recently. The two girls, Morgan Geyser and Anissa Weier, are now 14 and are being charged as adults for first-degree homicide. This means they could serve 65 years in prison, if found guilty. But on Friday the court is scheduled to discuss psychological evaluations of the girls, which could give them a chance for a lighter sentence.

This comes at the same time that HBO is announcing its release of a documentary about the case, called “Beware The Slenderman.” It is said to focus on “the court’s deliberation whether the girls should be tried as adults or children.” The trailer is sure to send chills down your spine.

The first trailer for @HBO doc “Beware the Slenderman” is as creepy as the story it tells https://t.co/86ILbr9McI pic.twitter.com/2x18FNeGk5

— Paste Magazine (@PasteMagazine) November 11, 2016

The girls’ victim Payton Leutner was a classmate. They lured her into the woods reportedly convinced that they had to kill her, otherwise the tall, faceless man known as Slenderman would come and kill their families. According to the girls, they wanted to prove to people that Slenderman was real, and if they sacrificed a human, they would be rewarded with being his proxies and living in his mansion. Fortunately, Leutner survived by crawling out of the woods to the street, where a passing cyclist helped her to safety.

Geyser and Weier’s defense attorneys have tried to have their cases moved to a juvenile court, but the motions were denied in August due to the degree of premeditation. According to the state, they had planned the deed for months, lied to the victim by telling her to not move and that they would get help, and started to flee from law enforcement. As a last resort to try to get the girls a more lenient sentence, their defense attorneys entered pleas of not guilty because of mental disease or defect in the late summer. On Friday, the conclusions of the psychologists who have evaluated the girls will be discussed in court.

Anissa Weier appears via video, Morgan Geyser appears in person as the Slender man case moves ahead pic.twitter.com/mpoeNd7GyJ

— Myra Sanchick (@myrasanchick) November 11, 2016

Entering a plea of insanity essentially means that the defendant asserts that at the time of the crime she was affected by a mental disease that prevented her from knowing right from wrong. If found guilty under those conditions, the defendant would normally be sent to a state mental hospital for treatment. Geyser has already been diagnosed with an early onset of schizophrenia. According to doctors, she was traumatized after the attack and talked to hallucinations of Slenderman in her cell.

After a suicide attempt, Geyser has spent the past six months at a mental health institute where she doesn’t get to read, draw, or even wear her glasses, much to her mother’s distress. Weier is committed to a juvenile detention center on a $500,000 bail and has recovered from a ”shared delusional belief” since she was separated from Geyser. Both girls’ parents are trying to lower the bail so that they can go home and be under house arrest.

Reality is scarier than fiction in the trailer for HBO’s Slenderman doc https://t.co/4dSpivmn73 pic.twitter.com/Ln0zcUMBux

— The A.V. Club (@TheAVClub) November 11, 2016

A fact that could work in the girls’ favor is that they may have truly believed they didn’t have any other choice than to kill Leutner, since they thought their families would die unless they did. This, according to the defense, should mean that the girls only should be charged with attempted second-degree homicide. Lawyers have asked that the girls’ trials be conducted separately and with a jury from another county.

In the meantime, popular culture is still dwelling on the online myth of Slenderman that has affected so many young people and many believed the 6^th season of “American Horror Story” would feature the faceless character. That didn’t happen, but it is not far-fetched to think that he will show up somewhere else soon.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Slenderman Case is Still Going On and HBO Made a Documentary About It appeared first on Law Street.

Yesterday we went through the five reasons why people are protesting the Brock Turner’s sentence, the 20-year-old former Stanford swimmer who was sentenced to six months in jail after he sexually assaulted an unconscious woman last year. Now it seems that civilians aren’t the only ones speaking out against the case and rape culture–celebrities are too.

Lena Dunham, who is the creator, writer, and star of the HBO series “Girls,” tweeted out Wednesday a video featuring her and few of her fellow female cast mates discussing sexual assault in dedication to the survivor of the Stanford case.

I dedicate this to the brave survivor in the Stanford case who has given so much to change the conversation. https://t.co/KMOJUxvPu0

— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) June 8, 2016

In the compelling Now This video, Dunham along with Allison Williams, Jemima Kirke, and Zosia Mamet explained that despite their differences, they are all in agreement when it comes to the issue of sexual assault.

Their message was simple–support, listen, and take action.

In the video, the women also offered the following three statistics on sexual assault:

• One in five women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
• 80 percent of those attacks will be committed by someone they know.
• One in four girls will be sexually abused before the age of 18.

They also didn’t hesitate to recognize their own privilege in the video, stating,

While its just the four of us here right now, we hope to represent the solidarity and support all survivors should be able to find. Which may be the first time that four white women can accurately represent anything.

Following the video’s release, people began using the hashtag #SheIsSomeone on social media to express their support for the Stanford victim, and other victims like her who have suffered from sexual assault as well as victim blaming.

A friendly reminder that sexual assault & rape is wrong because #sheissomeone and we all deserve safety and respect. https://t.co/j4XKxcKzUa

— Kelly Roskam (@KellyEWRoskam) June 9, 2016

People all over the world are coming together to support this girl and it’s amazing. #SheIsSomeone

— Emily (@emilyhawkkins) June 9, 2016

Not because she’s someone’s daughter
Not because she’s someone’s girlfriend
But because #SheIsSomeone

— Tessa (@GonceTessa) June 9, 2016

Dunham, who is an outspoken feminist, has publicly supported many women’s issues in the past, and even created an online feminist newsletter titled Lenny Letter in an effort to continue raising awareness on other issues plaguing women today.

So for all the women out there, I’d like to extend a big “thank you” to the cast of “Girls” for speaking out on this issue and helping to educate more women and men on how they can help support victims of sexual assault.

For more on the Stanford sexual assault case and Brock Turner’s sentencing read our original article here.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cast of “Girls” Unites to Send Powerful Message About Sexual Assault appeared first on Law Street.

In the latest episode of “Last Week Tonight,” John Oliver went over the problem with scientific studies in the media. He pointed out that if you start a story by claiming “scientists say…” you can give credence to any kind of not-so-true information. According to Oliver, the problem is the amount of information floating around out there masking itself as science, whether it’s actually only tested on five people, based on information that later got misinterpreted, or biased because of who sponsored the study. Or, my personal favorite, only tested on rats instead of people.

Oliver highlighted the fact that many scientists are under a lot of pressure to publish as many studies as possible, in as prestigious of publications as possible, to get more funding to be able to keep doing their jobs. Which means no one really wants to do replication studies because they are less likely to get funding, which in its turn leads to no one confirming the original study to corroborate its results.

As the Brit pointed out, “a lot of bullshit” is out there making us believe pseudo news stories that have been distorted since the press release. Take a look at these grains of gold: women are more open to romance when they are not hungry; a glass of red wine is the equivalent to going to the gym for an hour; or driving when you’re dehydrated is as dangerous as driving drunk (this study was sponsored by Coca Cola).

One notable video clip Oliver showed was from the “Today Show,” with one host saying, “You find the study that sounds best to you, and you go with that.”

And this is precisely what makes people not take science seriously–the idea that you can just pick what you like as easily as you pick which diet to be on. Oliver points out that it’s the same mindset that makes people not believe that climate change is real or that vaccines will give your kid autism. So all in all, always double-check your facts and go to the original source–otherwise you might actually still believe that smelling farts will prevent cancer.

Check out Oliver’s full takedown below:

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post John Oliver Takes on Bad Science in the Media appeared first on Law Street.

Let’s play a game. I want you all to close your eyes and imagine a land in which a power vacuum has led to a number of semi-qualified possible leaders vying for power. They spout a wide range of opinions, come from different lands (including one that’s pretty far north), talk about walls a lot, and have been waging a very long and drawn-out battle to rule their country.

Now open your eyes.

What did you imagine? If it was either A) the 2016 primaries or B) “Game of Thrones,” you are correct.

Now given those clear similarities, it was only a matter of time before someone made a fantastic 2016-inspired “GOT” mash-up. That day has come, with the Donald Trump-themed “Winter is Trumping.”

Essentially, the mash-up’s creator just edited Trump’s head onto the bodies of various “GOT” characters (it may or may not be a coincidence that many of the bodies belonged to the fantasy show’s most notorious villains.) The dialogue is a combination of real statements made by the Republican primary frontrunner, and real dialogue from the show.

The video was created by Huw Parkinson, of “Insiders,” an ABC political talk show in Australia. It was posted over the weekend on YouTube, and has quickly gone viral. The mash-up mostly focuses on Trump’s border policies, which seamlessly (and weirdly) fit with many issues in Westeros, including Daenerys Targaryen’s attempt to find a home for her people, and the “Wall” that keeps wildings from entering Westeros’s northern borders.

To be fair, I guess this isn’t the first attempt at a comparison between the craziness that is the 2016 primaries, and George R.R. Martin’s wildly popular book series/hit TV show. After all, here’s a Daenerys Targaryen and Hillary Clinton comparison. Thrillist did a great GOP/GOT crossover as well, entitled “Republican Candidates, Paired with their ‘Game of Thrones’ Equivalents,” and plenty of other outlets have done similar pieces. But, in my opinion, “Winter is Trumping” is my favorite combo yet–its laser-like focus and simple message takes the cake.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Winter is Trumping: Donald Trump Meets “Game of Thrones “ appeared first on Law Street.

British comedian John Oliver is back with a new set of “Last Week Tonight” episodes, and this weekend, he chose to take on the contentious voter ID laws that have been sweeping much of the nation for the last few years.

The 14-minute-long clip gives a pretty good rundown on a number of common-sense arguments against voter ID laws, including how difficult it can be for some people–particularly minority voters–to gain a photo ID if they don’t already have one.

Most importantly, Oliver pointed out that there’s really very little evidence to suggest that voter fraud is a problem. While estimates vary, multiple studies and surveys have come to same conclusion: voter fraud is so rare as to be negligible. In a large study conducted by Justin Levitt, a professor at the Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, only 31 cases of voter fraud were found from 2000-2014. That’s 31 cases, out of over a billion votes cast in that time period.

So what do voter ID laws really do? There’s plenty of evidence to suggest that they just keep people from voting, particularly minority voters. A new UC San Diego study looked at states that have recently put voter ID laws into effect, and found that minority participation saw a serious downturn. According to the Latin Post:

The study revealed Latino turnout decreased by an average of 9.3 points and black turnout by 8.6 points during primary elections where a strict voter ID law had been enacted.

The arguments made by Oliver in the first portion of the clip are all arguments that we’ve heard before, and while it’s admirable that John Oliver is bringing them up once again–given that various states don’t seem to be getting the message and keep passing totally unnecessary voter ID laws–he then veers off to point out hypocrisy on the part of the legislators in a wonderfully unexpected way.

Oliver delves into the practice of “ghost voting,” essentially when legislators cast votes for each other in sessions. Sometimes this means that legislators vote twice, or that others are voting for them–and they certainly don’t need to show any ID to do so. News Channel 5 in Tennessee looked into Oliver’s claims, to show how “ghost voting” can actually happen:

So, as Oliver pointed out, the same people who are concerned about individuals committing voter fraud aren’t so squeaky clean when it comes to voting accurately themselves. Oliver’s claims certainly add yet another ironic facet to the voter ID battle that threatens to continue in 2016. 

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Last Week Tonight is Back: John Oliver Demolishes Voter ID Argument appeared first on Law Street.

A recent HBO documentary has been tracking the life of Robert Durst, 71, a member of a huge New York City real estate empire. “The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst,” follows Durst, who has had multiple run ins with the law. The most recent of those just occurred, as Durst was arrested yesterday in New Orleans in connection with the 2000 death of his friend, Los Angeles-based writer Kathleen Berman.

The Durst Organization owns more than 15 prominent New York City skyscrapers, including the Bank of America building, and has been involved in building the massive One World Trade Center. The family’s net worth is estimated to be $4.4 billion, making them the 58th richest family in America, according to Forbes. While Durst is not involved with the family business, and is actually almost completely estranged from his family, he certainly has not had to want for money throughout his life.

Despite his family’s success, however, he’s had trouble with law enforcement. The first high profile incident seemingly occurred in 1982, when Durst was a suspect in the disappearance of his wife, a medical student by the name of Kathleen McCormack. According to a friend, they were fighting shortly before McCormack’s disappearance. He has never been charged, although he was the only suspect, and there’s long been speculation that he was responsible for her disappearance, and by extension, death. For example, a 2010 fictionalized version of the events, “All Good Things,” starring Kirsten Dunst and Ryan Gosling strongly implies that Durst was responsible.

The murder charge that Durst is currently being held on relates to McCormack’s disappearance as well. Officials allege that Durst’s close friend Kathleen Berman was contacted by investigators looking into McCormack’s case. She was supposed to meet them to talk about what she knew. Shortly after that, Berman was found shot in the back of the head. Durst is currently being held on a first-degree murder warrant for that death.

In a strange turn of events, shortly after Berman was killed, Durst was arrested for a completely separate murder. He was arrested for killing his neighbor in Galveston, Texas, a man by the name of Morris Black. After killing Black, he cut up his body and dumped it into a nearby river. In a verdict that shocked many, however, Durst was acquitted on the grounds that he had acted in self defense.

The last episode in the HBO documentary is set to air tonight–and it will be interesting to see if the program can shed anymore light onto the case. After all, last week’s episode showed LA police officers closing in on making an arrest in the Berman case.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post HBO Documentary Subject Robert Durst Arrested on Murder Charges appeared first on Law Street.

Since finishing college last May, I’ve noticed a post-grad trend of 20-somethings chucking away their TV remotes in favor of online streaming sites such as Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime. Some are just being cheap (can we say student loans) while others simply don’t feel compelled to have both traditional cable and online options. The truth is, millennials just don’t need cable, and new Nielsen figures agree. However, the move away from traditional TV viewing opens the door for innovation, and sometimes, legal battles over those new inventions.

This news shouldn’t be surprising–people have begun to rely more and more heavily on the web for fast and easy news consumption so why not make it a one stop shop for all entertainment? According to the New York Post:

Traditional TV usage — which has been falling among viewers ages 18 to 34 at around 4 percent a year since 2012 — tumbled 10.6 percent between September and January.

This means that there are a lot fewer young adults watching their flat-screens for primetime than four years ago. Surprisingly, only four years ago 21.7 million young people were using cable, but by the end of last month, that figure had fallen to 17.8 million, according to Nielsen counts. As baby boomers age so does cable’s prime demographic, with the median age of the TV audience hitting 50 this year, just north of the traditional target range of 18-49.

In an effort to adapt to the conversion from cable to online, networks have begun to introduce live streaming to their sites, similar to the way HBO launched it’s highly successful extension HBO Go. NBC is the latest company to make the leap. Soon they will be issuing an update for their channel’s iOS and Android apps that will introduce live mobile streaming, although according to The Verge, this will require users to log in with credentials from their TV provider and will only be available in markets where NBC owns the local station.

However, not all streaming sites have proved successful. New York based tech company Aereo took a turn for the worse when the online streaming startup filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November, just months after shutting down operations after facing an arduous Supreme Court battle.

Aereo’s unique approach didn’t sit well with networks. They assigned their users mini broadcast TV antennas that transmitted broadcast signals to individual subscribers, allowing them to avoid paying retransmission fees for broadcasters’ content. Feeling cheated, broadcasters objected to the convenient loophole by filing lawsuits, and the Supreme Court agreed that what Aereo was doing was wrong.

Options like these, even if not all pan out, are extremely enticing for consumers looking to differentiate from the norm and save a couple bucks. I myself have thought about saying goodbye to DVR and making the switch to online, but that lack of universal live streaming options for every network is the only thing holding me back. Under the current model, waiting a day or two for a network to upload the show you want to watch online is often the norm, but ultimately it’s a small price to pay as long as you don’t plan on live tweeting and can stay away from online spoilers (I can avoid neither). With the help of initiatives like NBC’s, that may not be a problem for long.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Millennials Don’t Need Cable: The New Ways We Watch TV appeared first on Law Street.

Scientology has long had an odd relationship with American celebrities. Some famous adherents include Kirstie Alley, Elisabeth Moss, Greta Van Sustern, John Travolta, and Tom Cruise. The Church of Scientology is also well known for using its substantial coffers to defend itself through litigation. It is within this context that HBO recently announced that it would be creating a documentary about the Church of Scientology and its celebrity followers. The company, probably wisely, is lawyering up before the release.

The book on which the documentary is based is called “Going Clear” and is written by Lawrence Wright. It focuses on the founder, L. Ron Hubbard, and the current leader, a man named David Miscavige, with particular emphasis on Scientology’s relationship to Hollywood and American celebrities–specifically John Travolta and Tom Cruise, as they are arguably two of the most famous celebrities in the religion.

The book makes some broad accusations, including abuse allegations against the church. The Church of Scientology, of course, flatly denies those claims. When the book was released, spokeswoman Karin Pouw released a statement said that:

The stories of alleged physical abuse are lies concocted by a small group of self-corroborating confessed liars. The hard evidence clearly shows that no such conduct ever occurred and that in fact there is evidence that shows it did NOT occur.

HBO claims that it has probably 160 different lawyers looking into the film–it needs to make sure that it is airtight before airing, because the company doesn’t particularly want to owe the Church of Scientology any money.

Media companies and media personalities have in the past tussled with the Church of Scientology, and not just in the courtroom. Matt Stone and Trey Parker, creators of South Park, did a controversial episode entitled “Trapped in the Closet” in 2005 that made fun of the religion. The episode also makes fun of Cruise and Travolta (particularly rumors about their respective sexual orientations) and calls the religion a cult, which is pretty tame as far as South Park episodes go.

The Scientologists reacted very, very poorly. The religious sect started basically stalking and surveilling Stone and Parker, attempting to find something incriminating. Marty Rathburn, who used to be involved with the Church of Scientology, explained the kinds of things they would do to Stone and Parker, saying:

Phone records. Bank records. Personal letters that expose some kind of vulnerability. They’ll read stuff into the kind of alcohol you’re drinking and how much. Prescriptions. They’ll figure out your diet. They can find out a lot about you through your trash.

Back to “Going Clear” and its corresponding documentary. The Church of Scientology has already managed to mess with it a bit. The book was never released in the United Kingdom because the publishers were afraid that it would lead to a lawsuit. However, HBO truly has every intention of moving forward with the movie plan–160 lawyers and all.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post HBO Battles Scientology Over New Documentary appeared first on Law Street.

I am wearing all black as I write this because it might as well be a funeral.

Sadly, Aereo is dead. The startup–which I had once believed to be a potential comeback kid has reached the end of its long and arduous battle; however, in a desperate attempt to retain hope, I am consoled by the revolutionary impact the small company seems to have made on the television industry. Aereo, a service provider that utilized small antennas to transmit broadcast signals to individual subscribers, filed for bankruptcy protection last week. Founder and CEO Chet Kanojia wrote in a letter to consumers:

We have traveled a long and challenging road. We stayed true to our mission and we believe that we have played a significant part in pushing the conversation forward, helping force positive change in the industry for consumers.

Despite valiant efforts, Aereo just could not overcome the legal and regulatory opposition that came after the Supreme Court decided Aereo’s business model was illegally violating copyright.

Shortly after the decision was released, Aereofiled for a cable license necessary for continued operation; however, the “Plan B” approach did not prove to be lucrative as the recent bankruptcy decision is Aereo’s best hope for maximizing its remaining value. With the filing for Chapter 11 reorganization proceedings, Aereo can put its legal woes behind it and sell any remaining assets that exist in the company. Lawton Bloom of Argus was appointed to serve as Chief Restructuring Officer.

William Baldiga, Aereo’s lawyer, announced that an auction of assets should occur on February 17, 2015, pending an approval hearing. “The company is now highly focused on devoting all its energy and limited resources to a transaction that will produce the highest and best return for our creditors and shareholders.”

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane granted various requests submitted by Aereo to allow what is left of the company to remain active during the liquidation period. Aereo has fired 75 of its 88 employees and greatly decreased remaining employee pay. Kanojia’s salary was cut in half.

While Aereo barely gained footing before its huge legal battle, the service forced major broadcasters to play offense instead of defense, recognizing a definitive hole in the cable market. Cord-cutters need programming too and Aereo may be the catalyst for a new business trend. Current broadcsting companies have already begun recognizing the internet television demand. CBS recently announced CBS All Access, a streaming service available by subscription for a $5.99 monthly fee. HBO also recently announced a streaming service independent of a cable subscription.

Although only existing content companies are dominating internet television by way of new services, it’s only a matter of time before new startups, supported by cloud technology, appear. The FCC is bracing itself for such an occurance. Last month, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler proposed a new rule that would allow internet television providers to license programming in an identical way to current cable and satellite companies. In an official FCC Blog post, Wheeler wrote:

Aereo recently visited the Commission to make exactly this point – that updating the definition of an MVPD [multichannel video programming distributor] will provide consumers with new choices. And perhaps consumers will not be forced to pay for channels they never watch.

So, although we are in a state of bereavement, heartbroken to see Aereo go, it will forever be the internet TV martyr that paved the way for the future of subscription streaming services.

Thank you, Aereo, for such innovation. You will be missed.

The post Aereo: The Martyr Files for Bankruptcy appeared first on Law Street.