ad

Netflix on Wednesday touted a surge in popularity for its low-cost streaming plan with ads, as it looks to tap into the lucrative the world of brands.

The streaming giant said it now has more than 190 million monthly active viewers watching ads through a plan that costs $7.99 a month. The lowest cost ad-free plan costs $17.99 a month.

In May, Netflix said it had 94 million monthly active users watching ads through the cheaper plan. That translated to roughly 170 million monthly active viewers, the company said at the time.

However, the Los Gatos, Calif.-based company is now using a different methodology to measure its audience watching ads, making exact comparison’s difficult.

Netflix now defines monthly active viewers as customers who watched at least 1 minute of ads on Netflix per month. It then multiplies that by the estimated average number of people in a household. Previously, Netflix had measured monthly active users based on the number of Netflix profiles watching content with ads.

The streamer said its previous measurement didn’t illustrate all the people who were in the room watching.

“Our move to viewers means we can give a more comprehensive count of how many people are actually on the couch, enjoying our can’t-miss series, films, games and live events with friends and family,”wrote Amy Reinhard, Netflix’s president of advertising in a post on the streamer’s website on Wednesday.

On Wednesday, Netflix executives said the growth in ad viewers was in line with their expectations.

“We are very satisfied with where we are at,” Reinhard, said in a press briefing. “We think there is a lot of opportunity to grow on this plan around the world, and we’re going to continue to make sure that we are offering our customers a great experience and a great buying experience on the advertising side.”

Netflix began its foray into ad-supported streaming in 2022, after it received pressure from investors to diversify how it makes revenue. Previously, Netflix mainly made money through subscriptions and for many years had been ad-adverse.

The company said last month it was on track to more than double its ad revenue in 2025, but did not cite specific figures. Netflix Co-CEO Greg Peters said in an earnings presentation in October that the ad revenue is still small relative to the size of the company’s subscription revenues, but advertisers are excited about Netflix’s growing scale.

“We see plenty of room for growth ahead,” Peters said.

On Wednesday, Netflix said it is expanding its options for advertisers, including demographic targeting in areas such as education, marital status and household income.

Netflix also said it has partnered with brands including brewing company Peroni Nastro Azzurro in ads for its romantic comedy series “Emily in Paris,” and tested dynamic ad insertion with programs including WWE Raw this quarter and will offer that feature in the U.S. and other countries for NFL Christmas Gameday.

Many streamers have been increasing the cost of their subscriptions in order to become more profitable. Earlier this year Netflix raised the prices on plans.

If the ads are any indication, Proposition 50 offers Californians a stark choice: “Stick it to Trump” or “throw away the constitution” in a Democratic power grab.

And like so many things in 2025, Trump appears to be the galvanizing issue.

Even by the incendiary campaigns California is used to, Proposition 50 has been notable for its sharp attacks to cut through the dense, esoteric issue of congressional redistricting. It comes down to a basic fact: this is a Democratic-led measure to reconfigure California’s congressional districts to help their party win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2026 and stifle President Trump’s attempts to keep Republicans in power through similar means in other states.

Thus far, the anti-Trump message preached by Proposition 50 advocates, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other top Democrats, appears to be the most effective.

Supporters of the proposal have vastly outraised their rivals and Proposition 50, one of the most expensive ballot measure campaigns in state history, leads in the polls.

“Whenever you can take an issue and personalize it, you have the advantage. In this case, proponents of 50 can make it all about stopping Donald Trump,” said former legislative leader and state GOP Chair Jim Brulte.

Adding to the drama is the role of two political and cultural icons who have emerged as leaders of each side: former President Obama in favor and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger against, both arguing the very essence of democracy is at stake.

Schwarzenegger and the two main committees opposing Proposition 50 have focused on the ethical and moral imperative of preserving the independent redistricting commission. Californians in 2010 voted to create the panel to draw the state’s congressional district boundaries after every census in an effort to provide fair representation to all state residents.

That’s not a political ideal easily explained in a 30-section television ad, or an Instagram post.

Redistricting is a “complex issue,” Brulte said, but he noted that “the no side has the burden of trying to explain what the initiative really does and the yes side gets to use the crib notes [that] this is about stopping Trump — a much easier path.”

Partisans on both sides of the aisle agree.

“The yes side quickly leveraged anti-Trump messaging and has been closing with direct base appeals to lock in the lead,” said Jamie Fisfis, a political strategist who has worked on many GOP congressional campaigns in California. “The partisanship and high awareness behind the measure meant it was unlikely to sag under the weight of negative advertising like other initiatives often do. It’s been a turnout game.”

Obama, in ads that aired during the World Series and NFL games, warned that “Democracy is on the ballot Nov. 4” as he urged voters to support Proposition 50. Ads for the most well-funded committee opposing the proposition featured Schwarzenegger saying that opposing the ballot measure was critical to ensuring that citizens are not overrun by elected officials.

“The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people,’” Schwarzenegger told USC students in mid-September — a speech excerpted in an anti-Proposition 50 ad. “Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”

California’s Democratic-led Legislature voted in August to put the redistricting proposal that would likely boost their ranks in Congress on the November ballot. The measure, pushed by Newsom, was an effort to counter Trump’s efforts to increase the number of GOP members in the House from Texas and other GOP-led states.

The GOP holds a narrow edge in the House, and next year’s election will determine which party controls the body during Trump’s final two years in office — and whether he can further his agenda or is the focus of investigations and possible impeachment.

Noticeably absent for California’s Proposition 50 fight is the person who triggered it — Trump.

The proposition’s opponents’ decision not to highlight Trump is unsurprising given the president’s deep unpopularity among Californians. More than two-thirds of the state’s likely voters did not approve of his handling of the presidency in late October, according to a Public Policy Institute of California poll.

Trump did, however, urge California voter not to cast mail-in ballots or vote early, falsely arguing in a social media post that both voting methods were “dishonest.”

Some California GOP leaders feared that Trump’s pronouncement would suppress the Republican vote.

In recent days, the California Republican Party sent mailers to registered Republicans shaming them for not voting. “Your neighbors are watching,” the mailer says, featuring a picture of a woman peering through binoculars. “Don’t let your neighbors down. They’ll find out!”

Tuesday’s election will cost state taxpayers nearly $300 million. And it’s unclear if the result will make a difference in control of the House because of multiple redistricting efforts in other states.

But some Democrats are torn about the amount of money being spent on an effort that may not alter the partisan makeup of Congress.

Johanna Moska, who worked in the Obama administration, described Proposition 50 as “frustrating.”

“I just wish we were spending money to rectify the state’s problems, if we figured out a way the state could be affordable for people,” she said. “Gavin’s found what’s working for Gavin. And that’s resistance to Trump.”

Newsom’s efforts opposing Trump are viewed as a foundational argument if he runs for president in 2028, which he has acknowledged pondering.

Proposition 50 also became a platform for other politicians potentially eyeing a 2026 run for California governor, Sen. Alex Padilla and billionaires Rick Caruso and Tom Steyer.

The field is in flux, with no clear front-runner.

Padilla being thrown to the ground in Los Angeles as he tried to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the Trump administration’s immigration policies is prominently featured in television ads promoting Proposition 50. Steyer, a longtime Democratic donor who briefly ran for president in 2020, raised eyebrows by being the only speaker in his second television ad. Caruso, who unsuccessfully ran against Karen Bass in the 2022 Los Angeles mayoral race and is reportedly considering another political campaign, recently sent voters glossy mailers supporting Proposition 50.

Steyer committed $12 million to support Proposition 50. His initial ad, which shows a Trump impersonator growing increasingly irate as news reports showing the ballot measure passing, first aired during “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Steyer’s second ad fully focused on him, raising speculation about a potential gubernatorial run next year.

Ads opposing the proposition aired less frequently before disappearing from television altogether in recent days.

“The yes side had the advantage of casting the question for voters as a referendum on Trump,” said Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist who worked for Schwarzenegger but is not involved with any of the Proposition 50 campaigns. “Asking people to rally to the polls to save a government commission — it’s not a rallying call.”

Last week, HBO Max announced it raised its standard subscription by $1.50 to $18.49 a month — up 23% from when the streaming service launched five years ago amid the pandemic.

Such announcements have become almost routine in the television business as inflation hits streaming platforms that are under growing pressure to turn a profit and pay for higher programming costs.

Once seen as a cheaper alternative to cable, the cost of a streaming subscription for the top platforms continues to rise, much like higher prices for groceries, gasoline and housing.

In fact, the average price for subscriptions to the top 10 paid subscription streaming services in the U.S. increased 12% this year, following double-digit percentage increases per year since 2022, according to Victoria, British Columbia-based Convergence Research Group.

The research firm included streamers such as Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Peacock, Apple TV and others in its data set. It factors subscriptions that are with ads or ad-free and does not take into account bundling. All of the major streaming services in the U.S. raised their prices on plans this year, except for Paramount+ and Amazon Prime Video, which boosted rates last year.

The price hikes reflect the tough economic realities of media companies that need to replace dwindling revenue from legacy pay TV channels that have seen sharp declines in viewership.

“The rest of their businesses have effectively been under attack by streaming and so they need this area to be profitable in order to compensate for the decline in their own businesses,” said Brahm Eiley, president of the Convergence Research Group. “It’s been tremendous pressure on them.”

Streaming services have been running as loss leaders for some time, said Tim Hanlon, chief executive of Vertere Group LLC, a media consulting firm.

“There’s no question that streaming is now under the gun to be its own profit center,” Hanlon said.

If rates go much higher, consumers may balk, experts said.

“The industry is playing a dangerous game by continuing to raise prices,” said Andrew Hare, senior vice president for the media research consultancy Magid. “We’re nearing a boiling point of rising churn and overwhelming choice.”

Magid has also already seen an uptick in the percentage of consumers who intend to cancel at least one streaming service in the next six months. The figure was 24% in the second quarter of 2025, up from 19% a year earlier.

“Hard as it is to imagine, the cable bundle is starting to look like a better value all the time,” Hare said.

Here is a look at which major streamers have raised prices on their ad-free streaming plans this year.

HBO Max

HBO Max raised prices across all of its plans. Its lowest-cost, ad-free streaming plan went up by $1.50 to $18.49 a month, while the annual version of that plan also increased $15 to $184.99.

HBO Max’s parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery, had 125.7 million global streaming subscribers in the second quarter, up 22% from a year earlier.

Like other streamers, HBO cited the need to help pay for quality content. The platform offers big-budget shows including drama “The Gilded Age” and “House of the Dragon,” which takes place in the “Game of Thrones” universe.

Consumers should brace themselves for more price hikes. Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav said at a Goldman Sachs investors conference last month that he believes HBO Max is underpriced.

“We want a good deal for consumers, but I think over time there’s real opportunity, particularly for us in that quality area to raise prices,” Zaslav said.

Peacock

Big-time sports properties have been moving to streaming platforms and guess who is going to help foot the bill? Consumers, of course.

Ahead of becoming a major provider of NBA games this season, Peacock increased prices on its plans, including the premium plus ad-free streaming service, by $3 to $16.99 a month. That was the third price hike since Peacock launched in 2020, where its ad-free plan started at $9.99 a month.

The Comcast-owned streamer, which has 41 million paid subscribers, has weekly games on Mondays and Tuesdays and will have a Peacock exclusive NFL game on Dec. 27. Peacock next year will air the Milan Cortina Winter Olympics and continue to stream major sporting events such as NFL games.

In a July earnings call, Comcast Corp. President Mike Cavanagh touted how Peacock will have the most hours of live sports of any streamer next year.

Netflix

Netflix has also gotten into the sports business, with the addition of two NFL games on Christmas Day.

The streamer, which remains the industry juggernaut, is also expected to add Major League Baseball’s Home Run Derby and an opening night game when MLB finalizes a new media rights deal this year.

The company cited its entry into high-priced sports when it raised its prices on most of its plans, including on its cheapest ad-free monthly plan by $2.50 to $17.99 in the U.S. earlier this year.

“As we continue to invest in programming and deliver more value for our members, we will occasionally ask our members to pay a little more so that we can re-invest to further improve Netflix,” Netflix said in a letter to shareholders in January.

The slice of sports is coming at the expense of fans who need multiple subscriptions — if they want to keep up with every NFL game.

“A certain type of fan is starting to recognize they are being fleeced,” Hanlon said.

Higher prices on ad-free plans can help drive traffic to a streamer’s lowest-priced plans with ads. Netflix launched its subscription plan with ads in 2022 at $6.99 a month and it has only increased by a $1 to $7.99 a month since then in January 2025.

While many major streamers offer cheaper plans with ads, others offer free streaming services with ads such as the Roku Channel or Tubi.

A recent research study by Magid found that three-quarters of consumers are fine with watching commercials, if it saves them money.

Four in 10 said they’re “overwhelmed” by the number of services they use. The average number of streaming subscriptions per household in the third quarter is 4.6, up from 4.1 the previous year.

“Together, these trends point to a more value-driven streaming consumer seeking affordability and simplicity,” the study said.

Apple TV

Apple TV was once one of the lowest-priced subscription service plans, launching at $4.99 a month. Since then, prices for Apple’s video streaming service have increased to $12.99 a month, with its latest price jump of $3 in August.

The Cupertino-based company has been trying to make its streaming business more financially sound, but faces a formidable task as it has been a big spender in attracting name talent to its programs and movies.

When Apple TV first launched, it had just nine programs, but since then has expanded its library to include critically acclaimed shows and films including comedy “Ted Lasso,” drama “Severance” and “The Studio.”

Apple said in a statement that while it did raise its prices on its standard monthly ad-free plan, the cost of its annual subscription remains at $99 and Apple One bundled packages did not change.

Disney+

Last month, Disney+ announced it would increase the cost of its ad-free streaming plan by $3 to $18.99 a month. Hulu did not increase its price on its ad-free monthly streaming plan.

It was the fourth consecutive year the Burbank entertainment giant has boosted its streaming prices since launching Disney+ six years ago, when the service cost just $6.99 a month.

Despite the recent price hikes from Disney and others, Eiley from Convergence Research Group thinks there’s still room for customer growth.

At the end of last year, just 36% of U.S. households had a traditional TV subscription, compared with more than half of U.S. households in mid-2022, according to Convergence Research Group data. By the end of 2028, the research firm forecasts just 21% of households will have traditional TV subscriptions.

“There’s still a massive amount of cord cutting going on,” Eiley said.

A large group of former UCLA football players sent a letter to chancellor Julio Frenk earlier this month asking for besieged athletic director Martin Jarmond to be replaced “to reestablish the university’s commitment to excellence, both on and off the field.”

The 64 players, who represent multiple eras of UCLA football spanning coaches Bob Toledo to Chip Kelly and include several who went on to play in the NFL, wrote to “express deep concern with the current direction of UCLA Athletics under Martin Jarmond. Despite the resources, history, and opportunities at his disposal, Mr. Jarmond has not demonstrated the level of leadership or vision consistent with UCLA’s proud legacy. Rather than building on the foundations of greatness established by those before him, his tenure has fallen short of advancing UCLA to its rightful place among the nation’s premier programs.

“UCLA deserves an athletic director who understands that this role is not merely about administration, but about stewardship of a legacy — one rooted in excellence, historic achievement, and national leadership. Unfortunately, Mr. Jarmond has not embodied these values, nor has he positioned UCLA Athletics to rise to the standard its history demands.”

The letter went on to call for new leadership, saying it was part of a movement “bigger than any one of us. Former players have joined forces — through countless calls, texts, and meetings — to push this cause forward. We are united in our commitment to protecting the proud legacy of UCLA football and athletics.”

A UCLA spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Jarmond has come under fire since the dismissal of coach DeShaun Foster after only 15 games illuminated the athletic director’s stewardship of the football program. Jarmond’s refusal to fire Kelly before Kelly abruptly left in February 2024 to take a job as offensive coordinator at Ohio State led to the whirlwind hiring of Foster, a position coach whose deficiencies as a head coach were on full display while posting a 5-10 record that included an 0-3 start this season.

Others have since criticized Jarmond for a broad range of shortcomings, including an insufficient response to leaked donor data, lowered expectations for success involving a once-proud football program and carte blanch spending that has led to staggering athletic department deficits.

A petition seeking Jarmond’s removal or resignation garnered 1,462 signatures and a mobile billboard truck circled Westwood with messages such as “UCLA Football Deserves Better Fire AD Martin Jarmond” and “$7 Million Buyout for UCLA’s AD? Failure Never Paid So Well.”

Some have questioned why Jarmond was granted a contract extension in May 2024, at a time when UCLA was transitioning from outgoing chancellor Gene Block to Frenk. According to the terms of that extension, Jarmond would be owed roughly $7.1 million, or the full amount of a contract that runs through June 30, 2029, if he was terminated without cause.

Many appear to want him gone before then. Before each of the football team’s last two home games at the Rose Bowl, an airplane has flown over the stadium pulling a banner calling for his dismissal.

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE — President Trump said Saturday that he plans to hike tariffs on imports of Canadian goods by an extra 10% because of an anti-tariff television ad aired by the province of Ontario.

The ad used the words of former President Reagan to criticize U.S. tariffs, angering Trump, who said he would end trade talks with Canada. Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford said he would pull the ad after the weekend, and it ran Friday night during the first game of the World Series.

“Their Advertisement was to be taken down, IMMEDIATELY, but they let it run last night during the World Series, knowing that it was a FRAUD,” Trump said in a post on his social media platform as he flew aboard Air Force One to Malaysia.

“Because of their serious misrepresentation of the facts, and hostile act, I am increasing the Tariff on Canada by 10% over and above what they are paying now.”

The ad used a recording of Reagan criticizing tariffs, though his comments were edited. He often criticized government policies — including protectionist measures such as tariffs — that interfered with free commerce and he spent much of that 1987 radio address spelling out the case against tariffs.

Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney will both attend the Assn. of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Malaysia. But Trump told reporters traveling with him that he had no intention of meeting Carney there.

Schiefelbein writes for the Associated Press.

There you are, sitting in traffic in your car, listening to Taylor Swift on Spotify because it’s easier than subjecting yourself to a new, more challenging artist. An ad pops up in your stream. It’s serious stuff, evidenced by the dystopian tone of the narrator: “Join the mission to protect America,” the serious man’s voice commands, “with bonuses up to $50,000 and generous benefits. Apply now … and fulfill your mission.”

It’s an Immigration and Customs Enforcement recruitment ad, part of the Trump administration’s investment of $30 billion to add more than 10,000 deportation officers to its ranks by the end of the year. You would have been spared the outrage if only you had paid for Spotify’s ad-free tier of service, but there’s no way the audio streamer is getting your money now. You’ll be switching to, say, Apple Music. Maybe Tidal?

The experience of being subjected to recruitment ads for a domestic military force, assembled by a power-hungry president, has generated intense backlash that’s culminated this week in calls for boycotts of streaming services and platforms that have featured ICE spots. They include Pandora, ESPN, YouTube, Hulu and Fubo TV. Multiple HBO Max subscribers bemoaned on X that they were subjected to ICE recruitment videos while watching All Elite Wrestling: “Time to be force-fed ICE commercials against my will for two hours again #WWENXT,” @YKWrestling wrote.

Recruitment ads — Uncle Sam’s “I Want You” poster comes to mind — are an American staple, especially in times of war. But the current recruitment effort is aimed at sending forces into American cities, predicated on exaggerated claims that U.S. metro areas are under siege and in peril due to dangerous illegal immigrants, leftist protesters and out-of-control crime rates. The data, however, does not support those claims. The American Immigration Council found that from 1980 to 2022, while the immigrant share of the U.S. population more than doubled (from 6.2% to 13.9%), the total crime rate declined by over 60%.

Yet there’s a far scarier doomscape on the horizon if ICE’s recruitment efforts are successful: a mercenary army loyal only to Trump, weaponized to keep him on the throne. If that sounds more dystopian than the aforementioned Spotify ad, consider that the administration has spent more than $6.5 million over the past month on a slew of 30-second commercials aimed at luring in police officers.

The ads aired on TVs in more than a dozen cities including Chicago, Seattle and Atlanta and opened with images of each specific metro area’s skyline. Then came the commanding narration: “Attention, Miami law enforcement!” It’s followed by the same messaging that is used in ICE ads across the country: “You took an oath to protect and serve, to keep your family, your city, safe. But in sanctuary cities you’re ordered to stand down while dangerous illegals walk free — Join ICE and help us catch the worst of the worst. Drug traffickers. Gang members. Predators.”

But are the ads working? It’s hard to say since transparency isn’t a hallmark of the MAGA White House. For what it’s worth, a Sept. 16 press release from the DHS claimed that it had received more than 150,000 applications in response to its campaign and had extended 18,000 tentative job offers.

As for the power of consumer-led boycotts, there’s hope. More than 1.7 million Disney, Hulu and ESPN subscriptions were reportedly canceled between Sept. 17 and Sept. 23 during Jimmy Kimmel’s temporary suspension by ABC (Disney is ABC’s parent company). The network pulled the show after the host’s comments related to Charlie Kirk’s assassination angered MAGA supporters and the Trump-appointed FCC chair appeared to threaten the network. But after a week with a significant increase in cancellations — a 436% jump compared to a normal week — Kimmel was back on the air.

As of today, Spotify appears unmoved by the pressure to pull those intrusive ICE ads. “This advertisement is part of a broad campaign the US government is running across television, streaming, and online channels,” a Spotify spokesperson said in a statement this week. “The content does not violate our advertising policies. However, users can mark any ad with a thumbs up or thumbs down to help manage their ads preferences.”

Thumbs down. Frowny emoji. Cue the dystopian narrator for a counter ad: “Join the mission to protect America: Cancel Spotify.”

As Californians start voting on Democrats’ effort to boost their ranks in Congress, former President Barack Obama warned that democracy is in peril as he urged voters to support Proposition 50 in a television ad that started airing Tuesday.

“California, the whole nation is counting on you,” Obama says in the 30-second ad, which the main pro-Proposition 50 campaign began broadcasting Tuesday across the state. The spot is part of a multimillion-dollar ad buy promoting the congressional redistricting ballot measure through the Nov. 4 election.

Proposition 50 was spearheaded by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California Democratic leaders this summer after President Trump urged GOP-led states, notably Texas, to redraw their congressional districts to boost the number of Republicans elected to the House in next year’s midterm election, in an effort to continue enacting his agenda during his final years in office.

“Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years,” Obama says in the ad, which includes footage of ICE raids. “With Prop. 50, you can stop Republicans in their tracks. Prop. 50 puts our elections back on a level playing field, preserves independent redistricting over the long term, and lets the people decide. Return your ballot today.”

Congressional districts were long drawn in smoke-filled chambers by partisans focused on protecting their parties’ power and incumbents. But good-government groups and elected officials, notably former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, have fought to take the drawing of congressional boundaries out of the hands of politicians to end gerrymandering and create more competitive districts.

Obama, long a supporter of ending gerrymandering, had already endorsed the ballot measure.

In California, these districts have been drawn by an independent commission created by voters in 2010, which is why state Democrats have to go to the ballot box to seek a mid-decade partisan redistricting that could improve their party’s chances in five of the state’s 52 congressional districts.

The ad featuring Obama, who spoke Monday on comedian Marc Maron’s final podcast about Trump’s policies testing the nation’s values, appears on Californians’ televisions after mail ballots were sent to the state’s 23 million registered voters last week.

The proposition’s prospects are uncertain — it’s about an obscure topic that few Californians know about, and off-year elections traditionally have low voter turnout. Still, more than $150 million has been contributed to the three main committees supporting and opposing the proposition, in addition to millions more funding other efforts.

Obama is not the only famous person to appear in ads about Proposition 50.

In September, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the creation of the independent redistricting commission while in office and has campaigned for similar reforms across the nation since then, was featured in ads opposing the November ballot measure.

He described Proposition 50 as favoring entrenched politicians instead of voters.

“That’s what they want to do, is take us backwards. This is why it is important for you to vote no on Proposition 50,” the Hollywood celebrity and former governor says in the ad, which was filmed last month when he spoke to USC students. “The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people.’ … Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”

As “Madame Web” star Sydney Sweeney remains mum on allegations of promoting eugenics via her American Eagle advertisement, she has seemingly stirred up even more support from far-right figures after recently gaining the favor of President Trump.

A black-and-yellow banner covering a billboard on the 91 Freeway in Corona boldly states: “Proud Boys Love Sydney Sweeney,” according to a photo that one Corona resident shared with ABC7.

The banner, which uses the neo-fascist group‘s signature colors, also references the hot-button American Eagle ad. “She has the best blue genes,” the banner says. Note “genes,” not “jeans.” It’s worth remembering that President Trump during a 2020 presidential debate ordered the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” when pressed about condemning right-wing violent extremists.

It’s unclear who put up the banner bearing the far-right group’s name, according to ABC7.

A representative for Sweeney did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment on Friday.

Earlier this month, jeans retailer American Eagle dropped a string of commercials for its latest campaign featuring the “Euphoria” star. In one advertisement, the Emmy-nominated actor who is blond says, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue,” she says.

Posters for the American Eagle campaign also featured the totally innovative, never-before-seen wordplay on “jeans” and genes.” A slogan reads, “Sydney Sweeney has great genes,” with the final word crossed out and replaced with “jeans.”

Sweeney, who seems to have a penchant for odd marketing opportunities, and the ads quickly faced criticism on social media, with users alleging the campaign leaned into the language of eugenics. Eugenics is a discredited practice that essentially touted the idea of improving the human race through selective breeding. It gained traction in the early 20th century and was used as a justification for Hitler’s Nazi Germany to wipe out millions of Jewish people, and U.S. authorities to forcibly sterilize more than 60,000 people in California and more than 30 other states.

In an attempt to quell the ire, American Eagle posted a statement stating that its campaign “is and always was about the jeans.”

Sweeney and the American Eagle campaign notably found support among the conservative crowd — it wasn’t the first time for the 27-year-old “Immaculate” actor. Days after the ad dropped, public records revealing her most recent voter registration history resurfaced, unveiling she registered as a Republican in June 2024. Trump found that irresistible to post about on his Truth Social platform.

“Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the ‘HOTTEST’ ad out there. It’s for American Eagle, and the jeans are ‘flying off the shelves.’ Go get ‘em Sydney!” he posted Monday. In an earlier version of his post, Trump misspelled the actor’s name as “Sidney Sweeney.”

He also used the post to diss brands he claimed used “woke” marketing, including Jaguar and Bud Light. Trump also couldn’t resist throwing shade at pop star Taylor Swift, who openly endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential election.

Amid the fashion fracas and social media discourse, it seems neither Sweeney nor American Eagle had anything to lose.

Sweeney shrugged off her latest bout of controversy last week as she was spotted doing karaoke with some “Euphoria” co-stars in Santa Monica. She also hit the red carpet on Monday to promote her latest film, “Americana,” from writer-director Tony Tost.

American Eagle, on the other hand, saw its stock surge this week.

Thanks to a lazy pun that’s as uninspired as the jeans it’s meant to sell, a series of American Eagle Outfitters ads starring 27-year-old actor Sydney Sweeney have sparked a culture war.

In one of several videos associated with the retailer’s campaign, the accomplished performer who also happens to be a blond bombshell says, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue,” she says, as the camera pans from her blue denim outfit to her blue eyes.

In another video, Sweeney defaces an American Eagle billboard that reads “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans,” crossing out the word “jeans” and replacing it with “genes.”

Jeans. Genes. Get it? Of course you do. It’s as basic as it gets. But that didn’t stop folks from assigning incredible complexity to the ads.

American Eagle Outfitters is accused of leaning into the language of eugenics to sell its mall wear. Eugenics is the absurd and bigoted theory that the human race can be perfected (i.e. made more Caucasian) through selective breeding. Eugenics gained traction in the early 20th century, most notably in Nazi Germany, where Hitler sought to create a master Aryan race, perpetrating unspeakable atrocities including the Holocaust.

Now there’s an argument across social media: Did Sweeney and the retailer play fast and loose with eugenics to sell jeans? Or is it just another distraction from a much scarier reality that “the great replacement theory” — a touchstone conspiracy among white supremacists that an “inferior” non-white population will displace them — is driving American policy and state-sanctioned actions? I pick Option 2.

Sleuthing for hidden white-power messaging in an otherwise playful commercial is easier than contending with the militarized xenophobia right in front of us. It’s happening on our streets, where immigrants with no criminal record are being kidnapped, then locked up and, in many cases, deported with no due process.

Too heavy? Let’s get back to the jeans/genes (again, who thought this pun was clever?). Commentary about the ad has proliferated across social media, where lefties, MAGAs and nondenominational Sweeney haters are chiming in, calling the ad a “Nazi dog whistle,” an excuse for a “woke freak out,” more evidence that “Western ideals of beauty” still dominate, and indisputable proof that Sweeney should remain a perennial target for those who still can’t separate the actor from the insufferable characters she played so well on “Euphoria” and “White Lotus.”

The American Eagle Outfitters’ fall campaign features “the Sydney Jean,” which was created in partnership with Sweeney, and revenue from sales of the jeans will be donated to the Crisis Text Line. According to its website, it’s a “nonjudgmental organization that champions mental well-being and aims to support people of every race, ethnicity, political affiliation, religion, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, socioeconomic status, and other backgrounds.”

Hardly Third Reich fare.

Yet the clothing line’s ad has been called “regressive” and racist, and one critic wrote in Slate: “These days, a blond, blue-eyed white woman being held up as the exemplar of ‘great genes’ is a concept that maybe shouldn’t have made it past the copywriters room.”

Never missing a chance to complain about complainers, White House communications manager Steven Cheung posted: “Cancel culture run amok. This warped, moronic and dense liberal thinking is a big reason why Americans voted the way they did in 2024. They’re tired of this bull—.” Former Fox News host Megyn Kelly took the opportunity to troll the opposition when she wrote Tuesday on X, “I love how the leftist meltdown over the Sydney Sweeney ad has only resulted in a beautiful white blonde girl with blue eyes getting 1000x the exposure for her ‘good genes.’”

American Eagle posted on Instagram Friday that it stands by its campaign. “‘Sydney Sweeney has great jeans’ is and always was about the jeans. Her jeans. Her story,” said the statement. “We’ll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone.”

It’s not the first time Sweeney’s actions have been used as fodder in a culture war. Her 2024 hosting gig on “SNL” included a sketch where she was dressed as a Hooters waitress, complete with ample cleavage. The skit satirized her standing as a sex symbol. MAGA bros saw it as the end of woke because Sweeney is “hot” and she made a joke about her boobs. Yes, even that was politicized.

So now that I’ve spent all this space explaining the unnecessary freak-out over a jeans ad, can we focus on a campaign that should spur just as much, if not more, condemnation?

The Department of Homeland Security has been posting images on its X account with captions that the father of eugenics, Sir Francis Galton, would have approved. On July 23, the DHS posted an image of a 19th century painting titled “American Progress” depicting Manifest Destiny, the religious belief that it was the right and duty of the United States to expand from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. The DHS caption (with its curious usage of uppercase letters): “A Heritage to be proud of, a Homeland worth Defending.” If you aren’t Indigenous, of course.

A week or so before that, “A Prayer for a New Life,” artist Morgan Weistling’s westward-expansion-era scene featuring a white family in a covered wagon making their way across golden plains. The DHS shared the image with the caption, “Remember your Homeland’s Heritage.” Aside from getting the name of the painting wrong, they inferred that this was the heritage we all share. There was no footnote for First Lady Melania Trump, Sen. Marco Rubio, Trump advisor Stephen Miller, Vice President JD Vance’s wife, Usha, SCOTUS’ Clarence Thomas and millions more whose American origin story doesn’t resemble “Little House on the Prairie.” So can we freak out about that, instead?

Apparently not, because now armchair Nazi hunters are pivoting to a Dunkin’ Donuts ad featuring “The Summer I Turned Pretty” star Gavin Casalegno, who delivers a tongue-in-cheek monologue about his role as the “king of summer.”

“Look, I didn’t ask to be the king of summer, it just kinda happened,” he says. “This tan? Genetics.”

Maybe just stick with the Ben Affleck Dunkin’ ad, where nary a g-word is spoken.

Thanks to popular shows like “Squid Game,” plus price hikes and growing advertising revenues, Netflix on Thursday reported strong growth in the second quarter, beating analysts’ expectations.

The Los Gatos-based streamer’s revenue rose 16% to $11.1 billion, while the company’s net income increased 46% to $3.1 billion compared to a year earlier. Analysts polled by FactSet had expected about $11 billion in revenue and $3 billion in profit.

Wall Street analysts have long deemed Netflix the winner of the streaming wars. The company no longer gives quarterly updates on how many customers it has, last revealing it had more than 301 million subscribers in 2024. But there’s still pressure on Netflix to continue to show financial growth, as the company aims to attract more advertising dollars and subscribers around the world.

Many analysts believe that Netflix’s future sales boost will come from its advertising business, which began in November 2022. The streamer is expected to generate $2.07 billion in ad revenue this year in the United States, which is estimated to climb to nearly $3 billion in 2027, according to research firm Emarketer.

“They’re seeing some substantial revenue and they are also getting a lot of people to sign up or switch to the ad supported tier,” said Paul Verna, a principal analyst at Emarketer.

Netflix said it expects total revenue in to grow 17% in the third quarter. The company increased its full-year 2025 revenue forecast, estimating that it will generate $44.8 billion to $45.2 billion. That’s up from the range of $43.5 billion to $44.5 billion that it previously projected.

In May, Netflix said its cheaper plan with ads reaches more than 94 million monthly active users, indicating that its version with commercials is gaining traction as other services follow a similar strategy.

“We continue to make progress building our ads business and still expect to roughly double ads revenue in 2025,” Netflix said in its letter to shareholders.

Earlier this year Netflix raised prices on most of its subscription plans in the U.S. Its cheapest plan with ads went up $1 to $7.99 a month. Netflix said the response to its recent price adjustments has been “broadly in line with our expectations.”

Netflix continues to face competition from other streaming services globally and entertainment companies like YouTube and TikTok that also take up significant amount of watch time among consumers.

During the second quarter, Netflix released popular programs including Korean animated film “KPop Demon Hunters,” drama “Sirens” and the third season of “Squid Game.”

“Squid Game’s” third season, which premiered late last month, was the most watched series in 93 countries during its debut week and broke a record for the most views for a show in its first three days on Netflix, a boon for a streaming service that thrives on capturing the attention of audiences worldwide by releasing must-watch programs.

“These are positive initiatives and they’re the quality of the content that shows the uniqueness of it,” said Melissa Otto, head of research at S&P Global Visible Alpha, on shows like “Squid Game” Season 3. “These are all things that pull the users in and make them want to subscribe to Netflix or watch Netflix content.”

Netflix also has received critical acclaim for its programming, noting it has received 120 Primetime Emmy nominations for shows including the limited series drama “Adolescence” and comedy-drama series “Nobody Wants This.”

Netflix stock closed at $1,274.17 on Thursday, up about 2%.

Bill Moyers, a soft-spoken former White House aide turned journalist who became a standard bearer of quality in TV news, died Thursday in New York. He was 91.

Moyers’ son William told the Associated Press his father died at Memorial Sloan Kettering hospital after a long illness.

Moyers began his TV career in 1971 during the early years of PBS after serving as a leading advisor and press secretary to President Johnson. He spent 10 years in two stints at CBS News in the 1970s and ‘80s. He was editor and chief correspondent for “CBS Reports,” the network’s prestigious documentary series, and an analyst for the “CBS Evening News.”

He also did a turn as a commentator on “NBC Nightly News” and was a host of the MSNBC program “Insight” in 1996.

But Moyers was often frustrated with the restraints of corporate-owned media and returned to non-commercial PBS each time.

At PBS, “Bill Moyers Journal” was the first news program on the service, launched in 1972 just as the Watergate scandal was heating up. His documentaries and series, which included “Now With Bill Moyers” and the weekly interview show “Moyers & Company, ” often examined complex issues and offered serious discussion. He earned top prizes in television journalism, including more than 30 Emmy Awards. His final program for PBS aired in 2013.

Moyers made a posthumous star out of a literature professor at Sarah Lawrence College with the landmark 1988 PBS series “Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth,” an exploration of religious and mythological archetypes. The series was watched by 30 million viewers.

His 2006 series “Faith and Reason,” where Moyers interviewed authors about the role of religion in their lives, was the kind of programming that distinguished public television, even as audiences had more viewing options on cable.

Moyers also fronted tough investigative programs such as “The Secret Government,” a deep dive into the Iran-Contra scandal during the Reagan administration. He often focused on the influence of money in the nation’s politics.

A believer in liberal causes, Moyers aggravated Republican administrations who often cited his programs when they accused PBS of bias and attempted to cut its federal funding.

PBS President Paula Kerger, who worked closely with Moyers for decades, said he always embodied the aspirations of public television.

“Bill was always of service: as a journalist, a mentor, and a fierce champion for PBS,” Kerger said in a statement. “He fought for excellence and honesty in our public discourse, and was always willing to take on the most important issues of the day with curiosity and compassion.”

Moyers was born June 5, 1934 in Hugo, Okla., the son of a dirt farmer and day laborer. He attended high school in Marshall, Texas, where he covered sports for the local newspaper.

After graduating from the University of Texas, he earned a master’s in divinity from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and became an ordained minister. He preached at small rural churches.

While in college, he established a relationship with Johnson, who hired him to work on his 1954 reelection campaign for U.S. Senate. He worked as a news editor for KTBC radio and television, the Austin, Texas, outlets owned by Johnson’s wife, Lady Bird.

Moyers stuck with Johnson when the senator was elected as John F. Kennedy’s vice president, becoming his personal assistant and later serving as a deputy director of the Peace Corps.

After Johnson was sworn in as president on Nov. 22, 1963, following the assassination of Kennedy, Moyers ascended as well. He was a top Johnson aide with a wide range of duties including press secretary.

According to a 1965 profile in Time magazine, Moyers was a key figure in assembling Johnson’s ambitious domestic policy initiatives known as the Great Society. He shaped legislation and edited and polished the work of Johnson’s speechwriters.

When Johnson underwent anesthesia for a gall bladder operation, Moyers was given responsibility to decide whether then-Vice President Hubert Humphrey should take over the president’s powers in the event of a crisis.

Moyers had a major impact on political communication when in 1964 he signed off on the creation of the “Daisy” ad for Johnson’s presidential election campaign.

The ad showing a girl counting petals she pulls from a daisy blends into a countdown for the launch of nuclear missile. Moyers expressed regret for the spot — an attack on Johnson’s Republican opponent Barry Goldwater’s views on the use of nuclear weapons. He believed the use of visceral imagery harmed the country’s politics in the long term.

Moyers left the Johnson White House in 1967 as he was disenchanted with the escalation of the Vietnam War. He went on to become publisher of the Long Island, N.Y., daily newspaper Newsday, raising its stature in the journalism industry, before his first tenure at PBS.

When he rejoined PBS in 1986, he formed his own production company called Public Affairs Television.

Moyers’ preacher-like delivery and emphasis on high moral standards in his commentaries led some people to criticize him as being a pious scold. But as cable news brought a more raucous style of current affairs discussions to TV, Moyers’ gentler approach was an oasis for many.

“His mission has always been to make things better, not louder,” Neil Gabler wrote in an appreciation of Moyers for The Times in 2009. “In a world of ego and bombast, he has always been modest and self-effacing.”

Moyers is survived by his wife Judith; three children, Suzanne Moyers, John D. Moyers and William Cope Moyers; six grandchildren; and a great-granddaughter.

Jamie Lee Curtis didn’t expect to be at the forefront of the artificial intelligence debate in Hollywood. But she didn’t have a choice.

The Oscar-winning actor recently called out Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg on social media, saying the company ignored her requests to take down a fake AI-generated advertisement on Instagram that had been on the platform for months.

The ad, which used footage from an interview Curtis gave to MSNBC about January’s Los Angeles area wildfires, manipulated her voice to make it appear that she was endorsing a dental product, Curtis said.

“I was not looking to become the poster child of internet fakery, and I’m certainly not the first,” Curtis told The Times by phone Tuesday morning.

The ad has since been removed.

What happened to Curtis is part of a larger issue actors are dealing with amid the rise of generative AI technology, which has allowed their images and voices to be altered in ways they haven’t authorized. Those changes can be wildly misleading.

Images and likenesses of celebrities including Tom Hanks, Taylor Swift and Scarlett Johansson have been manipulated through AI to promote products and ideas they never actually endorsed.

AI technology has made it easier for people to make these fake videos, which can proliferate online at a speed that is challenging for social media platforms to take down. Some are calling on social media firms to do more to police misinformation on their platforms.

“We are standing at the turning point, and I think we need to take some action,” Curtis said.

Curtis first became aware of the fake AI ad about a month and a half ago when a friend asked her about the video. The “Everything Everywhere All At Once” and “Halloween” actor then flagged the ad for her agents, lawyers and publicists, who directed her to send a cease and desist letter to Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram.

Nothing happened.

“It’s like a vacuum,” Curtis said. “There are no people. You can’t reach anybody. You have an email, you send an email, you never get anything back.”

Two weeks later, another friend flagged the same fake AI video. When Curtis wrote to her team, they assured her they went through the proper channels and they did everything they could do, she said.

“I went through the proper channels,” Curtis said. “There should be a methodology to this. I understand there’s going to be a misuse of this stuff, but then there’s no avenue of getting any satisfaction. So then it’s lawlessness, because if you have no way of rectifying it, what do you do?”

Curtis was concerned about the nefarious ways that people could alter the voices and images of other people, including Pope Leo XIV, who has identified AI as one of the challenges facing humanity. What if someone used AI to attribute ideas to the pope that he didn’t actually support?

Inspired by the danger of that possibility, she made her scathing Instagram post, tagging Zuckerberg, after she was unable to directly message him.

“My name is Jamie Lee Curtis and I have gone through every proper channel to ask you and your team to take down this totally AI fake commercial for some bulls— that I didn’t endorse,” Curtis wrote in her post on Monday. “… I’ve been told that if I ask you directly, maybe you will encourage your team to police it and remove it.”

The post generated more than 55,000 likes.

“I’ve done commercials for people all my life, so if they can make a fake commercial with me, that hurts my brand,” Curtis said in an interview. “If my brand is authenticity, you’re co-opting my brand for nefarious gains in the future.”

After she posted, a neighbor shared with her an email of someone at Meta who could help her. Curtis emailed that person (whom she declined to name), copied her team and attached the Instagram posts. Within an hour of sending the email, the fake AI ad was taken down, Curtis said.

“It worked!” Curtis wrote on Instagram on Monday in all caps. “Yay internet! Shame has [its] value! Thanks all who chimed in and helped rectify!”

Meta on Monday confirmed the fake ad was taken down.

“They violate our policies prohibiting fraud, scams and deceptive practices,” said Meta spokesman Andy Stone in an email.

As the technology continues to become more widely available, there are efforts underway at tech companies to identify AI-generated content and to take down material that violates standards.

Organizations like actors guild SAG-AFTRA are also advocating for more laws that address AI, including deep fakes. Both the writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023 hinged in part on demands for more protections against job losses from AI.

Curtis said she would have wanted the fake AI ad to be taken down immediately and would like to see technology companies, not just Meta, come up with safeguards and direct access to people policing “this wild, wild west called the internet.”

“It got the attention, but I’m also a public figure,” Curtis said. “So how does someone who’s not a public figure get any satisfaction? I want to represent everyone. I don’t want it to just be celebrities. I wanted to use that as an example to say this is wrong.”