copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-31): AAP FACTCHECK – Netflix stocks plummeted almost 40 per cent with $US2 billion wiped off the streaming giant’s value just four hours after it donated to Kamala Harris’s US presidential campaign, social media users claim. [...] "Netflix stock tumbles almost 40% after big campaign donation announcement – $2 billion lost in 4 hours," overlay text on the image read. [...] There has been no significant movement in Netflix’s stock price since Mr Hastings’ revealed his personal donation to Harris’s campaign.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-01-01): The Great Netflix Correction: loss of subscribers throws streaming business model into question was Dkr4188 now Dkr1999 for your first year. Make up your own mind. Build robust opinions with the FT’s trusted journalism. Offer available here until 24th October.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-25): Netflix founder Reed Hastings, who is also the current executive chairman of the streaming service, is under fire by some people so disappointed with his recent donation that they are canceling their subscriptions to the streamer. [...] After the news hit that Hastings donated $7 million to one of the presidential candidates for the 2024 election, the social media platform X saw a sudden spike in "Cancel Netflix" trending with a significant number of people deciding to kiss the service goodbye. [...] With people deciding their political opinions should dictate every part of their lives, one wonders if Hastings made an unwise business move. Perhaps it doesn’t matter because he probably knows that for every individual who chooses to cancel their subscription due to him donating to the Harris campaign, there will be someone willing to sign up for the same reason.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-26): Claims of Netflix losing six million subscribers following its executive chairman Reed Hastings’ $7 million donation to Kamala Harris’ presidential election campaign have spread rapidly across social media platforms. It has also been reported that the streaming platform lost $2 billion in four hours. However, it is worth noting that these assumptions are far from the truth. Netflix is neither losing money nor subscribers as a result of Hastings's donation to Harris. [...] "Netflix loses more than 6 million subscribers within hours of its big donation announcement." [...] "Netflix stock tumbles almost 40% after big campaign donation announcement- $2 billion lost in 4 hours."
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-30): Netflix loses 2 Billion in 4 hours after word of their huge donation to the Harris campaign. Go woke go broke. #netflix pic.twitter.com/njJM5iNS6i — Ultra M Tracy 🇺🇸🌻 (@magagrandmom) July 26, 2024 [...] A post shared on X, formerly known as Twitter, purports that Netflix lost $2 billion in just a few hours after a donation to Harris was announced. The post shared an image that includes a headshot of Harris and a Netflix logo. The caption reads, "Netflix loses 2 Billion in 4 hours after word of their huge donation to the Harris campaign. Go woke go broke."
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-08-05): Did Netflix's stock drop almost 40 percent after a "big campaign donation announcement"? No, that's not true: The story originally came from a network of satirical websites and Facebook pages. A representative for Netflix confirmed public records showing the company's stock had not dropped 40 percent. [...] NETFLIX STOCK TUMBLES ALMOST 40% AFTER BIG CAMPAIGN DONATION ANNOUNCEMENT - $2 BILLION LOST IN 4 HOURS. 'IT WAS A HUGE MISTAKE.' [...] The post claimed that the "full story [was] in [the] comment," but Lead Stories found no evidence of that. The quote in the on-screen text was not attributed to anyone and the post does not specify where the donation that led to Netflix's alleged "tumble" went. A photo of Harris can be seen on the right side of the post, implying that the purported donation was made to her presidential campaign.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-26): A July 26 Facebook post included an image of Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, with the headline, "Netflix stock tumbled almost 40% after big campaign donation announcement - $2 billion lost in 4 hours." The post’s caption read, "Perhaps big corps will learn to stay out of politics … I couldn’t be any happier about this!!" [...] We also found no evidence that Netflix’s stock fell 40% following Hastings’ donation. According to Yahoo Finance, the stock is down only about 3% over the past five days as of July 30. [...] Dunning-Kruger Times, Netflix loses big after big donation announcement, accessed July 30, 2024
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-26): Subscribers to the platform (mostly Republicans) are leaving the streamer in the rearview following Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings' July 2024 donation to the Kamala Harris presidential campaign. [...] Some see the political contribution as the corporation's stance in the election and have opted to cancel their accounts. [...] "I canceled Netflix because the co-founder Reed Hastings donated $7 MILLION to Kamala Harris' campaign. I don't support companies that support communists."
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-26): "Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement: ‘The people have spoken,’" text in an image featuring Harris said in a July 26 Facebook post. The misspelled caption said, "NETFLIX Lost 6 million subscribes within HOURS of political donation $$$$$ to Kamal Harris' platform." [...] We found no evidence to support the claim that Netflix has lost 6 million subscribers as a result of Hasting’s donation. As of April, the company has nearly 270 million subscribers worldwide.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2022-07-20): Netflix loses almost a million subscribers [...] "Netflix's subscriber loss was expected but it remains a sore point for a company that is wholly dependent on subscription revenue from consumers," said Insider Intelligence analyst Ross Benes. [...] Shares climbed more than 7% in after-hours trade on relief that the losses were not larger. The firm had warned it could lose as many as two million subscribers.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2022-04-20): Shares of Netflix closed down more than 35% Wednesday after the streamer reported earnings Tuesday evening that showed it lost subscribers for the first time in more than 10 years. The results and weak outlook led to a wave of downgrades from Wall Street on fears over the company's long-term growth potential.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-25): "After the depressing debate, we are in the game again," Hastings told tech-business publication The Information, which first reported the news of his donation. A rep for Netflix declined to comment. [...] In January of this year, Hastings donated 2 million shares of Netflix, currently worth nearly $1.3 billion, to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation. That represents Hastings’ biggest single charitable donation to date. The Silicon Valley Community Foundation says it works to "bridge critical gaps and divisions to deliver strategies that reduce systemic inequities" in the Bay Area.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-19): Netflix adds 8 million subscribers, disappoints on revenue outlook
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2023-07-20): Netflix added 5.9 million new subscribers in the last three months – almost three times as many as analysts expected – after clamping down on households that were sharing their passwords. [...] Some analysts have argued that Netflix is better positioned than its traditional media peers to weather the strike. Last year the company lost subscribers for the first time in its history. It has since begun to pick up subscribers again and at the start of the year announced a crackdown on password sharing.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-25): Oh lord, the human race is at it again, this time with a gargantuan number of people making the hashtag #CancelNetflix trend on X after it was revealed that former CEO Reed Hastings donated $7 million of his own money in an effort to see Kamala Harris in the White House come November. The hashtag began to trend earlier this afternoon after a report came out (via MSN) that Hastings donated his own cash to a pro-Harris PAC. Hastings co-founded Netflix in 1997 along with Mark Randolph, and has since stepped aside from his position as CEO, but remains executive chairman. X users and pro-Trump supporters are up in arms over the reveal, with many sharing screenshots of themselves canceling the streamer over the massive donation. Harris’ presidential campaign managed to bring in a whopping $81 million in its first 24 hours after POTUS Joe Biden decided to exit the current circus, and instead throw his weight behind his VP, who it seems will go toe-to-toe with Republican pick and convicted felon, Donald Trump, at polling stations later this year.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-21): Netflix has gained over 8 million global paid subscribers since April, according to the company’s second-quarter earnings report. With this increase, Netflix now boasts a total of 277.65 million paid subscribers worldwide. This reflects a 16.5 percent growth compared to last year.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-26): Did Netflix lose 6 million subscribers? (Fact Check) There are claims that Netflix lost 6 million subscribers few hours after the company reportedly donated $7 million to Kamala Harris‘s presidential campaign.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-30): The posts are mostly false. Reed Hastings, the billionaire executive chairman of Netflix’s board, did personally donate to a PAC linked to Harris’ campaign, but Netflix itself did not make a donation. There is also no evidence that the company has lost 6 million subscribers since the donation was made, and its stock has not fallen by 40 percent. [...] Following the calls for a boycott, America’s Last Line of Defense (ALLOD), a satire page that The Dispatch Fact Check has reported on previously, claimed in a July 25 post that Netflix had lost 6 million subscribers "within hours of donation announcement." ALLOD regularly posts stories that forward false information under the guise of satire. While some of ALLOD’s posts include satire labels, many do not, and its stories are often shared widely by users who believe they are true. [...] Netflix publishes subscriber numbers on a quarterly basis, so there is no way to know whether calls for boycotts have eroded its subscriber base this week. The company has seen steady growth in subscriber numbers over the past year, rising from 238 million in the second quarter of 2023 to 277 million in the second quarter of 2024. Subscriber numbers for the third quarter will not be available until mid-October. Netflix’s stock value has not decreased substantially since the boycott calls began. On July 24, the day before Hastings’ donation was made public, Netflix’s stock closed at $635.99. As of market close on July 29, it had fallen only 1.42 percent to $626.96.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-27): In July 2024, reports alleging that Netflix's stock plunged after the company or its CEO donated millions to U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential campaign went viral. One outlet, The Dunning-Kruger Times, published an article specifically claiming the company's stock fell almost 40%, losing $2 billion in four hours, as as result. The article began: Netflix Loses Big after Big Donation Announcement: "It was a Huge Mistake" You've probably already heard the news, patriots. Netflix, the company long associated with the Obamas, has gone fully woke and donated $7 million to the Kamala Harris campaign. In return, the American people canceled subscriptions at an alarming rate and the company lost billions in market cap overnight.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-31): Social media users spread disinformation following Hastings’ donation to Harris’ campaign. Netflix did not lose 6 million subscribers in the hours after the news broke. A "satirical" X account posted a graphic that read, "Netflix loses more than 6 million subscribers within hours of its big donation announcement." No reports have substantiated this, and the account self-describes its page as fake news. [...] The same satire account said, "Netflix stock tumbles almost 40% after big campaign donation announcement." A fabricated quote accompanied the graphic, "It was a huge mistake." This is false.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2022-04-20): SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Netflix suffered its first subscriber loss in more than a decade, causing its shares to plunge 25 percent in extended trading amid concerns that the pioneering streaming service may have already seen its best days. The company’s customer base fell by 200,000 subscribers during the January-March period, according to its quarterly earnings report released Tuesday. It’s the first time that Netflix’s subscribers have fallen since the streaming service became available throughout most of the world outside of China six years ago. The drop this year stemmed in part from Netflix’s decision to withdraw from Russia to protest the war against Ukraine, resulting in a loss of 700,000 subscribers. READ MORE: Netflix tests a possible password-sharing crackdown Netflix acknowledged its problems are deep rooted by projecting a loss of another 2 million subscribers during the April-June period. If the stock drop extends into Wednesday’s regular trading session, Netflix shares will have lost more than half of their value so far this year — wiping out about $150 billion in shareholder wealth in less than four months.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-31): A July 25 Facebook post (direct link, archive link) claims the streaming service Netflix made a significant donation to a political candidate. "Netflix just donated 7 million to Kamala," reads the post. "Bye bye Netflix! They need to feel this people! Cancel today!" [...] Netflix has not made any donations to Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign. Reed Hastings, the company's co-founder and former CEO, donated to a super PAC affiliated with Harris.
Claim: “Netflix loses 6 million subscribers within hours of donation announcement.” (Facebook posts, 2024-07-26)
Evidence (2024-07-27): However, the donation from Hastings prompted a number of social media users to criticize Netflix and plan a boycott against the movie and TV streaming service. Many of those calling for a boycott identified themselves as conservatives or supports of the MAGA movement on social media. [...] X user Vicki McCann responded to a post about the donation and said, "Boycott Netflix. I'm canceling my subscription @netflix." [...] Dr. Taylor Marshall shared a screenshot mentioning the donation and said: "We already canceled Netflix a long time ago, but if you have not done so already, it's now time to #CancelNetflix."
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-20): The reduction Bloomberg touted is based on a comparison of data from the beginning of 2012 and the end of 2013, the end of his time in office. Stops and frisks had ballooned before that period under his watch. The declines toward the end of his tenure came as the city faced public criticism over the policy and a lawsuit that questioned the legality of the police behavior and its impact on minorities. So while there was ultimately a sharp decline, Bloomberg had presided over a sharp increase in stop and frisks for most of his time as mayor.
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-19): Mike Bloomberg's claim of 95% reduction in stop-and-frisk policy needs context [...] Mike Bloomberg’s first appearance in a Democratic presidential debate involved him fending off attacks on his record on the stop-and-frisk policy in New York. The former mayor said too many people were stopped and that he’s apologized for it, but he also claimed that stops were cut back drastically once he learned about it. [...] Is it true that stop and frisks dropped 95% during Bloomberg’s tenure?
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-20): Biden called the stop and frisks 'abhorrent' and the former mayor admitted that it 'got out of control'. 'When we discovered – I discovered – that we were doing many, many – too many – stop and frisks, we cut 95 per cent of it out,' Bloomberg asserted. [...] 'Let's get something straight. The reason that stop and frisk changed is because Barack Obama sent moderators to see what was going on. When we sent them there to say "this practice has to stop," the mayor thought it was a terrible idea we send them there – a terrible idea,' Biden said, invoking the name of one of the most famous Democrats.
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2024-01-29): What We Discovered on ‘Deep YouTube’
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-20): - Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg said the stop-and-frisk policy that was "in place" when he became mayor "got out of control" and so "we cut 95% of it." That’s true if comparing the number of stops in the first quarter of 2012 with the last quarter of 2013, but the stops rose 600% in his first 10 years in office. They were twice as high in the year he left office than when he began. [...] As we wrote recently in a deeper dive into Bloomberg’s history with stop-and-frisk, Bloomberg gets to his figure of a 95% cut by comparing the quarterly high point of 203,500 stops in the first quarter of 2012 with the 12,485 stops in the last quarter of 2013 — a decline that would not have been possible without the numbers ballooning earlier in Bloomberg’s tenure. [...] Bloomberg said he "discovered" that the policy "got out of control" after conversations with "African-American clergy and businesspeople," and so he set about to cut the number of stops. The police department in May 2012 announced new training and supervision designed to address concerns about racial profiling in the application of stop-and-frisk. But there were other forces driving the decline: a day before the policy was announced, a federal judge granted class-action status to a lawsuit brought by people who had been stopped. And there was mounting public opposition to the stop-and-frisk program.
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-20): When I got into office, there were 650 murders a year in New York City. And I thought that my first responsibility was to give people the right to live. That's the basic right of everything. And we started -- we adopted a policy, which had been in place, the policy that all big police departments use, of stop and frisk. [...] BIDEN: Yes, let's get something straight. The reason that stop and frisk changed is because Barack Obama sent moderators to see what was going on. When we sent them there to say this practice has to stop, the mayor thought it was a terrible idea we send them there, a terrible idea. [...] WARREN: ... who are routinely cut out.
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2024-01-01): Your Actions Lead to Violence
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-19): Bloomberg’s claim that he cut 95 percent of stop-and-frisk incidents, which disproportionately targeted black and Hispanic men in New York while he was mayor, relies on a selective parsing of the data. [...] According to FactCheck.org, "Bloomberg gets to his figure of a 95% cut by cherry-picking the quarterly high point of 203,500 stops in the first quarter of 2012 and comparing that with the 12,485 stops in the last quarter of 2013 — a decline that would not have been possible without the numbers ballooning earlier in Bloomberg’s tenure." Bloomberg said he later discovered that the stop-and-frisk policy had gotten out of control and ramped it down, but that claim misses some context. For starters, Bloomberg continued to defend the policy until recently, disowning it only before he joined the presidential race.
Claim: “When we discovered, I discovered, that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks, we cut 95% of it out.” (Michael Bloomberg, 2020-02-20)
Evidence (2020-02-20): Stop and frisk, similar to stop and search in the UK, is a police tactic to reduce violent crime. It gives police officers powers to stop someone they suspect of committing a crime and the authority to search a person if they are suspected of carrying a weapon. Claim 1: Mike Bloomberg said: "I discovered that we were doing many, many, too many stop and frisks. [...] It's true there was a big reduction in the number of times stop and frisk was used by police towards the end of his tenure after it had peaked in 2011.