3 Doors Down singer Brad Arnold announces stage 4 cancer diagnosis
Brad Arnold, the lead singer of the rock band 3 Doors Down, says he has been diagnosed with a form of kidney cancer.
Arnold shared the news in a video posted to his Instagram page Wednesday, saying he was diagnosed with stage 4 clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
He added that the cancer had metastasized into his lung.
'That's not real good,' he said, adding that he has 'no fear' and 'sincerely am not scared of it at all.'
Clear cell renal cell carcinoma is the most common type of kidney cancer, according to the Mayo Clinic.
Arnold said because of his diagnosis, the band is canceling their upcoming tour.
3 Doors Down was set to embark on a tour starting on May 15 in Daytona Beach. All dates have since been removed from the band's official website, with a video of Arnold's announcement in its place.
Arnold asked his followers and listeners to 'lift me up in prayer every chance you get' and joked that he should go listen to their 2008 song 'It's Not My Time.'
Creed singer Scott Stapp was among those who gave their support to Arnold in the comments section of his post.
'If anyone has the FAITH and STRENGTH to face this fight, it's YOU brother,' Stapp wrote. 'I think I can speak for all of us, we are lifting you up in prayer right now believing without doubt for your total healing!'
3 Doors Down formed in the mid-1990s, with Arnold as one of the founding members. The band is known for hit singles including 'Here Without You,' 'When I'm Gone' and 'Kryptonite,' which peaked on the Billboard Hot 100 in the No. 3 spot.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
a few seconds ago
- Fast Company
Beauty publishing was always a lie. But AI just broke it
Beauty magazines have been lying to readers for decades—but at least they used to start with actual humans. NewBeauty magazine's Summer/Fall 2025 issue quietly crossed that line, publishing a multipage article dedicated to the beautification of female skin that featured perfect female models who weren't real. Spotted by professional photographer Cassandra Klepac, she pointed out that each photo was labeled as AI and included the prompt used to generate them. With the advent of technology capable of synthesizing ultra-high-definition photos of realistic humans, this was bound to happen sooner rather than later. Knowing the hell that Vogue recently faced for featuring Guess advertisements with AI-generated models—sparking the rage of 2.7 million TikTok viewers and subscription cancellations—it is surprising that NewBeauty's editors decided to do the same with actual editorial content, the supposedly 'real' part of magazines. So why did the magazine—which calls itself 'the beauty authority' in its tagline—do this? 'NewBeauty features both real people and patients, alongside AI-generated images,' executive editor Liz Ritter told me via email. 'We maintain a strict policy of transparency by clearly labeling all AI content in detail in our captions, including the prompts used to create these images, so readers always know the difference.' Subscribe to the Design newsletter. The latest innovations in design brought to you every weekday Privacy Policy | Fast Company Newsletters Her nonanswer leaves us to only speculate on the reasons why. Talking about the Guess campaign, Sara Ziff—founder of the Model Alliance—said that it was 'less about innovation and more about desperation and the need to cut costs.' Given the depressed status of the print media industry, I suspect that may have played a role in the case of NewBeauty. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Cass Klepac (@ Perfectly legal . . . However you may feel about the campaign, we know that NewBeauty didn't do anything illegal. There are virtually no laws governing editorial use of AI-generated humans at this point, except to stop deceptive use in politics and in regards to the honor of individuals (something already covered by libel laws). Surprisingly, advertising is a little bit more regulated. The Federal Trade Commission can penalize deceptive advertising practices. New York's groundbreaking AI disclosure law targets advertisements, requiring 'conspicuous disclosure' when synthetic performers are used. But editorial? It exists in a regulatory wasteland, leaving it to the judgment of editors. Europe's comprehensive AI Act mandates clear labeling of AI-generated content and carries maximum fines of €35 million ($40.7 million), but it focuses on transparency, not prohibition. You can fabricate entire humans for editorial use—you just have to mention it in the caption. NewBeauty did exactly that. . . . but dangerous anyway? We also know that, despite the fact there's nothing illegal about it, this doesn't mean it is right. Using artificial intelligence feels dangerous because it is so easy and so powerful. When it spreads—and it will—many professions will be affected. This includes not only the models, photographers, makeup artists, and all the people who make real photoshoots possible, but also the Photoshop artists who retouch what comes out of the digital camera into an image that quite often has very little to do with what the sensors capture. For the past few decades, Photoshop artists have erased wrinkles, refined arms, rebuilt waistlines, adjusted eyes, and turned anything that editors deemed imperfect into whatever fantasy beauty standard the industry set. Reality has been malleable, to be generous. advertisement Remember that time Rolling Stone heavily retouched Katy Perry because they didn't think she was pretty enough? Or that Lena Dunham Vogue cover and photo feature, the one in which she was missing an arm? Duham said at the time those photos were intended as 'fantasy.' Like everything else featured in glossy pages. Those were just two high-profile examples of a practice that happens regularly for any cover of any fashion, beauty, or celebrity print magazine. In this sense, acting surprised or offended by NewBeauty's AI models feels hollow, albeit understandable—due to a fear of the damage that AI tools will bring to the industry. It's been a ruse forever The hard reality is that photographers have used lighting and filtering tricks to make things look more beautiful than they are in real life since the advent of the medium. Then, the editorial and advertising industries have been breaking every taboo in digital manipulation since Photoshop was invented. Today, AI is democratizing the deception once again—to the point where a single art director for some random magazine can actually create a high-resolution print spread full of beautiful people who don't exist, simply by using a short prompt and spending a couple of dollars. I get it. It's tempting to tweak reality, sometimes rearranging it completely, to tell a compelling narrative. This summer I went to the Robert Capa museum in Budapest—highly recommended—and stared for a while at that famous Spanish Civil War photo of a Republican 'miliciano' being shot. I considered its terrible beauty and the effect it had on the public in an era in which the specter of Nazism and fascism was rising in Europe. I also considered the fact that some experts believe that the photo may have been staged (while others vehemently disagree) and pondered on what is real and what's not, on the effects of perceived reality versus 'real reality' versus manipulated reality. These are questions we constantly face as journalists. If Capa really staged that photo, perhaps it was the right thing to do at the time. Perhaps not. But I digress. I don't pretend to hold NewBeauty to the same fact-checking standards that governed news media back in the time of Capa. Beauty, fashion, cars, and luxury magazines are all part of that aspirational world in which reality easily gets bent to tell a fantasy. I would say that, by clearly labeling the AI images, NewBeauty is being way more honest than the editors of fashion and beauty magazines have been in years and decades past. Those magazines never labeled their photos, 'THIS CELEB IS PHOTOSHOPPED! THIS AIN'T REAL, STEPHANIE! STOP DIETING! LOL!' Yet all covers and many interior shots were digitally altered and many times reconstructed beyond recognition, sometimes pathetically so. Indeed, the beauty industry was already constructed on visual lies, but in the age of AI, the powers that be won't stop here. Will it be problematic? Yes. Will it cause real economic and personal damage? Most definitely. But we will get more and more used to it until we stop questioning the practice at all. I hate to tell you I told you so, but I told you so. It's the destruction of reality as we know it.
Geek Tyrant
a few seconds ago
- Geek Tyrant
New Rumor Claims THE BATMAN PART II Will Not Be Welcoming Back an Expected Star — GeekTyrant
Fans had a long wait from the time Matt Reeves's The Batman was announced to when it actually hit the screen, and right now we are looking at a five year gap between the first film, and its follow-up, The Batman: Part II . There was no news on the sequel for quite a while, but this past June, it was announced that the script had been finished, and the film would be on the shooting schedule for next spring, about a year and a half out from the movie's scheduled release date. Slow and steady, but headed in the right direction. Now, a new rumor has surfaced that puts a small damper on the long-awaited film, and that is the possible non-return of one actor from the first movie that was well-received by the fans - Zoë Kravitz, who played Selina Kyle, aka Catwoman. On the podcast The Hot Mic , industry insider Jeff Sneider shared that publicists at the junket for the upcoming film Caught Stealing (which stars Kravitz) asked media members to refrain from asking the actress questions about The Batman Part II . The reasoning given was 'she's not in it and doesn't know anything.' Sneider himself notes this isn't officially confirmed. This could have just been a way to get press to focus on the project at hand, and who knows? Filming is still so far off, maybe Kravitz's contract just hasn't been fully negotiated for her return. We will just have to wait and see, but I do hope to see her character return.
Forbes
2 minutes ago
- Forbes
‘Peacemaker' Season 2 Has Set A Rotten Tomatoes Score Record For DC
At this point, it is clearly unwise to underestimate James Gunn making a superhero movie or show, and if you want further evidence past this summer's hit Superman, you're about to find exhibit A. That would be season 2 of Peacemaker, which has netted a 98% certified fresh critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, with just a single negative review in. Season 1 was also highly scored, a 93%, but this is next-level and in fact, a record among DC properties. There is a list of DCEU properties to compare it to, along with the limited selection of DCU offerings so far, and guess what? Season 2 of Peacemaker tops them all. Here's the list, and I'll even throw in Matt Reeves stuff and The Dark Knight Trilogy, why not? Do I think that Peacemaker season 2 is really going to be the best DC project in the last four universes of the brand? Not particularly, but these numbers indicate it's going to be something you can't miss. James Gunn in particular keeps heavily, heavily reinforcing that it is going to be key to the entire future of the DCU to watch season 2 of Peacemaker, as it will not only explain how at least parts of Peacemaker season 1 and Suicide Squad are now DCU canon, it will lead into the entire new era in some ways. Specifically, he's promising the last batch of episodes are going to be epic, and the whole season will be filled with big-name guest appearances (yes, if I had to guess, Superman, Supergirl or both will show up). From the trailers, the explanation seems to be at least some sort of dimension-hopping shenanigans that will transplant the cast from one universe to another, or at least clone them and their experiences. It's a big tangle in terms of how far Gunn's reach extends back into the DCEU, as if Peacemaker is canon, is Harley Quinn, who was on his team? And then Leto's Joker. Etc. But it appears he will be drawing lines somewhere and Peacemaker will be the start of that. It debuts August 21 on HBO Max. Follow me on Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram
