Maxim Stolyarov, who oversees the public activities of rapper Instasamka, born Daria Zoteeva, addressed circulating rumors about a multimillion-dollar lawsuit allegedly brought by psychologists against the artist. He emphasized that the reports circulating in the press are false and that no legal action of that kind has been filed. In his words, the story is simply not true, and there is no court case pending against Instasamka at this time.
Instasamka has previously stirred discussion with a provocative line of commentary about psychologists, describing them as fraudsters. According to the artist, some psychology professionals exploit vulnerable people and push remedies that individuals can confront on their own. This stance has sparked debate about the role and ethics of mental health professionals in public discourse, and it has prompted varied reactions from fans and critics alike.
There was a specific report from an information channel on the social network Telegram known as Mash, which cited a named individual as the alleged complainant. The claims asserted that the Mash channel’s Olga was offended by Instasamka’s statements and was pursuing legal recompense amounting to 150 million rubles in non-pecuniary damages. The assertion quickly became a talking point across social media, yet there has been no official confirmation from judicial authorities or the artist’s representatives that such a lawsuit exists or is proceeding.
Beyond the legal rumor, the public figure recently shared a personal update about her appearance. At the start of January, Instasamka explained her decision to alter her look, including shaving her eyebrows. She told fans that the change was part of a broader plan to allow new eyebrows to grow in, describing the process as a deliberate and creative experiment with her image. The disclosure offered fans a glimpse into the personal side of a performer who often uses bold aesthetic choices to craft a distinctive public persona.
In a separate development, conversations surrounding Instasamka have also touched on concerns raised by her legal representation about an unsettling telephone call involving Bari Alibasov. The matter has drawn attention to the kinds of correspondence and inquiries that public figures sometimes encounter, highlighting the pressures that accompany a high-profile career. While the specifics of the phone call remain a topic of discussion, the star’s legal team has urged caution and verified information before drawing conclusions from rumors.
Observers note that rapid online rumors can create a confusing landscape where fans, commentators, and industry insiders misinterpret statements or conflagrate unrelated events. In such environments, a clear, official denial from a trusted representative can help restore accuracy. Stolyarov’s public statement serves as a reminder that not every sensational headline reflects real court action or verified disputes. The absence of formal court documents at this stage underscores the importance of relying on verifiable sources when evaluating legal matters involving public figures.
From a broader perspective, the exchange sheds light on how celebrity voices shape dialogue around mental health professionals and consumer expectations in the digital age. The controversy demonstrates how provocative remarks can fuel conversations about responsibility, accountability, and the boundaries of satire in the realm of music and pop culture. Fans often seek transparency about rumors and want confirmation before drawing conclusions, while commentators aim to dissect the statements in a way that informs rather than inflames public sentiment.
Ultimately, the narrative surrounding Instasamka illustrates the delicate balance between personal expression and public accountability. For now, no court documents have surfaced to support the claim of a multimillion-dollar lawsuit, and the artist’s representatives have reiterated that the report is untrue. As new information emerges, it will be essential to distinguish between speculation and verified facts, ensuring that the discourse remains grounded in reliable evidence rather than sensationalism.
Regarding the eyebrow change, Instasamka’s update adds a human element to the story. The artist’s admission that the alteration was a strategic move to nurture new eyebrow growth offers a rare glimpse into the practical considerations that can accompany a high-profile public image. It also underscores the ways in which celebrities manage their personas through cosmetic choices, sometimes turning personal decisions into moments of engagement with their audience. This sort of openness can cultivate a sense of connection with fans, even when it revolves around appearances rather than music alone.
As the situation evolves, observers will likely monitor for any official statements from legal representatives or credible judicial correspondents. In the absence of confirmed proceedings, the prevailing impression remains that the sensational claim was not substantiated. The episode serves as a case study in media literacy for fans and a reminder to seek corroboration before sharing or reacting to provocative claims about figures in the entertainment industry.