World

John Davidson Gives First Interview and Explains Tourette’s Tics After Shouting N-Word and Other Slurs at BAFTAs: ‘I Felt a Wave of Shame’ (EXCLUSIVE)

Published

4 months ago

February 24, 2026

John Davidson Gives First Interview and Explains Tourette’s Tics After Shouting N-Word and Other Slurs at BAFTAs: ‘I Felt a Wave of Shame’ (EXCLUSIVE)

John Davidson, the Scottish Tourette’s syndrome activist and real-life inspiration for “I Swear,” was thrust into the spotlight at the 79th BAFTA Awards when his involuntary vocal tics disrupted the ceremony, including an outburst of racial slurs that occurred as “Sinners” stars Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo presented an award. In an exclusive email interview with Variety, Davidson offers his perspective on what happened, including what precautions and guardrails he had expected the BBC and BAFTA to take before he attended the ceremony.

Since the fallout, Davidson’s team shares that he’s reached out to the studio handling “Sinners” in order to directly apologize to Jordan, Lindo and production designer Hannah Beachler.

Here he is, giving his account, in his own words.

Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo at the Bafta awards.

Getty Images for BAFTA

Many people’s only frame of reference for Tourette’s syndrome comes from stereotypes, particularly the idea that it’s “just swearing” or saying slurs for shock value. How do you describe the condition to someone starting from that place?

Very often, the media focuses on my particular type of Tourette’s, which is called coprolalia — the involuntary use of obscene or offensive language. This symptom affects 10% to 30% of people with the condition and is not a criterion for diagnosis. However, it is one of the hardest tics to manage and can be very distressing for those living with it. Many individuals report discrimination and isolation as a result.

I have been physically beaten to within an inch of my life with an iron bar after ticking a comment to a young woman whose boyfriend and accomplice ambushed me one evening.

The real challenge isn’t the tics themselves, but the misconceptions surrounding them. Understanding the full range of Tourette’s helps reduce stigma and supports everyone living with the condition.

When socially unacceptable words come out, the guilt and shame on the part of the person with the condition is often unbearable and causes enormous distress. I can’t begin to explain how upset and distraught I have been as the impact from Sunday sinks in.

In the moment before a vocal tic, do you know what’s coming, or does it only become clear after the fact?

Depending on the severity of the condition, people either have an ability to suppress what they are saying for short periods of time, or they don’t. Suppressing can be compared to taking a full bottle of Coca-Cola and shaking it each time you feel the need to tic. Before long, the pressure is so intense it has to be released, and it bursts out — and on occasion, that can lead to a tic attack.

For me personally, my brain works so fast and the tics have always been so aggressive that I have no idea when they are coming or what they will be. I have almost no ability to suppress, and when the situation is stressful, I have absolutely no choice but to tic — it simply bursts out of me like a gunshot.

When a tic involves a slur or taboo phrase, what’s the single most important thing you want people to understand about the distinction between intent and involuntary neurological response?

I want people to know and understand that my tics have absolutely nothing to do with what I think, feel or believe. It’s an involuntary neurological misfire. My tics are not an intention, not a choice and not a reflection of my values.

Those who have seen “I Swear” will understand this. My tics have said and done things over the years that have caused huge pain and upset — punching Dottie [my second mother] in the face is a prime example. Dottie is someone I love dearly. I would never, ever want to hurt her. I have even punched her in the face when she was driving at speed, almost causing a head-on collision.

Tourette’s can make my body or voice do things I don’t mean, and sometimes those tics land on the worst possible words. I want to be really clear that the intent behind them is zero. What you’re hearing is a symptom — not my character, not my thought, not my belief.

Tourette’s can feel spiteful and searches out the most upsetting tic for me personally and for those around me. What you hear me shouting is literally the last thing in the world I believe; it is the opposite of what I believe. The most offensive word that I ticked at the ceremony, for example, is a word I would never use and would completely condemn if I did not have Tourette’s.

I am often triggered by what I see and/or what I hear, and this part of the condition is called echolalia. For example, when the chair of BAFTA started speaking on Sunday, I shouted, “Boring.” On Sunday, Alan Cumming joked about his own sexuality and, when referencing Paddington Bear, said, “Maybe you would like to come home with me, Paddington. It wouldn’t be the first time I have taken a hairy Peruvian bear home with me.” This resulted in homophobic tics from me and led to a shout of “pedophile” that was likely triggered because Paddington Bear is a children’s character.

I would appreciate reports of the event explaining that I ticked perhaps 10 different offensive words on the night of the awards. The N-word was one of these, and I completely understand its significance in history and in the modern world, but most articles are giving the impression I shouted one single slur on Sunday.

What went into the decision to attend in person, and what conversations, if any, did you have with BAFTA or the BBC in advance about how to support you and other guests?

This was an awards ceremony that featured six nominations connected to a film that told the story of my life living with Tourette’s. This has been a three-year project for me, working with the writer, director, production and cast. I am also an active executive producer on the film. I had as much right to attend as anyone.

I also knew that as voting members, most people in the audience would have seen “I Swear” and would be well prepared, well educated and well informed about my condition.

After living with Tourette’s for almost 40 years, I was aware of how physically and mentally difficult it would be for me to attend. I also had a serious heart operation only five weeks ago. I put every ounce of energy and concentration into being able to attend.

I was thrilled to see that on the night, everyone — including some of the most well-respected and famous people from the film world — cheered at my name and applauded. I stood and waved to show my appreciation and acknowledged that this was a significant moment in my life, finally being accepted. It started as one of the most memorable experiences of my life.

StudioCanal were working closely with BAFTA, and BAFTA had made us all aware that any swearing would be edited out of the broadcast. I have made four documentaries with the BBC in the past, and feel that they should have been aware of what to expect from Tourette’s and worked harder to prevent anything that I said — which, after all, was some 40 rows back from the stage — from being included in the broadcast.

As I reflect on the auditorium, I remember there was a microphone just in front of me, and with hindsight I have to question whether this was wise, so close to where I was seated, knowing I would tic.

What was going through your mind in the moment you realized the room could clearly hear your tics?

Initially, my tics were noises and movements, but the more nervous I got, the more my tics ramped up. When my coprolalia tics came out, my stomach just dropped. As always, I felt a wave of shame and embarrassment hit me all at once. You want the floor to swallow you up. I wanted to disappear. I wanted to hide — just get away from all the eyes.

I was hoping people would understand. My mind was saying: These people have seen the film. They will know I can’t help this. They will know it’s not me. This is exactly why we are here. I was saying in my head, “Please don’t judge me. Please understand this isn’t who I am.”

I was trying to calm myself down, to breathe, but ultimately, I made the decision to leave to not cause any more upset. BAFTA found a private room with a monitor where I watched the rest of the awards.

The awards were, in all honesty, just a heightened version of my everyday life and are the reason why, for many periods in my life, I have been fearful of leaving the house — because I am so anxious and nervous about what I might tic and what people’s reaction might be.

You’ve spent years educating and campaigning around Tourette syndrome. Where have you seen real progress — and where does misunderstanding persist most stubbornly?

Sometimes you feel like you are making real progress in educating people on the condition, but there is so much more needed. Comments following the BAFTAs where people have said things like, “I need to stay inside,” “I wouldn’t say these things unless I thought them,” and “I am racist deep down” are deeply upsetting for me, and show there is still so much to do.

The negative responses only go to show the importance of people seeing the film and understanding more about an incredibly complex neurological condition. I had an expectation that the BBC would physically control the sound at the awards on Sunday. I was so far from the stage. From the lack of response from the early presenters to my tics, and with no one turning around to look at me, I assumed, like everyone else, that I could not be heard on the stage.

The only time I became aware that my tic had reached the stage was when Delroy and Michael B. Jordan appeared to look up from their role as presenters, and soon after that I decided to leave the auditorium.

Finally, is there any language you’d ask us to avoid — words like “outburst” or “uncontrollable” — in favor of something more accurate?

It’s important not to use the word “disability.” This is considered a “condition” by the Tourette’s community. I would prefer phrasing such as: “I have lived with the condition …”

Related Topics:BAFTA Featured I Swear John Davidson michael b. jordan

Click to comment

World

AI notetakers promise easy meeting recaps, but some professionals question their use

Published

3 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Press Room

AI notetakers promise easy meeting recaps, but some professionals question their use

NEW YORK (AP) — Launching an artificial intelligence tool to take notes and summarize important information from a virtual meeting can be alluring. Seconds after one of the agents attends an hour-long video conference, it can deliver a recap of key points and outline a to-do list for all the participants.

But the way popular AI notetakers accomplish those tasks makes some people avoid using them. The technology turns everything said during meetings into data. Confidential personnel information, corporate strategies, trade secrets and remarks that could later be seen as incriminating — all of it could end up in the wrong hands.

“There are huge risks to the organization on AI notetakers,” Amy Dufrane, the chief executive of human resources training and certification provider HRCI, said. “I don’t think companies should use it at all.”

An AI notetaker is a software application or device that uses artificial intelligence, speech recognition and large language models to record, transcribe and summarize conversations. The tools are intended to save time and improve participation, but professionals in a number of fields say there are reasons to be wary.

This article is part of AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health. Read more Be Well.

Chief among them is uncertainty about where the collected data is stored and for how long. Privacy advocates worry the companies behind the AI notetakers are creating voiceprints without consent. Voiceprints — a type of biometric profile similar to a fingerprint but tuned to the unique intonations and characteristics of one’s voice — can be used to access restricted or confidential information, including the contents of bank accounts.

Some tech companies resell data from the notetaking tools they created or use confidential meeting transcripts and recordings to train their AI models. There’s also the risk that conversations between an attorney and client could become fair game in legal proceedings; a New York federal judge in February ordered a criminal defendant to provide prosecutors with documents he created for his lawyers because it already had been shared with a third party, which was Anthropic’s Claude.

“People who use AI notetakers, they don’t always know where the data goes,” said Justin Daniels, an Atlanta-based corporate attorney at law firm Baker Donelson. “And in my context, if the data goes anywhere else and they’re not aware of it, that attorney-client-privileged conversation may not be attorney-client-privileged anymore.”

Here are some tips on the etiquette of kicking an AI notetaker out of a meeting, the risks of using one and how to protect yourself.

The first step when you join a meeting is check for bots

When you join a meeting, make it a habit to check whether an AI notetaker is present. It might appear as a meeting attendee, often labeled as an AI notetaker, or a pop-up message on the screen informing participants the meeting is being recorded. The latter could signal the presence of an AI notetaker.

Virtual meeting platforms such as Zoom and Google Meet let users know when recording is underway, but some meeting software does not make it clear when a notetaker is present, according to Thorin Klosowski, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s senior security and privacy analyst.

Participants also may use personal notetaking devices that are separate from the meeting platform, in which case the other attendees wouldn’t necessarily know a discussion was being recorded and transcribed.

“You hope the other person would tell you that they’re doing that,” Klosowski said. “Asking everyone for consent before doing a sensitive meeting would be the most polite approach to take.”

If you’re unsure whether someone has deployed an AI notetaker, you can ask. You can also state at the beginning that a meeting is not authorized for recording.

A polite way to establish such a boundary is to say, “Our company policy is that this meeting cannot be recorded,” Dufrane suggested. This relieves the employee, such as a salesperson who wants to make a good impression, of having to be the “bad guy,” putting the onus on the company instead, she said.

Another option is to allow the notetaker for part of the gathering but turn if off at the end to dedicate time for more delicate topics.

“I won’t start talking about anything substantive until it’s shut off, because I just don’t want to take the risk,” Daniels said.

Assert your privacy rights to protect voiceprints

Many AI notetakers determine unique acoustic signatures, or voiceprints, for each speaker in the room, said Chris Pluymers, associate attorney at The Dillon Law Group in East Lansing, Michigan. That’s how the companies distinguish one speaker from another, labeling them with monikers “Speaker 1” or “Speaker 2.”

One way voiceprints are used is to verify the identities of bank account holders over the phone. If bad actors got ahold of a person’s vocal signature, they could use it to access files, commit fraud or take over accounts, he said.

Laws in some states govern how voiceprints can be created and stored and provide rights that individuals can assert to object to the use of an AI notetaker during meetings they attend.

In Illinois, voiceprints are considered biometric identifiers, similar to fingerprints, and are covered under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act, which requires written notice and informed consent before an AI notetaker or other agent collects voiceprints. The law also mandates a documented data retention schedule and destruction policy, Pluymers said. But most companies using the tools have none of those systems in place, Pluymers said.

“In the world of AI, the world of data and privacy, the world of biometric identification, I don’t think you can have such a lax approach to it,” Pluymers said. “I think getting out ahead of it is crucial.”

Under the Illinois law, employees can say they don’t want to attend a meeting with an AI notetaker until they have assurances of where and why the data is being stored, and when it will be deleted, Pluymers said. They can also ask if there is a policy and written consent form to sign.

If an AI notetaker shows up at a meeting unexpectedly, a participant could say, “I prefer we keep this meeting without AI recording or transcript tools and I’d be happy to take my own notes and share a recap if that’s helpful,” Pluymers suggested. “Just being warm and genuine about it and asking them to respect your wishes.”

Know where your data goes

When working with AI notetaking apps, find out whether the companies that built them retain recordings, transcripts or metadata indefinitely or use them to train AI models, said Danielle Kays, a partner at Fisher Phillips who represents businesses on privacy and employment law matters.

“If there is some sort of speaker ID or voice recognition, really understand what that is and how it works,” Kays said.

Even when content is deleted, metadata about meetings can remain stored with the vendor, meaning sensitive business information could influence how the model behaves and in some cases could be memorized or reproduced, she said.

AI notetakers generate text, and that’s easier for outsiders to search through than video or audio files, according to EFF.

“Storing a bunch of video isn’t easy, it’s costly and hard to look through, but text is much easier to search and cheaper to store,” said Klosowski of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

___

Share your stories and questions about workplace wellness at [email protected]. Follow AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health at https://apnews.com/hub/be-well

World

Argentinian flight instructor jumps to death from plane, 22-year-old student forced to land alone

Published

4 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Press Room

Argentinian flight instructor jumps to death from plane, 22-year-old student forced to land alone

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A flight instructor jumped to his death out of a small aircraft over Argentina, forcing the student pilot he was teaching to land the plane herself.

Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, 42, was on board a two-seat Cessna 150G on Saturday when he made the decision to jump out over the province of Córdoba, according to CNN, which cited its Argentinian affiliate TN.

“He made this tragic decision on board an aircraft with another person by his side,” Eduardo Álvarez, director of the Flying Parrot Córdoba flying school where Bertazzo worked, told TN. “It’s impossible to think about it or understand it, but the human mind is so complex.”

An undated photo of Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, a 42-year-old pilot who jumped to his death from a plane on Saturday, July 4 in Argentina. (Instagram/Leandro Bertazzo)

PILOT DECLARES MAYDAY BEFORE SEAPLANE COMES DOWN IN NEW YORK CITY’S EAST RIVER

Rosario, the 22-year-old student, later told authorities that Bertazzo told her, “You know what you have to do, carry on,” before taking off his gear, opening the door and leaping out, according to Álvarez.

Opening the door of a plane midair is incredibly difficult. Álvarez said it would be akin to trying to open the door of a car traveling 124 miles per hour.

Cessna 150m FRA150M climbing out after take-off with flaps deployed and hills behind. (aviation-images.com/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

FRANTIC SEARCH UNDERWAY FOR CREW AFTER BOEING 737 WRECKAGE FOUND BY OFFICIALS

Álvarez said that Rosario managed to land the plane safely, despite being in “complete shock.” There was no damage to the plane, according to TN.

Álvarez noted that Bertazzo had gone on a flight with another student earlier in the day.

A view from the main road of the flight school Bertazzo worked at, Flying Parrot Córdoba. (Google Maps)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Álvarez also told TN that Bertazzo had visited a psychiatric institute, something that was only known by his family prior to his death.

Prosecutors in Córdoba will lead the investigation into Bertazzo’s death. The plane he jumped from is now in police custody.

James Cirrone is a writer on the Breaking/Trending News team at Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to james.cirrone@fox.com.

World

Former US Olympian pleads not guilty in DC reflecting pool vandalism case

Published

5 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Press Room

Former US Olympian pleads not guilty in DC reflecting pool vandalism case

Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn denies damaging US President Donald Trump’s Washington, DC reflecting pool renovation.

Published On 9 Jul 2026

A former US Olympian has pleaded not guilty to vandalising the newly renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, in a case that has drawn national attention amid accusations that the administration of US President Donald Trump is trying to shift blame for a troubled renovation.

David “Davey” Hearn, a 67-year-old three-time Olympic canoe racer, entered his plea in federal court on Thursday after prosecutors accused him of “maliciously” damaging the “American flag blue” lining installed at the bottom of the reflecting pool at Trump’s request ahead of celebrations taking place at Washington’s National Mall for the 250th anniversary of the United States’ independence on July 4.