• You've probably seen the Coldplay "kiss cam" moment that has ricocheted around the internet.
• A tech CEO and his head of HR appear to embrace, then look mortified after seeing themselves on cam.
• I wish I didn't know anything about any of this — I wish none of us did.

I don't want to know what you did at a Coldplay concert. I don't want to know who you were there with, what the track list was. I don't even want to know you went!

And if it turns out that you were caught on camera in a passionate embrace with a coworker? I mean, sure, I'm curious. I love gossip! But I'm not sure I should know about that. And that goes double if I don't know you in real life.

On Thursday, as I'm sure you know by now, a "kiss cam" video went viral from a Coldplay concert outside Boston on Wednesday night. In the clip, two audience members stand against a railing, the man with his arms around the woman. They look to be in their late 40s or early 50s, fit and attractive, enjoying the musical stylings of arguably Britain's greatest rock act of the 21st century.

As soon as they realize they're on the Jumbotron, the woman turns to hide her face, and the man ducks. You overhear front-man Chris Martin say into the microphone, "Either they're having an affair, or they're just very shy."

Yikes!

The clip appeared to show Astronomer CEO Andy Byron embracing the company's head of HR, Kristin Cabot. Neither has commented on the clip.

I'm not sure how people online figured out who these people were. Was it by using a controversial facial-recognition tool like PimEyes? Or was it from someone who knows them in real life who identified them?

The thing is, I don't know these people. (Neither, probably, do you.) I don't know their lives. I have no idea what was really going on. Astronomer execs, board members, and founders haven't returned BI's requests for comment, as my colleagues Madeline Berg and Tim Paradis report.

I can say that the online attention they've received is certainly distressing to them — on top of a situation that may also already be very distressing in other ways.

The issue might have some legs from an HR standpoint: If a company CEO is embracing his head of personnel at a concert, could that raise some issues? Sure! That's for the company and its execs to figure out. But otherwise, who cares? I don't.

I just spent almost every day of the last six weeks watching some of the most depraved people on Earth frolic around in swimwear and occasionally hump under thick duvets on "Love Island." I'm not going to suddenly go morality police to say that two Coldplay-loving consenting adults is the biggest scandal I can imagine.

And, to me, there's a potentially unsettling element of potential surveillance. As 404 Media wrote:

The same technologies used to dox and research this CEO are routinely deployed against the partners of random people who have had messy breakups, attractive security guards, people who look "suspicious" and are caught on Ring cameras by people on Nextdoor, people who dance funny in public, and so on. There has been endless debate about the ethics of doxing cops and ICE agents and Nazis, and there are many times where it makes sense to research people doing harm on behalf of the state or who are doing violent, scary things in to innocent people.

It is another to deploy these technologies against random people you saw on an airplane or who had a messy breakup with an influencer.

Again, we're not sure what happened here or how these people were apparently identified. But I don't think it's any of our business — barring something illegal — what happens at a concert. Could it violate a company's rules? Yes, but then the company can deal with it.

By the way: Why the heck does Coldplay have a kiss cam, anyway?

• Donald Trump has complained about media companies making movies outside the US.
• Netflix just emphasized how much of its production happens in the US.
• Coincidence?

Donald Trump, who frequently complains about media companies, doesn't appear to be angry at Netflix at the moment.

Netflix would like to keep it that way.

Which may explain why the company spent a bit of time in its latest earnings report talking up its commitment to making its shows and movies in America.

In the streamer's second quarter earnings report, Netflix officials made a point of emphasizing how much money it has spent making content in the US — $125 billion between 2020 and 2024 — and how much more it plans to spend in the near future — including new production facilities in New Mexico and New Jersey.

Does that have anything to do with the confusing announcement Trump made in May, when he vowed to slap a "100% Tariff on any and all Movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands?" A Netflix rep declined to comment.

But you can check out the language the company used in its shareholder letter for yourself:

As we grow globally, our most significant investment remains in the US, which accounts for the majority of our content spend, workforce and production infrastructure. From 2020-2024, we estimate that we contributed $125 billion to the US economy. Our expansion in Albuquerque, NM—adding four new soundstages to a 108-acre site—and our plan to invest roughly $1B to develop a state-of-the-art production facility (including 12 new soundstages) in Fort Monmouth, NJ, underscore our ongoing commitment to production in the US.

This isn't the first time Netflix has played up its interest in US production. That statement above includes a link to a report spelling out its investment in the US, which was published April 23 — less than a couple weeks before Trump came out with its Hollywood tariff plan.

And Netflix also discussed its US investments in its previous earnings report, which came out on April 17. But the language it used there was much lighter on superlatives, and much less America-centric. Compare and contrast:

While the majority of our content spend and production infrastructure investment is in the US, we now also spend billions of dollars per year making programming abroad. And instead of just licensing local titles, we're now making local shows and films in many countries, commissioned by our local executives, that keep our members happy. And our local slates are improving each year.

If Netflix is trying to please Trump or his circle via corporate messaging, they wouldn't be the first company to do so. In May, for instance, cable/broadband giant Charter went out of its way to describe its plan to acquire Cox as an explicitly pro-American move.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos, by the way, has said he had a "nice long dinner" with Trump in December at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, prior to Trump's second inauguration. "He said Melania and [son] Barron were big fans," Sarandos said.

House Democrats are largely shooing away the idea of trying to make Republicans miss their deadline to codify around $9 billion in DOGE cuts to public broadcasting and foreign aid, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: While on paper it appears to be a rare opportunity to satisfy the demands of their base to use procedural tools to obstruct the GOP agenda, lawmakers and aides told Axios it's not that simple.

• House Republicans are scrambling to pass the rescissions bill, which would codify cuts to PBS, NPR and foreign aid, before a Friday deadline mandated by the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
• But there is a widespread belief among Democrats, including leadership, that the Trump administration would simply ignore or side-step that deadline as they have in other cases.

Driving the news: At a press conference on Thursday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) demurred when asked if he would pull a repeat of the record-breaking eight hour, 44 minute speech he gave to delay passage of the "big, beautiful bill."

• Jeffries, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) can all speak for unlimited time in what is known as a "magic minute" speech.
• "I do expect I will participate in the debate, and I expect I will speak longer than a minute," Jeffries told reporters.
• When pressed, he added, "I think Democrats are going to continue to fight hard and do everything we can to make sure that we are pushing back aggressively against this rescissions package."

What we're hearing: Senior House Democrats and leadership aides told Axios that the prospect of a long speech appeared unlikely as of Thursday afternoon.

• One House Democrat told Axios they were told by leadership that Republicans "can play with the date, so [the deadline is] not hard and fast."
• A senior House Democrat told Axios on Thursday afternoon that leadership "doesn't think [the speech] will be long at this point."

Zoom in: Instead of trying to hold up the bill, Democrats see the most productive strategy as continuing to force Republicans to block their efforts to bring up bills forcing the Justice Department to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.

• "Democrats have succeeded in tying the House GOP in knots over Epstein files amendments," a Democratic leadership aide told Axios.
• "It's lunacy to wring our hands over a statutory deadline that the administration will simply ignore when we've been able to send the Republicans into utter chaos," the aide said.

Zoom out: Jeffries will have to contend with expectations from his grassroots base, which are sometimes untethered to the reality of congressional procedure.

• Some Democrats said those expectations alone may be reason enough for Jeffries to deliver a long speech.
• "I think it's smart, I think he should do it. People like it. People liked the last one," Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.) told Axios.

Yes, but: Members "would be really unhappy," if Jeffries gave a long speech "after what he did on July 4," a third House Democrat said on the condition of anonymity.

• Some lawmakers were frustrated that Jeffries spoke for nearly nine hours after his team maintained he would only go for about one, forcing them to scramble to reschedule flights ahead of the July 4 recess.
• "The base doesn't even give a s*** about this. The rescissions thing is not on their radar," the lawmaker added, arguing that if the grassroots does take notice of it, "they'll forget about it two days later and be like, 'What's next.'"
• "You can't feed that beast," they said.

• A Coldplay concert "kiss cam" appeared to show Astonomer CEO Andy Byron and head of people Kristin Cabot embracing.
• The footage has gone viral on social media.
• The company turned off comments on its LinkedIn and X profiles amid the chatter.

A video appearing to show a tech CEO and his head of HR embracing at a Coldplay concert is spreading around social media at the speed of sound.

Meanwhile, the startup at the center of the drama has stayed silent as people online flood the company's social media posts with comments.

The viral clip appears to show Astronomer CEO Andy Byron with his arms wrapped around the company's head of people, Kristin Cabot. It was captured on the concert's "kiss cam" and broadcast to the crowd at Gillette Stadium in Massachusetts.

Given the pair's reaction — mortified looks, a quick untangling, and a camera dodge — Coldplay's front man, Chris Martin, speculated from the stage that either they are "having an affair or they're just very shy."

Neither Byron nor Cabot has commented on the viral clip.

The executives, the company, its board members, and its founders have not responded to requests for comment from Business Insider. Astronomer turned off the ability to comment on its LinkedIn and X posts after they were bombarded with commentary.

The internet has been anything but quiet.

On X and TikTok, there's been a deluge of commentary about the footage, which has been viewed tens of millions of times. Most have joked about the incident: One user called it "Scandoval for people who can't attach a PDF to an email," while another chimed in, "god forbid you want to viva la vida local."

Flexport's founder, Ryan Petersen, said the board should give Byron a raise for the publicity it generated for the company.

Others have gone further, digging up the pair's LinkedIn pages and YouTube videos featuring Byron to leave comments referencing the viral clip.

Byron's name was the top trending Google search term over the past 24 hours; he was Googled over 2 million times.

There's even money on the line: On Polymarket, more than $35,000 has been committed to predict Byron's chances of remaining CEO, while a separate market about his marital status has a pool of $30,000.

It's unclear whether Astronomer has any policies around office relationships, as some companies do.

Still, "a hard launch of a workplace romantic relationship at a Coldplay concert is not the best way to go about it," Kate Walker, a human resources consultant and executive coach, told BI.

Astronomer, which builds various data management and optimization products, completed a Series D funding round in May that valued the company at $775 million, according to PitchBook.

Byron has been its CEO since July 2023. He previously held C-suite roles at several other software and tech firms.

Last year, he hired Cabot as the company's head of people.

"Kristin's exceptional leadership and deep expertise in talent management, employee engagement, and scaling people strategies will be critical as we continue our rapid trajectory," Byron said in a press release about her hiring last year.

The LinkedIn version of the announcement? It's been taken down.

• The US government spent $5 trillion to stimulate the economy during the pandemic.
• Much was lost to fraud, and several bills would extend deadlines to file charges.
• A bill involving the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant, which BI previously reported on, moved forward Wednesday.

A Senate committee on Wednesday advanced a bill that would give prosecutors more time to bring fraud charges tied to two pandemic-era relief programs — including one that, as Business Insider has reported, awarded millions of dollars to wealthy musicians who used the money on private jets, luxury goods, and parties.

Federal investigators believe at least 6% of the $5 trillion allocated for pandemic relief was routed to fraudsters or people and businesses who didn't qualify. Prosecutors have brought charges over a small fraction of that spending, and could run out of time to bring charges in thousands of cases that were referred to them.

Currently, prosecutors have five years after many fraud-related crimes occur to bring charges. The bill would give them an extra five years to file criminal charges against anyone who defrauded the $28 billion Restaurant Revitalization Fund or the $14 billion Shuttered Venue Operators Grant.

Originally pitched as a lifeline for independent venues and arts groups, the SVOG program ended up awarding billions with limited guardrails, and a Business Insider investigation found that pop stars like Chris Brown, Lil Wayne, and Marshmello used the money for jets, bonuses, and a birthday bash.

Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, who chairs the Small Business Committee that moved the bill forward, told Business Insider that the government should be "going after the people that truly didn't deserve the money."

"What we saw was a lot of celebrities that were gaming the system," she said, "that were able to take those dollars and buy jets and throw fancy parties and do things like that — boost up their wardrobe. That's not what the dollars were for."

The celebrities Business Insider reported on didn't previously reply to comment requests, except for Lil Wayne, who responded to a reporter's questions with an explicit sexual overture. The SBA has defended its fraud controls and said in late 2024 that it was still looking into some grants.

The agency has recently sent out hundreds of letters to SVOG grantees demanding that they repay their grants, according to people in the entertainment industry, but details on which grantees were targeted were not available.

Maggie Clemmons, an agency representative, told BI that the SBA is "continuously fighting to claw back fraudulently-obtained COVID funds, including within the SVOG program" and criticized "inaction" by the Biden administration.

The Restaurant Revitalization Fund, which cut checks of up to $10 million, has been scrutinized by auditors. Nearly a quarter of funds were awarded without doing enough to verify that grantees were eligible, the Small Business Administration's inspector general said last year, and the agency found that improper payments were "likely" in 53 out of 122 restaurant awards it analyzed.

The bill still needs to pass the Senate and House of Representatives before it becomes law. And even if the statute of limitations to bring charges is extended, whether prosecutors will clear out the backlog of pandemic-fraud cases is an open question. The agency's inspector general has said the SBA should also extend the time period for which grant recipients hold on to their records.

"My hope would be that given the priorities of the Department of Justice, that somewhere in that mix, we have those that will go after the fraudsters," Ernst said. "Fraud is fraud, and our taxpayers really need to know that the federal government takes it seriously."

The Ernst bill, the SBA Fraud Enforcement Extension Act, advanced without opposition from Democrats.

In 2022, lawmakers similarly extended the deadline to bring fraud charges over the Paycheck Protection Program and Economic Injury Disaster Loans from five years to 10.

Congress also allocated at least $653 billion to fund extra unemployment benefits during the pandemic. The House of Representatives passed a bill in March to allow more time to prosecute unemployment benefit fraud, but that bill hasn't advanced in the Senate.

• Lawmakers worry that military housing funds may again be diverted to domestic operations.
• Barracks have been plagued with maintenance issues for years, impacting troop morale and safety.
• The Army and Marine Corps are seeking more funding to address barracks and quality of life concerns.

As lawmakers negotiate next year's defense bill, some are sounding alarms over the possibility that funds intended to improve housing for junior troops could instead be diverted to support military operations at home.

In a hearing on Tuesday, Rep. Sara Jacobs, a California Democrat, pushed to add two stipulations into the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act aimed at safeguarding funding for military barracks and childcare centers. The proposals would have prohibited using the funds for domestic deployments of troops — specifically in support of immigration enforcement — and barred their transfer to border operations.

"This is simply saying that the money that we allocate as Congress for barracks and child development centers and quality of life infrastructure should be used for barracks and child development centers and quality of life infrastructure, not anything else," she said during the hearing.

Both additions were shot down along party lines.

Military barracks, dormitories where unmarried junior troops are housed, have long been plagued by maintenance issues. Many buildings are decades-old and have fallen into disrepair during 20 years of war in the Middle East.

"This is about actually showing our service members that we care about them," Rep. Jill Tokuda, a Democrat from Hawaii, said during the hearing, highlighting instances of barracks rooms overrun by black mold, leaky plumbing, unreliable electrical and A/C systems, and a lack of kitchens.

A 2022 government watchdog report noted how continuously delayed maintenance aggravates problems for the military's buildings around the world, valued at $1.3 trillion overall. In fiscal year 2020, for instance, the DoD's deferred maintenance backlog amounted to over $137 billion, exacerbated by "competing priorities".

A separate report the following year found widespread concerns about barracks management oversight and hazardous health risks to troops— and noted that shoddy conditions harm troop morale.

The services have taken note after coming under fire for the poor living conditions highlighted in the reports and scandalous news reports of substandard living conditions.

The Army sought $2.35 billion last year to address barracks concerns, an over 60% increase in funding from the year prior. The Marine Corps, meanwhile, has undertaken a decade-long, nearly $11 billion refurbishment program.

"The idea is not to fix it and forget it," Lt. Gen. James Adams, Deputy Commandant for Programs and Resources, said of the initiative during a panel at the Modern Day Marine expo in April, explaining that the Corps partly "got ourselves into the position we're in now" by neglecting maintenance.

But the military is facing maintenance woes on other fronts too— one of the Army's biggest bases was forced to dissolve its teams that oversaw preventative housing maintenance last month, amid federal government cuts, according to Military.com. And the Pentagon sought to shift $1 billion intended for Army barracks to finance deployments to the southern border earlier this year.

In a statement provided to Business Insider, Jacobs said that funds approved for barracks issues and childcare centers — which have faced staffing shortages and meager pay — are already a comparatively modest sum, considering the level of disrepair with which some facilities must contend.

"There's not enough money as it is to upgrade and maintain quality of life infrastructure like barracks and child development centers, and address urgent issues like mold and broken heating and A/C units," Jacobs wrote. "None of this money should be diverted for any reason — let alone to terrorize immigrant communities and stifle dissent."

"The fact that a billion dollars in the first six months of this administration was diverted from barracks and quality of life and operations and maintenance to the border is sending the message that we really don't care about your health and wellness," Tokuda said during the hearing, adding that money transfers were equivalent to "essentially guaranteeing that we will ultimately never fix these barracks."