Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>AP Images</span></p></div><p></p></div></div></p><ul class="summary-list"><li><strong><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/oliver-stone">Oliver Stone</a> spoke to Business Insider for the 10th anniversary of his George W. Bush biopic, "W."</strong></li><li><strong>The filmmaker reflected on "W." and the impact of US militarization, compared the Bush and Trump administrations, and discussed his recent documentary series, "The Putin Interviews."</strong></li></ul><p> </p><p>As a veteran of the Vietnam War, Oliver Stone has a distinctly critical view of war and of US militarization. </p><p>Reflecting on the legacy of George W. Bush's presidency as it relates to our current socio-cultural moment, Stone spoke to Business Insider in a recent phone interview for the 10th anniversary of his 2008 Bush biopic, "W."</p><p>Labeling Bush the "worst president we've ever had," Stone discussed the release and reception of "W." and how he approached it, along with the two other presidential biopics he's released in "Nixon" and "JFK."</p><p>The filmmaker also touched on his recent documentary series of interviews with Vladimir Putin, "The Putin Interviews," and how increased militarization in the US is "far more dangerous" than President Trump. </p><p><em>This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.</em></p><p><strong>John Lynch: I've read that you sort of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/movies/12berk.html">rushed to produce "W."</a> Why did you feel you needed to make and release it during Bush's presidency?</strong></p><p><strong>Oliver Stone:</strong> Actually, no. I made it at a time that I felt we should make it. In 2008, we were in the middle of the Iraq War. We were not going to get out. I saw that it was a complete disaster. So, Stanley Weiser and I wrote with the idea that the film would end in 2004. We were not trying to make a current history. We were going back four years. When he goes into Iraq, the film ends because we know it's going to go badly. We kind of leave it at that. He has failed. We sense that in the parallel story with his father, and so forth, and in his own life.</p><p><span>Although he's an empathetic character, I think we understand him because he's stupider than us in some ways, or at least much of the audience. </span>You kind of feel like he's a klutz. And it was always done as kind of a satire, somewhere on the edge of humor, so it wouldn't be rubbing raw in the political wounds of the country. That was the idea. And in that sense, it was never intended [to be] as heavy a film as "Nixon" was, or "JFK," for example, because frankly, he wasn't at that same level of thought. I called him at the time a two-dimensional character, as opposed to Nixon's three dimensions. I was trying to explain that he is a victim of his own limited worldview. He sees the world as a black-and-white cowboy movie, but the people around him, Cheney and so forth, are a different breed and darker. </p><p>But the idea was, get it out, because it's just not going to get any better. We could have released it in Obama's administration, but the film was made at a budget when Lionsgate was not as big a company. That was pre-"Hunger Games," as I remember. So they were in a rush to get it out because they thought it was timely. Now [<em>laughs</em>], that was really bad thinking because, frankly, no one foresaw the economic crisis of 2008, which was a disaster in September, and if you remember, we came out in October. We were finishing making the film and then the economics hit. I was hoping the opposite. I was hoping that it would be an argument in 2008 between Obama and McCain about national security. But that argument got buried in the dramatics of the economic meltdown. </p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>AP Images/J. Scott Applewhite</span></p></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><strong>Lynch: You said in <a href="https://www.interviewmagazine.com/culture/oliver-stone">an interview</a> at the time of the film's release that you wished Bush had enlisted in Vietnam because he "would have seen history in a different light" and "didn't understand the nature of war." Could you elaborate or reflect on that?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Well, that's always the case. John Kennedy had been to war. He'd been in a very tough situation, and he'd seen men die. He understood the gravity of it. And he was the last president, as I know, who served. No, Bush did. The father. George H.W. Bush. But there was a seriousness about him, and you didn't see that in his son, George W., who skipped Vietnam. He dodged it with his <a href="http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/la-en-dan-rather-truth-20151229-story.html">shaky Texas airguard bulls---</a>. Or Alabama, wherever he was. It was a horrible story, and I think CBS got killed for it, but they really had the story. But that's another story. </p><p>Bush was a juvenile about it. As was Cheney, who had a deferment. Rumsfeld did serve, but he's a bloodhound, one of those right-wing guys who'll never change. But Cheney and Bush were living in another reality, where you can move things around, invade a third-rate power like Iraq, and call it a victory, and "Mission Accomplished," and all that, and in the process destabilize the entire Middle East, which is still going on. The same thing is true of Trump, which worries me. And, to some degree, Obama. But Trump himself, he dodged Vietnam with some kind of medical excuse, as I remember. You know, there's reason to worry. We need people who are tested and have seen battle. Not that we want right-wing people like McCain in office. Absolutely not. But we need people who have heart and soul after war. It's very important that they serve the country. </p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>Lionsgate</span></p><p class="caption">John Brolin as President George W. Bush in "W."</p></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><strong>Lynch: Many reviewers at the time of the film's release called "W." a sympathetic portrayal of Bush, but I really think it's a stark reminder of his failures. Especially now, when there's almost a desire in the <keyword id="6354777" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Media">media</keyword> <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/remysmidt/peek-a-boo">to portray Bush</a> <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/miss-me-yet-george-w-bush-democrats/524175/">as a sympathetic figure</a>, compared to Trump - how do you see your portrayal in retrospect?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Jesus Christ. What a distortion that is. First of all, let me just say, it was done as an empathetic portrayal, which is to say, as a filmmaker, I'm making a drama. I'm not making a documentary. So, I'm walking in the shoes of. As a dramatist, that's my job, to understand the person. Nixon, also, I was not in favor of or sympathetic to, but I certainly tried to understand him. The same is true of W. It's very important to realize that there's a difference between empathy and sympathy. But that was unfortunately not understood. Certainly, in all my public statements, I was not at all in favor of anything he did. He was a disaster for the country in his reaction to 9/11. Everything he did set the whole tonality of this century. 18 years of Bush. Worst president we've ever had. But in line with the mentality of Reagan and the people who started it in the 1980s. </p><p>To say that Trump is similar is ridiculous because it trivializes the situation. Trump could get more serious if he goes to war in Iran, absolutely. But we're not there yet. He's got enough nutcases around him between Bolton and Pompeo that I would worry very, very much. But to say that he's George Bush is to miss the point. You've got to look back at George Bush, and look at the movie, for example, and see what an idiot we had as a president, and understand what a <em>mess </em>he put us into. We have not gotten out of Iraq. We have not gotten out of Afghanistan. We have not gotten out of the War on Terror, this global war on terror, which is the greatest fiction since the Cold War back in 1945. It drove me crazy, his administration, and it made me do "Untold History of the United States" in 2008. It took me until 2013. Came out on Showtime, 12 hours long. It's on Netflix now, and Amazon, and so forth, and it's the most powerful documentary I've ever made. It goes from 1896 to 2013 with Obama. Obama could not make a countermove. That was the problem. Obama could have been the difference maker, but he wasn't. He followed the policies of Bush, as <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nsa-phone-records-obama-george-bush-092352">Ari Fleischer himself said</a>, in 2012 or '13. He said, the guy has done what Bush would have done. </p><p><strong>Lynch: Bush recently reappeared to whip votes for Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation. You <a href="https://twitter.com/TheOliverStone/status/1047185864382529536">tweeted</a> recently that Kavanaugh is "e<span>verything I disliked about </span>Yale<span> when I left in '65." I was wondering, is Bush that too? And what is it about Yale that you disliked?</span></strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Oh, it wasn't specific to Yale. I went there. I got in, and my father had been. I never met Bush there, but he is a kind of entitled personality that was one of the reasons I left. I felt there was a lot of <em>that</em> going on. It was all-male when I went there, too. So you had a lot of legacy candidates, people who were C students, who in a way had it made, who knew where they were going in their life. I was the opposite. I was 19, and I didn't know what I wanted to do with my life. I was very much into experience and finding out. So the best thing I ever did, probably, was leave after my freshman year.</p><p>But I ran into Bush later in time, when he was running for office, and he was the one who reminded me that he was there with me [<em>laughs</em>]. I mean, in person, you can't not like him. He's a character. He's got a comedic side, you know. He's kind of goofy, is what I'm trying to say, like he was in the movie. You won't dislike him like you would a Cheney or Rumsfeld. But that doesn't make him any good. </p><p><strong>Lynch: In making "W.," you drew on the behind-the-scenes books and exposés that were written about Bush's administration. You've touched on this a bit, but how do you think those accounts compare to the accounts we've seen thus far on Trump?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>I don't know quite how to answer that, because the books on Trump so far have not been heavy. I haven't read them all, but they seem more like out for a quick buck, you know, a shark bite, blood in the water kind of thing. Because it's easy with Trump. The problem with Trump is that he absorbs the news. And as a result, it trivializes the news. So now, in this media, we all end up talking about Trump, which is a huge mistake, as opposed to talking about the forces, the "macro" forces that are running the thing that are far more dangerous than this guy.</p><p>He's dangerous, yes. But having a military budget the size we do in proportion to every other country in the world is insane. I keep going to the militarization of this country as being the most dangerous thing that's going on, in my opinion, having been in the military. This thing we do, naturally, where we just hike the budget and give the military everything they want, and they spend it and waste it, and it's not going into the health of this country. That is the major thing that is going wrong. Health, education, welfare, all these things are crucial, and we've lost sight of that. So I think that's far more revolutionary and radical than a contempt for management, for government, for the good things that the government can do. </p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>Showtime</span></p></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><strong>Lynch: Your most recent work, "The Putin Interviews," I found riveting, and toward the end, particularly hard-hitting. What did you take away from his perspective of power?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Whose perspective?</p><p><strong>Lynch: From Putin's.</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Ah, "particularly at the end," you said? Okay. I'll tell you, Putin is the most mature statesmen in the whole world right now. He's been there for four American presidents, since Clinton. He's learned in office. He was a technocrat when he got in on Yeltsin's appointment, and he worked his way into this knowledge. He's been everywhere, met everybody. And he sees the world as needing balance. It's not a uni-polar world, dominated by the United States. He's been very clear about that since he made that speech in Munich in 2007. He's been very clear that we need balances of regional power. Unfortunately, the United States just doesn't want to believe that.</p><p>That's what makes it a dangerous situation, because we're slipping as an empire, economically - certainly not militarily, but we're slipping. And it's our military side that scares the sh-- out of me, because when you slip, when you feel like you're no longer number one, as we tend to be arrogant, that's when you become very dangerous. Somehow we have to learn that we don't <em>have</em> to be number one. We can be partners with the world [<em>laughs</em>]. That's what I think Putin sees, very clearly. And he's trying to counter it in every way he can to keep his own region alive. He's in jeopardy. I mean, we have had our sights on him heavily since 2007 or 2008.</p><p><strong>Lynch: You did press Putin, though, in the interviews, about why he's stayed on for as long as he has, comparing him to other world leaders who have held power for decades. Why did you push him on that aspect?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Well, it's certainly a question that Americans will automatically think of him as a dictator and so forth. I don't see him as that at all. I see him as a man who is an authoritarian, and he's achieved great respect in Russia. By the polls in Russia, which are supposed to be accurate, everyone has said that they were internationally, he is popular. Not so much because of his pension plan, now, but he is very popular because of what he's done. And he did it by the law of Russia, which was of course, two terms, and then he became prime minister, and then went back to being president for two more. So he's doing his fourth term, which is what Roosevelt did, by the way. I think he's been in the equivalent sense a Roosevelt for that country, and he's very much admired. I don't think it's going to be easy for him to go beyond his four terms. I think he's going to have issues. But I do think he's created enough of a political system that will work in his absence. He doesn't have to rig elections, no. </p><p><strong>Lynch: In your films on US presidents, you've said that Nixon was a three-dimensional character, Bush a two-dimensional character, but that you were able to find humanity and empathy in both as characters. Could you find that same level of humanity in Trump to do a movie on him, or would you have no interest?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Sure. I mean the interest is something else, because I don't know if I do. But certainly, I think everyone has a human side. Even the worst of them, the Stalins, and the Hitlers. I mean, come on, everyone has <em>humanity</em>. No, absolutely. But whether I want to spend the time doing it, no. And also, whether you could do it, because financially the system has changed for me. It's become worse, and partly because of Clinton's communications act in 1995, that was no favor to the film business. In other words, everything became bigger, more <span>monopolistic. You can't have corporations controlling everything that's being made in America, on television and in movies. You can't. These corporations are killers. </span></p><p><span>If you look closely, after 2001, it's harder and harder to be critical of the United States, in our system, in our television or film system. You can show killing, you can show everything, rape, violence, all that, but you cannot criticize the government and the military, and so forth. These are control points. [<em>sighs deeply</em>]. I mean, I got into trouble just for doing documentaries on Chavez and Castro, and the South American revolution in 2008. </span></p><p><strong>Lynch: Is there anything you can tell me about what you have in the works going forward, what you're interested in?</strong></p><p><strong>Stone: </strong>Well, not really. I'm kind of quiet about that. I've been quiet. It's been a long haul. I've done 20 movies. "Snowden" was my last one, and that was a tremendous amount of work, and very critical of our cyber warfare issues, and so forth. And Snowden is an admirable figure. As is Julian Assange, who has completely been black-balled here. But the point is, that "Snowden" film was made with difficulty with French and German money, and very little American money, and didn't get a great distribution either, in America. So, it was tough. It's tough to make those kind of movies. They take a lot out of you.</p><p>I did "Putin," as you know. Thank God Showtime gave it a break. Where am I going to go now? I don't know. We'll have to see, if it's doable. Also, I'm 72 years old. I'm not that young [<em>laughs</em>]. But I don't know that you can say things that you could say. We have more choice, yeah, but it's a narrower target. They don't allow you to do things. Unless you're doing things that are socially acceptable, like documentaries attacking Putin, yes, that's fine, you can do that. Or attacking Trump, and so forth. But there is sort of a political correctness in the air that is very difficult for me to work in.</p>    <div class="margin-top">        <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-price-is-right-made-drew-carey-bob-barker-2018-10">How 'The Price Is Right' is made</a></h3>        <div>                    </div>    </div>

Oliver Stone says comparing 'disaster' of Bush's presidency to Trump is ridiculous and 'trivializes the situation,' as he reflects on his biopic 'W.' 10 years later

<p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>Paramount Network</span></p><p class="caption">The "Heathers" reboot was scheduled to have its premiere next week.</p></div><p></p></div></div></p><ul><li><strong>The Paramount Network is delaying the premiere of its "Heathers" reboot after the shooting in Parkland, Florida that took 17 lives.</strong></li><li><strong>The satirical comedy depicts violence at a high school, including teenagers murdering each other.</strong></li><li><strong>It was supposed to debut March 7.</strong></li></ul><p>The Paramount Network is delaying the premiere of its "Heathers" reboot out of respect for the victims and families of the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. </p><p>The reboot of the Winona Ryder and Christian Slater 1988 movie was set to premiere March, but will now be delayed until later this year. The plot of the movie (and the new show) revolves around a teenage girl who teams up with another student to murder the popular kids at their school.</p><p>On Wednesday, Paramount Network (formerly SpikeTV) released a statement:</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">"Paramount Network's original series 'Heathers' is a satirical comedy that takes creative risks in dealing with many of society's most challenging subjects ranging from personal identity to race and socio-economic status to gun violence. While we stand firmly behind the show, in the light of recent tragic events in Florida and out of respect for the victims, their families and loved one, we feel the right thing to do is delay the premiere until later this year."</p><p>Even though "Heathers" is comedic, its depiction of violence between teenagers, especially on school grounds, is likely the reason why the Paramount Network made the decision to postpone it. </p><p>The Paramount Network describes the "Heathers" reboot as an "hour-long pitch black comedy set in the present day." It stars Grace Victoria Cox, James Scully, Melanie Field, and Brendan Scannell. Shannen Doherty, who starred in the original "Heathers," is set to guest star along with Selma Blair and Casey Wilson.</p><p>Paramount did not specify when the series will premiere (however it has not been canceled).</p>      <div class="margin-top">        <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/how-all-nine-2018-best-picture-oscar-nominees-are-connected-academy-awards-movies-2018-2">You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common - here's how</a></h3>        <div>                    </div>    </div>

Paramount has delayed the premiere of its 'Heathers' TV reboot because of the Parkland shooting

<p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div>French comedians are having a field day with a recent Fox News segment that depicted Paris as a city partially bogged down by dangerous "no-go zones" ruled by Muslim religious law.</p>
<p>Yann Barthès - host of a French television program ("Le Petit Journal"), which is a satirical news program akin to the "Daily Show" was among those to push back on Fox.</p>
<p>The American cable news channel, <span>Barthès</span> pointed out, has higher ratings than its competitors.</p>
<p>"Two million Americans have heard this," he lamented at one point about the segment on "no-go zones".</p>
<p>Barthès theorized the guest who presented the information on Fox likely derived it from a socio-economic map by INSEE, a demographic data provider based in Paris.<span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div></p>
<p>L'INSEE's maps, the host pointed out, are based on a neighborhood's income rates, social integration, and insurance coverage, not "safety, religion, or any of the other crap thrown out by Fox News."</p>
<p>Barthès also accused Fox of sensationalism - a segment on Sean Hannity's show ran footage of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_riots">2005 French riots</a> without context, "leading us to think it looks like that every day." </p>
<p>Barthès went on to encourage his viewers to fight the disinformation by emailing a few words of protest to Fox head of communications Irena Briganti. He then shared her email address.<span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><br /></span></p>
<p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div></p>
<p> "Send as many emails as possible," Barthès said at the end of the segment. "Imagine that the director at Fox News might receive, I don't know, two million emails? Enough to make her inbox a no go zone."</p>
<p>Another show, "Le Petit Journal," went a little further with a sketch of two paranoid Fox reporters parachuting into Paris, unable to shed the blinders of the network they work for. You can watch that sketch, which is largely in English, below.</p>
<p>The "no-go zones" segment led to multiple <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/18/media/fox-apologizes-for-anti-islam-comments/">on-air apologies</a> from Fox News.</p>
<div></div>

French Comedians Are Roasting Fox News' 'No-Go Zones' Coverage

<ul class="summary-list"><li><keyword id="12153273" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="jaden-smith" source="Orion">Jaden Smith</keyword> was mocked on social media for an old interview from 2018. </li><li>In the interview, Smith says he prefers to hang out with adults instead of people his own age. </li></ul><p>Jaden Smith poked fun at himself with a satirical tweet in response to social media users who mocked a resurfaced <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3Wcu3LonH4">interview he gave to Los Angeles radio host Big Boy in 2018</a>. </p><p>In the resurfaced interview, a then-19-year-old Smith — who is now 23 years old — discussed his childhood and how he struggles to connect with peers his own age because according to him, they don't show interest in the socio-political topics of the day. </p><p>"I'm very happy that I spent my childhood with more adults than I did with kids my own age," Smith said in the interview. He then went on to explain that when he hangs out with people his own age, they seem "dumb and concerned with frivolous things in life."</p><p>Smith later added: "I'm just, like, 'Dude, like, oh my God. Can we talk about the political and economic state of the world, right now? Can we talk about what's going on in the environment? Can we talk about other things?'"</p><p>The actor's comments in the old interview were mocked on social media and became the basis of a series of memes. One <keyword id="11892744" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="twitter" source="Orion">Twitter</keyword> user called armadillo21, for instance, shared a video of a toddler walking with the caption: "Jaden Smith on his way to curse out his kindergarten classmates for not understanding the complexities behind the current political climate." </p><p>In response, Smith shared his own version of the meme accompanied by an image of himself. </p><p>"Me: Hey Wanna Talk About The Economic And Political State Of World Together," he wrote. "Girl: Nah. Me: Ok Cool."</p><p>Smith made headlines last month for a tweet he posted in apparent support of his father, Will Smith, who <a href="https://www.insider.com/will-smith-chris-rock-oscars-slap-jaden-smith-tweet-2022-3">slapped comedian Chris Rock at the 2022 Oscars</a>. Will Smith interrupted Rock's monologue during the Oscars ceremony and slapped him in the face in response to a joke Rock made about Jada Pinkett Smith, Will Smith's wife, and Jaden Smith's mother.</p><p>After the broadcast, Jaden Smith tweeted: "And That's How We Do It."</p><p>Jaden Smith has not commented further on the incident.</p>

Jaden Smith poked fun at himself after an old interview he gave was mocked by fans on Twitter

<ul class="summary-list"><li><keyword id="6762469" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="TikTok">TikTok</keyword>'s "chav" trend has received more than 1 billion views.</li><li>It satirizes an aesthetic associated with the British <keyword id="564400" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="working-class">working class</keyword>.</li><li>Users may not realize it, but experts worry it promotes damaging class stereotypes.</li></ul><p>In 10 seconds, a TikTok user who goes by "Maddie" transforms her look, applying bronzer several shades deeper than her skin tone, heavy eye make-up, and pale lips. She wears a grey hoodie, huge hoop earrings and scowls into the camera while lip-syncing "Body" by British rapper Bugzy Malone. The video is one of thousands on the platform using the <a href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMetyXvmX/">#chav</a> hashtag, which has over 1 billion views.</p><p>TikTok "chavs" are portrayed as young white women who dress in cheap sweats, wear patchy fake tan, and speak in an exaggerated version of <a href="https://accentbiasbritain.org/accents-in-britain/">Estuary English </a>- an accent traditionally associated with the British working class. </p><p>It's unclear whether the often non-British TikTok users posting videos parodying what they perceive as a "chav" understand the deep-seated connotations of the word. "Chav" has long been used to mock and belittle Britain's working class, and the new trend appears to be reigniting this narrative. </p> <h2><strong>The UK has long vilified working-class people</strong></h2><p>The <a href="https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/chav">Oxford English Dictionary</a> defines "chav" as a "young person from the working class, usually without a high level of education." In 2004, it was announced as the Oxford Languages <a href="https://languages.oup.com/word-of-the-year/">"Word of the Year"</a> and entered the mainstream, appearing in documentaries and television shows. Although its origins are not entirely clear, author Lance Manley posited in his <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Stab-Proof-Scarecrows-Lance-Manley/dp/1848762976">2010 book</a> that the word was an acronym for "council housed and violent."</p><p>Journalist Owen Jones wrote in his 2012 <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chavs-Demonization-Working-Owen-Jones/dp/1844678644">book</a> on the concept of "chavs" that it has historically been used by politicians to perpetuate social and economic inequality in the UK. He argues that the idea that working class struggles are "consequences of personal behavior, not the social structure of the country," was used by Conservative politicians to justify cuts to public spending, especially in the wake of the economic crisis of 2007. Jones cites <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11490294">comments from former culture secretary Jeremy Hunt in 2010,</a> which justified welfare caps by saying they would encourage people to have "responsibility for their choices."</p><p>Jones has referred to the word chav as "deeply offensive," and working-class activists have<a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13626046"> long called for it to be treated as a slur</a>.</p><h2><strong style="background-color: #ffffff;">Perception of class identity is more rooted in stereotypes than ever</strong></h2><p>While the concept of the British working class used to be based on socioeconomic standing, the TikTok trend mocking the community seems to view it as simply as an aesthetic, ignoring the marginalization that goes along with it. This may in part be connected to a change in how British people consider their own class identity.</p><p>A <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0038038520982225">study</a> by The Guardian found that many people consider themselves working class despite having middle-class upbringings. It's thought this could be due to the "grandparent effect" - using previous generations' circumstances as a means of deflecting one's own class privilege. This may be as a result of increased discussions surrounding systemic oppression.</p><p>Fleur MacInnes, a PhD student at the University of Oxford who posts TikTok videos <a href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMetyoVQM/">educating</a> her followers on social justice issues, suggests that users are unaware of the wider implications of the #chav trend and are in fact manipulating aesthetics based on stereotypes. "When you see people try to describe what does and doesn't make a 'chav', the definitions are all over the place," she said, adding that the term is used so loosely that it leaves anyone who is working-class "at risk of being deemed too 'chavvy' to be respected."</p><p>Characters from popular British television shows have been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2011/jun/05/how-chavs-replaced-working-class">described</a> by various media outlets as "chavs" due to their clothes, class, and accent and use of slang. The BBC's<a href="http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/reports/reports/creative-diversity-report-2020.pdf"> Creative Diversity Report 2020</a> found that "often those from lower socio-economic backgrounds are depicted negatively, fuelled by stereotypes and seen as the object of ridicule." </p><p>Reality TV shows such as "<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/may/15/jeremy-kyle-show-was-part-of-a-wider-shame-agenda-aimed-at-the-working-class">The Jeremy Kyle Show</a>" and documentaries such as "<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/23/caitlin-moran-benefits-street-working-class">Benefits Street</a>" have also been heavily criticized for their treatment of the working-class people they present, often in a sensationalized manner.</p><p>Dr. Deidre O'Neill, editor of the<a href="https://www.intellectbooks.com/journal-of-class-culture"> Journal of Class and Culture</a>, told Insider that "the proliferation of reality television documentaries that have been designated as 'poverty porn' represent working-class people as lazy, dishonest, and not very bright. " </p><h2><strong>Users may not understand the pain they're causing with this trend</strong></h2><p>Many teenagers may not remember these pop <keyword id="24504" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="100" keywordseo="culture">culture</keyword> phenomena, but the TikTok trends are helping to keep these stereotypes alive among a whole new demographic.</p><p>Whether intentional or not, the use of this trend can have a real impact on those from working-class backgrounds. 19-year-old university student Emily Taylor Davies finds the trend to be personally offensive. "I am from a very working-class background - which people never seem to believe as I don't fit into the 'chav' box ingrained in their head. It makes me deeply uncomfortable that there is such a widely accepted ideal that an entire section of society should fit a certain stereotype," she said.</p><p>Kat Bukowick, a 25-year-old <a href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMetyWEDN/">TikTok creator</a> with 30,000 followers who has seen an increase in "chav"-related content on the platform, thinks that most of it stems from a lack of education. "Loads of people taking part in the trends are either American or so far removed from class politics by the means of their own privilege that they haven't thought about it," she said.</p><p>The use of class stereotypes to create humorous content on TikTok isn't just relegated to working-class characters. The <a href="https://m.tiktok.com/h5/share/tag/359399.html?_d=secCgYIASAHKAESMgowUxK537ejeNAY/Q05bvazPFi0aTbq7sHJBv4qwcomysrsKurQeWTJ/0AxC6KcdzMTGgA=&amp;language=en&amp;name=privateschool&amp;sec_user_id=MS4wLjABAAAAZ7QNnhkoVuj9MMLQNY-JIHtd50Hd1hi54mP3G4iqukE9gpha1CKNTogx1evSkOAF&amp;share_challenge_id=359399&amp;share_link_id=6DB7CC2B-C5AA-414A-B97A-B61ABF094C55&amp;source=h5_m&amp;tt_from=whatsapp&amp;u_code=d811mcb2dccge9&amp;user_id=6728824539826078726&amp;utm_campaign=client_share&amp;utm_medium=ios&amp;utm_source=whatsappshare&amp;utm_medium=ios&amp;utm_source=whatsapp">#privateschool</a> hashtag also has over 1 billion views on TikTok and features videos satirizing wealthy teenagers who boast about attending prestigious<a href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMety3dT8/"> boarding schools</a>, owning flashy cars, and wearing designer fashion. </p><p>Olivia Anna, a 20-year-old TikTok user with close to <a href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMetyTP2H/">100,000 followers</a>, went to a state school but has posted <a href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMetygMk4/">#privateschoolgirl</a> videos. She told Insider she thinks the popularity of the trend is down to a desire to redress the balance of privilege.</p><p>While the "private school" videos follow a similar formula to the "chav" content on TikTok, some think there is a distinction. O'Neill told Insider that unlike parodying the rich, a negative representation of the working-class "reinforces and reproduces other negative discourses around class that are already in circulation."  </p><h2><strong>TikTok content based on class stereotypes highlights issues of inequality that exist in British society</strong></h2><p>O'Neill told Insider that these TikTok trends are a symptom of a wider problem.  They construct working-class people and working-class culture as the problem and not poverty and inequality," she said.</p><p>O'Neill said that there are real-life dangers that could result from the perpetuation of these class stereotypes on TikTok. "We are living at a time when the welfare state is being rolled back and more cuts to public services are on the way. If we stigmatize the people who rely on those services and construct that reliance as morally reprehensible, it becomes easier to justify the cuts to the welfare budget," she said. </p><p>O'Neill added, "What these hashtags do is make sure that this marginalization and demonization are reproduced and justified."</p><p><a href="https://www.insider.com/culture"><strong>To read more stories like this, check out Insider's digital culture coverage </strong><strong>here</strong><strong>.</strong></a></p>

You Searched For "Socio political satire" and got 5 results

Oliver Stone says comparing 'disaster' of Bush's presidency to Trump is ridiculous and 'trivializes the situation,' as he reflects on his biopic 'W.' 10 years later

John Lynch

Paramount has delayed the premiere of its 'Heathers' TV reboot because of the Parkland shooting

Carrie Wittmer

French Comedians Are Roasting Fox News' 'No-Go Zones' Coverage

Pierre Bienaimé

Jaden Smith poked fun at himself after an old interview he gave was mocked by fans on Twitter

Zac Ntim

TikTok's 'chav' trend is fueling damaging class stereotypes

Darcey Edkins

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides