Connect with us

News

The cases against Harvey Weinstein: A timeline of allegations and trials

Published

on

The cases against Harvey Weinstein: A timeline of allegations and trials

Harvey Weinstein is arraigned in court on September 18, 2024 in New York City, pleading not guilty to a new sex crimes charge.

Jeenah Moon/Getty


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jeenah Moon/Getty

This story was originally published in 2020, and has been updated with more recent information on Weinstein’s legal proceedings.

This report includes descriptions of sexual assault.

For much of Harvey Weinstein’s career, dark rumors of sexual assault and harassment tailed the Hollywood megaproducer. Only in recent years did the allegations gather the heft and momentum that culminated in multiple convictions.

Advertisement

While scores of women have accused Weinstein of crimes dating back decades — ranging from intimidation to rape — this timeline focuses on the incidents cited in criminal cases against him in Manhattan and Los Angeles. Though Weinstein’s New York conviction was overturned in spring of 2024, a new trial is underway in Manhattan. Those updates are below.

Timeline

Winter 1993-94: Weinstein allegedly rapes Annabella Sciorra

The actress Annabella Sciorra, perhaps best known for her Emmy-nominated work on The Sopranos, said Weinstein raped her at her Manhattan apartment after an industry dinner. She says the producer dropped her off, only to reappear at her door and force his way inside.

Sciorra’s allegation went on to become the subject of pretrial arguments in Manhattan. While the alleged incident happened too long ago to be prosecuted under state law and Weinstein’s defense team objected to its inclusion, her testimony was heard anyway during the 2020 trial, in support of the charge of predatory sexual assault.

Summer 2004: Weinstein allegedly forces Lucia Evans to perform oral sex

Advertisement

The former aspiring actress Lucia Evans told The New Yorker — in one of a pair of major stories that trained a national spotlight on the allegations against Weinstein — that he had raped her in his office in Manhattan’s Tribeca neighborhood.

“He forced me to perform oral sex on him,” Evans alleged, adding: “I said, over and over, ‘I don’t want to do this, stop, don’t.’ I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough. I didn’t want to kick him or fight him.”

Her account led prosecutors to pursue a criminal sexual act charge against Weinstein, although it was dismissed in 2018.

July 10, 2006: Weinstein allegedly forces himself on Mimi Haley

Mimi Haley, a former production assistant at Weinstein’s now-bankrupt production company, says that after inviting her to his New York City home, the producer ignored her objections, pulled out her tampon and forcibly performed oral sex on her.

Advertisement

“No woman should have to be subjected to this type of unacceptable abuse,” she said in 2017. “Women have the right to say no. A ‘no’ is a ‘no,’ regardless of the circumstances — and I told Harvey ‘no.’ “

Haley’s claim was included in charges against Weinstein filed in 2018 and she went on to testify in his 2020 trial in Manhattan.

Feb. 18-19, 2013: A pair of incidents in Los Angeles

These alleged incidents prompted Los Angeles prosecutors to file four charges against Weinstein in 2020: one felony count each of forcible rape, forcible oral copulation, sexual penetration by use of force and sexual battery by restraint.

“On Feb. 18, 2013, Weinstein allegedly went to a hotel and raped a woman after pushing his way inside her room,” the office of Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey explained in 2020. “The next evening, the defendant is accused of sexually assaulting a woman at a hotel suite in Beverly Hills.”

Advertisement

March 18, 2013: Alleged rape in New York City

For a long time, few details had been released about this allegation, which prompted two of the charges Weinstein was tried for in New York in 2020: first- and third-degree rape. Indeed, it was not until the trial’s opening statements that prosecutors released the name of the alleged victim, Jessica Mann, and the details of her story.

Prosecutors said Mann, an aspiring actress, had attended several industry events with Weinstein and endured increasingly aggressive sexual advances — including one incident in which, similar to Mimi Haley’s, Mann says Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her.

But it was later, on March 18 — one month after the alleged incidents in Los Angeles — that Mann says she tried to confront Weinstein at a hotel in Midtown Manhattan. There, he allegedly coaxed her up to his room, forced her to disrobe and ordered her onto the bed.

“He got on top of her and he raped her, forcing his penis into her vagina,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Meghan Hast told jurors in 2020. “Jessica just laid there. When he finished, he got off of her.

Advertisement

March 2015: New York DA decides not to prosecute allegation

Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, a Filipina-Italian model, reported Weinstein to the New York Police Department for allegedly groping her during a meeting at his Tribeca office in 2015. She says that later, at the urging of police, she wore a recording device for an arranged meetup at a Manhattan hotel. She says it was during that meeting that Weinstein admitted to groping her and sought unsuccessfully to get her to come to his room.

However, the office of then-Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. decided not to pursue the case, saying at the time that “a criminal charge is not supported.”

Years later, after the publication of a New Yorker piece detailing Gutierrez’s allegations, her story would become a focus of intense criticism leveled at Vance, whose office became responsible for prosecuting the criminal trial. Then-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo requested a review of the DA’s 2015 decision, though it’s not clear whether that was ever completed.

Oct. 5, 2017: The New York Times publishes allegations

Advertisement

While rumors of sexual harassment and assault had long dogged Weinstein — even supplying punchlines at the Oscars — it wasn’t until The New York Times and The New Yorker published exposés that the allegations found serious traction.

The Times’ story, written by investigative journalists Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, focused on allegations by a series of assistants and actresses, such as Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan.

Weinstein, in a statement released the same day, pledged to take a leave of absence from his production company and acknowledged that “I have a long way to go.”

Adding, “I so respect all women and regret what happened.” Weinstein did not admit any wrongdoing.

Oct. 10, 2017: The New Yorker‘s website publishes more allegations

Advertisement

Published just days after the The New York Times article, journalist Ronan Farrow’s piece in The New Yorker focused on a slew of other accusations — including the allegation by Lucia Evans that had been added but was later dropped from the list of criminal charges Weinstein faces in New York.

Oct. 14, 2017: Weinstein is expelled from the Academy

In one of the first signs that the reaction to The New York Times and The New Yorker reports represented a sea change, complete with real-world implications for Weinstein, the Hollywood producer was expelled from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the influential organization responsible for the Oscars.

“We do so not simply to separate ourselves from someone who does not merit the respect of his colleagues,” the Academy’s 54-member Board of Governors explained in a statement after an emergency meeting, “but also to send a message that the era of willful ignorance and shameful complicity in sexually predatory behavior and workplace harassment in our industry is over.”

March 19, 2018: The Weinstein Company files for bankruptcy

Advertisement

Buffeted by months of negative press, the production company that Weinstein founded with his brother, Bob, went belly up. The Weinstein Company declared bankruptcy and sold “substantially all” of its assets to Lantern Capital Partners. It also voided the nondisclosure agreements it had reached with Weinstein’s accusers.

May 25, 2018: Weinstein surrenders to police

The former Hollywood producer arrived at the New York Police Department’s 1st Precinct in Lower Manhattan, where he submitted to arrest with droves of journalists looking on. It was Harvey Weinstein’s first arrest in connection with the sexual assault allegations.

The same day, then-Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. submitted Weinstein’s initial slate of charges: “The defendant is charged with Rape in the First and Third Degrees, as well as Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, for forcible sexual acts against two women in 2013 and 2004, respectively.”

About a week and a half later, Weinstein plead not guilty to the charges, which changed significantly as new information came to light.

Advertisement

July 2, 2018: Additional charges against Weinstein announced

Manhattan District Attorney Vance announced the filing of a superseding grand jury indictment, which added charges connected with a third incident in 2006. The new slate included one count of criminal sexual act in the first degree and two counts of predatory sexual assault, the most serious charges levied against Weinstein by Manhattan prosecutors.

Miriam “Mimi” Haley, who was involved in the alleged 2006 incident, had come forward with her story more than half a year earlier, saying that during her time working at The Weinstein Company, Harvey Weinstein orally forced himself on her inside his New York City home.

Weinstein plead not guilty to the new charges a week after they were announced.

Oct. 11, 2018: One charge against Weinstein is dismissed

Advertisement

Justice James Burke, the judge overseeing the Manhattan trial, dismissed one of the charges against Weinstein after it became clear that investigators didn’t properly present certain information to the grand jury.

Lucia Evans told the grand jury — and The New Yorker — that Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex on him. But an unidentified friend of hers had contradicted that account in an interview with a detective, saying Evans called it a consensual act in exchange for the promise of acting work.

Prosecutors acknowledged later that the detective “failed to inform” them of “important details” of the interview prior to Evans’ grand jury testimony. Weinstein’s legal team pushed to have the criminal sexual act charge dismissed as a result, and prosecutors did not object.

Harvey Weinstein arrives at court for jury selection on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, in New York.

Harvey Weinstein arrives at court for jury selection on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, in New York.

Mark Lennihan/AP


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Mark Lennihan/AP

Jan. 6, 2020: Trial in New York City begins

Advertisement

Weinstein’s trial formally opened in Manhattan, with more than two weeks devoted to selecting a jury. After roughly a year and a half of pretrial wrangling, the charges Weinstein faced are as follows:

  • Two counts of predatory sexual assault
  • One count of rape in the first degree (connected to the 2013 incident)
  • One count of rape in the third degree (2013 incident)
  • One count of criminal sexual act in the first degree (2006 incident)

Jan. 6, 2020: Los Angeles prosecutors announce charges of their own

The same day that his trial opened in Manhattan, Weinstein was hit with new legal woes from the other side of the U.S.: four felony counts of sexual assault, filed by Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey. The charges are connected with incidents that allegedly happened at local hotels over two nights in February 2013.

“We believe the evidence will show that the defendant used his power and influence to gain access to his victims,” Lacey says, “and then commit violent crimes against them.”

Feb. 24, 2020: Manhattan jury finds Weinstein guilty in mixed verdict

After about five days of deliberations, jurors convicted the former producer of two of the five counts he faced — third-degree rape and a first-degree criminal sexual act — but acquitted him of the most serious charges.

Advertisement

He did not visibly react as the verdict was read but, according to defense lawyer Arthur Aidala, repeatedly told his attorneys afterward: “I’m innocent. … I didn’t rape anyone.”

Of the two counts that stuck, the criminal sexual act is the more serious, carrying a sentence of at least five years in prison and a maximum of more than two decades.

After the hearing, Weinstein’s path to the Rikers Island, where he was to await his sentencing, was rerouted to a nearby hospital after he experienced chest pains and high blood pressure.

March 11, 2020: Weinstein receives 23-year prison sentence in New York 

The sentence handed down in a Manhattan courtroom included 20 years for first-degree criminal sexual act and three years for third-degree rape — nearly the maximum allowed under New York state law.

Advertisement

Weinstein’s victims “refused to be silent, and they were heard,” Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said in a statement after the sentencing hearing. “Their words took down a predator and put him behind bars, and gave hope to survivors of sexual violence all across the world.”

Weinstein’s legal team vowed to appeal.

October 2022: Trial in Los Angeles begins 

The former movie mogul faced rape and sexual assault charges in front of a jury of nine men and three women at a Los Angeles court house. The former movie mogul was charged with raping and sexually assaulting four women between 2004 to 2013.

December 2022: Weinstein found guilty in mixed verdict in Los Angeles trial 

Advertisement

Weinstein was found guilty of rape, forced oral copulation and sexual misconduct – three of seven charges – in his Los Angeles trial.

“It is time for the kingmaker to be brought to justice,” LA County Deputy District Attorney Marlene Martinez said during closing arguments of the trial.

Weinstein’s convictions hinged on allegations from one of four accusers. (The jury ruled Weinstein was not guilty on one of the remaining charges, and couldn’t reach a decision on three others.) Four additional charges were dismissed.

February 23, 2023: Weinstein sentenced in California 

Weinstein was sentenced to 16 years behind bars by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lisa Lench, to be served consecutively after his 23-year sentence in New York.

Advertisement

April 25, 2024: New York conviction is overturned 

Weinstein’s 2020 sex crime conviction was overturned while serving a 23-year sentence in New York. In a 4-3 decision, the New York State Court of Appeals ruled that Weinstein did not receive a fair trial because the proceedings included testimony from women whose allegations were not part of the case. These are otherwise known as Molineux witnesses.

Judge Jenny Rivera wrote: “We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes because that testimony served no material non-propensity purpose … The only evidence against defendant [Weinstein] was the complainants’ testimony, and the result of the court’s rulings … was to bolster their credibility and diminish defendant’s character before the jury.”

April 28, 2024: Weinstein in and out of the hospital 

Weinstein was hospitalized at Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan upon his return to New York. After his 2020 conviction was vacated, Weinstein was turned over to the city’s Department of Correction. According to a state spokesperson Weinstein remains in custody because of his Los Angeles conviction and sentence.

Advertisement

May 1, 2024: Prosecutors plan for a new trial 

During a hearing in a New York courtroom, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg confirmed his office was putting together a new trial — first planned for the fall of 2024, and later delayed to the following spring.

May 29, 2024: New York prosecutors signal potential for new indictment

Manhattan prosecutors informed Judge Curtis Farber that they may seek a new indictment ahead of Weinstein’s upcoming trial. During a court hearing, Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Nicole Blumberg confirmed that additional survivors had come forward with assault claims and may be willing to testify.

June 7, 2024: Weinstein’s lawyers appeal California conviction 

Advertisement

Weinstein’s lawyers appealed his California conviction, arguing that evidence was excluded from his trial there, which ended in 2022.

September 12, 2024: Another New York indictment is announced

New York prosecutors announced in a hearing that Weinstein was indicted on additional sex crimes charges. Weinstein is not present in court, after being rushed into emergency heart surgery the weekend prior.

September 18, 2024: Weinstein pleads not guilty to new charge in New York

Prosecutors unsealed the indictment, detailing allegations of sexual assault against Weinstein in 2006. In a New York courtroom, Weinstein plead not guilty.

Advertisement

April 15, 2025: Jury selection begins in Weinstein’s trial in New York

In Harvey Weinstein’s third trial in just over five years, the disgraced film producer is facing assault allegations from three different women, including one whose identity has not yet been revealed.

Ilya Marritz and Clare Lombardo contributed to this timeline.

News

Video: Runaway Emu Leads Sheriff’s Corporal on 45-Minute Chase

Published

on

Video: Runaway Emu Leads Sheriff’s Corporal on 45-Minute Chase

new video loaded: Runaway Emu Leads Sheriff’s Corporal on 45-Minute Chase

transcript

transcript

Runaway Emu Leads Sheriff’s Corporal on 45-Minute Chase

An emu named Tina escaped from a farm in Florida last Friday. Body camera footage captured a sheriff’s office corporal chasing the large bird and eventually putting it in handcuffs.

I’ll be honest with you, I’ve never handcuffed an emu before, but they’ll fit around his legs and that’ll keep him from kicking. In you go. There you go. Oh, look — look who’s got you now. Don’t move, don’t move. Not yet, not yet, not yet. Don’t look at me that way — hey, hey, don’t bite me. Don’t even think about it. Don’t do it. Are you done resisting? I don’t want to have to charge you. Don’t talk back to me. Now you’re behaving, aren’t you? Secured.

Advertisement
An emu named Tina escaped from a farm in Florida last Friday. Body camera footage captured a sheriff’s office corporal chasing the large bird and eventually putting it in handcuffs.

By Jorge Mitssunaga

January 15, 2026

Continue Reading

News

Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act (again). What is it?

Published

on

Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act (again). What is it?

Law enforcement officers stand amid tear gas at the scene of a shooting Wednesday in Minneapolis.

Adam Gray/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Adam Gray/AP

President Trump on Thursday threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to suppress protests in Minnesota, a week after an ICE agent fatally shot a 37-year-old Minneapolis woman. 

The shooting death of Renee Macklin Good sparked protests nationwide against ICE’s continued presence in Minnesota and across the country. 

Protesters were further incensed on Wednesday evening when ICE agents in Minneapolis shot a Venezuelan immigrant in the leg during an attempted arrest. 

Advertisement

Writing on Truth Social, Trump said: “If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State.”

The act is one way the president can send troops to states to restore law and order. But unlike in Trump’s National Guard deployments in 2025, the Insurrection Act would allow armed forces to carry out law enforcement functions, such as making arrests and conducting searches.

The law could open the door to significantly expanding the military’s role in quelling protests, protecting federal buildings and carrying out immigration enforcement, which some of Trump’s aides have suggested he do.

Since Thomas Jefferson signed it into law in 1807, the Insurrection Act has only been invoked about 30 times. The last instance was over three decades ago. During his second term, Trump has repeatedly brought up the idea of invoking the statute.

“If people were being killed and courts were holding us or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure I’d do that,” he told reporters back in early October.

Advertisement

Trump has also erroneously claimed that nearly half of all U.S. presidents have invoked the law and that it was invoked 28 times by a single president, as he said during an interview with CBS’ 60 Minutes in late October.

In reality, only 17 out of 45 presidents — or 37% — utilized the law, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan law and policy organization that in 2022 tracked all Insurrection Act invocations. The group also did not find a president who invoked the emergency powers more than six times, as Ulysses S. Grant did during the Reconstruction era.

The White House did not release a statement on the president’s threat.

Here’s what to know.

How would the Insurrection Act get used?

There are three ways that the president can invoke the Insurrection Act, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Advertisement

The first is at the request of a state’s legislature or governor facing an “insurrection.” The law itself does not elaborate on what qualifies as an insurrection, but legal scholars generally understand the term as referring to a violent uprising of some kind.

In the second path, the president does not need a state’s consent to deploy troops when “unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion” makes it “impracticable” to enforce federal laws.

The third path also does not require the affected state’s support. In this case, the president can send in the military to suppress an insurrection that “hinders the execution of the laws” or “opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”

Before invoking the Insurrection Act, the president must first order the “insurgents” to disperse within a limited amount of time.

How would troop deployments differ under the Insurrection Act?

So far during Trump’s second term, National Guard troops have been called into Los Angeles, Chicago and Portland, Ore., under a statute known as Title 10, which places the force under federal control. The operations in Memphis and Washington, D.C., were authorized under Title 32, meaning they were under state command. (The situation in D.C is unique since the federal district is not a state and therefore does not have a governor.)

Advertisement

Under these deployments, Guard forces are subject to the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits federal military personnel from acting as police on American streets. It’s rooted in one of the nation’s founding principles, which opposes military involvement in civilian affairs.

The Insurrection Act, however, is a key exception to the law.

The controversial emergency powers were last used during the 1992 Los Angeles riots after the acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King.

Former President George H.W. Bush invoked the law at the request of then-California Gov.  Pete Wilson, who was worried that local law enforcement could not quell the unrest alone.

But that deployment also showed the risks of using military personnel as law enforcement. In an infamous moment, LA police officers asked a group of Marines to “cover” them as they approached a house. The Marines interpreted their request as asking them to open fire, while the police officers actually wanted them to stay on guard.

Advertisement

“The Marines then lay down suppressing fire. The police were completely aghast,” Mick Wagoner, a retired Marine Corps lieutenant colonel, told NPR earlier this year.

How much power does the Insurrection Act give the president?

Some of the Insurrection Act’s power comes from what’s not actually in it.

Terms like “insurrection,” “rebellion” and “impracticable” are loosely defined and give broad deference to the president, according to William Banks, professor emeritus of law at Syracuse University and an expert in national security and emergency powers.

“It’s incredibly open-ended and grants him a dramatic amount of discretion to federalize an incident,” he added.

Advertisement

The law also does not mention time constraints on the troop deployments. Nor does it involve Congress in the process to maintain checks and balances, Banks added.

The Insurrection Act has also been rarely tested in the courts. Trump himself described the Insurrection Act as providing legal cover.

“Do you know that I could use that immediately and no judge can even challenge you on that. But I haven’t chosen to do it because I haven’t felt we need it,” he said during the October 60 Minutes interview.

Despite its broad language, legal experts argue that historical precedent matters when it comes to the Insurrection Act.

If Trump were to invoke the law to address crime or enforce immigration laws, it would represent a sharp departure from past uses and would likely face legal challenges, according to Laura A. Dickinson, a professor at The George Washington University Law School who focuses on national security.

Advertisement

“ While it seems very broad on its face, it’s not a blank check,” she said.

Continue Reading

News

Trump says he’s been assured Tehran has stopped killing protesters as Iran reopens its airspace – live

Published

on

Trump says he’s been assured Tehran has stopped killing protesters as Iran reopens its airspace – live

Opening summary

Welcome to our continuing live coverage of the crisis in Iran.

Donald Trump says he has been assured that the killing of Iranian protesters has been halted, adding when asked about whether the threatened US military action was now off the table that he will “watch it and see”.

The president said at the White House that “very important sources on the other side” had now assured him that Iranian executions would not go ahead. “They’ve said the killing has stopped and the executions won’t take place,” Trump said. “There were supposed to be a lot of executions today and that the executions won’t take place – and we’re going to find out.”

Advertisement

Earlier, Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi told Fox News that executions executions were not taking place and there would be “no hanging today or tomorrow”. “I’m confident that there is no plan for hanging.”

The family of Erfan Soltani, the first Iranian protester sentenced to death since the current unrest began, has been told his execution has been postponed.

Here are some of the other latest developments:

  • Trump said Iranian opposition figure Reza Pahlavi “seems very nice” but expressed uncertainty about whether Pahlavi would be able to muster support within Iran to eventually take over. “I don’t know how he’d play within his own country,” Trump told Reuters in the Oval Office. “And we really aren’t up to that point yet. I don’t know whether or not his country would accept his leadership, and certainly if they would, that would be fine with me.”

  • Iran has reopened its airspace after a near-five-hour closure that forced airlines to cancel, reroute or delay some flights.

  • The United Nations security council is scheduled to meet on Thursday afternoon for “a briefing on the situation in Iran”, according to a spokesperson for the Somali presidency. The scheduling note said the briefing was requested by the US.

Iranian women wearing chadors walk near a mural depicting Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (top left) in Tehran. Photograph: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA
  • Some US and UK personnel have been evacuated as a precaution from sites in the Middle East. The British embassy in Tehran has also been temporarily closed.

  • Spain, Italy and Poland advised their citizens to leave Iran. It followed a call by the US urging its citizens to leave Iran, suggesting land routes to Turkey or Armenia.

  • Araghchi insisted the situation was “under control” and urged the US to engage in diplomacy. “Now there’s calm,” the Iranian foreign minister said. “We have everything under control, and let’s hope that wisdom prevails and we don’t end up in a situation of high tension that would be catastrophic for everyone.”

  • The death toll in Iran from the regime’s crackdown stands at 2,571 people, according to the US-based Human Rights Activists news agency. More than 18,100 have been arrested, it said.

  • Foreign ministers from the G7 group said they were “prepared to impose additional restrictive measures” on Iran over its handling of the protests, and the “deliberate use of violence, the killing of protesters, arbitrary detention and intimidation tactics”.

Share

Updated at 

Advertisement

Key events

AI-generated videos purportedly depicting protests in Iran have flooded the web, researchers say, as social media users push hyper-realistic deepfakes to fill an information void amid the country’s internet restrictions.

US disinformation watchdog NewsGuard said it identified seven AI-generated videos depicting the Iranian protests – created by both pro- and anti-government actors – that had collectively amassed about 3.5m views across online platforms.

Among them was a video shared on Elon Musk’s X showing women protesters smashing a vehicle belonging to the Basij, the Iranian paramilitary force deployed to suppress the protests, reports Agence France-Presse.

One X post featuring the AI clip – shared by what NewsGuard described as anti-regime users – garnered nearly 720,000 views.

Advertisement

Anti-regime X and TikTok users in the US also posted AI videos depicting Iranian protesters symbolically renaming local streets after Donald Trump.

The AI creations highlight the growing prevalence of what experts call “hallucinated” visual content on social media during major news events, often overshadowing authentic images and videos.

Share

Updated at 

Continue Reading

Trending