Search
AI Powered
Latest News
More from
Most Read
Italian reporter sparks backlash
For those catching up, Polidoro addressed a visibly confused Garfield and Roberts:
"The question was for Julia and Andrew. Now that the 'Me Too' era and that the Black Lives Matters are done, what do you expect in Hollywood? And what we lost, we lost something in the political outpouring, era?"
The delivery was clunky enough that Roberts asked her to repeat it, adding dryly, “With your sunglasses on, I can’t tell which of us you’re talking to.” Notably, Polidoro persisted in excluding Edebiri, who then stepped in with the kind of grace Polidoro couldn’t manage.
Edebiri responded:
"Sorry, I know that that [question] is not for me, and I don't know if it's purposeful that it's not for me, but I don't think it's done. I don't think it's done at all. I think maybe hashtags may not be used as much, but I do think that there's work being done by activists, by people every day, and it's beautiful, important work that's not finished, that's really, really active."
Edebiri didn’t just deliver the most thoughtful answer of the day—she did it while embodying exactly why her voice should have been prioritized in the first place.
You can watch the awkward moment below:
- YouTubeEntertainment Tonight/YouTube
And let’s be 100 percent clear: Ayo Edebiri isn’t some newcomer stumbling into the spotlight. She’s an Emmy and Golden Globe winner for The Bear, a rising comedy powerhouse who’s written for What We Do in the Shadows and Big Mouth, and the voice of Missy, a Black and biracial character whose arc wrestles directly with race and identity.
As a Black woman in Hollywood, she has consistently used her platform to highlight issues of representation, while also breaking barriers simply by existing in spaces that have historically sidelined women of color. To exclude her from a conversation about #MeToo and Black Lives Matter isn’t just tone-deaf—it’s erasing the very voices those movements fight to center.
Polidoro has since offered what she’s calling an “official statement,” though it reads less like an apology and more like a defensive diary entry better suited for a group therapy icebreaker.
Recasting herself as a victim, Polidoro posted the following on her Instagram:
“I find it striking that those who unjustly accuse me of racism and consider themselves custodians of justice find acceptable violent language, personal attacks, and cyberbullying.”
Step One of Apology 101: the first words should probably be “I’m sorry” or “I apologize,” not “Here’s why I’m hurt.”
She insisted the pile-on had overshadowed her “original intent,” which apparently only Roberts and Garfield were worthy of answering:
“I would like to clarify that, rather than focusing on the thoughtful responses of Ayo Edebiri, Julia Roberts, and Andrew Garfield, the discussion continues solely on how I should have phrased the question. All the contributions from those present were reported in full in the published interview, without any omissions.”
Then came the classic bingo card defense:
“To those who unjustly accuse me of racism, I would like to clarify that in my work I have interviewed people of every background and ethnicity, and my own family is multi-ethnic, matriarchal, and feminist, with a significant history of immigration.”
Translation: "I have diverse friends, therefore I can’t be racist." Somewhere, her manager is pouring a very stiff drink.
You can view the rest of her post here:
One glaring omission from this statement?
Any direct acknowledgment of Edebiri—the 29-year-old actress who was visibly sidelined in real time—or the fact that Polidoro chose to leave the only woman of color at the table out of a question that directly concerned race.
Critics have rightly called it insincere, not only for dodging responsibility but also for framing the backlash as a response to a wording issue instead of to a deliberate act of exclusion.
The math is simple: if you’re asking about movements centered on people of color and survivors, and you deliberately skip over the only Black woman sitting three feet in front of you, that’s not (as stated in Polidoro’s original reply in social media comments) “unclear or formulating with the wrong words.”
That’s a choice—and a glaring lapse in journalistic judgment. And it’s one Polidoro still hasn’t owned.
And social media had plenty to say in response to her so-called apology:
@itscheriontop/Instagram
@t0peisdope/Instagram
@ehliaes/Instagram
@dollandia3000/Instagram
@studiopixie/Instagram
@thekoreanvegan/Instagram
@tokenlite/Instagram
@ohnayli/Instagram
@steadyspirit/Instagram
@jess_otw/Instagram
@haylee_noelle_/Instagram
@toureshow/Instagram
Polidoro noted in her Instagram post that she might seek legal protection against online attacks.
According to her social media bio, Polidoro is a Golden Globes voter, a member of the European Film Academy, and an awards-season analyst. She has written for The Hollywood Reporter and holds a master’s degree in film and audiovisual criticism. She also teaches publishing for fashion and entertainment at Italy’s National Academy of Fine Arts.
An impressive résumé, yes. But these credentials don't exempt her from being called out when she sidelines a voice that should have been front and center.
Meanwhile, Luca Guadagnino’s After the Hunt—a 2025 psychological thriller starring Roberts, Garfield, Edebiri, Michael Stuhlbarg, and Chloë Sevigny—continues to make headlines for all the reasons the director probably didn’t have in mind. The film follows a college professor caught between sexual abuse allegations involving her student and a colleague.
Coming out on October 10, here’s the trailer for After the Hunt:
- YouTubeAmazon MGM Studios/YouTube
Despite the PR fiasco, Polidoro’s lucky: cancellation fades fast, but accountability doesn’t. Hollywood loves a redemption arc—she just needs to stop rehearsing denial.
A Truly Disturbing Drawing Of Epstein With Young Girls From His 'Birthday Book' Is Sparking Outrage
In one panel, dated 1983, he is depicted offering balloons and a lollipop to three young girls. In the adjacent 2003 panel, a visibly older Epstein reclines in a massage chair while four blonde women attend to him. A woman bearing a tattoo of Epstein’s initials inside a heart on her backside is depicted engaging in a sexual act.
Above the scene, Epstein’s private jet—commonly described as his “sex-trafficking plane”—is shown flying over palm trees and a sprawling estate that resembles Trump’s Mar-a-Lago. It remains uncertain whether the illustration is intended to portray that property or who created the artwork.
You can see the drawing below.
House Oversight Committee
The disgust was palpable and the drawing's release has only amplified calls for justice as the scandal surrounding the Epstein files continues to capture the nation's attention.
Trump previously denied he ever "wrote a picture" after The Wall Street Journal reported on a birthday letter to Epstein bearing Trump’s signature that included a drawing of a nude woman in sharpie pen.
The "birthday book" dates back 16 years before Epstein was charged with child sex trafficking by the Justice Department in 2019, during Trump’s presidency.
Trump has denied writing the note, which surfaced as he faces mounting backlash over Attorney General Pam Bondi’s decision not to release additional evidence uncovered in the Justice Department’s investigation of Epstein.
Crockett Epically Rips Trump Over His Claim That The Signature On Epstein Birthday Letter Isn't His
The Wall Street Journal reported in July about a Trump birthday letter to Epstein. The WSJ article included the text of Trump's note and a description of it, saying it was typed with what looked like a crude silhouette of a woman drawn with a black marker around the text.
But Trump vehemently denied any such letter existed, going on to file a libel lawsuit against the paper, the reporters, and the paper's owner, Rupert Murdoch.
Now that the House of Representatives Oversight Committee has access to some of Epstein's possessions—items subpoenaed from his estate—it turns out Trump's birthday letter does exist.
@OversightDems/X
The new story from the White House is that the letter was compiled into a book for Epstein back in 2003, but that the signature doesn't match the POTUS'.
People aren't buying the latest version of the story from the White House, including Texas Democratic Representative and House Oversight Committee member Jasmine Crockett.
Speaking with CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins, Representative Crockett spelled out the issue with Trump's involvement with Epstein.
Representative Crockett stated:
"Here’s the deal. We have a president that is sitting in office that obviously had a very close relationship with arguably one of the worst pedophiles that we have ever seen in this country."
The Texas Democrat added:
"As American people, we should all be in unison, no matter if you’re a Democrat, Republican or independent, when it comes down to cracking down on something like this."
"And this literally is so big. As someone who practiced criminal law in Texas, in Arkansas, and in federal courts—I have never seen a case this big, and I [practiced law] for literally over 15 years."
She was then asked by Kaitlan Collins:
"The White House has denied that the drawing existed. They denied that it was Trump's signature. What do you what do you make of their defense here?"
Representative Crockett responded:
"The fact that the President is a liar? I mean, he's consistent."
"Here’s the thing, we got this from the Epstein estate. This isn’t something that came from a random Democratic something. This came from the estate."
You can see the moment here:
People concurred with Crockett's assessment.
The letter in question was a message for the notorious sex trafficker's 50th birthday, one of several compiled into a commemorative book by Epstein's criminal accomplice and former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell.
Maxwell, who recently met with Trump administration officials before being transferred to a nicer prison amid rumors of a possible presidential pardon, is currently serving 20 years for conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.
The White House's assertion is that 22 years ago, someone decided to include a forged note from Epstein's friend Donald Trump in a 50th birthday keepsake that would probably only be seen by Jeffrey Epstein.
To substantiate their new claim, documents signed in 2025 were referenced.
But signatures change over time. And undisputed documents from the same time frame—1990s to 2000s—signed by Trump show the same style of signature.
@hugolowell/X
Trump, his staffers, his cronies, and his MAGA minions have claimed, among other things, that Trump barely knew Epstein; that they were business acquaintances who fell out over a real estate deal; and that they were friends who parted ways due to Epstein's inappropriate behavior at Mara-a-Lago.
Trump finally disclosed in July that they were close friends who had a disagreement over Epstein poaching employees—including underage girls—from Mar-a-Lago after Trump told him not to.
One of the latest versions being shared by the MAGA faithful, including Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, involves Trump being aware of Epstein's sex trafficking, but only because he was an FBI informant.
It's unclear if Trump's alleged cooperation with the FBI was related to Epstein's 2008 conviction for felony solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of prostitution with a minor by the state of Florida—crimes related to a time while Trump was still publicly interacting with Epstein in the early 2000s.
Or was the alleged cooperation related to Epstein's 2019 federal indictment by Trump's Department of Justice for sex trafficking minors and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking?
Johnson began walking that particular version of Trump's Epstein tale back after people started asking how much Trump knew and how much he participated in to be able to provide credible evidence to the FBI of Epstein's sexual exploitation of girls as young as 14.
The story of the evidence the FBI and Trump's Department of Justice compiled to support the indictment and arrest of Epstein in July of 2019—which have come to be called the Epstein files—keeps changing as well.
Trump campaigned in 2024 on a promise to release all of the information if he was reelected. But once in office, the files went from being on Attorney General Pam Bondi's desk to not existing to being inconsequential.
Lies change based on circumstances, but the truth remains the same.