Public enemy | Who Trolled Amber Ep 6

I'm Josie Santee, health coach, wellness editor, and host of the Every Girl podcast, where we cut through the noise with realistic, expert-backed advice to help you thrive in every category of life while still loving the person that you already are. And part of loving yourself is being really authentic to you, including the clothes you wear.
In partnership with Nordstrom, we're helping you update your spring wardrobe so your style is fit for your best self. Nordstrom brings you the season's most wanted brands like Skims, Mango, Free People, and Princess Polly, all under $100.
From trending sneakers to beauty must-haves, we've curated the styles that you'll wear on repeat this spring. Free shipping, free returns, and in-store pickup make it easier than ever.
Shop now in stores and at Nordstrom.com. Getting healthy on a budget can be tough, but that's where Nourish comes in.
Nourish connects you with a registered dietitian for expert nutrition advice without the high cost. The best part? 94% of patients pay $0 out of pocket, since Nourish works with hundreds of insurance plans, like Blue Cross Blue Shield, Aetna, and United.
Meet with your dietician online from home or message them through the Nourish app for extra support. Staying healthy has never been this affordable.
Match with your dietician at usenourish.com. That's usenourish.com slash switch.
Upfront payment of $45 for three-month plan, equivalent to $15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available.
Taxes and fees extra. Default terms at MintMobile.com.
Tortoise. Just a warning before we start, this series contains strong language and descriptions of violence.
I wrote about the nuclear industry in France, EGF, Airbnb, the green industry in Saudi Arabia. Meet Julian.
He's a journalist, but not a normal one. I wrote under the pseudonym of Julien Fomenta-Rosa.
Fomenta, it's the anagram of fantôme, French, so ghost. And Julien Rosa, with a T, it's the anagram for journalist.
So it's a phantom journalist, ghost journalist, which is what I did for six years. Julian has written hundreds of articles, not for a newspaper or a blogging site, but for a French PR firm.
About the human rights in Qatar, presidential elections in many countries, such as Gabon, Ivory Coast, Congo, Djibouti.

The stories didn't look like puff pieces from a PR company. They read like genuine news articles.
And they were convincing enough to appear in major publications like the Huffington Post. But in each case, Julian's real identity was disguised.
My stories were published under some different fake identities, such as lawyers, teachers, students, economists, what else, nurses, could be a professor, an engineer. Anyone reading Julian's work would think it was written by an expert, someone impartial or with real experience, when actually it was anything but.
There was a fire in Flamandille, one of the French nuclear plants in Normandy. And just after a few hours after the fire, then I was asked to write a story to say how safe the plants were.
Julian's work lies in that grey area where PR, fake news and information manipulation all collide. Part of the same shady world that I think may have been used to target Amber Heard.
The only reason we know about Julian's activities is that a few years ago, he decided to get out of the industry. He was worried about being caught and he was starting to lose grip on reality.
I felt like I was leaving the Truman Show because I thought at any time my story and my work would be revealed. I wanted to speak to Julian to understand the world of misinformation better, how it wasn't just about bots and trolls, but about a whole ecosystem of misdirection and fake news.
That was all interesting enough, but then he dropped the name of a company that rang a bell. I happened to write about Rusal, and that was a story about the Ebola virus.
Rusal is a Russian aluminium giant, which was controlled by Oleg Deripaska, one of the country's most powerful oligarchs. Rusal has a huge mining presence in Guinea.
When Ebola struck the West African country in 2014, the company helped to pay to vaccinate the population. For Roussel, this was a significant PR coup, and Julian was commissioned to make sure that everyone knew about it.
I was then asked in the same story to make the reader think that Ebola was one of the worst pandemic ever. And we were very fortunate that some companies like Roussel were brave enough to make this pandemic end and at the end of the brief I was asked like NB you need to make Roussel appear right after the headline.
When he mentions Roussel my ears prick up because I'd just been reading about a man who worked on behalf of Roussel. Someone who was paid to help promote the company's presence in Guinea and specifically worked on its Ebola initiative.
Someone who might have had nothing to do with Julian or the company which employed him, but whose name seems to pop up whichever road this story takes me down.

That name rings a bell, Alexi. Wow.

He's represented a number of very interesting

and in my view controversial people.

I'm talking about the man

who many hold most responsible for trolling Amber.

He attacked witnesses,

he attacked us as the legal team and personally.

It was unlike anything I've seen

from a professional counsel. Johnny Depp's lawyer, Adam Waldman.
I'm Alexei Mostras and this is Who Trolled Amber? The final episode, Public Enemy. Almost everyone I've spoken to for this story has told me, you've got to look at Adam Waldman.
He's the key to all this. It didn't take me long to see what they were talking about.
Since he first had dinner with Johnny Depp in 2016, Adam Waldman has upended the actor's life. It's almost like Johnny Depp had two periods, before Waldman and after Waldman.
Before Waldman, the actor's strategy was generally to ignore criticism, to let his agents and managers sort things out behind the scenes. After Waldman, the strategy appeared to change, to attack, attack, attack.
In January 2017, the same day Depp finalised his divorce from Amber Heard, he sued the management group, or TMG, for $25 million, alleging fraud, negligent misrepresentation, wrongful foreclosure, and a breach of fiduciary duty, E! News reported. Under Waldman's guidance, Depp sued his former lawyers and his former business managers.
This was long before he sued Amber, and these earlier lawsuits went Depp's way. He won big.
The attack strategy seemed to work, so it wasn't surprising that by the time Depp v Heard came around, the gloves were off. Nothing wrong with an aggressive lawyer, you might think, except that in defending Depp, Waldman arguably went too far.
In the UK defamation trial between Depp and The Sun, Waldman was told off by the judge for posting menacing tweets about Amber's witnesses. He was tweeting throughout the UK trial, tweeting his version of what was happening in court.
I've never seen such aggressive and wholly inappropriate public commentary from a lawyer. The Sun's lawyers also accused him of preparing false witness statements and manipulating evidence on Depp's behalf, allegations he denied.
The Sun's QC said that Mr Waldman was prepared to deploy threats and improper tactics to secure trial in the US. A judge there found that he'd leaked confidential information to the press.
Amber's lawyers accused him of being a publicity hound, who was more interested in trolling their client than complying with court rules. Defendant Amber Heard brings this motion for sanctions against Adam Waldman for his repeated abuse of the discovery process, violation of the court's protective order and general conduct in this case.
Adam Waldman doesn't behave like any lawyer I've encountered before. Who on earth is this guy? He advised him on mining operations in Guinea and Jamaica, on a Russian Ebola vaccine.
He was earning a lot of money for doing all of this stuff. I'm in the office with my producer Xavier.
I want to see what else I can learn about Adam Waldman, and I come across these online documents called Farrah filings. Farrah filings are legal papers which you have to file in the US if you work for a foreign agent.
It turns out that Waldman had to file dozens of Farrah papers. Not because of his work for Depp, but because of his relationship with a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.

He works with him on animal welfare, Canadian energy policy, Chinese metal policy. Oleg Deripaska is a super controversial figure.
He's been sanctioned by the UK, Europe and the US. He's been accused of money laundering, threatening the lives of business rivals,

illegally wiretapping a government official and taking part in extortion and racketeering. He's even faced claims that he helped Russia interfere in the 2016 US election.
Deripaska was one of seven oligarchs slapped with sanctions for quote malign activity around the globe. Three of his companies were also sanctioned.
As you might imagine, Deripaska denies everything. I hope that sooner or later people will recognise it's wrong.
We'll try to assess the facts. If Adam Waldman was just Deripaska's lawyer, it would be a colourful detail, but maybe not too big a deal.
Plenty

of people have represented Deripaska through the years. But the Farah filings tell a different story.
He offered Deripaska legal advice, but he also seems to have helped him with his PR and his press strategy. He offered commercial advice to his businesses.
And for all this, he was earning $40,000 every month in 2017.

That amount... commercial advice to his businesses.
And for all this, he was earning $40,000 every month. In 2017, that amounted to more than $560,000.
You can see on one of the forms that Waldman traveled to Siberia, Amsterdam, and Moscow with Deripaska. And the filings say here that the purpose of the travel is marked as friendship, not business.
So at one point at least, these guys were friends. This wasn't just a lawyer-client relationship.
The documents paint a picture that looks far more pally than that. They've been pictured together more than once.
Yeah, so if you look at this website, you can see that it's got pictures of Waldman next to Deripaska at this like Oktoberfest party they're drinking beers together they've got like their arms around each other. There's a Twitter account that shows Waldman like posing with these dogs at a dog charity that I think Deripaska set up so it seems like they were pretty close.
You might think that Oleg Deripaska, a man accused of crimes like money laundering and extortion, was the most controversial Russian that Waldman worked for. But you'd be wrong.
Look at this, right? Like, Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister. Basically, Russia's mouthpiece abroad.
Waldman registers as an agent for him too. Sergei Lavrov is Russia's foreign minister.
Basically Russia's mouthpiece abroad. Waldman

registers as an agent for him too. Sergei Lavrov is Russia's official

mouthpiece abroad. This is Lavrov last year, saying that it was Ukraine which

started the war against Russia. The fara filings make clear that

Thank you. we are trying to stop and which was launched against us using Ukraine.
The Farah filings make clear that Waldman worked for Lavrov in the Russians' official capacity as foreign minister. He was a counsel for Lavrov on political and legal matters as requested, as well as diplomatic matters.
Working for Lavrov means he's working directly for Russia. Waldman's relationship with Lavrov continued for years, from 2010 until May 2017.
Which means, at the time Waldman started working for Depp, he was also working for Moscow. You might ask, what have Waldman's previous clients got to do with Depp v Heard? Well, for me, it's about showing that Waldman was willing to go beyond what you'd normally expect from a lawyer.
He didn't just advise Deripaska, he became friends with him. And he kept working for Lavrov, even after Russia had invaded Crimea in 2014, and even after the country had been accused of attempting to subvert US democracy.

And that's not all, because Waldman also represented a third man,

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.

Taken in isolation, there's nothing wrong with that.

But Waldman was Assange's lawyer at the same time as he was representing the Russian state. And that's interesting given Assange's history with Russia.
Tonight there is growing evidence that Russia is using WikiLeaks as a delivery vehicle for hacked emails and other information. Intelligence and administration officials tell CBS News they're confident the Russian government is behind the DNC's email.
Trump has also denied knowing who is responsible, that he's put out a new campaign ad arguing the WikiLeaks emails provide a window into what he calls Clinton corruption. Assange has always denied that Russia leaked him the emails.
Our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party. What did this mean? Was I stumbling onto a bigger story? I thought that Peter Pomerantsev might be able to help.
He's an expert on Russian propaganda. Disinformation campaigns were always a large part of the Russian states.
They already had a rich tradition of coordinated disinformation campaigns from old media. And then they work out, you can use it with digital media.
They start off

with using it domestically against domestic opposition. Troll farms start coming for the

domestic opposition first, and then they start rolling it out abroad and across the world. And

again, I don't think there's any one trick that they have come up with, but what they've done is

institutionalize it as a tool of foreign policy. and I think they were the first to do that.
Peter had never heard of Adam Waldman, but he knows a lot about the people Waldman associated with. I think you've discovered something that nobody else has really clocked.
This really rather unheard of character who seems to be, we don't know if he's at the centre of the web or the side of the web, but part of a very, very, very malign, let's be frank, web of characters who played a very active role in subverting Western democracies and furthering Russia's aims. What started out as a celebrity courtroom drama

has morphed in my mind to something bigger, more convoluted.

A kind of shadow world of disinformation,

where companies, celebrities and countries like Russia all overlap.

It's hard to work out how all these strands fit together,

but Adam Waldman's name keeps coming up. I'm Josie Santee, health coach, wellness editor, and host of the Every Girl podcast, where we cut through the noise with realistic, expert-backed advice to help you thrive in every category of life while still loving the person that you already are.
And part of loving yourself is being really authentic to you, including the clothes you wear. In partnership with Nordstrom, we're helping you update your spring wardrobe so your style is fit for your best self.
Nordstrom brings you the season's most wanted brands like Skims, Mango, Free People, and Princess Polly, all under $100. From trending sneakers to beauty must-haves, we've curated the styles that you'll wear on repeat this spring.
Free shipping, free returns, and in-store pickup make it easier than ever. Shop now in stores and at Nordstrom.com.
Are you trying to get healthier but have no idea where to start? Connect with a registered dietitian through Nourish and learn how to fuel your body in a way that actually works for you. Because eating better doesn't mean eating less.
Take appointments with your dietitian online from home, plus message them anytime for extra support. And since Nourish works with hundreds of insurance plans like Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Aetna, and United, 94% of patients pay $0 out of pocket.
Ready to take control of your health? Get started at UsNourish.com. That's UsNourish.com.
Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile, with a message for everyone paying big wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop.

With Mint, you can get premium wireless for just $15 a month.

Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments, but that's weird.

Okay, one judgment.

Anyway, give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch.

Upfront payment of $45 for a three-month plan, equivalent to $15 per month required.

Intro rate first three months only. Then full price plan options available.
Taxes and fees extra. What is your current occupation? Attorney.
I'm also involved with a skincare company in a variety of capacities. I want to speak to Adam Waldman directly.

I have a lot of questions.

But before I call him, I bring up a video of the deposition he gave in the Depp v. Heard trial.

On tape, he looks smart in a white shirt and blue tie.

But what he says isn't exactly revelatory.

And what is your role in this case as counsel for Mr. Depp? Objection.
I would instruct the witness not to answer that question. Okay, I'll follow the instruction.
Waldman is advised that he doesn't have to answer any question which could reveal any legal advice he's ever given Depp. That's the same question that I instructed Mr.
Waldman not to answer before, just stated in a slightly different way, so I would instruct the witness not to answer that question. I accept the instruction.
In total, he refuses to answer more than 70 questions. But there are some questions that he can't avoid because they're not covered by legal privilege.
And it's one of these exchanges that really stops me in my tracks. Have you provided information about this case to other social media personalities who then post that information? I've provided information episodically to what I would call internet journalists.

Have you communicated with a social media user who goes by the name That Umbrella Guy?

I've had several phone calls with the person who goes by the name That Umbrella Guy.

I don't actually know his real name.

Have you communicated in a similar fashion with someone on social media who goes by the name That Brian Fellow?

Yes. Waldman reveals that he's directly communicated not just with the press, but with two YouTubers.
A man called Matthew Lewis, who goes by the name That Umbrella Guy, and Brian McPherson, commonly known as That Brian Fella. Waldman calls them internet journalists.

And look, I'm not a snob about this.

Some of the best journalists today don't work for mainstream media.

Look at Bellingcat, for instance.

But journalists should at least try and be objective.

She's got the psycho eye.

She looks crazy.

And these YouTubers are not that. They're more like professional trolls.
I wasn't afraid of him stabbing me then. Like what? She's a nut.
She said he was hurting and tried to kill you. I'm the biggest piece of crap now.
She does have the right name. Turd.
That umbrella guy, who's also known as Tug, started out on YouTube eight years ago reviewing household appliances. Today I want to briefly consider this water sprinkler unit, and the reason I want to do so is twofold.
But he soon discovered that making content trashing Amber Heard was much more popular and profitable. Hey there, to all you wonderful folks, welcome to another week of craziness.
Tug has posted literally hundreds of videos about Amber Heard. His channel has racked up 140 million views.
His worst comments about Amber are in videos that are now private. But I've downloaded the transcripts and used AI to voice some of them up.
Amber, your lips are gross. I don't know where they've been.
Look at how gross her skin is in that. — It's all meaty and sweaty.
— That's why she's got lip herpes. — She looks like she's got the meat sweats.
Turning himself into a full-time Amber Heard troll has made Tug a lot of money. — Nicky C, thanks for the five.
Dude McGuy, thanks for the 20. Karina, thanks for the 20 there.
Appreciate that. — We worked out that he earned £65,000, or about $82,000,

during the trial from YouTube tips alone.

YouTube has definitely helped and made my life better too, for sure.

And that doesn't include advertising revenue or sales of merchandise.

He even boasted that Amber had paid for his house and his kid's college fund.

If that umbrella guy were a lone wolf, I might not have paid him that much attention.

Lots of YouTubers said the same about Amber, or worse.

But Tug was one of only a handful who spoke directly with Adam Waldman. Adam Waldman, you freaking crazy fool.
I love Adam Waldman, dude. And Tug didn't just speak to Waldman.
The YouTuber implies that Waldman passed him information as well. Tug posted videos containing material that no one else had, including two witness statements which had not yet been made public.
It exclusively came from myself, by the way. Let's just say it sourced its way to me.
This inside track helped Tug's videos become a big part of how Amber came to be seen online. There was actually a huge narrative priming that occurred before the trial even began, where from the outset, the entire idea and the entire conception was that Amber Heard was an abuser, that she was not credible, and that she was just basically bad in every sense of the word.
That's Kat Tenbarge. She works for NBC and is kind of a bet noir for Depp fans.
While other reporters were focused on the day-to-day of the US trial, Kat was more interested in what was going on online with people like that umbrella guy. She thinks that they were part of a deliberate strategy.
The moment that Adam Waldman testified, He really opened the floodgates for all of these influencers and creators to revel in the fact that they had this type of close communication with Team Dev. Kat tried to interview Tug, but instead of just saying no, he screenshotted her email and tweeted it out to his followers.
As soon as he did that, it was instantaneous. I received DMs on Twitter that basically said, we know where you live, we know where you are, and we're going to come find you, and we're going to hurt you.
He did the same to me just a couple of days before I recorded this. I sent him an email asking about his links to Adam Waldman.
He posted my list of questions online and then made a video with another YouTuber. Alexi.
Yeah, I like that. Alexi.
Now, what's funny is, like, I looked at his name and the first thing I thought was Alexi Moistress. That's what I thought his name was.
Oh, yeah. Jokes about my name.
It feels like I'm back at school. Let's see.
What's the second question here? Substantial amount of money covering Miss Her and Mr. Depp.
Advertising. Tips from supporters.
Oh, give me them tips, babe. Just the tips.
Are you ashamed of saying things like, she's got to be the biggest piece of crap now? She does have the right name, turd. Or she's got those psycho eyes.
She looks crazy. If Tug represents one sort of anti-amber herd troll, loud, misogynistic and crude, then that Brian fella, the other YouTuber who talked to Adam Waldman, represents something else.
Hey everyone, thanks for checking out my video. I really appreciate it.
I've put a lot of work into this, even if it doesn't show. On the 14th of November, 2018, Brian McPherson, a little-known actor,

posts a 35-minute video on YouTube.

My attempt here is to stick to facts and not rumours.

The video raises questions about one of Amber's friends and his evidence against Johnny Depp.

I don't know his motivations.

All I know is I believe he did lie.

McPherson's video is forensic. It seems to be the work of someone who really knows their way around the case, and viewers are impressed.
You've put 90% of journalists to shame. Thank you for speaking facts.
I'm genuinely in awe. Why aren't you on Johnny's legal team? He needs you.
In this first video, McPherson works with information that's already out there, already in the public domain. But in January 2020, all that changes.
Hey everyone, welcome back. Just a couple of minutes of your time for the intro.
This video is probably not what you expected in terms of what I promised my next one would be, but I believe it needed to be made and it also needs to be seen and heard by as many people as I can. This video is different.
It's a recording of a private conversation between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. A real exclusive.
Just before McPherson posts his video, the Mail Online news website publishes a two-minute snippet of it. But this obscure YouTuber seems to get hold of the whole thing.

I think what you're about to watch or listen to is the single biggest and most damning piece of evidence yet. In the recording, Amber tells Depp, I can't promise you I won't get physical again.
I can't promise I won't get physical again. For Depp fans, this is the proof they've been waiting for, that he is the real victim.
And I should say, it is something that pulls you up short. Amber appears to admit hitting Depp across the face.
It's quite a shocking admission. When she appeared on the stand, Amber explained that she sometimes hit Depp in self-defence.
But I have to repeat, I'm not trying to re-litigate the case. The fact is that a British judge found that Depp had abused Amber on a dozen occasions and that, quote, no great weight was to be put on Amber's alleged admissions.
A US jury reached a different conclusion. Macpherson's video gets 6 million views on YouTube, and many more millions see his content on other sites.
It has a huge impact on how Amber is seen online. But here's the thing, it was manipulated.
Let me play you a bit of Macpherson's recording. We must.
There can be no physical violence. I can't promise you that I'll be perfect.
I can't promise you I won't get physical again. Pretty damning, right? And Amber did say those words.
It's the truth, but it's not the whole truth. Because between Depp's line...
There can be no physical violence. And Amber's line...
I can't promise you that I'll be perfect. I can't promise you I won't get physical again.
There's seven minutes of tape missing. We know this because a full version was released during the UK trial.
In reality, this is how Amber responds to Depp. I agree about the physical violence.
I agree about the physical violence. But MacPherson cuts that critical line.
In his version, it seems like Depp is pleading for the violence to end and Amber is saying, as a direct reply, I can't promise it won't. There's something else too.
Depp's words themselves are edited. He doesn't just say, there can be no physical violence.
There are three words missing. There can be no physical violence.
I agree about the physical violence. There can be no physical violence towards each other.
So now listen to the two versions side by side. This is Macpherson's video.
There can be no physical violence. I can't promise you that I'll be perfect.
I can't promise you I won't get physical again. Whereas this is the real exchange.
There can be no physical violence towards each other. I agree about the physical violence.
Somewhere along the way, this very sensitive piece of evidence was altered in favour of Depp. People never figured out that these were acts of disinformation.
They just took them at face value and they shared them and they reacted to them. That's not the only time it happens.
A few months later, McPherson publishes audio of the aftermath of a fight between Depp and Hurt. It's another exclusive.
The original recording is over five hours,

but McPherson has slimmed it down. He says he's only made cosmetic changes.
I've cut it down from hours of white noise, no noise, cleaning sounds, and non-speaking to get a much cleaner product. But again, this is not the case.
The audio is missing lines that later appear in court documents. the audio that was leaked to Brian McPherson and that was disseminated across the internet was essential to people's understanding of the case.

The Brian Fella's videos changed my mind.

You were what changed my mind about JD when I heard the recordings.

Brian Fella is awesome.

His videos were the first breakdowns of the JD allegations and followed. Amber heard tweets in Ron Chanel's database.
About what evidence he passed to two YouTubers

who played a big role in turning the internet against Amber. And about what work he did

for Oleg Deripaska and Sergei Lavrov. He hasn't answered any of my emails so I give him a call.
This is Adam Waldman. Please give me a message.
Oh, hi, Mr. Waldman.
This is Alexei Mostras from Tortoise Media. I'm trying to reach you...
He doesn't pick up, but 25 minutes after I call, he posts a Twitter message. It quotes Public Enemy, the 80s rap pioneers.
False media, their pens and pads I'll snatch. Because I've had it.
I'm not an addict, fiending for static. I'll see their tape recorder and grab it.
No, you can't have it back, silly rabbit. Nordstrom brings you the season's most wanted brands.
Skims, Mango, Free People, and Princess Polly, all under $100. From trending sneakers to beauty must-haves, we've curated the styles you'll wear on repeat this spring.
Free shipping, free returns, and in-store pickup make it easier than ever. Shop now in stores and at Nordstrom.com.

If you have health insurance, you might be able to see a personal dietitian for $0 out of pocket.

Nourish connects you with a dietitian that fits your needs, covered by your insurance.

Nourish accepts hundreds of insurance plans and 94% of patients pay $0 out of pocket.

Meet with your dietitian online and message them anytime through the Nourish app. With hundreds of five-star reviews from real patients,

you know you're in good hands. Find your dietician at usenourish.com.
That's usenourish.com. Waldman is one of the most fascinating characters I've come across.
He remains threaded into this story in a way that I can't quite untangle. On the one hand, he's this high-powered, obviously intelligent lawyer, a guy who's represented celebrities, oligarchs, really extraordinary figures.

On the other hand, when it comes to the internet, he's happy to behave as if he's another YouTuber attacking Amber Heard. Just after I contact him, Waldman does what that umbrella guy did.
He posts my questions online. Less like a lawyer, more like a troll.
Towards the end of this investigation, I got in touch with Amber Heard. She didn't want to speak on the record, so I can't tell you what she said.
I get the impression she's trying to get on with her life. But in a way, this podcast has never just been about Amber.
It's about how online trolling can not only have devastating effects on a victim, but can create ripples that go far wider. And certainly the verdict in the US trial, I do feel affected my day-to-day approach to the work that I've done in terms of industry misconduct.
Maureen Ryan is a writer for Vanity Fair. She's been at the forefront of reporting on the Me Too movement for years.
For her, Depp's victory gave Hollywood an excuse to backtrack on hard-won reforms. As a woman who's been online for 30 years, sometimes they just want to take a woman down many pegs and they don't need much of an excuse to do it.
A lot of people went nuts with that opportunity. The thing about the Johnny Depp Amber Heard case in particular that chilled me to my soul frankly was the idea that you know Amber Heard wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post which is a very respected publication and Johnny Depp's name isn't in it.
Maureen's right Amber never named Johnny Depp in her piece for the Washington Post and she still ended up losing a defamation case. It told survivors of industry misconduct.
If this can be done to a woman who's actually a well-known, well-established person in the industry, it's going to be even worse for you. You can see how that would deter other women from speaking out.
You don't have to talk about it if you don't want to, but I was interested in the variety piece that you wrote about sexual assault and your own experience in sexual assault. Do you mind just telling me a bit about that? Thank you for asking.
I'm okay to talk about it. So in late 2017, I wrote about something that only my close friends and family knew about at the time, which was that I was assaulted by a television executive in 2014.
I wrote a piece about my own experience, and I didn't name the person who did it. And to this day, I haven't named that person.
And Amber Heard didn't choose that path. And, you know, I really applauded her piece at the time because talking about incidents of assault and abuse that you've experienced is really difficult.
I suppose that you wrote about your assault without naming the perpetrator. And then some years later, Amber Heard wrote her, claimed assault without naming the perpetrator.

She got sued, even though she didn't name the perpetrator. And I wonder if that had happened before you, rather than after you, whether you would have written the piece that you did.

Yeah, I never thought about that before.

I think I wouldn't have written that.

I don't know that I would have been able to handle that psychologically, this idea that even if I did not name the person who did this to me, that I could still be in danger. there are some times I wish I had named him.

It really haunted me because I really, I've devoted the last seven years of my life to try to prevent. I'm sorry.
I don't want what happened to me to happen to anyone else. I knew that in that moment, in late 2017, I could not name that person.

I have still not named that person publicly.

And for a long time I thought about whether that was the right decision.

But in the light of the Depp versus Heard, I'm even more certain that that was the right decision. My favorite Agatha Christie book is Murder on the Orient Express.
A few years ago, Johnny Depp starred in the movie version directed by Kenneth Branagh. The story is the ultimate whodunit.
A man called Lanfranco Cassetti is killed in a train carriage and detective Hercule Poirot investigates his murder. Everyone in the carriage is a suspect.
But here's the spoiler. They all did it.
They all had their own motive. When it comes to who trolled Amber, the answer, I think, is the same.
There were the real-life debt fans, the online misogynists, grifters who thought they could make a quick buck, and critically, our evidence suggests, thousands and thousands of bots and trolls, from Thailand to Spain, from Chile to Saudi Arabia. A seemingly global campaign.
All of these forces came together to attack Amber Heard online. Some, like Adam Waldman, did more than others.
But, like on the Orient Express, everyone played a part. This year is the biggest election year in history.

Billions of people will go to the polls,

in India, in the UK, and most importantly perhaps, in the US.

Over 50 countries will hold votes in 2024.

It feels like democracy itself is on the line.

And hovering over all of this, like a ghost at the feast,

is the spectre of disinformation.

For me, Dept v. Heard is a warning, because if a famous actress can be trolled online in a widespread and inauthentic way, then what happens when the stakes are even higher? It's one thing to confuse a bot with a real-life Johnny Depp fan.

But what if it's impossible to tell the difference

between a Russian troll and a US election official?

If we can no longer separate what's fake from what's real online,

then the question we're all left with is this.

How can we ever trust our own opinions again? We contacted Johnny Depp while making this podcast, but he didn't respond.

Thank you for listening to Who Trolled Amber.

Who Trolled Amber is written and reported by me, Alexei Mostras, and by Xavier Greenwood.

The producer is Xavier Greenwood.

Additional reporting by Katie Riley.

Sound design is by Carla Patella. The narrative editor is Gary Marshall.

The editor is David Taylor. Thank you.
I'm your needs, covered by your insurance. Nourish accepts hundreds of insurance plans, and 94% of patients pay $0 out of pocket.
Meet with your dietitian online and message them anytime through the Nourish app. With hundreds of five-star reviews from real patients, you know you're in good hands.
Find your dietitian at usenourish.com. That's usenourish.com.
We'll help you monitor your progress and give personalized recommendations so you can make strides towards your goals and find your way to money.

Make sure you're on the right track, no matter where you are, on your financial journey. Intuit Credit Karma.
Karma you can count on. Ever wonder what your lashes are destined for? The cards have spoken.
Maybelline New York Mascara does it all. Whether you crave fully fan lashes with lash sensational, big, bold volume from

the colossal, a dramatic lift with falsies lash lift, or natural looking volume from great lash,

your perfect lash future awaits. Manifest your best mascara today.
Shop Maybelline New York

and discover your lash destiny. Shop now at Walmart.