Freddie Flintoff was injured in the crash which happened at Dunsfold Aerodrome near Cranleigh in Surrey, where the former cricketer had been filming for BBC One’s Top Gear
Freddie Flintoff has spoken candidly about injuries – both physical and mental – suffered in the crash (Image: PA)
Freddie Flintoff has told how his two-year-old son wouldn’t go near him after his horror Top Gear crash.
The former professional cricketer, 47, said he became “a snappy mess” following the smash which happened during filming for the BBC One programme at Dunsfold Aerodrome near Cranleigh, Surrey. The three-wheeled Morgan supercar overturned on the track and Freddie, who played cricket for England for 11 years, dragged his face along the ground, cutting open the side of his nose, cheek and lips, and shattering his jawbone and teeth.
But he has spoken this week of how traumatic the mental injuries were, revealing for the first time how the ordeal impacted his children. Freddie, who had PTSD following the accident, said: “(After the crash) I would get snappy and angry.
“The kids were incredible… It was the younger one, Preston, because he would have been about two, two and a half, at the time and he wouldn’t come near me to begin with because I was a mess.”
Top Gear was shelved following the crash, and Freddie reportedly received £9m in compensation from BBC Studios, who make the show. Yet, the star has spoken since at how the experience changed his life, including how he wouldn’t leave his home – except for medical appointments – for six to eight months in the wake of it.
But the former fast bowler, a Lancashire Cricket Club legend, has now said he is on the road to recovery, to a great extent thanks to wife Rachael Wools, whom he wed in March 2005.
Speaking on Piers Morgan Uncensored, Freddie said: “I have flashbacks and nightmares, but I’ve probably got more of an acceptance of them now.
“I suppose that the biggest thing it did do, was brought me back to cricket. Family and friends and cricket have been things that now, have probably helped me more than anything. It’s all good now. But Rachael was strong. I suppose she had to be for both of us.”
Freddie, originally from Preston, Lancashire, has returned to TV work in recent months too. A second series of Freddie’s Field of Dreams – in which he creates a brand-new cricket team with a group of promising teens and inspires a fresh generation – aired on the BBC in 2024. The BBC has given the green light for a third series, it is understood.
And the dad was chosen to front the revival of game show Bullseye, which returned as a trial on Christmas Day last year on ITV. It became so popular ITV commissioned Bullseye for a full series, which is set to broadcast before the year is out.
“KPop Demon Hunters” creator Maggie Kang thinks there’s potential for more Huntr/x stories in the future, but only in animation.
In a recent interview with the BBC, the co-director of the Netflix phenomenon said there is nothing officially in the works, but she thinks “there’s definitely more we can do with these characters in this world.” Kang and her co-director Chris Appelhans also assured fans that if another “KPop Demon Hunters” were to happen, “it will be a story that deserves to be a sequel, and it will be something that we want to see.”
Produced by Sony Pictures Animation, the movie follows a popular K-pop girl group whose members use their music and dance moves (and magical powers) to fight demons and protect the world. But Huntr/x’s leader Rumi is keeping a secret from her bandmates Mira and Zoey that could lead to their downfall.
With Hollywood’s current trend of sequels and remakes, it’s easy to believe that “KPop Demon Hunters” could spawn its own franchise. But Kang and Appelhans both insist that a live-action adaptation should be off the table.
“It’s really hard to imagine these characters in a live action world,” Kang told the BBC, pointing to the tone and comedic elements in “KPop.” “It would feel too grounded. So totally it wouldn’t work for me.”
Appelhans agreed that the characters in “KPop Demon Hunters” are best suited for animation and worried a live-action version of them could feel too “stilted.”
“One of the great things about animation is that you make these composites of impossibly great attributes,” Appelhans told the BBC. “Rumi can be this goofy comedian and then singing and doing a spinning back-kick a second later and then free-falling through the sky. The joy of animation is how far you can push and elevate what’s possible.”
For now, it seems that Huntr/x will keep shining only in the medium they were born to be — in animation.
A SHOPPER has sparked a debate among bargain hunters after sharing an incredible yellow sticker haul on social media – and admitting she cleared the shelves of highly reduced items.
The savvy shopper managed to scoop up 51 cartons of fruit juice for less than £4, along with a massive discount on cleaning essentials.
3
Multiple packages of Dettol antibacterial multi-purpose cleaning wipesCredit: Facebook/ExtremeCouponingAndBargainsUK
3
Collection of Morrisons brand juice boxes, featuring both apple & blackcurrant and orange flavoursCredit: Facebook/ExtremeCouponingAndBargainsUK
The post quickly racked up comments after the woman declared: “Yes I cleared the shelves who wouldn’t,” justifying her massive purchase.
The focus of her shopping spree was Morrisons, though she noted the deal might not be nationwide.
The woman, who shared her impressive savings in the popular Facebook group Extreme Couponing And Bargains UK, basket was full of discounted everyday essentials.
She bought 17 multipacks of juice cartons (4x apple and blackcurrant, 13x orange juice) that were priced at a mere 20p per pack.
This means she paid just £3.40 for 51 individual juice cartons, a saving of over 90% on the original price.
The money saver also grabbed a huge stock of Dettol cleaning wipes.
These were marked up at 75p but scanned at an even lower 37p per pack of 70 wipes.
She bought 13 packs, grabbing a year’s worth of cleaning supplies for just £4.81.
But her post soon quickly got a reaction from other money savers.
Many users congratulated her on the incredible luck, insisting that any serious bargain hunter would do the same but others disagreed.
I did my weekly shop in Tesco for under £25 – here’s my exact shopping list & my tip to avoid tears when chopping onions
“I wouldn’t have cleared the shelf actually,” one wrote.
A second also stated: “It’s lovely to hear of people getting a bargain but when you say…
“I cleared the shelf, surely you didn’t mean that figuratively.
“I mean you did leave some for someone else to ‘get a bargain’?”
3
Morrisons receipts showing 4 cartons of apple and blackcurrant juice and 3 cartons of orange juice drinkCredit: Facebook/ExtremeCouponingAndBargainsUK
“I’m sorry but I get annoyed when people clear the shelf.
“I just think it’s a great bargain but please be fair to others to have the opportunity to get as well,” a third added.
But someone else said: “Why not, great find. That pack lunches are sorted.”
And another added: “Well done you…I would have as well…always share with relations and friends.”
A Facebook user also commented: “Well done you, who wouldn’t take the lot I would , to split between my family.”
Money saving challenges
Here’s some of our favourite money saving challenges.
Weather saving challenge – Save the amount equal to whatever the highest temperature was that week. £1 = 1C.
1p challenge – save 1p a day for everyday of the year, but it increase the amount by 1p each day. So day one you save 1p, 2p on day two and 3p on day three. When you reach 100 days you start adding a £1 coin each day too, while this increases to a £2 coin each day plus pennies at 200 days, and £3 each day on top of pennies at day 300.
20p a day challenge – Start by putting 20p in savings, then increase the amount by 20p every day. For example, the first week will look like this: 20p, 40p, 60p, 80p, £1, £1.20, £1.40.
£5 a week challenge – Like the 20p challenge, put aside £5 a week and increase it by a fiver each week. Eg £5, £10, £15, £20
Round-up challenge – Every time you buy something, round up the purchase to the nearest £1 and put the difference in a savings account. Eg. You pay £2.60, so you put 40p in savings. You can use an app such as Monzo or Starling to do this.
Bingo challenge – Here you have a bingo card with different numbers on it and you tick them off when you’ve put that amount in your savings account. It can be ad hoc but you have to tick them all off by the end of the month.
Monday to Sundaychallenge – With this challenge, you simply save £1 on Monday, £2 on Tuesday and so on until the weekend where you don’t save on Saturday or Sunday.
365 day challenge – Every Sunday you put aside £1, followed by £2 on Monday, £3 on Wednesday and so on. On Saturday you’ll put away £7, and then the process repeats and you’ll put aside £1 on Sunday as the new week begins
MORE than a few eyebrows were raised at the Emirates when Arsenal’s starting line-up was announced.
In particular the midfield three of Mikel Merino, Declan Rice and Martin Zubimendi.
7
Declan Rice started in a three-man midfield against Manchester CityCredit: Getty
7
Martin Zubimendi joined Rice in the midfieldCredit: Reuters
7
Mikel Merino was a more surprising name in the Gunners midfieldCredit: AP
It was a defensive-minded decision by Arteta to put pressure on City’s Rodri and limit his influence from deep while keeping things tight until he found the courage to fling on his attacking game-changers at the right moment.
It backfired massively.
Those who criticised Arteta for playing not to lose instead of going for the win at Liverpool last month – eventually losing 1-0 – have even more fuel to chuck on the now-blazing fire.
He had a fully-fit Eze on the bench, and yet kept the handbrake on with a safety-first approach. The question remains: does Arteta have the bravery to win a league title?
The sort of midfield that would have been Jose Mourinho-approved, but one that Arteta must NEVER start again in a title-defining game again if Arsenal are to compete for the Prem.
That trio had no pace, no drive, no attacking intent – and Arsenal have no hope of glory come May should they combine from the off again.
7
Pep Guardiola and Sir Alex Ferguson in 2011Credit: Getty – Contributor
7
Liverpool boss Arne Slot and GuardiolaCredit: Reuters
MARTINELLI MORE THAN JUST A ‘FINISHER’
MIKEL Arteta made it clear after Arsenal’s Champions League opener just how much it pains him to leave Gabriel Martinelli on the bench.
The Brazilian came on away at Athletic Bilbao on Tuesday night and after 36 seconds he netted before creating another for Leandro Trossard.
It was not enough for Arteta to reward Martinelli with a first start for nearly a month against Manchester City, revealing that he prefers to call his subs “finishers” to give them more meaning and motivation.
But after yet another late goal to snatch points, there is now a dilemma for Arteta: continue using him as a super-sub – or super-finisher – or recall him to that left-winger spot.
Martinelli would admit himself that he has not been in good form over the last 18 months with just 18 goals in all competitions over the past two seasons.
But he is certainly knocking on the door. Is this the start of his North London renaissance?
7
Gabriel Martinelli rescued a point for ArsenalCredit: Getty
EZE SHINING IN GOOD COMPANY
WITH England boss Thomas Tuchel watching on, Eberechi Eze proved why he is so special and belongs on the biggest of stages.
Eze would have been more than frustrated to be left on the bench for this one, desperate to build some momentum in an Arsenal shirt with next summer’s World Cup looming.
But boy did he deliver when he was thrown on at half-time with Mikel Arteta desperate for some magic after playing it safe for the first 45 minutes.
His beautifully-crafted long ball over the top to put in Gabriel Martinelli for a late, late equaliser is exactly why Arteta snatched him from Crystal Palace, lured from the grasps of rivals Tottenham at the last minute.
Once again for large parts, the Gunners struggled to break down a low block, just like they did last season, but Eze is the player with the key to unlock the most stubborn of defences – if he is given the chance.
It cannot be clearer now – Arteta must start Eze as much as possible between now and the end of the campaign if Arsenal are going to claw the Prem title away from Liverpool.
A judge has rejected Erik and Lyle Menendez’s petition for a new trial, ruling that additional evidence that they suffered sexual abuse at their father’s hands would not have changed the outcome of the trial that has put them in prison for more than 35 years for gunning down their parents.
The ruling, handed down by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge William C. Ryan on Monday, is the latest blow to the brothers’ bid for release. Both were denied parole during lengthy hearings in late August.
A habeas corpus petition filed on behalf of the brothers in 2023 argued they should have been able to present additional evidence at trial that their father, Jose Menendez, was sexually abusive.
The new evidence included a 1988 letter that Erik Menendez sent to his cousin, Andy Cano, saying he was abused into his late teens. There were also allegations made by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, who claimed Jose Menendez raped him.
The brothers have long argued they were in fear for their lives that their father would keep abusing them, and that their parents would kill them to cover up the nightmarish conditions in their Beverly Hills home.
Prosecutors contended the brothers killed their parents with shotguns in 1989 to get access to their massive inheritance, and have repeatedly highlighted Erik and Lyle’s wild spending spree in the months that followed their parents’ deaths. .
“Neither piece of evidence adds to the allegations of abuse the jury already considered, yet found that the brothers planned, then executed that plan to kill their abusive father and complicit mother,” Ryan wrote. “The court finds that these two pieces of evidence presented here would have not have resulted in a hung jury nor in the conviction of a lesser instructed offense.”
Ryan agreed with Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman that the petition should not grant the brothers a new trial because the abuse evidence would not have changed the fact that the brothers planned and carried out the execution-style killings in the family living room.
Ryan wrote the new evidence would not have resulted in the trial court proceeding differently because the brothers could not show they experienced a fear of “imminent peril.”
A spokesperson for the group of more than 30 Menendez relatives who have been fighting for the brothers’ release did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for the district attorney’s office was not immediately available for comment.
The gruesome killings occurred after the brothers used cash to buy the shotguns and attacked their parents while they watched a movie in the family living room.
Prosecutors said Jose Menendez was struck five times with shotgun blasts, including in the back of the head, and Kitty Menendez crawled on the floor wounded before the brothers reloaded and fired a final, fatal blast.
The petition rejected this week was one of three paths the Menendez legal team has pursued in seeking freedom for the brothers. Another judge earlier this year resentenced them to 50 years to life for the murders, making them eligible for parole after they were originally sentenced to life in prison.
Both were denied release at their first parole hearing, but could end up before the state panel again in as soon as 18 months. Clemency petitions are also still pending before Gov. Gavin Newsom.
A pilot shared a warning to all passengers travelling to their dream destination by air, as he said there is one thing he would never touch on a plane no matter what
He says it’s better to leave it alone than take the risk (stock image)(Image: Getty Images)
Everyone eagerly awaits their summer getaway – but an airline pilot issued a crucial warning to all travellers heading to their ideal destination by air. He revealed the one thing he would never utilise on an aircraft despite it being designed purely for passenger comfort and convenience.
In a TikTok clip, the pilot, known online as @captain.steeeve8, declared: “Stop putting personal items in the seat back pocket in front of you. If you want to lose it, and never see it again, put it in that dark hole that is the seat back pocket in front of you.
“I can’t tell you how many people I’ve spoken to who have got off the plane and left something personal in the seat back pocket.”
He continues by explaining how retrieving your belongings becomes virtually impossible unless the aircraft remains at the gate and you’ve only just disembarked moments earlier.
Captain Steve added: “The odds diminish that every minute that ticks if you leave that seat and you leave [your items] in that back hole of disappear.”
Responding to his post, one user commented: “My teacher was grading our tests on a plane and put them all, the whole grades math tests in the seat pocket. She forgot them there, we all got an A+.”
Another user added: “Great advices and awesome information as always! Thank you very much! Any tips flying your pets with you?”
A third user said: “Yes all great ideas. Lost my 3D Sudoko book left in the seat pocket! Had to wait for Xmas to get the next volume – done book per year. Was so peeved!” Another user lamented: “Pocket – lost my kindle that way.”
This follows a warning from a flight attendant who advised passengers to avoid washing their hands in aeroplane toilets, suggesting the use of hand sanitiser instead.
The cabin crew member, known as @cherdallas on TikTok, revealed: “I’ve seen people vomit inside the bathroom sinks numerous times so if you drop sometimes in there, I would consider it a loss.
“Never ever have I seen the sinks get cleaned out. The sink water that you wash your hands with is also filthy.
“You’re not allowed to drink it because it has too much bacteria in it so washing your hands with it is probably not great.
“I don’t know what’s in it but it constantly degrades my nails and makes them extremely brittle whether I have paint on them, gel or dip, it completely degrades the outside of it.”
Having extended most of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and added even more tax breaks, Congress is once again punting on the central fiscal question of our time: What kind of government do Americans want seriously enough to pay for?
Yes, the Big Beautiful Bill avoided a massive tax increase and includes pro-growth reforms. It also adds to the debt — by how much is debatable — and that’s before we get to the budgetary reckoning of Social Security and Medicare’s impending insolvency. Against that backdrop, it’s infuriating to see a $9-billion rescission package — one drop in the deficit bucket — met with cries of bloody murder.
The same can be said of the apocalyptic discourse surrounding the Big Beautiful Bill’s reduction in Medicaid spending. In spite of the cuts, the program is projected to grow drastically over the next 10 years. In fact, the reforms barely scratch the surface considering its enormous growth under President Biden.
Maybe we wouldn’t keep operating this way — pretending like minor trims are major reforms while refusing to tackle demographic and entitlement time bombs ticking beneath our feet — if we stayed focused on the question of what, considering the cost, we’re willing to pay for.
Otherwise, it’s too easy to continue committing a generational injustice toward our children and grandchildren. That’s because all the benefits and subsidies that we’re unwilling to pay for will eventually have to be paid for in the future with higher taxes, inflation or both. That’s morally and economically reprehensible.
Admitting we have a problem is hard. Fixing it is even harder, especially when politicians obscure costs and fail to recognize the following realities.
First, growing the economy can, of course, be part of the solution. It creates more and better opportunities, raising incomes and tax revenue without raising tax rates — the rising tide that can lift many fiscal boats. But when we’re this far underwater, short of a miracle produced by an energy and artificial intelligence revolution, growth alone simply won’t be enough.
Raising taxes on the rich will fall short, too. Despite another round of loud calls to do so, like those now emanating from the New York City mayoral campaign, remember: The federal tax code is already highly progressive.
Here’s something else that should be common knowledge: Higher tax rates do not automatically translate to more tax revenue. Not even close. Federal revenues have consistently hovered around 17% to 18% of GDP for more than 50 years — through periods of high tax rates, low tax rates and every combination of deductions, exemptions and credits in between.
This remarkable stability is no fluke. It reflects a basic reality of human behavior: When tax rates go up, people don’t simply continue what they’ve been doing and hand over more money. They work less, take compensation in non-taxable forms, delay selling assets, move to lower-tax jurisdictions or increase tax-avoidance strategies.
Meanwhile, higher rates reduce incentives to invest, hire, and create or expand businesses, slowing growth and undermining the very revenue gains legislators expect. It’s why economic literature shows that fiscal-adjustment packages made mostly of tax increases usually fail to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio.
Real-world responses mean that higher tax rates rarely generate what static models predict as we bear the costs of less work, less innovation and less productivity leading to fewer opportunities for everyone, rich or poor.
If the underlying structure of the system doesn’t change, no amount of rate fiddling will sustainably result in more than 17-18% in tax collections.
Political dynamics guarantee further disappointment. When Congress raises taxes on one group, it often turns around and cuts taxes elsewhere to offset the backlash. Then, when the government does manage to collect extra revenue — through windfall-profits taxes, inflation causing taxpayers to creep into higher brackets, or a booming economy — that money rarely goes toward deficit reduction. It gets spent, and then some.
It’s long past time to shift the conversation away from whether tax cuts should be “paid for.” Instead, ask what level of spending we truly want with the money we truly have.
I suspect that most people aren’t willing to pay the taxes required to fund everything our current government does, and that more would feel this way if they understood our tax-collection limitations. That points toward the need to cut spending on, among other things, corporate welfare, economically distorting subsidies, flashy infrastructure gimmicks, and Social Security and Medicare.
Until we align Congress’ promises with what we’re willing and able to fund, we’ll continue down this dangerous path of illusion, denial, and intergenerational theft — as we cope with economic decline.
Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate.
Lexie Limitless, a US YouTuber who became the youngest person to visit every nation in the world at the age of 21, has named her four least-favourite European countries
10:24, 08 Jul 2025Updated 10:25, 08 Jul 2025
Lexie Limitless took to her channel to share her thoughts on the 44 countries in Europe(Image: Lexie Limitless/YouTube)
A globe-trotting YouTuber who has visited every country in the world has shared her thoughts on the 44 nations in Europe, saying there are four she would not return to. American Lexie Limitless holds the impressive title of being the youngest person to visit every country in the world at just 21.
In her latest video, ‘I travelled to every country in Europe so you don’t have to’, Lexie reveals some of her favourite “hidden gems” from the continent – including Slovenia, Mostar in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Cesky Krumlov in Czech Republic.
However, she also discusses four nations that didn’t quite hit the mark for her.
Lexie said: “Alright, it’s time to talk about one of my least favourite subjects, and I got to say in advance that travel is so subjective. Places that I’ve been that I didn’t necessarily connect with might not be the same for everyone.
“Everyone’s preferences are different, but I think that the countries that didn’t really leave as much of an impression on me as some of the others in Europe would probably be Belarus, Slovakia, Moldova and Bulgaria.”
Lexie listed four nations with which she didn’t really connect(Image: Lexie Limitless/YouTube)
She continued: “If I had to name a few specifically, I think it was just that in those countries, in particular, it’s so important to know a good local who’s going to show you around and show you all the best spots.”
Lexie believes travel is “mostly about” the people you meet along the way. As she didn’t know anybody in these countries, she had a “really difficult” time obtaining “unique experiences”.
She added that it’s almost “unfair” to compare smaller nations like Moldova or Bulgaria, to a country like Italy, as they have some “advantages” geographically, noting the “diversity” in their “environment“.
The seasoned traveller also stated that she tries to “avoid” naming specific countries that she may not necessarily recommend and would “absolutely love” to go back if she had “more of a purpose” or reason to be there beyond sightseeing.
Belarus, a former Soviet republic, is a landlocked nation in Eastern Europe that shares its borders with Russia, Ukraine, and Poland, among others. Since 1994, it has been ruled by President Alexander Lukashenko, who has been dubbed “Europe’s last dictator.”
Lexie added that travel is “subjective” and “everyone’s preferences are different”(Image: Lexie Limitless/YouTube)
Situated within the heart of the continent, Slovakia borders the Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary, Poland and Ukraine. It was formerly part of Czechoslovakia until the so-called “velvet divorce” in 1993.
Meanwhile, Moldova, another landlocked country and former Soviet republic, is nestled between Ukraine and Romania. The BBC reports that two-thirds of its population share Romanian roots, highlighting their shared heritage.
Bulgaria, situated in the eastern Balkans with a coastline along the Black Sea, is predominantly Slavonic-speaking. Since the fall of Communism, it has been steadily transitioning towards a market economy.
Warner Bros. Discovery is in poor shape — so much so that Chief Executive David Zaslav has decided to unwind the 2022 merger he orchestrated by splitting the company in two.
But Zaslav himself is doing just fine, to the chagrin of shareholders.
In a rare searing rebuke, investors recently cast a symbolic vote disapproving of Zaslav’s 2024 compensation package, which rose 4% to $51.9 million compared with the year before.
The package, approved by the company’s board of directors, ensured that Zaslav remained one of the nation’s highest-paid corporate leaders. Proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services, known as ISS, described the company’s executive compensation packages as “an unmitigated pay-for-performance misalignment.”
The situation renewed scrutiny of the compensation levels for leaders of the top entertainment companies, which remain high compared with peers in other industries.
Although 2024 was a bad year for Hollywood, it was a very good year for some of the industry’s top executives, according to a survey of data by Equilar, which studies executive pay, for The Times.
The median compensation for those executives for 2024 was $33.9 million, up 7% from 2023, Equilar said. That’s about double the median compensation of CEOs at S&P 500 companies, which was $17.1 million last year.
The compensation data include stock options, base salaries, bonuses and other perks for CEOs from Netflix, Fox Corp., Roku, Lions Gate Entertainment Corp., AMC Networks, Comcast, Warner Bros. Discovery and the Walt Disney Co.
Paramount was excluded from the median data because of a change from one CEO to three in April 2024.
“The compensation packages remain somewhat out of whack based on the good old days where the margins were substantially higher,” said Evan Shapiro, a former NBCUniversal executive who now runs his own company. “The Hollywood era got used to very specific — some would argue irrational — pay packages and never readjusted itself when the business went haywire.”
Pay packages increased for Netflix co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, reflecting the streaming giant’s strong performance. The value of Sarandos’ pay package went up 24% to $61.9 million, while Peters’ went up 50% to $60.3 million.
Other executives whose compensation increased included Bob Bakish, who was ousted as CEO of Paramount in April 2024. He had a package worth $86.96 million in 2024 (which included his roughly $69 million severance), up 178% from $31.3 million a year earlier.
Disney chief Bob Iger, who spent 2024 mounting a turnaround for the Burbank-based company, earned $41.1 million, up 30% from the previous year. During the year, Disney had renewed strength at the box office and achieved streaming profitability after years of losses.
Fox Corp.’s CEO Lachlan Murdoch’s total pay rose 9% to $23.8 million, while Roku CEO Anthony Wood got a bump of 37% to $27.7 million.
Others got a pay cut. Comcast CEO Brian Roberts’ 2024 compensation declined 5% to $33.9 million, primarily due to a lower cash bonus. AMC Networks CEO Kristin Dolan had a 40% drop to $8.7 million last year related to a $6.8-million equity award she received in 2023 tied to her promotion to CEO.
Lionsgate CEO Jon Feltheimer earned $18.2 million in the company’s fiscal 2024 year, down 15% compared with $21.5 million from fiscal 2023.
For 2024, the highest-paid chief executives among publicly traded media and entertainment companies compiled by Equilar for The Times were Bakish, Zaslav, Sarandos, Peters and Iger.
Most of the companies declined to comment or referred The Times to proxy statements filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Fox Corp. did not return a request for comment.
The increase in pay reflects a broader trend at publicly traded companies. Compensation is increasing as companies try to align pay with performance by handing out large stock awards, said Amit Batish, senior director of content for Equilar. Certain awards such as stock options typically benefit executives only if the stock goes up.
Some executives are also adding security perks after the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson last year, he said.
Several Hollywood executives had pay packages last year that were worth substantially more than the median, Equilar said. With so much change and disruption happening in the entertainment business and plenty of competition for skilled leadership, companies believe they need to pay up to hold on to executive talent.
“Especially in the entertainment industry that’s constantly evolving, with streaming services taking over, there’s constant fluctuations in the market, so companies are looking to find ways to keep their executives on board and motivated,” Batish said.
Sky-high executive compensation has resurfaced debate about a subject that has been simmering since even before the 2023 strikes led by writers and actors — the widening pay gap between executives and workers.
Many entertainment workers have left Southern California due to the lack of work, as more productions are moving out of the area due to increased costs. Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, NBCUniversal and Paramount have continued to lay off employees. Some entertainment workers struggling to find jobs have adopted the saying “Persist to ’26,” replacing last year’s “Survive ‘til ’25.”
“Any survey of executive pay, generally there’s a disconnect between what people see in their own checking accounts and when they see what executives, particularly for top Fortune 500 companies, earned,” said David Smith, a professor of economics at the Pepperdine Graziadio Business School. “There’s often discontent with the chasm between the rank and file and CEOs.”
Zaslav became a symbol of that ire in 2021 when his compensation package was valued at $246.6 million, which included stock options tied to the merger. The value of his 2024 compensation was much lower at $51.9 million, but still higher than other executives such as Disney’s Iger.
Following the nonbinding shareholder “say on pay” vote, Warner Bros. Discovery pledged to address shareholder concerns. Those changes are expected to lower Zaslav’s future payouts. Similarly, Disney and Netflix in recent years have been hit with negative shareholder votes on the pay, leading to adjustments.
Zaslav’s target annual cash bonus opportunity will shrink from $22 million to $6 million after splitting Warner Bros. Discovery in two, separating studios and streaming services from linear cable networks, the company said. Zaslav’s base salary would remain $3 million.
“We structured the new compensation packages to address shareholders’ feedback by fostering pay-for-performance alignment,” Warner Bros. Discovery board chair Samuel A. Di Piazza Jr. said in a statement.
While Warner Bros. Discovery worked on retiring $4.4 billion in debt through cost-cutting and launched its streaming service Max (which is being rebranded back to HBO Max) in 70 markets last year, the company also had some fumbles, including losing the NBA on its TV networks.
“It appears the board may have been out-negotiated,” said Lloyd Greif, chief executive of Los Angeles investment bank Greif & Co. “They created incentives that did not directly translate into a higher stock price, or higher revenue and EBITDA growth” — referring to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. “So,” he added, “you have to look at the results and say, the board blew the call.”
The company’s compensation committee said it took into account Zaslav’s performance across different goals including revenue, cash flow, enhancing the motion picture slate, cost controls, launching Max globally and securing talent.
Warner Bros. Discovery’s revenue in 2024 fell 5% to $39.3 billion, compared with 2023. Adjusted earnings excluding certain items fell 11% during that same time period. The stock price declined about 7% in 2024.
“It just sends a very bad message to your teams,” said Paul Verna, vice president of content at research firm Emarketer, adding that leaders should inspire their teams amid challenges facing the industry. “It’s very hard to do that when you’re firing thousands of people but not really absorbing any pain yourself in your own compensation.”
The committee saw the loss of the NBA U.S. TV rights as a positive, saying it resulted in a “more efficient long-term relationship with the league,” according to the company’s proxy filing.
When the compensation committee evaluated those figures, it took out costs related to a joint venture called Venu Sports that was meant to launch in 2024 but was scrapped, as well as new sports rights programming and packages.
That irked some groups, including ISS, though some executive compensation experts said it is not uncommon for companies to factor out some costs deemed to be out of the executive’s control.
The reverberations of the shareholder vote continue.
It could cause the board to put pressure on the compensation committee to improve its performance or activist shareholders to target the company for a proxy contest, Lawrence Cunningham, director of the University of Delaware’s Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, wrote in an email to The Times.
“Shareholder votes on pay, even when non-binding, send a signal that can be important,” Cunningham wrote. “A 60% no vote is huge.”
Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s David Zahniser, with an assist from Noah Goldberg and Laura Nelson, giving you the latest on city and county government.
Newsletter
You’re reading the L.A. on the Record newsletter
Sign up to make sense of the often unexplained world of L.A. politics.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
If Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass manages to hold on to her power to oversee the city’s homelessness programs, she may well have one person to thank: City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo.
Szabo, a fixture in the administrations of the past three mayors, was effectively the city’s star witness in its legal battle against the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, the nonprofit group that sued the city in 2020 over its handling of the homelessness crisis.
During a seven-day hearing that concluded Wednesday, the alliance pressed U.S. Dist. Judge David O. Carter to take authority over homeless services away from Bass and the City Council and give it to a to-be-determined third party overseen by the court.
On four of those seven days, Szabo sat in the witness chair, defending the city’s decisions and occasionally offering cutting remarks about the city’s critics. Above all, he insisted the city would meet its obligation to provide 12,915 additional homeless beds by June 2027, as required under a settlement agreement with the alliance.
Szabo, who reports to both Bass and the council, is well known within City Hall for his work preparing the city budget, negotiating with city unions and providing policy recommendations on homelessness and other issues. During his time in Carter’s courtroom, he was also a human shield, taking the brunt of the hostile questions and helping to ensure that Bass and others would not be called to testify.
Throughout the proceedings, the city’s lawyers lodged hundreds of objections to the alliance’s questions, sometimes before they had been fully asked. Carter cautioned them that the rapid-fire interruptions could make things difficult for inexperienced witnesses.
He also made clear that the group did not include Szabo.
“Mr. Szabo,” the judge said, “certainly is used to the stress.”
The alliance had placed not just Bass but also Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and Traci Park on its witness list, saying all three had made public statements criticizing the response system. Bass herself called the system “broken” during her State of the City address in April, a fact highlighted by Matthew Umhofer, an attorney for the alliance.
Those statements, Umhofer said, only reinforce the alliance’s argument that the city’s homelessness programs are beyond repair and must be placed into receivership.
“The city is not fixing that broken system,” he said during closing arguments. “It’s simply doubling down on that broken system.”
Bass spokesperson Zach Seidl, asked to explain the mayor’s use of the word “broken,” said she was referring to a number of obstacles, including “an urge from many to return to the old way of doing things that allowed homelessness to explode.”
“But change is happening,” he said. “Under the Mayor’s leadership, we are moving forward.”
The city’s newly hired legal team from Gibson Dunn, the law firm that persuaded the Supreme Court to uphold laws barring homeless encampments on public property, sought to amplify that message. They also claimed the mayor and council members were shielded by the “apex doctrine,” which bars high-level, or apex, government officials from testifying except in extraordinary circumstances.
The city’s lawyers offered up just two witnesses of their own: Szabo and Etsemaye Agonafer, Bass’ deputy mayor for homelessness programs, saying they were the most familiar with the issues. The alliance initially sought 15.
Agonafer testified for about four hours, highlighting progress made by the mayor’s Inside Safe program, which moves people out of encampments and into hotels and motels.
Umhofer ultimately withdrew his subpoenas targeting Bass and the others, saying he didn’t want to incur additional delays. But he called Bass cowardly for failing to show up. By then, he said, his team had enough evidence to show that the city’s elected officials should no longer control homeless programs.
“We have quite literally put the homelessness response system in Los Angeles on trial,” said Elizabeth Mitchell, another alliance attorney, on the final day of proceedings.
The alliance used much of the questioning to highlight problems at the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, also known as LAHSA. That agency, overseen by a board of appointees from the city and county, has been criticized repeatedly in audits dating back to 2001 — documents highlighted by the alliance during the proceedings.
Szabo acknowledged that LAHSA has faced issues with data collection. But he insisted that the city is closely tracking the beds required under its settlement with the alliance. “We have taken steps to ensure that the data we are reporting is accurate,” he told the court.
Carter, who has yet to rule in the case, did not sound as confident in the city’s attention to detail. On Wednesday, he demanded that the city turn over records regarding its compliance with another agreement in the case — this one known as the “roadmap.” The roadmap agreement, which expires June 30, required the city to produce 6,700 beds.
In his order, Carter raised questions about whether city officials had double counted “time-limited subsidies” — money used to help homeless people move into apartments and pay their rent — by applying them both to the roadmap requirements and to the obligations within the alliance settlement agreement.
Szabo said city officials are collecting the records for the judge.
Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, whose district includes Hollywood, voiced confidence in Szabo. He also praised Bass for taking on the issue of homelessness, pointing out that LAHSA reported that the city had made progress last year.
“We’re doing things that are showing results,” said Soto-Martínez, whose office has participated in 23 Inside Safe encampment operations. “Is it perfect? No. But we’re working through it.”
State of play
— ICE RAID OUTRAGE: L.A.’s elected officials voiced their anger on Friday over a series of federal immigration sweeps in Westlake, Cypress Park and other parts of the city. L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis said the individuals detained were “hardworking Angelenos who contribute to our local economy and labor force every day.”
Bass issued her own statement, saying: “We will not stand for this.”
“As Mayor of a proud city of immigrants, who contribute to our city in so many ways, I am deeply angered by what has taken place,” she said. “These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city.”
— WELCOME, AECOM: Nearly five months after a firestorm laid waste to a wide swath of Pacific Palisades, Bass announced that the city has hired the global infrastructure firm AECOM to develop a plan for rebuilding the area and reconstructing utilities and other infrastructure. The firm will work alongside both the city and Hagerty Consulting, which Bass tapped as a recovery contractor in February, according to the mayor’s office.
— SWITCHING HORSES? Businessman and gubernatorial candidate Stephen J. Cloobeck offered praise for L.A.’s mayor last year, commending her for her work addressing homelessness. He even said he had donated $1 million to LA4LA, an initiative promoted by Bass during her 2024 State of the City address, an event he attended. But last weekend, while making the rounds at the California Democratic Convention, he told The Times he wasn’t so keen on Bass’ leadership. “I would support Rick Caruso in a heartbeat over Mayor Karen Bass, and that’s a quote,” he said.
— MISSED MESSAGES: Bass has come under heavy scrutiny for deleting text messages she sent during the January firestorms. But she wasn’t the only one. L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who represents the area devastated by the Eaton fire, has an iPhone that “auto deletes” messages every 30 days, her spokesperson said.
— ENGINE TROUBLE: Earlier this year, then-Fire Chief Kristin Crowley cited disabled engines, and a lack of mechanics, as one reason why fire officials did not dispatch more personnel to Pacific Palisades before the Jan. 7 fire. But a Times analysis found that many of the broken engines highlighted by department officials had been out of service for many months or even years — and not necessarily for a lack of mechanics. What’s more, the LAFD had dozens of other engines that could have been staffed and deployed in advance of the fire.
— SAYONARA, CEQA: State lawmakers are on the verge of overhauling the California Environmental Quality Act, which has been used for decades to fight real estate development and public works projects in L.A. and elsewhere. One proposal would wipe away the law for most urban housing developments.
— PADRINOS PAYOUT: L.A. County has agreed to pay nearly $2.7 million to a teenager whose violent beating at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall launched a sprawling criminal investigation into so-called “gladiator fights” inside the troubled facility. Video of the December 2023 beating, captured on CCTV, showed Jose Rivas Barillas, then 16, being pummeled by six juveniles as probation officers stood idly by.
— EVADING EVICTION: A 70-year-old homeless man who illegally moved into a state-owned house in the path of the now-canceled 710 Freeway extension is fighting his eviction. Benito Flores, who seized a vacant residence in El Sereno several years ago, recently holed up in a tree house he built in the backyard — and so far has warded off attempts by sheriff’s deputies to lock him out.
— AIRPORT AHEAD: The long-awaited LAX/Metro transit center at Aviation Boulevard and 96th Street finally opened on Friday, bringing commuters tantalizingly close to Los Angeles International Airport. For now, free shuttle buses will run every 10 minutes along the 2.5-mile route between the transit center and LAX.
— BREAKING BARRIERS: The first transgender captain in the Los Angeles Fire Department died last month at age 80. Michele Kaemmerer joined the LAFD in 1969, retiring in 2003. She transitioned in 1991 and later led Engine 63 in Marina del Rey. In a 1999 interview with PBS, Kaemmerer said that some firefighters who knew her before she transitioned refused to work with her. Despite those hardships, she “always had a good attitude,” said her widow, Janis Walworth.
QUICK HITS
Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to combat homelessness did not launch any operations at new locations this week.
On the docket for next week: The city’s newly formed Charter Reform Commission holds its first meeting on Tuesday, discussing the process that will be used to select its remaining members.
Stay in touch
That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to [email protected]. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.
A woman has shared her anger after being confronted by a tall man who told her she should give up her extra legroom seat because it’s ‘not her fault he is tall’
The woman wasn’t impressed by her fellow passenger’s behaviour [stock image] (Image: Getty Images)
A woman who booked a premium seat for a 12-hour flight took to Reddit to share her experience after she was asked to swap seats mid-flight. The passenger, who had reserved her plane seats ‘months in advance’, recounted: “At the time of booking I paid extra to choose my seats.
“The seat I chose was $55 extra and right at the front of the plane (trying to arrive somewhere on time upon landing). The seat also happened to be an extra legroom seat and I am a 4’11 female.” Initially, everything went smoothly as she checked in, boarded, and settled into her seat, but things took a turn when “the seatbelt sign was switched off” and a man approached her requesting to “change seats”.
Although initially open to the idea, she quickly declined upon realising his seat “was way in the back of the plane”. She firmly “told him no sorry” and justified her refusal by stating that she’d paid extra to “sit up front”.
The situation escalated as the man grew increasingly agitated and refused to leave, arguing that “there’s no reason someone of my height needs extra legroom (I told him I paid to be upfront).
“I suggested that he ask the other people in those seats if they could swap but he refused saying that he wouldn’t want to bother other men or split up couples.”
The woman recounted how the man turned “rude and angry”, prompting her to summon a flight attendant who instructed him to take his seat. She said: “For the rest of the flight he would walk past for no reason slamming into me (I was sitting aisle).”
She finished her tale by seeking opinions from fellow Reddit users on whether she was at fault and if she should have conceded her seat to him.
Reddit users didn’t hesitate to weigh in on her story, with a number of commenters affirming that she had done nothing wrong and was entitled to stay in her pre-paid seat.
One commenter explained: “So my brother is 6’6″. You know what he does when he has to fly? He makes sure to get an emergency exit row or whatever row has the extra leg room.”
He usually has to pay for it. Any tall person with an ounce of common sense knows they have to do this for flights.
“This tall guy knows he needs more leg room but tried to dodge the extra fee by asking someone to switch. OP was completely justified in refusing ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY PAID EXTRA and the tall person has no right to be a nuisance about it.”
A second chimed in, saying: “Tall person here. If I want more leg room, I can pay for it like everyone else. I don’t pay for the cheapest seat possible and then try to get someone shorter to give me the more expensive seat that they purchased for free.”
And a third added their thoughts: “He is tall, he’s been tall all of his life. He knew flying was a hardship on him and he didn’t wanna spend the extra money and he became an abusive bully to a single female when he didn’t get his way.
“You should’ve reported him and he should’ve been removed from the flight or you should’ve been compensated for your seat. A grown man felt he was entitled for you to give him what he wanted. You were an easy target because you were alone and he didn’t get his way and he harassed you the entire flight.”
