ResidentialBusiness

With community opposition growing, data center backers are going on a full-scale public relations blitz. Around Christmas in Virginia, which boasts the highest concentration of data centers in the country, one advertisement seemed to air nonstop. “Virginia’s data centers are … investing billions in clean energy,” a voiceover intoned over sweeping shots of shiny solar panels. “Creating good-paying jobs” — cue men in yellow safety vests and hard hats — “and building a better energy future.” The ad was sponsored by Virginia Connects, an industry-affiliated group that spent at least $700,000 on digital marketing in the state in fiscal year 2024. The spot emphasized that data centers are paying their own energy costs — framing this as a buffer that might help lower residential bills — and portrayed the facilities as engines of local job creation. The reality is murkier. Although industry groups claim that each new data center creates “dozens to hundreds” of “high-wage, high-skill jobs,” some researchers say data centers generate far fewer jobs than other industries, such as manufacturing and warehousing. Greg LeRoy, the founder of the research and advocacy group Good Jobs First, said that in his first major study of data center jobs nine years ago, he found that developers pocketed well over a million dollars in state subsidies for every permanent job they created. With the rise of hyperscalers, LeRoy said, that number is “still very much in the ballpark.” Other experts reflect that finding. A 2025 brief from University of Michigan researchers put it bluntly: “Data centers do not bring high-paying tech jobs to local communities.” A recent analysis from Food & Water Watch, a nonprofit tracking corporate overreach, found that in Virginia, the investment required to create a permanent data center job was nearly 100 times higher than what was required to create comparable jobs in other industries. “Data centers are the extreme of hyper-capital intensity in manufacturing,” LeRoy said. “Once they’re built, the number of people monitoring them is really small.” Contractors may be called in if something breaks, and equipment is replaced every few years. “But that’s not permanent labor,” he said. Jon Hukill, a spokesperson for the Data Center Coalition, the industry lobbying group that established Virginia Connects in 2024, said that the industry “is committed to paying its full cost of service for the energy it uses” and is trying to “meet this moment in a way that supports both data center development and an affordable, reliable electricity grid for all customers.” Nationally, Hukill said, the industry “supported 4.7 million jobs and contributed $162 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in 2023.” Dozens of community groups across the country have mobilized against data center buildout, citing fears that the facilities will drain water supplies, overwhelm electric grids, and pollute the air around them. According to Data Center Watch, a project run by AI security company 10a Labs, nearly 200 community groups are currently active and blocked or delayed 20 data center projects representing $98 billion of potential investment between April and June 2025 alone. The backlash has exposed a growing image problem for the AI industry. “Too often, we’re portrayed as energy-hungry, water-intensive, and environmentally damaging,” data center marketer Steve Lim recently wrote. That narrative, he argued, “misrepresents our role in society and potentially hinders our ability to grow.” In response, the industry is stepping up its messaging. Some developers, like Starwood Digital Ventures in Delaware, are turning to Facebook ads to appeal to residents. Its ads make the case that data center development might help keep property taxes low, bring jobs to Delaware, and protect the integrity of nearby wetlands. According to reporting from Spotlight Delaware, the company has also boasted that it will create three times as many jobs as it initially told local officials. Nationally, Meta has spent months running TV spots showcasing data center work as a viable replacement for lost industrial and farming jobs. One advertisement spotlights the small city of Altoona, Iowa. “I grew up in Altoona, and I wanted my kids to be able to do the same,” a voice narrates over softly-lit scenes of small-town Americana: a Route 66 diner, a farm, and a water tower. “So, when work started to slow down, we looked for new opportunities … and we welcomed Meta, which opened a data center in our town. Now, we’re bringing jobs here — for us, and for our next generation.” The advertisement ends with a promise superimposed over images of a football game: “Meta is investing $600 billion in American infrastructure and jobs.” In reality, Altoona’s data center is a hulking, windowless, warehouse complex that broke ground in 2013, long before the current data center boom. Altoona is not quite the beleaguered farm town Meta’s advertisements portray, but a suburb of 19,000, roughly 16 minutes from downtown Des Moines, the most populous city in Iowa. Meta says it has supported “400+ operational jobs” in Altoona. In comparison, the local casino employs nearly 1,000 residents, according to the local economic development agency. Ultimately, those details may not matter much to the ad’s intended audience. As Politico reported, the advertisement may have been targeted at policymakers on the coasts more than the residents of towns like Altoona. Meta has spent at least $5 million airing the spot in places like Sacramento and Washington, D.C. The community backlash has also made data centers a political flashpoint. In Virginia, Abigail Spanberger won November’s gubernatorial election in part on promises to regulate the industry and make developers pay their “fair share” of the electricity they use. State lawmakers also considered 30 bills attempting to regulate data centers. In response to concerns about rising electricity prices, Virginia regulators approved a new rate structure for AI data centers and other large electricity users. The changes, which will take effect in 2027, are designed to protect household customers from costs associated with data center expansion. These developments may only encourage companies to spend more on image-building. In Virginia’s Data Center Alley, the ads show no sign of stopping. Elena Schlossberg, an anti-data-center activist based in Prince William County, says her mailbox has been flooded with fliers from Virginia Connects for the past eight months. The promises of lower electric bills, good jobs, and climate responsibility, she said, remind her of cigarette ads she saw decades ago touting the health benefits of smoking. But Schlossberg isn’t sure the marketing is going to work. One recent poll showed that 73 percent of Virginians blame data centers for their rising electricity costs. “There’s no putting the toothpaste back in the tube,” she said. “People already know we’re still covering their costs. People know that.” This article originally appeared in Grist. Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org View the full article

Prime minister’s handling of Mandelson scandal has left Labour party simmering with resentmentView the full article

US president says the two countries should seek a ‘modernised’ treaty instead of extending current agreementView the full article

Cisco has launched the Cisco 360 Partner Program, a comprehensive initiative that aims to empower small businesses, consultants, resellers, and managed services providers in navigating the rapidly evolving AI landscape. This program promises to reinforce how small businesses partner with Cisco, equipping them with tools and designations to help meet the demands of an increasingly digital market. The new program is particularly relevant as it addresses the growing needs for AI-ready data centers, future-proof workplaces, and enhanced digital resilience. Cisco’s emphasis on collaboration signals a shift in how technology partnerships can drive business success, something small business owners should take note of. One of the standout features of the Cisco 360 Partner Program is its potential to create clearer, more predictable earnings for partners through the Cisco Partner Incentive (CPI). This incentivizes businesses to align their sales and marketing strategies closely with Cisco’s offerings, making it easier for small business owners to plan for growth. Tim Coogan, Senior Vice President of Global Partner Sales at Cisco, emphasizes this by stating, “With our partners, we’ve strengthened what is already a world-class ecosystem to deliver even greater value and help our mutual customers connect, protect, and thrive.” Another key benefit of the program is the introduction of new partner designations, which assist customers in identifying partners with specialized expertise. All participating partners begin as registered Cisco Partners, but additional tiers—like Cisco Portfolio and Cisco Preferred Partners—indicate varying levels of skills and customer engagement. This distinction can help small businesses streamline their search for partners that possess the right capabilities to meet their specific needs. A significant tool within the program is the new Cisco Partner Locator, which allows businesses to search for qualified partners across a range of areas including Security, Networking, Collaboration, Services, and more. This can be particularly advantageous for small businesses that may not have the internal resources to tackle complex digital transitions alone. To further enhance partner offerings, Cisco has unveiled several new resources, including rebates and a Partner Value Index that will enable businesses to differentiate their services. With the backdrop of Cisco’s recent AI Readiness Index, which underscores the competitive advantage of being AI-ready, the Cisco 360 Partner Program aims to leverage partnerships to fulfill technology needs effectively. However, small business owners should be mindful of certain challenges that may arise from adopting new program initiatives. The focus on creating measurable value means businesses must be prepared to adjust their operations to align with Cisco’s evolving framework. The implementation of these changes may require time and investment, which can strain resources for smaller organizations. Additionally, partners will be evaluated based on their expertise and engagement levels, leading to the possibility of increased pressure to continually refine their offerings. Quotes from industry leaders emphasize the significance of this strategic shift. Elisabeth De Dobbeleer, Senior Vice President at Cisco, remarked, “The Cisco 360 Partner Program was designed with partners to foster collective success, enable differentiation, and help partners scale with confidence.” Meanwhile, Kevin Brown from Insight noted that the program aligns perfectly with their goal of delivering meaningful customer outcomes, reflecting a broader industry sentiment on the program’s potential. For small business owners considering this transition, the Cisco 360 Partner Program offers a pathway to enhanced collaboration, improved partner identification, and greater earning potential. However, they should also prepare for the new demands that come with these benefits. As technology continues to evolve, programs like Cisco 360 are essential for businesses looking to stay ahead. By embracing these partnerships, small business owners can better position themselves for success in the competitive landscape of the AI era. For more information about the program, visit Cisco’s newsroom. Image via Google Gemini This article, "Cisco Launches 360 Partner Program to Enhance Collaboration in AI Era" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

Cisco has launched the Cisco 360 Partner Program, a comprehensive initiative that aims to empower small businesses, consultants, resellers, and managed services providers in navigating the rapidly evolving AI landscape. This program promises to reinforce how small businesses partner with Cisco, equipping them with tools and designations to help meet the demands of an increasingly digital market. The new program is particularly relevant as it addresses the growing needs for AI-ready data centers, future-proof workplaces, and enhanced digital resilience. Cisco’s emphasis on collaboration signals a shift in how technology partnerships can drive business success, something small business owners should take note of. One of the standout features of the Cisco 360 Partner Program is its potential to create clearer, more predictable earnings for partners through the Cisco Partner Incentive (CPI). This incentivizes businesses to align their sales and marketing strategies closely with Cisco’s offerings, making it easier for small business owners to plan for growth. Tim Coogan, Senior Vice President of Global Partner Sales at Cisco, emphasizes this by stating, “With our partners, we’ve strengthened what is already a world-class ecosystem to deliver even greater value and help our mutual customers connect, protect, and thrive.” Another key benefit of the program is the introduction of new partner designations, which assist customers in identifying partners with specialized expertise. All participating partners begin as registered Cisco Partners, but additional tiers—like Cisco Portfolio and Cisco Preferred Partners—indicate varying levels of skills and customer engagement. This distinction can help small businesses streamline their search for partners that possess the right capabilities to meet their specific needs. A significant tool within the program is the new Cisco Partner Locator, which allows businesses to search for qualified partners across a range of areas including Security, Networking, Collaboration, Services, and more. This can be particularly advantageous for small businesses that may not have the internal resources to tackle complex digital transitions alone. To further enhance partner offerings, Cisco has unveiled several new resources, including rebates and a Partner Value Index that will enable businesses to differentiate their services. With the backdrop of Cisco’s recent AI Readiness Index, which underscores the competitive advantage of being AI-ready, the Cisco 360 Partner Program aims to leverage partnerships to fulfill technology needs effectively. However, small business owners should be mindful of certain challenges that may arise from adopting new program initiatives. The focus on creating measurable value means businesses must be prepared to adjust their operations to align with Cisco’s evolving framework. The implementation of these changes may require time and investment, which can strain resources for smaller organizations. Additionally, partners will be evaluated based on their expertise and engagement levels, leading to the possibility of increased pressure to continually refine their offerings. Quotes from industry leaders emphasize the significance of this strategic shift. Elisabeth De Dobbeleer, Senior Vice President at Cisco, remarked, “The Cisco 360 Partner Program was designed with partners to foster collective success, enable differentiation, and help partners scale with confidence.” Meanwhile, Kevin Brown from Insight noted that the program aligns perfectly with their goal of delivering meaningful customer outcomes, reflecting a broader industry sentiment on the program’s potential. For small business owners considering this transition, the Cisco 360 Partner Program offers a pathway to enhanced collaboration, improved partner identification, and greater earning potential. However, they should also prepare for the new demands that come with these benefits. As technology continues to evolve, programs like Cisco 360 are essential for businesses looking to stay ahead. By embracing these partnerships, small business owners can better position themselves for success in the competitive landscape of the AI era. For more information about the program, visit Cisco’s newsroom. Image via Google Gemini This article, "Cisco Launches 360 Partner Program to Enhance Collaboration in AI Era" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

In special education in the U.S., funding is scarce and personnel shortages are pervasive, leaving many school districts struggling to hire qualified and willing practitioners. Amid these long-standing challenges, there is rising interest in using artificial intelligence tools to help close some of the gaps that districts currently face and lower labor costs. Over 7 million children receive federally funded entitlements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which guarantees students access to instruction tailored to their unique physical and psychological needs, as well as legal processes that allow families to negotiate support. Special education involves a range of professionals, including rehabilitation specialists, speech-language pathologists and classroom teaching assistants. But these specialists are in short supply, despite the proven need for their services. As an associate professor in special education who works with AI, I see its potential and its pitfalls. While AI systems may be able to reduce administrative burdens, deliver expert guidance and help overwhelmed professionals manage their caseloads, they can also present ethical challenges – ranging from machine bias to broader issues of trust in automated systems. They also risk amplifying existing problems with how special ed services are delivered. Yet some in the field are opting to test out AI tools, rather than waiting for a perfect solution. A faster IEP, but how individualized? AI is already shaping special education planning, personnel preparation, and assessment. One example is the individualized education program, or IEP, the primary instrument for guiding which services a child receives. An IEP draws on a range of assessments and other data to describe a child’s strengths, determine their needs and set measurable goals. Every part of this process depends on trained professionals. But persistent workforce shortages mean districts often struggle to complete assessments, update plans and integrate input from parents. Most districts develop IEPs using software that requires practitioners to choose from a generalized set of rote responses or options, leading to a level of standardization that can fail to meet a child’s true individual needs. Preliminary research has shown that large language models such as ChatGPT can be adept at generating key special education documents such as IEPs by drawing on multiple data sources, including information from students and families. Chatbots that can quickly craft IEPs could potentially help special education practitioners better meet the needs of individual children and their families. Some professional organizations in special education have even encouraged educators to use AI for documents such as lesson plans. Training and diagnosing disabilities There is also potential for AI systems to help support professional training and development. My own work on personnel development combines several AI applications with virtual reality to enable practitioners to rehearse instructional routines before working directly with children. Here, AI can function as a practical extension of existing training models, offering repeated practice and structured support in ways that are difficult to sustain with limited personnel. Some districts have begun using AI for assessments, which can involve a range of academic, cognitive, and medical evaluations. AI applications that pair automatic speech recognition and language processing are now being employed in computer-mediated oral reading assessments to score tests of student reading ability. Practitioners often struggle to make sense of the volume of data that schools collect. AI-driven machine learning tools also can help here, by identifying patterns that may not be immediately visible to educators for evaluation or instructional decision-making. Such support may be especially useful in diagnosing disabilities such as autism or learning disabilities, where masking, variable presentation and incomplete histories can make interpretation difficult. My ongoing research shows that current AI can make predictions based on data likely to be available in some districts. Privacy and trust concerns There are serious ethical—and practical—questions about these AI-supported interventions, ranging from risks to students’ privacy to machine bias and deeper issues tied to family trust. Some hinge on the question of whether or not AI systems can deliver services that truly comply with existing law. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires nondiscriminatory methods of evaluating disabilities to avoid inappropriately identifying students for services or neglecting to serve those who qualify. And the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act explicitly protects students’ data privacy and the rights of parents to access and hold their children’s data. What happens if an AI system uses biased data or methods to generate a recommendation for a child? What if a child’s data is misused or leaked by an AI system? Using AI systems to perform some of the functions described above puts families in a position where they are expected to put their faith not only in their school district and its special education personnel, but also in commercial AI systems, the inner workings of which are largely inscrutable. These ethical qualms are hardly unique to special ed; many have been raised in other fields and addressed by early-adopters. For example, while automatic speech recognition, or ASR, systems have struggled to accurately assess accented English, many vendors now train their systems to accommodate specific ethnic and regional accents. But ongoing research work suggests that some ASR systems are limited in their capacity to accommodate speech differences associated with disabilities, account for classroom noise, and distinguish between different voices. While these issues may be addressed through technical improvement in the future, they are consequential at present. Embedded bias At first glance, machine learning models might appear to improve on traditional clinical decision-making. Yet AI models must be trained on existing data, meaning their decisions may continue to reflect long-standing biases in how disabilities have been identified. Indeed, research has shown that AI systems are routinely hobbled by biases within both training data and system design. AI models can also introduce new biases, either by missing subtle information revealed during in-person evaluations or by overrepresenting characteristics of groups included in the training data. Such concerns, defenders might argue, are addressed by safeguards already embedded in federal law. Families have considerable latitude in what they agree to, and can opt for alternatives, provided they are aware they can direct the IEP process. By a similar token, using AI tools to build IEPs or lessons may seem like an obvious improvement over underdeveloped or perfunctory plans. Yet true individualization would require feeding protected data into large language models, which could violate privacy regulations. And while AI applications can readily produce better-looking IEPs and other paperwork, this does not necessarily result in improved services. Filling the gap Indeed, it is not yet clear whether AI provides a standard of care equivalent to the high-quality, conventional treatment to which children with disabilities are entitled under federal law. The Supreme Court in 2017 rejected the notion that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act merely entitles students to trivial, “de minimis” progress, which weakens one of the primary rationales for pursuing AI – that it can meet a minimum standard of care and practice. And since AI really has not been empirically evaluated at scale, it has not been proved that it adequately meets the low bar of simply improving beyond the flawed status quo. But this does not change the reality of limited resources. For better or worse, AI is already being used to fill the gap between what the law requires and what the system actually provides. Seth King is an associate professor of special education at the University of Iowa. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. I’ve always said there’s no good reason to buy an older model Whoop band, since the company will give you the latest model for free when you subscribe. But on Reddit, some people who already own Whoop 5.0 bands are buying up old 4.0 bands to get a bargain on the subscription price. There have been a few posts on this, but perhaps the master of this hack is Redditor u/thelifeofcb, who found Whoop 4.0 bands, new in box, at a T. J. Maxx store for $39 each, and bought several. This allowed them to extend their existing subscription—they wear a Whoop 5.0—for several years at essentially a $200/year discount. How the discount Whoop hack worksWhen new Whoop bands are sold through retailers, they come packaged with a one-year subscription. The idea is that you’ll create an account on the app, pair the band you bought through the app, and get credit for a 12-month subscription—since that was the main thing you paid for when you bought the band at full price. Back in the Whoop 4.0 days, there was only one tier of membership. When tiers were introduced, those subscriptions rolled over to a Peak subscription, the one that currently goes for $239/year. That means a 4.0 device—however much you pay for it—can give you a year-long Peak subscription. Redditors have found that pairing one of these new Whoop 4.0 devices added a year’s subscription to their accounts, whether they were a new customer or not. That means you can buy a few discount bands, pair them all, and enjoy several years’ worth of discounted membership. That $39 band is thus a $200 discount on each year’s membership. Some say that they received an offer to upgrade to a Whoop 5.0 band if they added two years' worth of membership (paired two bands). That $39 price is an unusually good one, but you can still get a significant discount anywhere new Whoop 4.0 devices are sold. For example, Amazon has 4.0 devices right now for $124, which is still about half the price of a Peak subscription. You can find them cheaper on eBay, but I’d be wary of buying a box that may have been opened. I’ll explain that below. Scoring a cheap Whoop won't always work, thoughWhile Redditors say this works—and it does fit with my understanding of how subscriptions are paid for and claimed in the app—there are a few pitfalls to beware of. The first is that this applies to new-in-box devices that (1) are sold with a subscription, and (2) have never been paired. The hack would not work with a hand-me-down device that has already been used, nor with a new one that has already been paired and its subscription claimed. For example, you can’t pass the same band to a friend and expect it to give both of you a subscription. This means you have to be sure the band you buy has not been opened. If a store accepts returns of opened items, they may not realize that the valuable item here—the digital subscription—has already been claimed. If they put it back on the shelf, and you buy it, you’re out the purchase price and you still don’t have a subscription. The other issue is just the e-waste that this causes. You’re buying a device just to throw it in the trash. But I’d argue that’s Whoop’s fault, not yours—those devices are obsolete and headed for the landfill (or responsible electronics recycling program, if you can find one) regardless of what you do. View the full article

As Winter Storm Fern swept across the United States in late January 2026, bringing ice, snow, and freezing temperatures, it left more than a million people without power, mostly in the Southeast. Scrambling to meet higher than average demand, PJM, the nonprofit company that operates the grid serving much of the mid-Atlantic U.S., asked for federal permission to generate more power, even if it caused high levels of air pollution from burning relatively dirty fuels. Energy Secretary Chris Wright agreed and took another step, too. He authorized PJM and ERCOT—the company that manages the Texas power grid—as well as Duke Energy, a major electricity supplier in the Southeast, to tell data centers and other large power-consuming businesses to turn on their backup generators. The goal was to make sure there was enough power available to serve customers as the storm hit. Generally, these facilities power themselves and do not send power back to the grid. But Wright explained that their “industrial diesel generators” could “generate 35 gigawatts of power, or enough electricity to power many millions of homes.” We are scholars of the electricity industry who live and work in the Southeast. In the wake of Winter Storm Fern, we see opportunities to power data centers with less pollution while helping communities prepare for, get through, and recover from winter storms. Data centers use enormous quantities of energy Before Wright’s order, it was hard to say whether data centers would reduce the amount of electricity they take from the grid during storms or other emergencies. This is a pressing question, because data centers’ power demands to support generative artificial intelligence are already driving up electricity prices in congested grids like PJM’s. And data centers are expected to need only more power. Estimates vary widely, but the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab anticipates that the share of electricity production in the U.S. used by data centers could spike from 4.4% in 2023 to between 6.7% and 12% by 2028. PJM expects a peak load growth of 32 gigawatts by 2030—enough power to supply 30 million new homes, but nearly all going to new data centers. PJM’s job is to coordinate that energy—and figure out how much the public, or others, should pay to supply it. The race to build new data centers and find the electricity to power them has sparked enormous public backlash about how data centers will inflate household energy costs. Other concerns are that power-hungry data centers fed by natural gas generators can hurt air quality, consume water, and intensify climate damage. Many data centers are located, or proposed, in communities already burdened by high levels of pollution. Local ordinances, regulations created by state utility commissions, and proposed federal laws have tried to protect ratepayers from price hikes and require data centers to pay for the transmission and generation infrastructure they need. Always-on connections? In addition to placing an increasing burden on the grid, many data centers have asked utility companies for power connections that are active 99.999% of the time. But since the 1970s, utilities have encouraged “demand response” programs, in which large power users agree to reduce their demand during peak times like Winter Storm Fern. In return, utilities offer financial incentives such as bill credits for participation. Over the years, demand response programs have helped utility companies and power grid managers lower electricity demand at peak times in summer and winter. The proliferation of smart meters allows residential customers and smaller businesses to participate in these efforts as well. When aggregated with rooftop solar, batteries and electric vehicles, these distributed energy resources can be dispatched as “virtual power plants.” A different approach The terms of data center agreements with local governments and utilities often aren’t available to the public. That makes it hard to determine whether data centers could or would temporarily reduce their power use. In some cases, uninterrupted access to power is necessary to maintain critical data systems, such as medical records, bank accounts and airline reservation systems. Yet, data center demand has spiked with the AI boom, and developers have increasingly been willing to consider demand response. In August 2025, Google announced new agreements with Indiana Michigan Power and the Tennessee Valley Authority to provide “data center demand response by targeting machine learning workloads,” shifting “non-urgent compute tasks” away from times when the grid is strained. Several new companies have also been founded specifically to help AI data centers shift workloads and even use in-house battery storage to temporarily move data centers’ power use off the grid during power shortages. Flexibility for the future One study has found that if data centers would commit to using power flexibly, an additional 100 gigawatts of capacity—the amount that would power around 70 million households—could be added to the grid without adding new generation and transmission. In another instance, researchers demonstrated how data centers could invest in offsite generation through virtual power plants to meet their generation needs. Installing solar panels with battery storage at businesses and homes can boost available electricity more quickly and cheaply than building a new full-size power plant. Virtual power plants also provide flexibility as grid operators can tap into batteries, shift thermostats or shut down appliances in periods of peak demand. These projects can also benefit the buildings where they are hosted. Distributed energy generation and storage, alongside winterizing power lines and using renewables, are key ways to help keep the lights on during and after winter storms. Those efforts can make a big difference in places like Nashville, Tennessee, where more than 230,000 customers were without power at the peak of outages during Fern, not because there wasn’t enough electricity for their homes but because their power lines were down. The future of AI is uncertain. Analysts caution that the AI industry may prove to be a speculative bubble: If demand flatlines, they say, electricity customers may end up paying for grid improvements and new generation built to meet needs that would not actually exist. Onsite diesel generators are an emergency solution for large users such as data centers to reduce strain on the grid. Yet, this is not a long-term solution to winter storms. Instead, if data centers, utilities, regulators and grid operators are willing to also consider offsite distributed energy to meet electricity demand, then their investments could help keep energy prices down, reduce air pollution and harm to the climate, and help everyone stay powered up during summer heat and winter cold. Nikki Luke is an assistant professor of human geography at the University of Tennessee. Conor Harrison is an associate professor of economic geography at the University of South Carolina. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

In terms of maximizing engagement on social media, choosing the right planner can greatly impact your strategy. Social media planners offer various features, such as content curation, scheduling, and analytics, that help streamline your efforts. By comprehending the key features and comparing top tools like SocialBee, Pallyy, and Agorapulse, you can identify which planner best suits your needs. Let’s explore the options available in 2025 and how they can improve your social media presence. Key Takeaways Choose planners like SocialBee for robust content curation and AI-driven strategy to enhance audience engagement. Utilize Pallyy’s user-friendly drag-and-drop scheduling to streamline post planning and maximize reach. Agorapulse offers advanced analytics and collaboration tools to effectively monitor audience sentiment and improve interactions. Leverage Buffer’s AI Assistant for generating engaging content ideas and maximizing post effectiveness across multiple platforms. Consider affordable options like Publer for essential features that still support engagement growth within budget constraints. Overview of Social Media Planners Social media planners are essential tools that help you efficiently manage your content across various platforms, ensuring a consistent brand presence and promoting audience engagement. By consolidating all social media in one place app, these planners streamline social media publishing, allowing you to schedule posts effectively. They often include features like analytics, content calendars, and collaboration tools, which help you track performance metrics and engage with your audience more meaningfully. Many of the best social media planners integrate with popular design tools like Canva and Unsplash, enabling you to create visually appealing content on the same platform. With pricing options ranging from free plans to premium subscriptions, there’s a solution that fits various business needs and budgets. Key Features to Look For When selecting a social media planner, several key features can greatly improve your experience and effectiveness. First, look for scheduling capabilities that automate posting across multiple platforms, guaranteeing consistent engagement without manual effort. You should likewise choose planners that offer robust analytics and reporting features, helping you track engagement metrics and optimize your content strategy based on performance data. Furthermore, verify the tool supports team collaboration with content approval workflows and multi-user access to streamline communication. Seek planners that include content curation tools, like RSS feeds and design platform integration, for easier content discovery. Finally, consider planners with a unified inbox to manage interactions across different networks, simplifying engagement and response management. Top Social Media Planners in 2025 As of 2025, several top social media planners stand out for their unique features and capabilities, making them valuable tools for individuals and businesses alike. Here are some significant options: SocialBee: Offers robust content curation and publishing, with plans starting at $29/month and a 14-day free trial. Pallyy: Features a user-friendly drag-and-drop scheduling workflow, ideal for visual content on Instagram and TikTok, with a free plan for 15 scheduled posts. Sendible: The most scalable choice for agencies, integrating with tools like Canva, starting at $29/month with a 14-day trial. Metricool: Supports multiple platforms with a drag-and-drop planner and batch scheduling, starting at $22/month with a free plan. Agorapulse: Perfect for collaboration and reporting, used by over 3,000 agencies, beginning at $69/month. SocialBee: Pros and Cons When considering SocialBee, you’ll find a mix of impressive features and some limitations. It offers robust content curation tools and a unique AI copilot that can help shape your social media strategies, but it’s essential to highlight that it lacks certain functionalities like social listening. With pricing starting at $29 per month and a free 14-day trial, it presents a viable option for businesses looking to improve their social media management. Key Features Overview SocialBee stands out in the crowded field of social media management tools owing to its robust features designed to streamline content planning and execution. Its extensive content curation tools, including RSS feeds and post categorization, allow you to manage and organize your social media content efficiently. The platform furthermore integrates with popular design tools like Canva, Unsplash, and GIPHY, enhancing the visual appeal of your posts. Significantly, the AI copilot generates customized social media strategies to suit your needs. Here are some key features: Strong post variant feature Hashtag collections to boost engagement Extensive content curation tools Integration with design platforms Unique AI copilot for strategy generation However, it lacks thorough social listening features. Pricing and Plans Finding the right pricing plan for your social media management needs can be crucial, especially if you’re looking for a balance between features and budget. SocialBee’s plans start at $29/month, with a 14-day free trial allowing you to explore its capabilities. For long-term users, there’s a 16% discount on annual sign-ups, making it more economical. The platform offers extensive content curation and publishing features, enhancing engagement on major social networks. Nevertheless, although it includes valuable tools like post categorization and content approval workflows, it lacks certain social listening functionalities. Users appreciate the unique AI copilot for generating strategies, but keep in mind that it mightn’t meet all your requirements as a fully inclusive tool. Pallyy: Pros and Cons Pallyy offers a range of features that make it a compelling choice for social media scheduling, particularly for users focused on visual platforms like Instagram and TikTok. Here are some pros and cons to evaluate: Pros: User-friendly drag-and-drop scheduling workflow. Feed Planner tool for maintaining aesthetic cohesion on Instagram. Generous free plan with 15 scheduled posts per month. Unified social inbox for managing interactions across different networks. Affordable Premium plan starting at $25 per month. Cons: Limited features on the free plan may restrict growth. May not be as robust for text-heavy platforms like Twitter or Facebook. When weighing your options, Pallyy’s features cater especially well to visual content creators. Sendible: Pros and Cons When considering a social media scheduling tool, Sendible stands out for agencies and individuals alike, as it offers a scalable platform that integrates seamlessly with popular resources like Canva and Pexels. Its priority inbox helps you focus on important conversations, allowing efficient management of multiple client dashboards. You’ll appreciate the customizable posts and visual campaign overview, which simplify tracking your social media strategies. Furthermore, Sendible supports content curation through Google News alerts and RSS feeds, enhancing your ability to source relevant content. Conversely, pricing starts at $29 per month, which may be a consideration for some. Pros Cons Scalable for various needs Starting price may be high Integrates with popular tools Limited free features Priority inbox for efficiency Learning curve for new users Customizable post options Could overwhelm beginners Content curation capabilities Some features require upgrades Agorapulse: Pros and Cons When considering Agorapulse, you’ll find a range of features customized for social media management, such as a unified inbox and advanced analytics. The pricing starts at $69 per month, positioning it as a premium option among its competitors. In this discussion, we’ll explore both its key features and pricing structure to help you determine if it’s the right fit for your needs. Key Features Overview Agorapulse offers a range of features intended to boost social media management, making it a solid choice for businesses looking to streamline their online presence. Here are some key features that stand out: Unified Inbox: Consolidates messages from various channels for easier engagement management. Advanced Reporting: Tracks social media performance and analyzes audience interactions effectively. Automated Tasks: Improves workflow with features for labeling and assigning messages to team members. Social Media Monitoring: Provides insights into audience sentiments and brand health. Collaboration Tools: Supports teamwork but may lack advanced social listening features compared to competitors like Sprout Social. These functionalities collectively improve your ability to manage social media effectively as well as enhancing engagement with your audience. Pricing Structure Analysis Evaluating the pricing structure of Agorapulse reveals a mix of benefits and drawbacks that can impact your decision-making process. Although Agorapulse offers a limited free version, its paid plans start at $69 per month, catering to agencies and larger teams. Each plan varies in the number of allowed social profiles and users, providing flexibility to meet your specific needs. Furthermore, opting for annual billing can lead to significant savings. Agorapulse justifies its higher price point with advanced features like social media monitoring and AI writing assistance. Users often find that the robust analytics and collaboration capabilities deliver substantial value, making the investment worthwhile for serious social media management. Nonetheless, it’s vital to evaluate your budget and requirements before committing. Buffer: Pros and Cons Buffer stands out as a popular choice for social media management, particularly because it offers a user-friendly interface that simplifies the scheduling of posts across various accounts. Here are some pros and cons to reflect on: Pros: Free plan available for basic needs. Robust analytics to track engagement and performance. AI Assistant for generating posts and content ideas. Unlimited scheduled posts with paid plans. Ability to manage multiple social accounts simultaneously. Cons: May lack advanced features found in extensive tools. Deeper analytics may not be as robust. Paid plans start at $15 per month. Some users may find the interface too simplistic. Limited customization options for analytics reports. Choosing the Right Planner for Your Needs How do you determine the right social media planner for your specific needs? Start by identifying your primary platforms; for example, if you focus on Instagram and TikTok, tools like Pallyy and Later are ideal since they excel in visual content scheduling. Next, evaluate the features you require—content curation, analytics, or team collaboration—where SocialBee offers robust content curation and approval workflows. Don’t forget to assess your budget; Publer, starting at $12/month, is an affordable choice. Look for planners with trial periods, like Sendible or Hootsuite, to test their effectiveness before committing. Finally, prioritize user-friendly interfaces; tools like Buffer and Metricool streamline your social media management, helping you save time and improve efficiency. Frequently Asked Questions What Is the 5 3 2 Rule for Social Media? The 5 3 2 Rule for social media suggests that in a set of ten posts, you should share five valuable pieces of content from others, three personal insights or updates, and two promotional posts about your own products or services. This strategy balances engagement with promotional efforts, encouraging community interaction. What Is the 5 5 5 Rule on Social Media? The 5 5 5 rule on social media recommends that you create a balanced content strategy by posting five engaging or entertaining posts, followed by five informative or educational posts, and then five promotional posts. This approach prevents overwhelming your audience with sales pitches, as well as providing value. By alternating content types, you can maintain interest, promote community interaction, and improve engagement metrics, ultimately resulting in a more holistic brand presence on social media. What Is the Best Social Media Platform for Engagement? When considering the best social media platform for engagement, Instagram stands out with its average engagement rate of 1.22% for brands. TikTok follows closely, leveraging its algorithm to keep users engaged through short videos. Pinterest users engage more with brands, whereas LinkedIn has gained traction for B2B interactions, generating notably higher engagement than Facebook. Twitter’s engagement is driven by trending topics and hashtags, making content relevance essential for maximizing interaction. What Gets the Most Engagement on Social Media? To get the most engagement on social media, focus on using visuals like images and videos, as they generate considerably more interaction than text alone. Interactive content, such as polls and quizzes, invites participation, enhancing engagement rates. Furthermore, sharing personal stories can make your posts more relatable, leading to increased shares. Timing likewise matters; posting during peak hours, especially from 9 AM to 12 PM on weekdays, can boost visibility and interaction. Conclusion In summary, selecting the right social media planner can greatly improve your engagement strategies. Each tool, from SocialBee to Buffer, offers unique features customized to different needs, whether it’s scheduling, analytics, or content creation. By evaluating the pros and cons of each option, you can make an informed choice that aligns with your brand’s goals. Prioritizing the features that matter most to you will help guarantee a consistent and effective online presence, cultivating stronger connections with your audience. Image via Google Gemini This article, "Best Social Media Planners to Maximize Engagement" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

In terms of maximizing engagement on social media, choosing the right planner can greatly impact your strategy. Social media planners offer various features, such as content curation, scheduling, and analytics, that help streamline your efforts. By comprehending the key features and comparing top tools like SocialBee, Pallyy, and Agorapulse, you can identify which planner best suits your needs. Let’s explore the options available in 2025 and how they can improve your social media presence. Key Takeaways Choose planners like SocialBee for robust content curation and AI-driven strategy to enhance audience engagement. Utilize Pallyy’s user-friendly drag-and-drop scheduling to streamline post planning and maximize reach. Agorapulse offers advanced analytics and collaboration tools to effectively monitor audience sentiment and improve interactions. Leverage Buffer’s AI Assistant for generating engaging content ideas and maximizing post effectiveness across multiple platforms. Consider affordable options like Publer for essential features that still support engagement growth within budget constraints. Overview of Social Media Planners Social media planners are essential tools that help you efficiently manage your content across various platforms, ensuring a consistent brand presence and promoting audience engagement. By consolidating all social media in one place app, these planners streamline social media publishing, allowing you to schedule posts effectively. They often include features like analytics, content calendars, and collaboration tools, which help you track performance metrics and engage with your audience more meaningfully. Many of the best social media planners integrate with popular design tools like Canva and Unsplash, enabling you to create visually appealing content on the same platform. With pricing options ranging from free plans to premium subscriptions, there’s a solution that fits various business needs and budgets. Key Features to Look For When selecting a social media planner, several key features can greatly improve your experience and effectiveness. First, look for scheduling capabilities that automate posting across multiple platforms, guaranteeing consistent engagement without manual effort. You should likewise choose planners that offer robust analytics and reporting features, helping you track engagement metrics and optimize your content strategy based on performance data. Furthermore, verify the tool supports team collaboration with content approval workflows and multi-user access to streamline communication. Seek planners that include content curation tools, like RSS feeds and design platform integration, for easier content discovery. Finally, consider planners with a unified inbox to manage interactions across different networks, simplifying engagement and response management. Top Social Media Planners in 2025 As of 2025, several top social media planners stand out for their unique features and capabilities, making them valuable tools for individuals and businesses alike. Here are some significant options: SocialBee: Offers robust content curation and publishing, with plans starting at $29/month and a 14-day free trial. Pallyy: Features a user-friendly drag-and-drop scheduling workflow, ideal for visual content on Instagram and TikTok, with a free plan for 15 scheduled posts. Sendible: The most scalable choice for agencies, integrating with tools like Canva, starting at $29/month with a 14-day trial. Metricool: Supports multiple platforms with a drag-and-drop planner and batch scheduling, starting at $22/month with a free plan. Agorapulse: Perfect for collaboration and reporting, used by over 3,000 agencies, beginning at $69/month. SocialBee: Pros and Cons When considering SocialBee, you’ll find a mix of impressive features and some limitations. It offers robust content curation tools and a unique AI copilot that can help shape your social media strategies, but it’s essential to highlight that it lacks certain functionalities like social listening. With pricing starting at $29 per month and a free 14-day trial, it presents a viable option for businesses looking to improve their social media management. Key Features Overview SocialBee stands out in the crowded field of social media management tools owing to its robust features designed to streamline content planning and execution. Its extensive content curation tools, including RSS feeds and post categorization, allow you to manage and organize your social media content efficiently. The platform furthermore integrates with popular design tools like Canva, Unsplash, and GIPHY, enhancing the visual appeal of your posts. Significantly, the AI copilot generates customized social media strategies to suit your needs. Here are some key features: Strong post variant feature Hashtag collections to boost engagement Extensive content curation tools Integration with design platforms Unique AI copilot for strategy generation However, it lacks thorough social listening features. Pricing and Plans Finding the right pricing plan for your social media management needs can be crucial, especially if you’re looking for a balance between features and budget. SocialBee’s plans start at $29/month, with a 14-day free trial allowing you to explore its capabilities. For long-term users, there’s a 16% discount on annual sign-ups, making it more economical. The platform offers extensive content curation and publishing features, enhancing engagement on major social networks. Nevertheless, although it includes valuable tools like post categorization and content approval workflows, it lacks certain social listening functionalities. Users appreciate the unique AI copilot for generating strategies, but keep in mind that it mightn’t meet all your requirements as a fully inclusive tool. Pallyy: Pros and Cons Pallyy offers a range of features that make it a compelling choice for social media scheduling, particularly for users focused on visual platforms like Instagram and TikTok. Here are some pros and cons to evaluate: Pros: User-friendly drag-and-drop scheduling workflow. Feed Planner tool for maintaining aesthetic cohesion on Instagram. Generous free plan with 15 scheduled posts per month. Unified social inbox for managing interactions across different networks. Affordable Premium plan starting at $25 per month. Cons: Limited features on the free plan may restrict growth. May not be as robust for text-heavy platforms like Twitter or Facebook. When weighing your options, Pallyy’s features cater especially well to visual content creators. Sendible: Pros and Cons When considering a social media scheduling tool, Sendible stands out for agencies and individuals alike, as it offers a scalable platform that integrates seamlessly with popular resources like Canva and Pexels. Its priority inbox helps you focus on important conversations, allowing efficient management of multiple client dashboards. You’ll appreciate the customizable posts and visual campaign overview, which simplify tracking your social media strategies. Furthermore, Sendible supports content curation through Google News alerts and RSS feeds, enhancing your ability to source relevant content. Conversely, pricing starts at $29 per month, which may be a consideration for some. Pros Cons Scalable for various needs Starting price may be high Integrates with popular tools Limited free features Priority inbox for efficiency Learning curve for new users Customizable post options Could overwhelm beginners Content curation capabilities Some features require upgrades Agorapulse: Pros and Cons When considering Agorapulse, you’ll find a range of features customized for social media management, such as a unified inbox and advanced analytics. The pricing starts at $69 per month, positioning it as a premium option among its competitors. In this discussion, we’ll explore both its key features and pricing structure to help you determine if it’s the right fit for your needs. Key Features Overview Agorapulse offers a range of features intended to boost social media management, making it a solid choice for businesses looking to streamline their online presence. Here are some key features that stand out: Unified Inbox: Consolidates messages from various channels for easier engagement management. Advanced Reporting: Tracks social media performance and analyzes audience interactions effectively. Automated Tasks: Improves workflow with features for labeling and assigning messages to team members. Social Media Monitoring: Provides insights into audience sentiments and brand health. Collaboration Tools: Supports teamwork but may lack advanced social listening features compared to competitors like Sprout Social. These functionalities collectively improve your ability to manage social media effectively as well as enhancing engagement with your audience. Pricing Structure Analysis Evaluating the pricing structure of Agorapulse reveals a mix of benefits and drawbacks that can impact your decision-making process. Although Agorapulse offers a limited free version, its paid plans start at $69 per month, catering to agencies and larger teams. Each plan varies in the number of allowed social profiles and users, providing flexibility to meet your specific needs. Furthermore, opting for annual billing can lead to significant savings. Agorapulse justifies its higher price point with advanced features like social media monitoring and AI writing assistance. Users often find that the robust analytics and collaboration capabilities deliver substantial value, making the investment worthwhile for serious social media management. Nonetheless, it’s vital to evaluate your budget and requirements before committing. Buffer: Pros and Cons Buffer stands out as a popular choice for social media management, particularly because it offers a user-friendly interface that simplifies the scheduling of posts across various accounts. Here are some pros and cons to reflect on: Pros: Free plan available for basic needs. Robust analytics to track engagement and performance. AI Assistant for generating posts and content ideas. Unlimited scheduled posts with paid plans. Ability to manage multiple social accounts simultaneously. Cons: May lack advanced features found in extensive tools. Deeper analytics may not be as robust. Paid plans start at $15 per month. Some users may find the interface too simplistic. Limited customization options for analytics reports. Choosing the Right Planner for Your Needs How do you determine the right social media planner for your specific needs? Start by identifying your primary platforms; for example, if you focus on Instagram and TikTok, tools like Pallyy and Later are ideal since they excel in visual content scheduling. Next, evaluate the features you require—content curation, analytics, or team collaboration—where SocialBee offers robust content curation and approval workflows. Don’t forget to assess your budget; Publer, starting at $12/month, is an affordable choice. Look for planners with trial periods, like Sendible or Hootsuite, to test their effectiveness before committing. Finally, prioritize user-friendly interfaces; tools like Buffer and Metricool streamline your social media management, helping you save time and improve efficiency. Frequently Asked Questions What Is the 5 3 2 Rule for Social Media? The 5 3 2 Rule for social media suggests that in a set of ten posts, you should share five valuable pieces of content from others, three personal insights or updates, and two promotional posts about your own products or services. This strategy balances engagement with promotional efforts, encouraging community interaction. What Is the 5 5 5 Rule on Social Media? The 5 5 5 rule on social media recommends that you create a balanced content strategy by posting five engaging or entertaining posts, followed by five informative or educational posts, and then five promotional posts. This approach prevents overwhelming your audience with sales pitches, as well as providing value. By alternating content types, you can maintain interest, promote community interaction, and improve engagement metrics, ultimately resulting in a more holistic brand presence on social media. What Is the Best Social Media Platform for Engagement? When considering the best social media platform for engagement, Instagram stands out with its average engagement rate of 1.22% for brands. TikTok follows closely, leveraging its algorithm to keep users engaged through short videos. Pinterest users engage more with brands, whereas LinkedIn has gained traction for B2B interactions, generating notably higher engagement than Facebook. Twitter’s engagement is driven by trending topics and hashtags, making content relevance essential for maximizing interaction. What Gets the Most Engagement on Social Media? To get the most engagement on social media, focus on using visuals like images and videos, as they generate considerably more interaction than text alone. Interactive content, such as polls and quizzes, invites participation, enhancing engagement rates. Furthermore, sharing personal stories can make your posts more relatable, leading to increased shares. Timing likewise matters; posting during peak hours, especially from 9 AM to 12 PM on weekdays, can boost visibility and interaction. Conclusion In summary, selecting the right social media planner can greatly improve your engagement strategies. Each tool, from SocialBee to Buffer, offers unique features customized to different needs, whether it’s scheduling, analytics, or content creation. By evaluating the pros and cons of each option, you can make an informed choice that aligns with your brand’s goals. Prioritizing the features that matter most to you will help guarantee a consistent and effective online presence, cultivating stronger connections with your audience. Image via Google Gemini This article, "Best Social Media Planners to Maximize Engagement" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication. If you’re a competitive gamer, OLED displays are widely recommended for their speedy pixel response times, which virtually eliminate motion blur and ghosting. The result is smoother, sharper visuals with better contrast, so you don’t have to deal with the dreaded slow-motion lag when you’re in the zone. LG’s UltraGear monitors are known for leading the charge in this area, and right now, the highly rated 27-inch LG 27GX700A-B Ultragear OLED monitor is 41% off at $473.99 (originally $799.99), taking more than $300 off the price tag. LG 27GX700A-B Ultragear OLED Monitor $473.99 at Amazon $799.99 Save $326.00 Get Deal Get Deal $473.99 at Amazon $799.99 Save $326.00 This QHD OLED monitor delivers deep blacks and infinite contrast with vibrant colors and 1300 nit brightness (very high for an OLED, though the tradeoff may be some color accuracy), as well as a 240Hz refresh rate and 0.03 response time for smoother gameplay. Dark scenes are enhanced by DisplayHDR True Black 400 plus OLED per-pixel lighting, while FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync keep frames steady and eliminate tearing. It’s also UL-certified as anti-glare with a matte screen compared to similar models from competitors with a TrueBlack Glossy coating—and it’s flicker-free with low blue light emission. For serious gamers looking to upgrade to crisp OLED visuals with maximum brightness, better motion clarity thanks to a high refresh rate and best-in-class contrast, the LG 27GX700A-B Ultragear OLED monitor takes blurry guesswork out of the equation. While it doesn’t have 4K detail or the immersive scale of a larger curved monitor, at a rare 41% discount, you’ll be hard-pressed to find comparable quality at a sub-$500 price point. Our Best Editor-Vetted Tech Deals Right Now Apple AirPods 4 Active Noise Cancelling Wireless Earbuds — $139.99 (List Price $179.00) Apple Watch Series 11 [GPS 46mm] Smartwatch with Jet Black Aluminum Case with Black Sport Band - M/L. Sleep Score, Fitness Tracker, Health Monitoring, Always-On Display, Water Resistant — $329.00 (List Price $429.00) Apple iPad 11" 128GB A16 WiFi Tablet (Blue, 2025) — $299.99 (List Price $349.00) Blink Mini 2 1080p Security Camera (White) — $23.99 (List Price $39.99) Ring Outdoor Cam Pro Plug-In With Outdoor Cam Plus Battery (White) — $189.99 (List Price $259.99) Amazon Fire TV Stick 4K Plus — $29.99 (List Price $49.99) Deals are selected by our commerce team View the full article

Files show former prince tried to encourage Emirati foreign minister to do business with disgraced financierView the full article

Fiscal watchdog predicts companies will lower wages on back of chancellor’s Budget measureView the full article

In 2024, the clean energy sector saw a job boom: The industry added nearly 100,000 new jobs throughout that year, meaning clean energy jobs grew more than three times faster than the rest of the workforce. Last year was a different story, however. It was a year of losses for the clean energy industry, in terms of projects, investments, and employment. Existing factories closed, like Natron Energy’s sodium-ion battery facilities in Michigan and California. Planned facilities were canceled, including a $3.2 billion Stellantis battery factory in Illinois. And multiple kinds of projects were scrapped, blocked, or downsized, from EV plants to wind farms. In total, the turbulent year meant that 38,000 jobs—a mix of current and future positions—were erased from the clean energy industry, according to a new analysis by E2, a nonpartisan organization that tracks U.S. clean energy projects. A net loss of clean energy jobs The vast majority of those 38,000 lost jobs were in manufacturing (though some may have been counted in multiple categories, like energy generation or maintenance). For comparison, by the end of 2024, there were about 577,000 manufacturing jobs in the clean energy industry. These job losses are especially significant because they’re happening amid a general decline in manufacturing employment. In 2024, clean energy manufacturing had been a “bright spot,” says Michael Timberlake, E2 director of research and publications, helping bring back U.S. production. “When those projects are canceled, we’re not just losing jobs on paper; we’re losing a pathway that had been driving a new manufacturing resurgence,” he says. “And the investment doesn’t disappear. It moves to other countries and U.S. competitors that are aggressively building clean energy supply chains and hiring the workers we can’t afford to lose.” Even amid cancellations, some new clean energy projects and jobs were announced in 2025, like a $42 million Anthro Energy battery factory in Louisville, Kentucky, which will create 110 jobs. But the number of jobs eliminated outweighs those potential additions. Just 22,905 jobs were announced in 2025, meaning a net loss of more than 15,000 expected clean energy positions. “No previous year tracked by E2 saw job losses on this scale, underscoring how quickly employment gains can evaporate when projects are abandoned,” the analysis reads. New clean energy investments were also overshadowed by cancellations. Companies canceled, closed, or downsized $34.8 billion in clean energy projects, nearly three times the $12.3 billion in new investment announced throughout the year, a 3-to-1 imbalance. Republican-held districts hit harder Though the entire country was affected by these losses, Republican-held districts felt their impact a bit more than others. Republican districts lost $19.9 billion in investments that would have brought 24,500 jobs to those regions, compared to $10.6 billion and 12,600 jobs lost in Democratic-held districts. That makes sense because the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) signed by then-President Joe Biden in 2022—which spurred clean energy jobs and projects—benefited many Republican-led districts, even though not a single Republican voted for the legislation and in fact House Republicans voted 42 times to repeal it. Nearly 200,000 of the 334,000 clean energy jobs that the IRA created in its first two years were in congressional districts represented by Republican House members. Still, clean energy is growing Despite attacks on clean energy by the current The President administration, the sector is still growing in the United States. In 2025, nearly all of the new power added to the country’s grid came from solar, wind, and batteries. Even the U.S. Energy Information Administration has said that all net new generating capacity the country sees in 2026 will come from renewables. And clean energy experts say the industry will continue to grow—even as the president tries to prop up coal, oil, and gas—because electricity generated from renewables is cheaper than fossil fuels, and the projects are often faster to build than fossil fuel power plants. Still, economic losses that the clean energy sector saw in 2025 are devastating, and may not be fully recovered. And if clean energy job growth is at risk, that affects our entire economy. Clean energy jobs are present in every single state, and, as the World Resources Institute put it in November, “movement toward clean energy will create opportunity for millions of Americans.” E2’s data also doesn’t capture the “tens of thousands of additional jobs and projects” that likely would have been announced if the country’s policy and market certainty continued, Timberlake says. “Likely hundreds of projects that would have been announced, and hundreds more that could’ve been announced this year, cannot be recovered,” he adds, “and will instead benefiting workers and communities in other countries.” View the full article

US president adds that he retains right to ‘militarily secure’ American base on Diego GarciaView the full article

Spotify is about much more than music these days, and nothing makes that clearer than the company's recent commitment to books—not just audiobooks, but old-school paper ones. Today, Spotify announced it's coming hard for Amazon's Kindle and Audible businesses, and will soon start selling physical copies of books in addition to audiobooks. Starting today, the company is also introducing "Page Match," a feature that allows you to use your phone's camera to instantly sync an audiobook with either a physical book, or one you're reading on an e-reader. How you'll buy physical books through SpotifySpotify's physical book sales infrastructure isn't quite ready yet, but the mere announcement is a surprising move in a few ways. Not only is a streamer making a big commitment to physical products, but the offering is being implemented in a way that could help local booksellers, rather than compete with them. This will likely bea relief to any bookstores that have struggled to compete with Amazon. To bring physical book sales to market, Spotify is partnering with Bookshop.org, a site that connects shoppers with independent bookstores near them (although it doesn't source inventory from them, but drop ships them from the distributor). Purchases deliver 30% of the sale back to a selected bookstore (which Bookshop.org says is the entire profit margin, though the site does keep a ); if the shopper doesn't pick a specific bookstore to support, 10% of their purchase will go towards a general profit sharing fund for all bookstores partnered with the website. It's a stunningly market-friendly move, made possible by Bookshop.org's B corporation status. But from a selfish perspective, it also means Spotify won't have to deal with the logistics of selling books: In order to buy a physical book through the app, users will first have to navigate to one of the service's audiobooks, then click a button that says Add to your bookshelf at home. After that, they'll be taken to a checkout page on Bookshop.org. It's unclear whether Spotify itself will be making any money on these sales, or if it is simply acting as a middle-man. The company says it's "meeting readers where they are" and is "excited to see the impact Spotify's scale will have for local bookstores." But even if there's no direct profit incentive, I'm sure Spotify will be happy if it can drive some sales to a store other than Amazon, or use the new feature to convince readers of physical books to try the app. How to sync your physical book with a Spotify audiobookSpeaking of Amazon, Audible has been able to sync audiobook progress with Kindle e-books for a while now, making it easy to jump between reading and listening. Now, Spotify wants to do the same, but with a more open approach. Rolling out today, with support expected to come to "most English-language titles" by the end of February, Spotify's Page Match feature will sync your Spotify audiobook progress with your spot in a physical, paper-based book, or even an e-reader. This works because it doesn't use an account to sync, but instead works via your phone's camera. To use Page Match, open a supported audiobook in your Spotify app, tap Page Match, then tap Scan to listen. Place your camera over the page you want to sync to, whether that's in a physical book or one displayed on an e-reader screen. You can then tap Play from here to start listening from where that page kicks off in the audiobook, or Save for later to make a bookmark you can jump to at any time. Once you're done listening to your audiobook and want to go back to your physical book or e-reader, just open your audiobook, tap Page Match, and tap Scan to read. Place your camera over your physical book or e-reader, and after some processing, Spotify will tell you which page to flip to to start reading from where you stopped listening. Unlike Spotify's audiobook recaps, Page Match supposedly does not use AI, instead relying on computer vision and text matching. Still, I'm curious how the "Scan to read" feature will handle inconsistent page numbering between different editions of a book, which can be a major problem with e-books in particular. Spotify says that if the feature runs into snags, it will prompt you to try again. Page Match is available to all audiobook listeners on Spotify, so there's a good chance you can try it now. Premium subscribers and Audiobook+ members can use the feature with their monthly listening hours, while free users can use Page Match with supported audiobooks they've bought outright. I don't subscribe to Spotify and I don't own any audiobooks on the service, but the company says that to get started, you only need "make sure your Spotify app is updated." Spotify's continued push into books and podcastsSpotify might have started off as a simple app for streaming music, but now, it's clear the company wants to maximize hours spent in its app, and that means branching out to all types of audio content. According to an interview with The Verge, it has seen a 36% year-over-year increase in customers starting audiobooks on a platform, and a 37% increase in overall audiobook listening hours. The growth is supposedly mostly coming from existing customers rather than new subscribers, so it remains to be seen whether Spotify's enhanced audiobook support can dethrone Amazon. Page Match working with any physical book or e-reader is probably a good start. View the full article

Bob Iger doesn’t understand generative AI. He thinks it is good for the quarterly bottom line. He believes a corporation can control it, and that lawyers and agreements can bind it. He is clueless. Generative AI is here to kill Hollywood—including the company he’s now leaving to Josh D’Amaro, the new heir to Disney’s throne. This became painfully clear to me during Disney’s recent first-quarter financial call. Taking a victory lap for his “modernization” efforts, he briefly laid out the roadmap for the company’s partnership with OpenAI, announced in December 2025. Under the agreement, Disney would invest $1 billion in the AI company and let it tap Disney’s IP crown jewels so Sora users can make clips of Donald The President wearing an Iron Man suit battling Jafar dressed as an Iranian Ayatollah. Here’s Iger’s plan as stated: Step one—flood Disney+ with Sora 2 generated “vertical videos” capped at 30 seconds. Iger views this as a “positive step” that will “jump-start” the platform’s ability to compete with the dopamine-loop short-form content of TikTok and YouTube. There is no Step 2. At least not yet. For the last 15 years, Iger has been on a quest to find the silver bullet that keeps Disney relevant deep into the 21st century. He bought Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, and Fox. Now, as he leaves Cinderella’s castle behind, he clearly views this Sora partnership as the final move that allows him to leave the company “future-proofed.” During the call, Iger all but carved this philosophy in stone for D’Amaro. “I believe that in the world that changes as much as it does that in some form or another, trying to preserve the status quo is a mistake, and I’m certain that my successor will not do that,” Iger said. “They’ll be handed, I think, a good hand in terms of the strength of the company, [and a] number of opportunities to grow.” But to say curated AI slop provides “a number of opportunities to grow” is an Epcot-sized ball of naiveté. Iger’s intention to evolve Disney is correct; stagnation is indeed death, as any Harvard Business School freshman will recite. But his strategy fails to understand the nature of the beast he has invited into the Magic Kingdom. Iger is talking about generative AI like a new distribution channel or a camera lens—a tool that can be kept in a walled garden to serve a corporate master. But AI is not a tool; it is a solvent. It dissolves the barriers between creator and consumer, between professional and amateur, and ultimately, between value and noise. A new plan for Disney D’Amaro is walking into a wall of noise that is going to get increasingly harder to break through as generative content continues to take over our feeds. Disney’s saving grace could be that D’Amaro, a man who built his career overseeing the company’s theme parks and experiences, likely understands the value of true physical, human-driven innovation. Expanding those experiences, as Iger said on the call, will be Disney’s focus in the years to come. It makes perfect sense. Disney’s Experiences segment outperformed the Entertainment segment in Q1 2026 by a factor of almost three. While entertainment revenue reached $11.61 billion, high content production and marketing costs for major releases caused its operating income to plunge 35% to $1.1 billion. In contrast, the Experiences segment posted record revenue of $10.01 billion with an operating income of $3.31 billion, accounting for roughly 71% of Disney’s total segment operating profit for the quarter. It’s telling that the physical experience and its human factor, beat the cumulus of film and TV re-fried franchise releases. D’Amaro has the opportunity to set a strategy that could make Disney thrive. He has the track record to do it. D’Amaro’s experience isn’t limited to running a theme park. He secured the throne partly because he championed Disney’s $1.5 billion investment in Epic Games and Fortnite. He seemingly understands the digital generation. Now the question is, will he see the Sora deal for what it is? Disney’s agreement with OpenAI is a three-year deal, with a one-year exclusivity clause that opens Disney to close deals with, say, Kuaishou Technology, the Chinese makers of Kling. In corporate time, three years is a blink. But for Generative AI—where time is measured in yellow dog’s years—it is an epoch. By the time this contract expires, the havoc AI will have wreaked on the entertainment industry won’t be something you can negotiate away. This is a pivotal moment that D’Amaro needs to address now, even if it goes against the stock market algorithms and the vision of a Wall Street-revered old man now sailing into the sunset on his gilded version of the Black Pearl. Iger’s AI strategy Iger outlined three pillars for this AI strategy at his call: Creativity (assisting the process) Productivity (efficiency, read: cost-cutting) Connectivity (a “more intimate relationship” with the consumer). His vision is a Disney+ where you don’t just watch Frozen; you generate a 30-second clip of Olaf dancing in your living room. Exciting. The financial sector, predictable as ever, applauded at the mere thought of Disney embracing AI. When the Sora deal was announced, many analysts like Citi Research Media Analyst Jason Bazinet called this a masterful move: A “strategic defense,” and a way to monetize IP that would otherwise be scrapped for free. Bazinet believes “this agreement codifies what specific IP can be used (animated characters) and what form the output can take (i.e. short-form video). This will both protect actors/actresses in Hollywood and prevent cannibalization of Disney’s long-form Film and TV output.” Outside the boardroom, things aren’t so La La Land. The unions that work in the “Creativity” pillar view Iger’s AI strategy as a betrayal, framing it as a Trojan Horse that normalizes the technology that is intended to replace them. The Writers Guild of America said that “[the partnership] seems to endorse the platform’s appropriation of their work while diminishing the value of their creations for the benefit of a tech corporation.” Iger’s idea of “Productivity” is just corporate speak for employing fewer humans. “Jobs are going to be lost,” as filmmaker Tyler Perry said after the news. Perry saw the writing on the wall a long time ago, halting an $800 million studio expansion after seeing the first version of Sora. If you can generate a location, you don’t need to build it. If you can generate a performance, you don’t need to film it. Disney has been cutting jobs in the film, television, and finance department, but none related yet to its AI initiatives, mainly in post-production.. And as for “Connectivity,” consumers are all well served, thank you very much. Anyone who has surfed YouTube, TikTok, Discord, Instagram, X, or Reddit, knows they are overflowing with AI-generated videos. There are not enough Avengers, Baby Yodas, and Mickey Mice in the world to win this war of content. And the more time that passes, the less chance Disney has at winning that war with the same tools as the “enemy” is using. Disney is adopting Sora to fight a battle in its own walled garden, limited to its famous-but-limited IP. By definition, it can’t compete against the entire planet creating universes of infinitely-expanding generated content. Horizon events Iger seems to believe that by partnering with OpenAI, Disney has bought safety. Somehow, he thinks this buys Disney control over the beast. But OpenAI does not control generative AI. Altman is a chump compared to the combined power of the companies cooking generative AI video technology in China. Generative AI is, right now, an all-powerful being who doesn’t care about corporate deals. Iger’s remarks remind me of that viral 1999 Newsnight interview with David Bowie, where he laughed at the interviewer who thought the Internet was “just a tool.” No Bob, Bowie would have told Iger today, AI is not a tool. It’s an alien lifeform. Experts warned me of this moment in 2023. Tom Graham—CEO of Metaphysic, a firm dedicated to protecting actors and regular people against AI clones— told me that we were approaching a “horizon of events” where reality would evaporate. Gil Perry—CEO of AI avatar firm D-ID—predicted that within “one or two years,” we wouldn’t be able to distinguish truth from lies. Emad Mostaque—co-founder of Stability AI—told me that within a decade, we’d create anything in real-time with “visual perfection.” They were all correct, but far too conservative. We didn’t need a decade. We barely needed three years. Which, in itself, is a testimony of the true power of AI and its ability to change reality and content as we know it. Today, early 2026, we have crossed that horizon. The “uncanny valley,” which allowed us to instinctively distinguish fake AI from real, is permanently closed. Models like Sora 2 and Google’s Veo 3 more than often produce video indistinguishable from reality for short clips. But the real threat to Disney isn’t the partner they paid $1 billion to; it’s the technology they didn’t buy. Open-source platforms like Wan 2.6—made by Chinese company Alibaba—are already running on consumer hardware, offering “multi-shot storytelling” and character consistency that rivals the closed systems of Silicon Valley. The technology is wild, uncensored, and free. It doesn’t care about Disney’s copyright. It doesn’t care about walled gardens. It is creating a Big Bang of content where a teenager in a basement can generate a film that looks as expensive as a Marvel blockbuster. The dilution of magic And this is where Iger’s gamble truly falls apart. He assumes that in this world of infinite, picture-perfect content, Disney’s IP will remain king. And why? Disney has spent the last decade systematically exhausting its brand equity. We are drowning in the umpteenth Star Wars spinoff and the 50th Marvel phase. The brand fatigue is palpable. Why would people, except the hard-core fanboys, choose to consume frozen-TV-dinner clips of the same old stuff again and again? How can the acceleration of this IPs’ exhaustion, allowing users to churn out “AI-slopped” versions of these characters, help Disney? Iger thinks adding “curated” user-generated noise to Disney+ is a value-add, failing to see it for what it is: the final commoditization of its former magic. Why would the current and future generations care about a sanitized, 30-second Mickey Mouse clip on Disney+ when they can go to an open platform and generate their own universe, tailored specifically to their own desires, with characters that feel just as real but are completely new? Change course or sink If there’s anything I can be sure of is that the history of the internet—from YouTube to TikTok—teaches us one thing: The audience craves the new, the raw, and the personal. They are moving away from the polished, corporate monoliths. By integrating Sora 2, Iger isn’t saving Disney; he is training his audience to accept synthetic media, accelerating the very shift that renders legacy studios obsolete. Bob Iger is right that you have to change or die. But by betting that he can ride the tiger of generative AI without being eaten, he may have just opened the cage door for good. Perhaps D’Amaro, the man of the physical Disney, can save the House of Mouse from the digital trap Iger has set for him. If the future of content is infinite, cheap, and synthetic, the only true luxury left is the human touch. D’Amaro has the chance to zag where the rest of the industry is zigging. He can double down on the one thing AI cannot simulate—the spark of human genius that birthed this company in the first place. Instead of competing with teenagers in garages on AI speed, hire them to do what Walt Disney himself did: Invent new mythologies. Create your own technologies. Craft truly new, bold stories born from the messiness of the human spirit, not the probability curves of a model trained on the past. Reclaim the “experience” not just as a theme park ride, but as the act of witnessing something undeniably, beautifully human. That is the only magic trick left that an algorithm can’t replicate. View the full article

In certain corners of corporate America, a generous parental leave policy has become a crucial tool for recruiting and retention. Many of the biggest tech employers have been leaders on this front, offering 16 to 20 weeks of leave, or even close to six months at companies like Google. But even as companies have expanded their parental leave benefits, few of them have sought to address the unique challenges many parents—and especially mothers—face when they actually return to work. A handful of companies, among them Apple and Amazon, offer a grace period that enables employees to ease back into work part-time or work flexible hours for a few weeks. Despite all these advances, clinical psychologist and author Angele Close argues that many leaders still don’t fully comprehend how pregnancy and motherhood fundamentally changes people—a phenomenon that is now better understood. Over the last decade, researchers have studied how going through pregnancy and motherhood alters cognition and changes the brain in a manner that lasts at least two years. There’s a term for this experience: matrescence, which Close defines as a “profound identity transformation that women go through becoming mothers, [which] affects all areas of their life—physiologically, neurologically, emotionally, psychologically, spiritually.” In her book Matrescence: On Pregnancy, Childbirth, and Motherhood, journalist and science writer Lucy Jones describes it as a transition akin to adolescence, with comparable changes to the brain. The modern workplace, however, is not really designed to accommodate matrescence. It’s not just that women are uniquely impacted by pregnancy and childbirth; in many cases, they also disproportionately shoulder the burden of caregiving responsibilities. Even now, with so many companies offering more generous leave policies, men still take less leave. Most workplaces are simply not equipped to adequately support working mothers when they return—and concerns over showing bias or making shaky assumptions about their ambitions can put employers in a tricky position. Setting up support Close believes the first step is just increasing awareness of how working mothers are changed by the experience of matrescence. “People don’t understand matrescence yet, so we have to get that language in our culture to really appreciate it,” she says. “There is this idea [that] you get your leave, and then you’re going to just bounce right back . . . Of course, it’s unique and individual to everybody. But even just having that language and the lens of it—she’s not coming back the same woman she was when she left. And can we give space for that? Can we be curious about that?” For some employees, matrescence might precipitate a more radical shift. “Many women do start wanting different things,” Close says. “What lights you up before might light you up differently. Sometimes that might mean they are going to just leave the company and go and try something new.” Of course, despite common assumptions that a woman’s ambitions recede after having a baby, everyone responds to motherhood differently. But Close says companies should be more open to the idea that something may have shifted. Or at least give employees an opening to have a conversation about their priorities upon their return: both what they might need as they reacclimate, and how they hope to balance their ambitions alongside their caregiving responsibilities. That might also include having a follow-up conversation a few months down the road, to check in and reevaluate. “Most women that I talk to want that,” says Close, who works with clients both as a therapist and motherhood coach. “They are fulfilled in work. They don’t want to stay at home. They want to find a way to integrate this and make it work. But because it’s not understood in the workforce and in their organizations, they aren’t fully supported.” Navigating a transformation While parental leave policies and other caregiver benefits can amount to lip service at certain companies, it remains a crucial offering for many employees, as well as an opportunity for companies to talk about issues that might impact working parents. A company that wants to highlight the challenges faced by mothers returning to the workplace could, for example, bring in people to speak on the subject for a “lunch and learn” event. When employers don’t leave room for much dialogue about their career ambitions, it also makes it that much more difficult for working mothers to raise concerns. “If I’m not feeling supported, now I have to vocalize it,” Close says. “So the more that people understand, the safer it’s going to be for a mom to have the confidence to say: ‘I know it’s not me and I’m not failing. This is what I need.’” In fact, companies should see this as an opportunity to cultivate loyalty and strong leadership skills. The experience of matrescence can be a “real positive transformation for women,” Close says, one that gives them greater clarity on their values and priorities. The juggling act of early motherhood enhances their ability to manage competing priorities in a way that can prove exceptionally useful in the workplace. “She’s now juggling many, many things, and her whole body—her physiology—is managing that, and developing it, and getting good at it,” she says. “We’re missing out on potential great leaders if they just feel unsupported and end up leaning out.” The costs of failing to support There are long-term consequences when companies fail to develop those employees, well beyond the acute transformation of early motherhood. In their initial years of child-rearing, working mothers may need more flexibility in their schedules and seek out greater work-life balance. But the motherhood penalty can affect how companies perceive those women further along in their careers, as their children grow older and they want to pour themselves into their work. “There are a lot of women who are kind of at the later stages of motherhood, where they have a lot to offer,” Close says. “They have more energy, they have more space, and they have gained those skills.” After all, there’s a real cost when companies are unable to retain these workers. In the years since the pandemic—which drove many working mothers out of their jobs—the number of women in the workforce had surpassed pre-pandemic levels. But last year, that trend started to reverse: In the first half of 2025, about 212,000 women exited the workforce, and a Washington Post analysis found that the share of working mothers between the ages of 25 and 44 had dipped by nearly three percentage points. The December jobs report cemented this shift as 81,000 workers left the labor force—all of whom were women, according to the National Women’s Law Center. “When moms come to see me, they’re cracking, or they’re burnt out,” Close says. “A big part of what I do is to just say: What you’re going through is normal, and it’s expected, and it’s not a personal, individual failure. What a world it would be if we all understood that, and companies and bosses and CEOs could make space for that and be supportive. We’d have a lot more moms [who] are thriving.” View the full article

U.S. job openings fell to the lowest level in more than five years, another sign that the American labor market remains sluggish. The Labor Department reported Thursday that vacancies fell to 6.5 million in December — from 6.9 million in November and the fewest since September 2020. Layoffs rose slightly. The number of people quitting their jobs — which shows confidence in their prospects — was basically unchanged at 3.2 million. December openings came in lower than economists had forecast. The economy is in a puzzling place. Growth is strong: Gross domestic product — the nation’s output of goods and services — advanced from July through September at the fastest pace in two years. But the job market is lackluster: Employers have added just 28,000 jobs a month since March. In the 2021-2023 hiring boom that followed COVID-19 lockdowns, by contrast, they were creating 400,000 jobs a month. When the Labor Department releases hiring and unemployment numbers for January next Wednesday, they are expected to show the companies, government agencies and nonprofits added about 70,000 jobs last month — modest but up from 50,000 in December. On Wednesday, payroll processor ADP reported that private employers added just 22,000 jobs last month, far fewer than forecasters had expected. And the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas said Thursday that companies slashed more than 108,000 jobs last month, the most since October and the worst January for job cuts since 2009. “The hiring recession isn’t going to end anytime soon,” Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, wrote in a commentary. “Job openings in December just fell to their lowest level since September 2020. It’s yet another sign of how little hiring – or interest in hiring – is happening in this economy.” Economists are trying to figure out if hiring will accelerate to catch up to strong growth or if growth will slow to reflect a weak labor market or if advances in artificial intelligence and automation mean that the economy can roar ahead without creating many jobs. —Paul Wiseman, AP economics writer View the full article

Novo Nordisk’s stock dove 7% on Thursday just after an announcement from a key competitor. The drop came just after telehealth company Hims & Hers announced it will offer a new version of the treatment, made from the same active ingredient, semaglutide, for a fraction of Novo Nordisk’s price. The telehealth site will offer the treatment at an introductory price of $49, the announcement said. After the introductory offer ends, patients with a 5-month subscription will pay $99 monthly for the treatment. Novo Nordisk sells the weight-loss drug for $149. Hims & Hers had already been offering the treatment in an injectable form, but the oral version is new for the brand. “We’re excited to find ways to continue bringing branded treatments to the platform across specialties. More choice on the platform is the best thing for customers everywhere,” said Hims CEO Andrew Dudum in a statement. While the announcement spurred Novo Nordisk’s stock to reach its lowest level since July 2021, it wasn’t the only company that saw its stock slip on Thursday. Eli Lilly’s fell by up to 6.1% on the announcement. Meanwhile, Hims and Hers Health stock surged 19% on Thursday. On Wednesday, Novo CFO Karsten Munk Knudsen told Reuters that the company is “frustrated” with “mass marketing” of knock-off versions of the drug which was “unapproved by the FDA”. The CFO warned that unprecedented pricing pressure as competition grows in the weight-loss drug market, added that it’s a challenge to predict “if and when the tide turns” for the brand. Per Hims & Hers announcement, the company said that safety is the brand’s “top priority.” It continued, “The Compounded Semaglutide Pill joins a wide range of other weight loss treatments accessible through our platform, all of which meet rigorous clinical standards.” Fast Company reached out to Novo Nordisk but did not hear back by the time of publication. In November, when the company dropped its prices to fend off competition, Dave Moore, executive vice president of U.S. operations at Novo Nordisk, said, “As pioneers of the GLP-1 class, we are committed to ensuring that real, FDA-approved Wegovy and Ozempic are affordable and accessible to those who need them.” Moore continued: “The U.S. healthcare system is complex, with different types of insurance and various ways for patients to obtain their medicines. Our new savings offers provide immediate impact, bringing forward greater cost savings for those who are currently without coverage or choose to self-pay.” View the full article

Mortgage rates edged higher after the Fed held rates steady, with markets weighing political shifts, Treasury moves and mixed signals on where borrowing costs head next. View the full article

Announcement made despite lack of progress in Ukraine-Russia peace dialogue View the full article

Start-up describes Opus 4.6 as its ‘most capable’ model for businesses and knowledge workView the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. When Owala water bottles started appearing in every influencer's "daily essentials" video and cluttering my Instagram feed, I rolled my eyes. I assumed this was another overhyped product that people would forget about in three months, just the latest in a long line of Stanley Cup successors. One of my biggest personality quirks (or "flaws," according to some) is that I'm a major spiller. The Stanley Cup's open straw is a non-starter for me. In fact, no water bottle technology has been stronger than my ability to spill its contents. After watching my latest bottle create yet another puddle in my bag, I caved and bought an Owala. And now, I have to admit this water bottle is officially an upgrade in my life. Why the Owala water bottle is the bestI'm a huge fan of the FreeSip lid—yes, that's what they call it, and yes, it lives up to the name—is genuinely brilliant in its simplicity. There's a built-in straw for when you want to sip without tilting (perfect for walking, driving, or my personal use case: lying horizontally on the couch). Flip it open a bit more, and there's a wide-mouth spout for when you want to chug. One lid, two drinking options, and crucially, a push-button lock that has saved my laptop, my physical planner, and my dignity. Seriously, I cannot emphasize this enough: I am a world-class spiller. The Owala's lock mechanism is the only thing standing between me and constant catastrophe. At 24 ounces, it's the perfect size—big enough that I'm not refilling it every hour, small enough that it actually fits in my bag's side pocket and doesn't make me look like I'm headed out for a weekend camping trip when I'm just going to run errands. It's become my constant companion without feeling like I'm lugging around gym equipment. Owala FreeSip Insulated Stainless Steel Water Bottle with Straw for Sports and Travel, BPA-Free, 24-oz, Blue/Teal (Denim) $29.99 at Amazon Shop Now Shop Now $29.99 at Amazon Sometimes the influencers are onto something. And now I'm part of the problem, becoming the exact person who won't shut up about their water bottle. But when you find something that solves multiple persistent problems at once, when a product actually delivers on its promises instead of just looking good in photos, it's hard not to evangelize a little. The Owala works. I'm staying hydrated, my bag is staying dry, and I'm sipping with ease wherever I go. View the full article

For many women in the U.S. and around the world, motherhood comes with career costs. Raising children tends to lead to lower wages and fewer work hours for mothers—but not fathers—in the United States and around the world. As a sociologist, I study how family relationships can shape your economic circumstances. In the past, I’ve studied how motherhood tends to depress women’s wages, something social scientists call the “motherhood penalty.” I wondered: Can government programs that provide financial support to parents offset the motherhood penalty in earnings? A ‘motherhood penalty’ I set out with Therese Christensen, a Danish sociologist, to answer this question for moms in Denmark—a Scandinavian country with one of the world’s strongest safety nets. Several Danish policies are intended to help mothers stay employed. For example, subsidized child care is available for all children from 6 months of age until they can attend elementary school. Parents pay no more than 25% of its cost. But even Danish moms see their earnings fall precipitously, partly because they work fewer hours. Losing $9,000 in the first year In an article to be published in an upcoming issue of European Sociological Review, Christensen and I showed that mothers’ increased income from the state—such as from child benefits and paid parental leave—offset about 80% of Danish moms’ average earnings losses. Using administrative data from Statistics Denmark, a government agency that collects and compiles national statistics, we studied the long-term effects of motherhood on income for 104,361 Danish women. They were born in the early 1960s and became mothers for the first time when they were 20-35 years old. They all became mothers by 2000, making it possible to observe how their earnings unfolded for decades after their first child was born. While the Danish government’s policies changed over those years, paid parental leave and child allowances and other benefits were in place throughout. The women were, on average, age 26 when they became mothers for the first time, and 85% had more than one child. We estimated that motherhood led to a loss of about the equivalent of US$9,000 in women’s earnings—which we measured in inflation-adjusted 2022 U.S. dollars—in the year they gave birth to or adopted their first child, compared with what we would expect if they had remained childless. While the motherhood penalty got smaller as their children got older, it was long-lasting. The penalty only fully disappeared 19 years after the women became moms. Motherhood also led to a long-term decrease in the number of the hours they worked. Studying whether government can fix it These annual penalties add up. We estimated that motherhood cost the average Danish woman a total of about $120,000 in earnings over the first 20 years after they first had children—about 12% of the money they would have earned over those two decades had they remained childless. Most of the mothers in our study who were employed before giving birth were eligible for four weeks of paid leave before giving birth and 24 weeks afterward. They could share up to 10 weeks of their paid leave with the baby’s father. The length and size of this benefit has changed over the years. The Danish government also offers child benefits—payments made to parents of children under 18. These benefits are sometimes called a “child allowance.” Denmark has other policies, like housing allowances, that are available to all Danes, but are more generous for parents with children living at home. Using the same data, Christensen and I next estimated how motherhood affects how much money Danish moms receive from the government. We wanted to know whether they get enough income from the government to compensate for their loss of income from their paid work. We found that motherhood leads to immediate increases in Danish moms’ government benefits. In the year they first gave birth to or adopted a child, women received over $7,000 more from the government than if they had remained childless. That money didn’t fully offset their lost earnings, but it made a substantial dent. The gap between the money that mothers received from the government, compared with what they would have received if they remained childless, faded in the years following their first birth or adoption. But we detected a long-term bump in income from government benefits for mothers—even 20 years after they first become mothers. Cumulatively, we determined that the Danish government offset about 80% of the motherhood earnings penalty for the women we studied. While mothers lost about $120,000 in earnings compared with childless women over the two decades after becoming a mother, they gained about $100,000 in government benefits, so their total income loss was only about $20,000. Benefits for parents of older kids Our findings show that government benefits do not fully offset earnings losses for Danish moms. But they help a lot. Because most countries provide less generous parental benefits, Denmark is not a representative case. It is instead a test case that shows what’s possible when governments make financially supporting parents a high priority. That is, strong financial support for mothers from the government can make motherhood more affordable and promote gender equality in economic resources. Because the motherhood penalty is largest at the beginning, government benefits targeted to moms with infants, such as paid parental leave, may be especially valuable. Child care subsidies can also help mothers return to work faster. The motherhood penalty’s long-term nature, however, indicates that these short-term benefits are not enough to get rid of it altogether. Benefits that are available to all mothers of children under 18, such as child allowances, can help offset the long-term motherhood penalty for mothers of older children. Alexandra Killewald is a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article