Editor Tracy Hof has joined FilmCore Editorial. She had been freelancing for the past several years with spot credits for such clients as Gatorade, Toyota and the U.S. Army.
Hof, who’s also experienced in documentaries and independent films, will be based at FilmCore, Santa Monica, but will also be available for assignments through the company’s shops in San Francisco and New York.
She first established herself at now defunct Straight Cut, initially as an assistant before being promoted to editor in 1998. There she cut Cybercash’s “Lifestyle Choice” directed by Jeff Gorman of JGF (now bicoastal Sandwick Films) for agency Katsin/Loeb, San Francisco. That spot went on to win a Gold Lion at Cannes in ’00.
In one of the most important cases of the social media age, free speech and national security collide at the Supreme Court on Friday in arguments over the fate of TikTok, a wildly popular digital platform that roughly half the people in the United States use for entertainment and information.
TikTok says it plans to shut down the social media site in the U.S. by Jan. 19 unless the Supreme Court strikes down or otherwise delays the effective date of a law aimed at forcing TikTok's sale by its Chinese parent company.
Working on a tight deadline, the justices also have before them a plea from President-elect Donald Trump, who has dropped his earlier support for a ban, to give him and his new administration time to reach a "political resolution" and avoid deciding the case. It's unclear if the court will take the Republican president-elect's views — a highly unusual attempt to influence a case — into account.
TikTok and China-based ByteDance, as well as content creators and users, argue the law is a dramatic violation of the Constitution's free speech guarantee.
"Rarely if ever has the court confronted a free-speech case that matters to so many people," lawyers for the users and content creators wrote. Content creators are anxiously awaiting a decision that could upend their livelihoods and are eyeing other platforms.
The case represents another example of the court being asked to rule about a medium with which the justices have acknowledged they have little familiarity or expertise, though they often weigh in on meaty issues involving restrictions on speech.
The Biden administration, defending the law that President Joe Biden signed in April after it was approved by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress, contends that... Read More
