• The music streaming service Spotify has operated at a loss since its inception in 2006.
• The company, which filed to go public on Wednesday, said that its losses come from royalties and licensing fees for musical artists. 
• In 2017, Spotify generated $4.99 billion in revenue but posted $1.5 billion in losses. 

Licensed content and music royalties are keeping the music streaming company Spotify in the red.

The Swedish company has lost a cumulative €2.4 billion — or $2.9 billion — since its inception in 2006, according to the paperwork Spotify filed on Wednesday for a public offering. 

"We have incurred significant costs to license content and continue to pay royalties to music labels, publishers, and other copyright owners for such content," Spotify wrote in its filing. " If we cannot successfully earn revenue at a rate that exceeds the operational costs, including royalty expenses, associated with our service, we will not be able to achieve or sustain profitability or generate positive cash flow on a sustained basis."

It turns out these music royalties aren't cheap. Spotify spent more than €8 billion — or $9.76 billion — in royalties to artists, labels and publishers since 2006. In 2017, the company's expenses related to music rights grew by 27% from the year before. 

Licensing fees area a necessary part of Spotify's business, and the company knows that its relationships with music labels could make or break it as a company, according to the F-1.

While the hefty music fees are a necessary cost of doing business, Spotify can recoup those costs by reeling in more paying subscribers and advertisers. 

So far, Spotify has struggled to do that: In 2017, Spotify grew its revenue 38% year-over-year, bringing in €4.09 billion. But its losses more than doubled during the same period, expanding from €539 to €1.235 billion.

Spotify said in its filing that it intends to introduce new services and features that could help boost its subscribers and outpace its music competitors at Apple, Amazon and Google.

And, of course, it's having a splashy IPO — a great way to advertise its music service to new potential subscribers. 

SEE ALSO: Spotify, the music streaming service that's crushing Apple Music, just filed to go public in a very weird way

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What it's actually like to hear voices in your head

• Spotify filed to go public Wednesday in a "Direct IPO."
• In its SEC paperwork, Spotify used the example of Lorde to show how it could launch a music artist's career.
• Spotify says Sean Parker helped catapult Lorde to stardom by putting her on his playlist, "Hipster International."

Spotify filed to go public on Wednesday (in a weird way), and the music-streaming giant used the opportunity to take credit for launching pop star Lorde's career.

In its SEC paperwork, Spotify emphasized that it could help both emerging and established artists by allowing their music to be discovered. 

"One prominent example of how Spotify enabled an aspiring artist to reach a global audience is international pop star Lorde," Spotify wrote.

Here's how Spotify describes Lorde's rise to stardom:

"Lorde started out as a singer-songwriter from New Zealand looking to break out with her new single, 'Royals,' when Sean Parker added her single to his popular playlist Hipster International. After approximately one month, Lorde had jumped past prominent artists such as Katy Perry, Drake, and Lady Gaga to land at the top of Spotify’s Viral Chart, and after eight months, she had reached over 100 million streams on Spotify and was #1 on the Billboard Hot 100."

According to Spotify, we need to add another accolade to tech disrupter Sean Parker's already long resume. After founding Napster when he was a teen, Parker went on to become the president of Facebook (before stepping down), and an early investor and board member at Spotify. Then in 2013, using his ironically named Spotify playlist, "Hipster International" (which currently has 748,778 followers), he shot Lorde to the heights of Katy Perry, Drake, and Lady Gaga.

"I feel like in many ways she's the antidote to disposable pop music," Parker told Forbes at the time. "I feel like it was accessible to the same people who listen to Katy Perry, for instance, but there's obviously something more authentic and personal to Lorde's music. I got the sense she represents the return to a singer-songwriter approach to songwriting, and yet she has a knack for writing incredibly infectious melodies."

While the extent to which Spotify's existence allowed Lorde to become a star can be debated, it is clear that a placement on Spotify's prominent playlists (like RapCaviar) can help boost an artist's profile.

It is also evident that Spotify wants to position itself to investors as a service that is good for artists, and can help jumpstart their careers.

SEE ALSO: Spotify, the music streaming service that's crushing Apple Music, just filed to go public in a very weird way

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

• The Paramount Network is delaying the premiere of its "Heathers" reboot after the shooting in Parkland, Florida that took 17 lives.
• The satirical comedy depicts violence at a high school, including teenagers murdering each other.
• It was supposed to debut March 7.

The Paramount Network is delaying the premiere of its "Heathers" reboot out of respect for the victims and families of the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. 

The reboot of the Winona Ryder and Christian Slater 1988 movie was set to premiere March, but will now be delayed until later this year. The plot of the movie (and the new show) revolves around a teenage girl who teams up with another student to murder the popular kids at their school.

On Wednesday, Paramount Network (formerly SpikeTV) released a statement:

"Paramount Network's original series 'Heathers' is a satirical comedy that takes creative risks in dealing with many of society's most challenging subjects ranging from personal identity to race and socio-economic status to gun violence. While we stand firmly behind the show, in the light of recent tragic events in Florida and out of respect for the victims, their families and loved one, we feel the right thing to do is delay the premiere until later this year."

Even though "Heathers" is comedic, its depiction of violence between teenagers, especially on school grounds, is likely the reason why the Paramount Network made the decision to postpone it. 

The Paramount Network describes the "Heathers" reboot as an "hour-long pitch black comedy set in the present day." It stars Grace Victoria Cox, James Scully, Melanie Field, and Brendan Scannell. Shannen Doherty, who starred in the original “Heathers,” is set to guest star along with Selma Blair and Casey Wilson.

Paramount did not specify when the series will premiere (however it has not been canceled).

SEE ALSO: Spotify says Sean Parker launched pop star Lorde's career by putting her on his 'Hipster International' playlist

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

• Spotify is preparing to become a public company.
• An IPO will be very good for a number of Spotify executives and investors who own a lot of shares.
• Here's a list of the biggest shareholders in Spotify who stand to get rich (or get richer) if the IPO goes well.

Global music streaming service Spotify just filed the paperwork for its IPO in which it hopes to raise at least $1 billion for the company.

The company won't be the only beneficiary. Should its stock fare well, Spotify's founders, executives and major investors will also fare well.

We don't know yet how much money Spotify hopes its shares to sell at, so we don't know how many millions Spotify will bring each of these people or investment firms. Spotify will price its shares closer to its first day of trading. 

But we do know who owns a lot of shares and who stands to get a windfall, thanks to its IPO documents filed with the SEC.

Here are the biggest potential winners from the Spotify IPO:

Daniel Ek, 35, is the company's co-founder CEO and the face of Spotify. He currently owns 25% of the company and nearly 47 million shares. Those shares will be worth more than $1 billion if Spotify trades at $22 per share or more.

Wealth is nothing new to Ek. He's been a self-made millionaire for over a decade now after selling his first company, ad tech startup Advertigo, at age 23 for $1.25 million.

After that sale, he bought fancy cars, wooed women and wound up feeling empty and depressed he later admitted.

That's when he started thinking about doing something next with his life, had long talks with Swedish businessman Martin Lorentzon where they envisioned creating a way to allow people to have better access to all of the world's music. And here we are at Spotify's IPO.

Martin Lorentzon, 48, co-founder and director and former chairman, is the next biggest shareholder. He owns 13% of the company, just under 24 million shares.

Lorentzon's first partnership with Ek was when the ad network company he founded, Tradedoubler acquired Ek's company Advertigo in 2006 and made the young Ek a millionaire.

Investor Sony Music Entertainment International owns over 10 million shares. Its investment deal, and the royalties it made from sharing its huge catalog of music with Spotify, was the source of some dispute. 19 artists including Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood sued Sony over it, alleging they weren't getting their fair share of money Spotify was paying Sony. As Spotify prepped for its IPO, Sony settled that suit in January. 

Investor Technology Crossover Management (TCV) owns 9.5 million shares, overseen by TCV partner and Spotify board member Christopher "Woody" Marshall. Marshall has a huge roster of successful investments under his belt, including Netflix, Airbnb, Twilio, Dollar Shave Club, others.

Investor Tiger Global owns 12.2 million shares. Tiger is one of the world's largest hedge funds, founded by Chase Coleman, an early investor in Facebook and a power player in tech and finance.

Investor Tencent, owns about 13.4 million shares. Tencent is the Chinese internet giant, run by its billionaire, engineer founder CEO Pony Ma. He is one of China's wealthiest people.

CFO Barry McCarthy owns 142,680 shares, and has upcoming options to purchase about another 1.5 million shares. McCarthy is the former CFO of Netflix.

Shishir Mehrotra, 38, owns 99,560 shares. Mehrotra is a board member and former YouTube executive. In April he was granted $2.6 million worth of shares for his time as an employee at Spotify, too.

There are a number of other well-known people who will also benefit with Spotify's IPO because they are serving on Spotify's board. This includes Padmasree Warrior, former star engineer at Cisco and current CEO of NIO US (a Chinese electric car company); Nike exec Heidi O’Neill and Netflix exec Ted Sarandos.

SEE ALSO: Spotify, the music streaming service that's crushing Apple Music, just filed to go public in a very weird way

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I've used the iPhone for 10 years and these are my favorite tips and tricks

• Netflix will have roughly 700 new and original TV shows in 2018, the company's chief financial officer announced at a conference. 
• It is expected to spend some $8 billion this year, mainly on original content.
• Netflix is one of the best performing stocks this year.

Netflix is set to add roughly 700 new original television shows in 2018, Variety's Todd Spangler reports, citing an announcement by CFO David Wells at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference on Monday. 

The streaming service is expected to spend roughly $8 billion this year, and a large chunk of that cash will go towards growing its inventory of original content. That became evident when earlier in Febraury Netflix signed  "Glee" and "American Horror Story" producer Ryan Murphy to a five-year, $300 million deal. 

"The increase in original content, including those 700 shows, is part of the company's ongoing effort to create and improve its content base for current and future subscribes," Piper Jaffray analyst Michael Olson told Business Insider.

Olson, who is one of the most bullish Netflix analysts on Wall Street and has a $319 price target for the stock, said that by making a larger portion of its content original, Netflix is giving itself a competitive advantage because it's selling "unique content that they can control" and tailor to its subscriber base.

BTIG Research's Rich Greenfield told Business Insider that "it appears that the investment in programming is driving not only more subscribers, but the ability to raise prices." Netflix's subscriber growth has impressed of late, hitting a record 8.3 million in the fourth-quarter of 2017. Aditionally, the company raised the price of its standard plan in October by $1 to $10.99 a month, and could raise it again later this year. 

However, some on Wall Street remain skeptical of the company's heavy spending. Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter, who is one of the longest running Netflix bears, told Business Insider the company is "not investing prudently," and even if Murphy has a 50% success rate, it is "still going to lose money."

Netflix is up 46% this year, and is the top performing FAANG stock by a wide margin.

SEE ALSO: Pizza Hut is the new official pizza of the NFL — and that should terrify Papa John's

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What happens to your body when you start exercising regularly

• Spotify CEO Daniel Ek introduced himself to the world with a letter to potential investors.
• At roughly 1,300 words, Ek's letter touched upon the company's business potential.
• "We really do believe that we can improve the world, one song at a time," Ek wrote.

Spotify is ditching underwriters, roadshows and even predetermined price ranges in its unorthodox "Direct IPO." But there's one tradition the music streaming company is sticking with: The founder's letter.

The so-called founder's letter has become a staple of tech IPOs, pioneered by the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter.

And Daniel Ek, Spotify's 35-year-old Swedish cofounder and CEO, did not disappoint. 

Ek's letter to investors, titled "Our Path" and contained on page 92 of Spotify's F-1 filing, weighed in at a hefty 1,259 words. That easily topped the 471 words written by Roku CEO Anthony Wood and the brief, perhaps symbolic, 138 words of Twitter cofounder Jack Dorsey, yet was respectfully shy of the 2,189-word manifesto penned by Mark Zuckerberg in 2012.

In keeping with the genre, Ek used soaring language and details of his personal life to tout the values of the company, the benefits of the product and the limitless potential of the business.

"What started out as an application and grew into a platform must now become a global network," he declared.

But the letter also veered into uncharted territory as Ek let his vision run wild. Ek described a future Spotify that serves as a "cultural platform where professional creators can break free of their medium’s constraints" and "where everyone can enjoy an immersive artistic experience that enables us to empathize with each other and to feel part of a greater whole." 

The letter's Burning Man-esque feel soon took on a political tone, as Ek preached a global worldview at odds with the isolationist climate sweeping across many countries today.

"This is the future we envision; where artists cross genres and cultural boundaries, creating ideas that propel society forward; where fans can discover something they never would have otherwise; where we’re all part of a global network, building new connections, sharing new ideas, across cultures," Ek wrote.

In what may become the letter's most memorable line, Ek signed off on a hopeful note:  "We really do believe that we can improve the world, one song at a time."

Here is the full letter, which you can also read here:

SEE ALSO: Spotify, the music streaming service that's crushing Apple Music, just filed to go public in a very weird way

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Elon Musk's The Boring Company sold out of these $500 flamethrowers

• Spotify released its financial results Wednesday as part of the paperwork it filed to become a public company.
• The results show just how difficult the streaming business is, even for the market leader.
• Investors shouldn't expect Spotify to ever become a big money maker.

If you hadn't figured this out already, the streaming music business is a terrible one to be in.

That's the chief takeaway from the financial paperwork Spotify filed Wednesday in advance of becoming a public company. Despite dominating the subscription music market, the company generates relatively little money per user, has to give away nearly all the money it generates to the big recording companies, and continues to rack up losses.

And, as the company warned potential investors, things may never get much better.

"There can be no guarantee as to when we will eventually reach profitability, if at all," the company said in it regulatory filings.

It's been clear from the years and years worth of losses Pandora has posted that streaming music can be a tough business. But one would have hoped that Spotify would be in a much better position. After all, by some measures, the company has been wildly successful.

Spotify dominates the streaming music business

Not too long ago, there were plenty of doubters around who wondered if consumers would ever give up buying songs and albums in favor of paying a monthly subscription. Now, subscriptions generate far more money for the music industry than paid downloads, thanks in no small part to Spotify.

The company has 159 million monthly active users from around the world, 71 million of which pay a monthly subscription fee to use its service. Despite facing off against some of the biggest and most powerful companies in the world, including Apple, Google, and Amazon, Spotify has more than held its own. Its number of paying subscribers is about double that of Apple Music, the no. 2 player in the streaming music market.

Even though it's already huge, Spotify continues to grow rapidly. Its number of monthly active users jumped 29% last year. And as impressive as that growth is, Spotify is having even more success convincing users to pay for its service. Its number of premium subscribers grew 46% in 2017.

All that growth has helped lead to improving financial results. The company's sales jumped 39%.

Thanks to contracts it renegotiated with the major record labels last year, Spotify now gets to keep more of the money it takes in from subscribers and advertisers, helping it improve its bottom line. While its operating loss increased last year, the company actually shrunk that loss significantly as a portion of its revenue. And Spotify has generated free cash flow — the amount of cash yielded by a company's operations less expenditures on long-term goods and assets like property and equipment — for the last two years.

But it hands over nearly all its revenue to the record labels

It sounds like everything is moving in the right direction, right? So what's not to like?

Well, as impressively as Spotify has performed and as big of an impact as it's had on the music industry, its business is still nothing to get excited about. Even with the renegotiated contracts, Spotify still has to pay out huge royalty fees to the big record labels.

After paying out those fees and a few assorted other costs directly related to providing its streaming service, the company is left with only around 21 cents of every dollar it takes in. And that's before it has to pay for advertising or research and development.

Those costs are a big reason why Spotify doesn't seem to have ever posted a full-year profit. Last year, for example, it lost about $1.5 billion on $5 billion in sales. Even if you back out a big one-time financing expense it recorded and some much smaller finance-related income, the company would still have lost $461 million on its operations alone.

If you exclude certain non-cash charges, as Wall Street analysts are fond of doing, Spotify's operations actually generated money. Just not a whole lot. Last year, the company produced $133 million in free cash flow, up from $89 million the year before.

To put those numbers in perspective, Spotify generated about 84 cents of cash for every monthly active user it had last year, up from about 72 cents the year before. All those $10 a month subscriptions it sells and ads it posts on its free service? They added up to less than a $1 per user — for the whole year.

The company is hemmed in by user expectations and deep pocketed rivals

And you shouldn't expect Spotify to ever generate lots of cash, even it it does eventually become profitable.

Here's why.

The appeal to consumers of music streaming services like Spotify is that they offer access to practically all recorded music for a relatively affordable price.

As such, the services are completely dependent on the music labels to grant them access to their libraries — and they have to pay whatever the labels think is fair. Right now, that's somewhere in the neighborhood of 80 cents of every dollar — but that price could up.

Spotify could try to pull a Netflix and publish more artists on its own, rather than having to license all the songs and albums from the big music labels. 

But the Netflix model won't translate to Spotify. 

That's because unlike Netflix, Spotify couldn't get away with offering a more tailored selection of content. Consumers expect access to a universe of music when they subscribe to a streaming service. It's different than TV, which is more hit-driven. 

If Spotify goes narrow, it becomes a nice-to-have service for consumers, instead of the must-have universal music service that consumers will gladly let Apple, Google or Amazon charge their credit cards for every month. 

And that points to the fundamental "catch-22" problem in the streaming music business.

You can't go narrow. But if you go broad there's little to differentiate the streaming services. They all basically offer the same proposition. Sure, the apps consumers use to access them are different, and some offer better features than others, but consumers basically get the same thing from each one for the same basic price. That close competition limits Spotify's ability to raise prices or differentiate its service.

And while music is Spotify's entire business, it's a just side hustle for Spotify's bigger rivals. Apple Music helps sell iPhones. For Amazon, music helps make its Prime subscription service more attractive. Those companies can afford to run their music businesses at breakeven or even at a loss, because they're making their money elsewhere. Spotify doesn't have that luxury — but its sales and costs will likely be influenced by such factors.

So don't get too excited about Spotify's impending debut on the public markets. Yes, it dominates streaming music. But that position isn't worth a whole lot.

SEE ALSO: Spotify, the music streaming service that's crushing Apple Music, just filed to go public in a very weird way

MORE BI PRIME: Here's why Spotify is bypassing the normal IPO process — and why more companies don't do it

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We built Nintendo's next big thing, Nintendo Labo

Retro feels, pastel hues, and symmetrical buildings are just some of the recurring themes in the works of cult filmmaker Wes Anderson — and it turns out similar places exist in real life.

Brooklyn-based die-hard Anderson fan Wally Koval originally created his Instagram account @AccidentallyWesAnderson after being inspired by a Reddit forum called "Accidental Wes Anderson."

His account is a space dedicated to sharing photos of buildings and landmarks around the world that look like they could be straight out of one of his films.

Koval told Business Insider: "I have always been a big fan of Wes Anderson's work, developing a bit of a fascination for the extraordinary aesthetic he brings to the locations and settings portrayed in his films. When I started seeing real-life Anderson-esque locations pop up on the Subreddit, I became intrigued to know more about the history and background behind the facades, so I started digging."

Now, he manages the Instagram account with his fiancée Amanda, whom he calls their "chief location scout."

"@AccidentallyWesAnderson is a community, an inspiration, and an adventure — we explore the intersection of distinctive design and the unique narratives that typically follow. We hope to contribute to an unending bucket list of travel destinations, and perhaps help someone put a new pin in their own map," he said.

Ahead of the release of Anderson's new film "Isle of Dogs" later this month, Koval shared a selection of photos from the account with Business Insider. From palaces in Jaipur to Berlin's "gritty" rapid transit systems and dreamy Art Deco buildings in Downtown LA, scroll down for some Wes Anderson-inspired travel inspiration — bucket lists at the ready.

*Photographers are listed by their Instagram usernames along with the year each landmark was built.

SEE ALSO: The 30 most stunning and influential Instagram travel accounts to follow in 2018

Lake Shore Place, Chicago, c. 1926 — @HasoTaso

Stadtbad Lichtenberg, Berlin, Germany, c. 1928 — @Berlinstagram

Eastern Columbia House, Los Angeles, California, c. 1930 — @ElizabethDaniels01

Each year, deserving actors and actresses lose out in the Oscars' best acting categories.

But there are a handful of great actors that the Academy has repeatedly nominated and proceeded to repeatedly neglect. 

Amy Adams has lost five times at the Oscars for five captivating roles, most recently with her first best actress nomination for 2013's "American Hustle."

But some all-time greats like Glenn Close, Richard Burton, and Peter O'Toole have had it even worse.

Here are the 21 actors who have been nominated for at least four Oscars without winning once:

SEE ALSO: The 40 actors who have won multiple Oscars, and who has won the most

Michelle Williams — 4 nominations

Best actress nominations: "Blue Valentine" (2010), "My Week with Marilyn" (2011)

Best supporting actress nominations: "Brokeback Mountain" (2005), "Manchester by the Sea" (2016)

Barbara Stanwyck — 4 nominations

Best actress nominations: "Stella Dallas" (1937), "Ball of Fire" (1941), "Double Indemnity" (1944), "Sorry, Wrong Number" (1948)

Stanwyck received the Academy Honorary Award for lifetime achievement in 1981.

Rosalind Russell — 4 nominations

Best actress nominations: "My Sister Eileen" (1942), "Sister Kenny" (1946), "Mourning Becomes Electra" (1947), "Auntie Mame" (1958)

• "Red Sparrow" director Francis Lawrence reacts to the love-hate response critics have had to the movie.
• Despite some saying that the movie glorifies rape and violence, he said, "I don't think it's gratuitous in any way."

 
Jennifer Lawrence's latest movie "Red Sparrow" opens in theaters on Friday, and depending who you believe in the film criticism world, the 20th Century Fox release is either a unique spy thriller rarely made by a Hollywood studio, or a dull pretentious work that glorifies rape and violence. 

With a current rating of 60% on Rotten Tomatoes, the love-hate reaction for the movie is one that its director, Francis Lawrence ("Hunger Games: Catching Fire" and "Hunger Games: Mockingjay" 1 and 2), is still trying to wrap his head around.

"I haven't read too many reviews yet but I'm starting to get that sense," Lawrence told Business Insider on Wednesday about the polarizing reaction to the movie. "It's hard for me to tell quite yet what it is people hate about it."

Based on the 2013 Jason Matthews novel of the same name, "Red Sparrow" follows a famed Russian ballerina named Dominika (Jennifer Lawrence) who is recruited to become a "Sparrow," part of a Russian intelligence unit that trains its agents to use seduction and manipulation to get what they want.

The movie is violent and sexually graphic — in one scene Jennifer Lawrence is nude and uses her sexuality to intimidate a man who attempted to rape her in a previous scene — which has thrown off many who were expecting Fox to release a more traditional action-packed spy thriller.

Lawrence said this might be part of the reason for the split reception.

"I certainly knew that taking on this kind of content would turn some people off," he said. "There's just some people who don't want to watch tough movies and movies with brutality. I don't think it's gratuitous in any way or that I went too far or too gory or anything like that, I wasn't interested in that, I was interested in intensity. Some of it may be in preconceived ideas of who Jen is, what they think a spy thriller should be, people may also have a hard time with this kind of content in the world now."

Much of the focus of the film's publicity has been on why Jennifer Lawrence took the role, which she she said "empowered" her following being the victim of a hack that led to nude photos of her being leaked online in 2014. But some critics don't see it that way. New York Post film critic Sara Stewart described the movie as "a throwback to old Hollywood in its belief that gratuitous rape and violence are the best way to create a heroine with backbone."

"Eventually I will read reviews," Lawrence said. "But listen, I would rather people love it or hate it than think it's mediocre."

SEE ALSO: Our predictions of who will win at the 2018 Oscars on Sunday night — and who really should win

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

• Lupe Fiasco spoke with Business Insider after attending a technology summit at the headquarters of Autodesk with the Society of Spoken Art (SOSA), his educational guild for rappers.
• Fiasco touched on his work with SOSA, using blockchain technology to "revolutionize music," and choosing Reddit as the exclusive forum of news for his upcoming album, "DROGAS Wave."

Lupe Fiasco has made a career of releasing intricate and innovative rap albums, but his interests have never been limited to music. 

In 2015, Fiasco founded the Society of Spoken Art (SOSA), an educational guild with the mission of introducing established rappers and aspiring artists to a slate of academic concepts. 

Business Insider spoke on the phone with Fiasco last week, after he and a group of SOSA members participated in a two-day technology summit with the architect and lecturer Michael Ford at the San Francisco headquarters of Autodesk. 

Fiasco, newly independent from his contentious contract with Atlantic Records, touched on his work with SOSA, using blockchain technology to "revolutionize music," and choosing Reddit as the exclusive forum of news for his upcoming concept album, "DROGAS Wave."

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

Lynch: In this post-Atlantic phase of your career, how has having a greater level of creative control changed your approach to the craft, or has it?

Fiasco: No, I mean, it hasn't necessarily changed. It's just what I show to the world is different, if that makes any sense.

Lynch: Going off that, from what you've said about "DROGAS Wave," your next album, the working concept of it sounds like it's about to be incredible. How has greater creative control informed your work there?

Fiasco: You're gonna have to sign up to the Reddit. I made a promise to my little Reddit community that I'll only discuss "DROGAS: Wave" on Reddit [laughs]. To the chagrin of Twitter, and Instagram, and all the publicity folks, I kind of save it for the fans. You know, I think that one of the reactions, outside of music, has just been: focus on the fans. Let them be the first to crack things, or get the exclusive or the insight. And I've made a deal with them that I wouldn't talk about the album except on Reddit. I kind of broke it a little bit on Twitter, but it was things that we had already discussed prior. But in terms of anything that wasn't on Twitter, I just want people to democratize that process. It's like, hey, follow the Reddit page, subscribe to the sites, and I'll give you all the Easter eggs and the ideation and how the process grew and where it's going, and things you can expect from the album. I might even do some special previews of certain things on there. But I just wanted to isolate the process, really focus on the core, which is my fans. And I think that's something that, over the years, I've been more focused on what the press thinks, or what the label thinks, or what I think. And I think now that I have opportunity, let me just focus on the fans and give them the scoops, you know what I'm saying?

Lynch: I understand that, but why Reddit in particular, as a forum? What drew you to that?

Fiasco: I was watching [laughs]... There's this podcast. What's it called? "Stuff They Don't Want You To Know." And it was like this super interesting topic they were talking about, like assassins, or something like that, and Lake City Quiet Pills. And it was like, "Yeah, this came out on Reddit." And I'm thinking, what is this Reddit thing? You know, it just seemed like a place where if I wasn't a rapper, I'd probably be on Reddit 24 hours a day. You know what I'm saying? Like that's just the person that I am. But nah, it was a message-board space that I'd never really went into, and it wasn't like super fanned out. It wasn't like a bunch of fans posting up every little tidbit about my life. It just seemed like it was a little bit more serious, in terms of the conversation. It wasn't just like a bunch of fan boys, and stuff like that, or fan girls. And it was something that was direct, like you had to be on there. And people were pretty cool with when I just told them, "Look, if y'all can just keep everything that I do here on Reddit, and not go to different message boards or go to the press, or put it on a blog or something like that." And I mean, people kind of abided by that, which has never happened anywhere else that I've tried to do something fan-direct. So I just felt like, I have their trust, they have my trust now, so it just seemed like the right community to do it in.

Lynch: On a sort of similar topic, Michael Ford talked a bit about Genius as a forum that's at the intersection of a lot of the things he's preoccupied with. The Genius page for your song "Mural" — it's a lyrical masterpiece, and seeing how people break it down is compelling. But I wonder what you think of that sort of crowd-sourced dissection of songs. Do you find that productive?

Fiasco: I think it's good in terms of its inception and what it was meant to do. I think sometimes it spoils too much. But then, at the other side, they get a lot of stuff wrong. So I'll go in there and look at the annotations like, "That's wrong." But I won't fix it [laughs]. And I've always promised that I would never fix it, right? Just kinda let it rock. But I think some people don't want to be spoiled. You know, they don't want to get it first. They want to take their time with it. They don't want to be told the end of every movie, every time, just for the sake of a dope review that you put out first, or something like that. So, especially for rappers like myself, where a part of what I do is this puzzle-rap kind of thing, to get you to think about certain things, or listen to something four or five times, where you really may not get it until three years later. I think, when I came up listening to rap, that was exciting to me. That journey or that kind of puzzle aspect of it was exciting, and I think to spoil that sometimes can be a little funky. But at the same time, too, there's a plus to it because people can maybe relate to the raps a little bit more, or really kind of get it. But, just to be up front, some of that stuff is just wrong [laughs]. I'll let you find out what it is, on the next episode of Lupe Fiasco. But overall, I like it, man. I remember when they first started and it was a super cool idea. So, I'm all for it.

Lynch: To touch on SOSA for a bit, the stated mission behind that, what do you think rappers or lyricists in general can learn from the study of semiotics and linguistics?

Fiasco: With SOSA, our main goal is to introduce or make rappers aware of those fields, of linguistics, of semiotics, and then all of these other things that we kind of get into, all these other rabbit holes. It comes into communication theory, literary criticism, etcetera, etcetera. And it's more to introduce it to them in a very high-end kind of way, meaning that the information is not dumbed down. It's not like "hip-hop-ified" or "rap-ified." We don't teach you how to rap. We teach you how to hopefully become a linguistics professor, or what have you. So the curriculum is really intense in that aspect of it, but we deal with really high minds. We're really selective about who we choose to be a part of SOSA. People that not only want to expand what they do as rappers, but also expand and venture out into other opportunities. Similar to, in staying with Autodesk and Michael Ford, exploring these new territories, but exploring it in a very meaningful, articulate way. Leaving open the wild creativity of rap, and other things that we do to create what we do, but putting that kind of intellectual or academic backbone there as well. So to sum it up, the question that we answer at SOSA is, "Rappers know how to do it. But we don't necessarily know what we're doing." SOSA wants to answer that "what," or help rappers answer that "what" for themselves. What they choose to do with it, how they choose to do it is kind of up to them, but SOSA just wants to be that support group and that place where they can go if they're interested in expanding beyond entertainment, when it comes to rap.

Lynch: I've just got a few state of the industry questions. In popular music recently, there's been a trend of sort of overlong albums. Do you think that's something that is compromising artistry at all, or is it strictly a commercial thing? How do you view that topic, maybe in respect to your own work?

Fiasco: You said "overlong albums"? What do you mean?

Lynch: Yeah like album length, 24 tracks. Migos had 24 tracks, that's like an hour, 40 minutes [laughs]— that's crazy.

Fiasco: I mean, I think that's dope. "Doctor Zhivago" is like six days long. I think it's dope! My only issue with that is that, when I was in the industry, I got demonized for trying to do that. The labels and the publishing companies, everybody was like, "No, you can't do that. Your album has to be 12 songs. Anything over 14 songs you actually lose money when you sell the album." So I got hit with everything under the sun to get me to keep albums under 12 songs. And now to see people like Drake or Migos, or — yeah, I looked at Migos album, "Culture II" was like a double CD, and I was like, "Man, I wanted to do a double CD and they wouldn't even let me" [laughs]. So I mean, it's dope. It's good to see that there's an avenue. I'm sure that has to do with the digital space, streaming having something to say about the length of an album. So that's kind of one of the pluses, where if you have a really dense, extended idea, that there is a place for it to be commercially released and commercially accepted. I look at it as a positive. 

Lynch: What about personally, in the age of streaming, has the prospect of knowing that that's how people are consuming music changed your process at all, or your approach to album-making?

Fiasco: No, not really. No.

Lynch: Do you have any thoughts on cryptocurrency, if you have it or don't have it?

Fiasco: It's a sham, baby! It's a sham! [laughs] No, I have somewhat of a close compatriot who's on the forefront of blockchain, and the implementation of blockchain, on a very high level. And I've had a candid conversation with her about what is the real fruit when it comes to that whole kind of piece, and it's the blockchain side of it, as opposed to the crypto side of it. I mean, the crypto is gonna have a place the same way that, what were they called, what were those flowers called? No, no, remember Trolls back in the '90s? Like "Oh, these trolls are worth 20 million dollars now." People are gonna find a way to speculate and value things no matter what it is. I mean, whether it was troll kids, or flowers, or baseball cards, or it's digital currency, you're always going to have that regardless. And I think there's going to be a time to win in that and then a time to lose in that, but I think the difference between those things and the cryptocurrency, specifically bitcoin now, is that the technology and the implications and applications for that blockchain side of it is going to be so massive.

And I think that is what is interesting to watch, as opposed to trying to make money off cryptocurrency. Specifically for music, like hopefully blockchain will revolutionize music. It's a disagreement that I've always had with Spotify, which was, they're saying, you can never get rid of piracy. And that was the reason we can charge .00000 nothing for a song, and completely devalue music. But then you have blockchain technology coming around, where you say, "Ah, now we're able to kind of reverse that process," by implementing kind of blockchain strategy when it comes to licensing music. So I think that aspect of is super interesting on a professional side, a personal side, intellectually, I think it's also interesting. But in terms of thoughts on crypto, I think it's like any other kind of speculative commodity, if you got in early enough, you're a genius or you're lucky, and you're just going to kind of rid the wave until something else comes along and pushes that out the way.

SEE ALSO: 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

• Netflix just released "The Push," a reality TV special from UK mentalist and magician Derren Brown.
• In the special, Brown tries to see if he can manipulate someone into committing murder.

On Thursday, Netflix premiered its latest venture into reality TV, following the "Queer Eye" reboot which debuted in February. But "The Push" is a lot darker than "Queer Eye."

"The Push," a special that's just over an hour, shows UK mentalist, magician, and TV star Derren Brown trying to convince someone to kill another person. "Can we be manipulated by social pressure to commit murder?" Brown asks in the trailer. The special made its original debut on Channel 4 in the UK in January 2016.

Some Netflix users were disturbed by the show's premise when the trailer came out, and questioned whether it was real. But the show is very real, though the murder is not. Brown's goal with "The Push" is not to actually get people to murder someone: He wants to see if it is possible to convince someone to. And if he can convince someone, what lengths would he have to go to, and who would do it?

For the special, Brown puts a man named Chris into a scenario that builds up to a point when he must decide to kill someone or not. Chris attends a charity event, and discovers he's the only one who dressed up: something is already very strange.

A series of stranger and stranger events build up throughout the special, which lead him to a roof, where he ultimately has to decide to push someone off the building. A team of actors and make-up artists help make the scenario feel like reality for Chris. 

IndieWire made an unlikely comparison that actually makes a lot of sense: Comedy Central's "Nathan for You." On that show, comedian Nathan Fielder uses his business background and insight to "help" struggling companies and people, frequently offering them terrible advice. 

"Gathering a bunch of people together for a charity where someone has to deliver a speech and everyone’s in on it except the one person talking played out very close to the 'Chili Shop/Massage Parlor' episode from last year’s Season 4," Indiewire wrote. "The biggest change here is Fielder’s deadpan voiceover explaining the various steps in the process has given way to a more earnest, devious Brown."

But Bustle pointed out the psychological effects this manipulation can have on someone. "How does one recover from the psychological trauma of being manipulated into pushing a man off a building? Even if the subject manages to resist the peer pressure, surely the psychological toll is still great."

Brown doesn't see "The Push" that way.

"Within five minutes of the end happening, they were fine," Brown told The Independent. "But it's amazing how malleable people become. We think we've got these values and morals that we could never transgress, but all that goes out the window."

SEE ALSO: The 21 actors who have gotten the most Oscar nominations without winning one

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio are teaming up with Quentin Tarantino for the director's upcoming ninth film, "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," Tarantino announced on Wednesday.

Pitt and DiCaprio were in talks to star in the film for weeks, but the contract negotiations for it were reportedly so "strenuous" that DiCaprio was ready to walk away from the project in January, sources told The Hollywood Reporter. 

Pitt previously worked with Tarantino on 2009's "Inglorious Basterds," and DiCaprio appeared in 2013's "Django Unchained."

"Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" is set for release on August 9, 2019.

Here's everything we know about Tarantino's upcoming ninth film:

SEE ALSO: Quentin Tarantino's next film will be released by Sony following the Harvey Weinstein scandal

The film takes place in "Los Angeles in 1969, at the height of hippy Hollywood."

Tarantino described "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" in a statement on Wednesday, calling it, "a story that takes place in Los Angeles in 1969, at the height of hippy Hollywood. The two lead characters are Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio), former star of a Western TV series, and his longtime stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt). Both are struggling to make it in a Hollywood they don't recognize anymore. But Rick has a very famous next-door neighbor ... Sharon Tate."

In July 2017, early reports of the film described its script as focused on the murder of actress Sharon Tate by Charles Manson's followers. 

While Tarantino's most recent statement mentions Sharon Tate as a player in the movie, Tarantino previously said that the film would not center on Charles Manson, but on the year 1969.

It has been five years in the making.

Tarantino said on Wednesday that he had been working on the script for the film for half a decade.

"I’ve been working on this script for five years, as well as living in Los Angeles County most of my life, including in 1969, when I was seven years old," he said. "I’m very excited to tell this story of an L.A. and a Hollywood that don't exist anymore. And I couldn't be happier about the dynamic teaming of DiCaprio & Pitt as Rick & Cliff.”

It's a "Pulp Fiction-esque" movie

Deadline reported in January that the Leonardo DiCaprio would play an "aging actor" in a "'Pulp Fiction'-esque movie."

"Pulp Fiction," Tarantino's 1994 classic, told a collection of interconnected stories.

• Jeff Franklin, the showrunner for Netflix's "Fuller House," has been fired.
• Studio Warner Bros. Television did not renew his contract due to accusations of inappropriate behavior on the family friendly show.
• Franklin has been accused of verbally abusing staff and making explicit sexual comments in the writers' room.
• Franklin isn't the only man to be fired from a Netflix show after allegations of bad behavior.

Netflix's "Fuller House" showrunner Jeff Franklin was fired over allegations of inappropriate behavior, Variety reported Wednesday.

Warner Bros. Television, the studio that makes "Fuller House," did not renew Franklin's contract.

Franklin was accused of verbally abusing his staff, and making inappropriate comments in the writers’ room, such as sexually explicit comments about his sex life. Franklin was not accused of directly sexually harassing or assaulting any staffers. 

A source told Variety that Franklin brought a lot of women he was dating to the set, and gave them bit parts on the show.

In a statement to Business Insider, Warner Bros. said, "We are not renewing Jeff Franklin’s production deal and he will no longer be working on ‘Fuller House.'" Netflix confirmed to Business Insider that season four of the show would move forward, however.

“I’m heartbroken to be leaving Fuller House," Franklin wrote on Instagram Wednesday, first spotted by Deadline. “Creating and running Full House and Fuller House has been the greatest joy. I wish the cast, my second family for over 30 years, continued success. I’m so proud of all we accomplished together, and beyond grateful to our loyal fans. Adios Tanneritos!”

Franklin isn't the first man working on a Netflix original show who's been let go over accusations of inappropriate behavior: "House of Cards" star Kevin Spacey and "The Ranch" star Danny Masterson were let go as well after accusations of sexual assault against them surfaced. 

Here are the three Netflix shows that have been affected by allegations of inappropriate behavior, and what happened:

SEE ALSO: After accusing her 'One Tree Hill' boss of sexual harassment, the showrunner for Lifetime's 'UnReal' tells us how she creates a safe environment on her show

Kevin Spacey, "House of Cards"

Kevin Spacey was the star and executive producer of "House of Cards."

In November 2017, allegations of sexual harassment and assault surfaced against the actor, which included having sex with minors.

"Netflix will not be involved with any further production of House of Cards that includes Kevin Spacey," Netflix said in a statement. "We will continue to work with MRC during this hiatus time to evaluate our path forward as it relates to the show."

"House of Cards" sixth and final season with air in 2018 and focus on Robin Wright's character.

Danny Masterson, "The Ranch"

In December 2017, Netflix fired actor Danny Masterson, who starred opposite Ashton Kutcher in "The Ranch." Four women have accused Masterson of sexual assault, including rape.
Masterson said he was "very disappointed" in Netflix's decision, and denied all of the accusations against him.

In a statement, Netflix said, "As a result of ongoing discussions, Netflix and the producers have written Danny Masterson out of 'The Ranch.' "Yesterday [December 5] was his last day on the show, and production will resume in early 2018 without him."

Jeff Franklin, "Fuller House"

Warner Bros. TV, the studio that makes "Fuller House" for Netflix, did not renew Franklin's contract for any more seasons.

The decision was made after several complaints about Franklin's behavior in the writers room.

“‘Fuller House’ will return for a fourth season, as planned," Netflix said in a statement. "We hope to go into production in the next few months.”

• The Oshry sisters, famous on Instagram, have made a name for themselves with viral memes and even a morning talk-show on YouTube.
• But a new Daily Beast report shed light on their mom, anti-Muslim political blogger Pamela Geller, who was banned from England for her extreme views. 
• Their Oath show "The Morning Breath" was then canceled.

The Oshry sisters — Claudia, Jackie, Olivia, and Margo — are famous Instagram stars who have rose in popularity thanks to viral memes and social media videos. Claudia, better known by her username @girlwithnojob, is the most notable with nearly 3 million Instagram followers. She routinely posts memes such as this one:

But their life isn't all glitz and gifs.

The sisters seem to have been trying very hard to distance themselves from their mother, Pamela Geller, and her history of anti-Muslim views. But a Daily Beast report Wednesday shed light on the connection, and it's already having consequences.

Claudia and Jackie's (@jackieoproblems) YouTube morning show "The Morning Breath" was canceled Thursday by Oath, the company formed after Yahoo and AOL merged. The company issued a statement to The Daily Beast: "The Morning Breath, an Oath social-media show, is being canceled immediately and we have launched an internal investigation and will take other appropriate steps based on the results of the investigation."

This was a swift fall from grace for the Oshry sisters. Just last month, Oath CEO Tim Armstrong raved about the sisters in an interview with Recode (as Recode's Peter Kafka pointed out Thursday).

"Check out 'The Morning Breath,' I think it's one of the most ground-breaking programs," Armstrong said. "The Oshry sisters are some of the most talented people I've ever met. The impact they're having in the younger news generation is going to be meaningful."

Geller is known for being an anti-Muslim activist, far-right political blogger who has contributed to Breitbart News, and the executive director of Stop the Islamization of America (which the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified as a hate group).

Geller was even banned from England in 2013 because of her views. A government spokesman said at the time, "We condemn all those whose behaviours and views run counter to our shared values and will not stand for extremism in any form."

The sisters had mostly tried to keep their distance from their mother (they don't even follow her on social media) and have kept silent on her actions until now.

Claudia issued the following statement to The Daily Beast after the report ran:

"We want to be clear to our audience and fans that our political and cultural beliefs are not anti-Muslim or anti-anyone. Our views are separate from our mother’s. Being raised by a single parent, we were taught to make our own choices based on our personal beliefs. We are inspired to think for ourselves and we do.  We do not condone discrimination or racist beliefs of any kind."

Claudia also posted a video on Instagram Wednesday night apologizing for anti-Obama Tweets that resurfaced in The Daily Beast's report:

The Daily Beast report doesn't seem to be slowing Geller down, though. She posted half a dozen Muslim-related tweets Thursday morning.

SEE ALSO: 21 pieces of politically charged artwork posted by actor Jim Carrey, who has amassed over 17 million followers on Twitter

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

• Jay Z is the richest hip-hop artist in the world, according to a new ranking from Forbes.
• Alongside his wife Beyoncé, they're one of the world's richest power couples.
• From entertainment to politics to tech, these happily married pairs span many industries and have a combined fortune of over $260 billion.
  

Some people seem to have it all.

Juggling a successful career or marriage has its challenges, but doing both well can quickly launch you into power couple status.

Devoting time to the relationship may be harder for power couples. But across many industries, from entertainment to politics to tech, these duos have managed to stay happily married while building empires together. And they're not just powerful — they also have a combined fortune of over $260 billion.

Scroll through to see seven of the richest power couples in the world.

SEE ALSO: Mark Zuckerberg and his college-sweetheart wife, Priscilla Chan, are worth $74 billion — see their houses, cars, and travels

DON'T MISS: Inside the decade-long relationship of Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who met at a networking lunch and once broke up because of religious differences

Tom Brady and Gisele Bündchen

Combined net worth: $540 million

Both halves of this tanned and toned power couple, who have been married for eight years, are in the top earners of their respective industries. Supermodel Gisele Bündchen is the highest-paid model in the world, raking in $30.5 million in 2016, and Patriots quarterback Tom Brady is the third-highest paid player in NFL history. His endorsement deals earn him about $8 million annually.

Perhaps the most telling example of their wide-ranging influence is the viral news of their insane diet, which is composed of 80% vegetables and 20% lean meats.

Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner

Combined net worth: Between $207 million and $762 million

The eldest daughter of President Donald Trump and unpaid adviser in the White House, Ivanka Trump just celebrated her eighth wedding anniversary with husband Jared Kushner, a senior adviser to the president and owner of a real-estate empire.

Their estimated net worth was revealed earlier this year in public filings that document the couple's assets, including a $25 million art collection, and income from the Ivanka Trump lifestyle brand and various investments.

Kushner suggests the couple, who are parents to three children, have their roles figured out: "I would say she is definitely the CEO of our household, whereas I’m more on the board of directors."

Beyoncé and Jay-Z

Combined net worth: $1.16 billion

Beyoncé and Jay-Z are entertainment royalty. The couple — who has been married since 2008 and have three children — earn their wealth primarily from music producing credits, album sales, live performances, and worldwide tours, as well as stakes in streaming service Tidal, a private jet company, and a luxury champagne brand.

This summer, they bought an $88 million mansion in Los Angeles — for which they took out a $59 million mortgage — making it the sixth priciest home purchase in LA history. Not bad for the highest-paid celebrity couple in the world.

• Twitter released a list of the most-tweeted Oscar nominees.
• None of them are favorites to win.
• This shows a huge discrepancy between what audiences see and what Academy voters see.

Despite a slew of more diverse voters, Academy voters still appear to be out of touch with what audiences like.

Twitter released a list of the most-tweeted Oscar nominees in 2018, and none are favorites to win. Most of them are underdogs, or complete longshots.

Here are the most tweeted 2018 acting nominees:

1. Daniel Kaluuya ("Get Out," nominated for best actor)
2. Timothée Chalamet ("Call Me by Your Name," nominated for best actor)
3. Saoirse Ronan ("Lady Bird," nominated for best actress)
4. Mary J. Blige, ("Mudbound," nominated for best supporting actress)
5. Margot Robbie ("I, Tonya," nominated for best actress) 

None of these performers are expected to win.

Gary Oldman is the favorite for best actor for his role as Winston Churchill in "Darkest Hour," which will be a controversial win considering he was accused of domestic abuse by his ex-wife. If he wins, the reaction will likely be negative, if Casey Affleck's win last year for "Manchester by the Sea" is any indication. 

In the best actress category, Ronan and Robbie will probably lose to favorite Frances McDormand for her work in "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri," a movie that's stirred controversy for its empathetic portrayal of racist characters. 

Although Blige and fellow nominee Laurie Metcalf ("Lady Bird") have a lot of support from fans, Allison Janney is expected to win for "I, Tonya."

Despite admirable and important efforts to finally diversify its voters, it seems like the Academy is still a bit out of touch with popular culture when it comes to picking the winners. This year, all the expected winners are white and straight characters, although plenty of the nominees that are people of color (Blige, Kaluuya) or portrayed gay characters (Chalamet) are just as deserving (or more) of a win.

Perhaps this is because Academy voters are in the industry, or used to be, so their perspective on what's fresh differs from what regular audiences see. But this could also mean that despite a wider range of voters, the older, more expected votes still dominate the Oscars.

And even though some actors are frontrunners, that doesn't mean they'll win. The Academy could still surprise us!

SEE ALSO: Here are the 17 biggest Oscar snubs of 2018

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: You can connect all 9 Best Picture Oscar nominees with actors they have in common — here's how

• In a Twitter exchange Thursday between Marvel Studios and Iron Man actor Robert Downey, Jr., Marvel announced that "Avengers: Infinity War" would be opening a week early.
• The film is now set for an April 27 release date, with a new poster to show for it.

You'll now be able to see "Avengers: Infinity War" a week earlier than expected. 

Marvel Studios announced on Twitter Thursday that the film's release date had been moved up to April 27. It was previously slated for a May 4 release. 

The studio made the announcement during a "casual" Twitter exchange with Iron Man actor Robert Downey, Jr. Marvel Studios asked fans if they were ready to see the film on May 4, to which Downey replied "Any chance I could see it earlier?"

Marvel Studios then tweeted a new poster, similar to the first poster released for the movie but with the new release date.

The new release date puts a bit of distance between "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Deadpool 2," which opens on May 18, and another Disney property "Solo: A Star Wars Story," which opens May 25.

Whatever the reason, it's clear that fans are thrilled at the news if Twitter reactions are any indication (especially Chance the Rapper).

SEE ALSO: 'This is Us' star Sterling K. Brown's 'Black Panther' role was so secretive he didn't even tell his wife about it

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Richard Sherman explains why he's working without an agent going into a contract year

• President Trump's press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, announced on Thursday that video game executives are coming to the White House to meet with the president next week.
• The announcement was made in response to a question about the president's ability to get gun control legislation passed.
• The Entertainment Software Association, which represents the video game industry, has yet to issue a statement regarding the meeting.
• At the heart of this news is President Trump's apparent belief that playing violent video games can lead to violent behavior.

President Trump will meet with video game executives next week, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said during a press briefing on Thursday.

The meeting is part of the White House response to the attack on February 14 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where a gunman killed 17 students and staff members with a legally purchased AR-15 rifle. In the wake of the shooting, a national debate over gun control has re-emerged. 

President Trump met with senators from both parties on Wednesday to discuss legislative measures on gun control. Trump emerged as something of a moderate — he urged raising the legal age of gun purchases from 18 to 21, supported limitations on military-style weapons, and declared intentions to sign an executive order banning "bump stocks."

But Trump has also said "the level of violence on video games is really shaping young people's thoughts." In so many words, Trump seems to believe that playing violent video games is tied to real-life violence.

Sanders offered the news of the upcoming meeting between video game executives and Trump in response to a question regarding the president's effort to pass gun control legislation. The meeting will be held at the White House.

"This is going to be an ongoing process," Sanders said, "And something we don't expect to happen overnight. It's something that we're going to continue to be engaged in, and something that we're going to look into the best ways possible to make sure we're doing everything we can to protect schools across the country."

It's not clear which video game company executives are meeting with Trump, but it's likely to include representation from major players like Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Activision, EA, and a handful of others. 

SEE ALSO: Trump said several things that stunned Republicans in an extraordinary meeting about guns

DON'T MISS: Trump seemed to place part of the blame for school shootings on violent video games and movies — and a Parkland survivor called it a 'pathetic excuse'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Forget 'Make America Great Again' — Wharton professor says Trump has been terrible for America's brand

VRChat is a popular and free multiplayer online experience. It's only accessible via Steam, and only if you own a virtual reality headset — specifically, the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift — but despite its currently limited audience, VRChat is a transformative platform like nothing you've ever experienced. Calling it a video game would be a wild understatement.

In the simplest terms I can muster, VRChat is a surreal virtual meeting space that lets people socialize, attend events, take classes, create art, play games, perform for large crowds, and explore virtual environments — all from the comfort of their own homes.

In the same way that AOL and Yahoo chat rooms gave the world a peak into some of best and worst corners of the internet in the late 1990s and early 2000s, VRChat has become the new virtual Wild West in 2018.

Users claim to have found a community unparalleled by real life there, and a surprisingly large group of people have come out saying that VRChat has saved their lives, as they battle with mental health issues like loneliness, anxiety, and depression. Unfortunately, like other places on the internet, harassment, trolling and hacking are present here, too. 

Above all else, VRChat's rapid growth in users and functionality are unprecedented, and we are only just beginning to see its potential.

Here's what it's like to use VRChat:

SEE ALSO: All the futuristic technologies in 'Black Panther,' and how close they are to becoming reality

DON'T MISS: How to use the new-look Snapchat like a pro, whether you're new to the app or you've been using it for years

THE WORLD

To truly understand what it's like to experience a community entirely based in virtual reality, one must first be willing to leave the physical, biological world behind.

In VRChat, you'll be entering a world where cartoon characters walk through the streets; where portals can transport you from a dungeon in a medieval castle to the holodeck of a spaceship, then to the set the popular 90s sitcom "Seinfeld," in a matter of seconds.

Here are some examples of various playable stages in VRChat.

In this world, the limits of physics, logic and science are no match for the human imagination, which runs rampant with little regard for consequences.

The makers of VRChat make a free software development kit (SDK) available to the public, so that anyone with enough computer storage and a handful of YouTube tutorials can create their own in-game avatars and stages. 

Thanks to the SDK, much of the virtual world in VRChat is user-generated, and awash with plenty of pop culture references. 

There is a downside, however: Since so much of the game design is crowdsourced, and since VR headset controllers and other hardware varies so widely, the graphics in VRChat do not compare to modern AAA video games. To be frank, navigating through the VRChat universe feels like walking through a bizarre, stiff, 8-bit dream. 

But what the platform lacks in design chops, it makes up for in community engagement.