All Activity

Google seems to have added a new section to music knowledge panels named "Behind the music." It seems that this is generated using Google's Gemini AI and gives you a bit of background on the song.View the full article

Microsoft is now showing two rows of shopping ads at the top of the Bing Search results. There is even an option to expand them to show more ads.View the full article

Dubai, the go-to destination for influencers, is now doubling down on its biggest market with the launch of its very own “influencer academy.” Jointly funded by the Dubai Department of Economy and Tourism and a travel content creation agency, the “Beautiful Destinations Academy” offers three months of social media “training” for “students,” aimed at bolstering Dubai’s tourism industry. The academy is still accepting applications for four budding influencers, who will be paid to travel and live in the city starting next month. A promotional video by Beautiful Destinations describes the program as “an elite training environment where we invest in you to support Dubai’s unparalleled vision for the future of tourism.” Successful applicants will typically train five days a week, with modules covering photography and cinematography, editing and color grading, sound effects, AI tools, industry regulations, and professional development as a travel content creator. At the end of the course, students will receive a certificate from Dubai College of Tourism, with “the really special ones” offered a full-time job at Beautiful Destinations. All expenses, including flights and accommodation in a luxury serviced apartment, are covered, along with a livable income for the three-month program. Students will also have access to shoot at some of Dubai’s “most stunning and exclusive locations, normally reserved for celebrities and royalty.” Jeremy Jauncey, CEO and founder of Beautiful Destinations, told The Independent: “I want to share what I’ve learned with the next generation and give others the chance to experience the coolest career in the world. And there’s no better city than Dubai—which has inspired Beautiful Destinations’ creators since our earliest days—to do this in. You don’t need to be an expert to apply—we’re looking for raw, hidden talent.” He added: “We want to equip young people with the skills to build a solid future in travel content creation, to take advantage of this fast-growing sector. You don’t need expensive equipment or formal training – just a desire to turn your social media hobby into a dream career.” Issam Kazim, chief executive of Visit Dubai, told The Times UK that the academy’s launch is “a testament to our commitment to fostering creativity, innovation and ­excellence in the tourism sector.” Dubai welcomed a record 18.72 million international visitors last year and recently introduced the “golden visa” (a new visa that allows influencers to live in the UAE sponsorship-free), along with a Dhs150 million government support fund to aid influencers. Given that over half of Gen Zers aspire to be influencers, where better to make that happen than the influencer hotspot of the world? Applicants must upload a 60-second video on “travel culture or adventure” on Instagram, tag @BeautifulDestinations @VisitDubai #BDacademy, and complete an online form before April 24 to be considered for the first cohort. View the full article

Mel Robbins’s best-selling book, The Let Them Theory, has captured the imagination of millions of people, earning critical acclaim and resonating deeply with those seeking peace in a chaotic world. The core premise is simple yet powerful: let people be who they are, let them make their own choices, and most importantly, don’t waste your energy trying to change others. It’s a philosophy of radical acceptance—an invitation to stop being burdened by the expectations, behaviors, and opinions of those around us. At first glance, this mindset seems liberating. Who wouldn’t want to shed the weight of trying to control the uncontrollable? In a time where burnout is rampant and people are constantly drained by personal and professional obligations, the Let Them philosophy offers a reprieve—a way to step back and prioritize emotional well-being. And yet, as compelling as this idea may be, it raises an important question: Is “letting them” always the right approach? The Appeal of Letting Go There’s undeniable wisdom in Robbins’s message. Far too many people spend their lives tangled in the choices and behaviors of others, investing enormous emotional energy in situations they have no real power to change. Parents stress over grown children’s choices. Friends stay in draining relationships, hoping people will evolve. Professionals lose sleep over colleagues’ attitudes and behaviors. In these cases, Robbins’s philosophy is a wake-up call: Stop trying to fix what isn’t yours to fix. Let them. Let them be irresponsible. Let them be distant. Let them succeed, let them fail. Let them love you or walk away. Let them hold on to outdated beliefs. Let them go down a path you don’t agree with. The argument is that by surrendering control over others, you reclaim control over yourself—your happiness, your peace, your emotional freedom. It’s an enticing philosophy, and for certain moments in life, it’s the exact right thing to do. But what happens when letting go becomes an excuse for disengagement? What happens when “let them” is applied too broadly? When ‘Let Them’ Becomes an Excuse If Let Them is about relinquishing control over what we cannot change, then where does that leave the things we can change? What about the injustices in our world? What about the relationships that are worth fighting for? What about the responsibilities we carry toward our families, our communities, our workplaces? There are times in life when “letting them” isn’t the right answer—when stepping back is an abdication of responsibility, not a path to freedom. If a colleague is sabotaging team morale, do you simply let them? If a friend is struggling with self-destruction, do you let them spiral? If a system is broken, do you let it stay that way? The truth is, some things are worth our time and effort. Some battles are worth fighting. Some people are worth engaging with, even if change isn’t immediate or easy. To withdraw entirely under the banner of Let them is to risk apathy in moments that require action. A Luxury Not Everyone Can Afford Then there’s another reality—Let Them is a philosophy that, in some ways, is easier for those who have already secured success, influence, or financial stability. For a young professional trying to establish a career, the idea of simply letting things happen may not be practical. For parents raising children, letting them doesn’t always work—you can’t let a child make every decision unchecked. For leaders steering a company, a community, or a movement, stepping back at the wrong moment can mean failure, chaos, or even harm. The ability to disengage from unnecessary drama is a privilege, one that grows more accessible with financial independence, career success, and age. It’s no coincidence that many of the most enthusiastic adopters of this philosophy are those who have already reached a place where they can afford to say, “Time is precious. I won’t waste it.” In fact, this may be the true strength of Let Them—not as a universal directive, but as a philosophy particularly well-suited for those in the later stages of life. For those who have already built their careers, raised their children, fought their battles, and established their reputations, Let Them can be a tool for cutting away unnecessary distractions and spending their remaining years in peace. But for those still climbing, still building, still fighting? “Let them” might not always be the right answer. Be Selective, Then Commit So where does this leave us? If we reject a total embrace of Let Them, do we go back to exhausting ourselves in battles we cannot win? Do we spend our lives trying to fix people who don’t want to be fixed? Of course not. The balance lies in discernment—in knowing when to let go and when to lean in. Not every battle is worth fighting, but some are. Not every relationship is worth saving, but some are. Not every system is worth engaging with, but some demand our full attention. The key isn’t to detach from everything but to be highly selective about where you invest your energy. And once you decide something is worth your time, you don’t go halfway—you go all in. I’ve never been one to do things halfway. I don’t believe in a life of passive observation. I believe in engagement, in purpose, in fighting for what matters. And while I agree that some things—some people—are best left to their own devices, I also know that meaningful change requires effort. If everyone simply “let them,” where would progress come from? Lead Them There’s real value in Let Them, but like all philosophies, it’s not one-size-fits-all. It works best when applied strategically—when used to free ourselves from unnecessary burdens while still engaging with the things that truly matter. For those in the final chapters of life, those who have earned the right to be selective, it may be a mantra of peace. But for those still in the fight—building, growing, leading, advocating—the call isn’t to let go entirely. The call is to choose wisely, and when the moment demands it, to step in fully. Because sometimes, the answer isn’t Let Them. Sometimes, the answer is Lead Them. View the full article

It has taken a little over five months and has been anticipated for several weeks, but it now appears increasingly likely that the bromance between Elon Musk and Donald The President is nearing its end. Musk is reportedly planning to step down from his role overseeing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). During Tesla’s latest earnings call this week, Musk said, “my time allocation to DOGE will drop significantly” next month—though he noted that he still intends to dedicate some time to government issues going forward. The announcement came as Tesla reported surprisingly poor results, and Musk’s pivot appeared to serve as a parachute for a business in freefall. Following his remarks and amid expectations that he would now refocus on Tesla, the company’s share price rose. “This was an off-ramp for Musk out of the The President White House,” says Dan Ives, managing director and senior equity research analyst at Wedbush Securities. “The global brand damage, political firestorm, and perfect storm chaos over the past few months will now end this volatile political chapter for Musk.” What Musk’s departure means for the quasi-governmental agency he’s leaving behind remains uncertain. The President has heavily promoted the potential cost savings DOGE would deliver to U.S. taxpayers—though it’s unclear whether Musk’s actions have genuinely produced the savings touted by the administration. “If The President hasn’t got bored with DOGE, there’s still a chance that he might send a check to voters with a nominal saving,” says Bruce Daisley, a former Twitter executive. “He’s never expressed much interest in the midterms, so it’s possible this won’t be of interest by then.” Cary Cooper, professor of organizational psychology at the University of Manchester, believes The President will continue DOGE’s work by appointing another entrepreneur or business titan to lead the agency. “He’ll appoint another business guy, no question about it,” he says. Any new head of DOGE may not feel bound by Musk’s infamous ‘five things’ email, which demanded government workers justify their roles by reporting five achievements from the past week. Still, Cooper believes the mission will carry on. “It may have been Musk who led the way, but I think The President wants that to happen as well, because he perceives the civil service to be left of center,” Cooper says. DOGE remains The President’s tool for pushing that agenda. As for the businesses Musk is returning to, opinions are divided. Tesla’s reputation—and share price—have suffered amid sweeping layoffs and controversial decisions that have impacted many American families. Ives and Wedbush Securities believe Musk’s stint in government and his perceived callousness will reduce long-term demand for Tesla’s electric vehicles by as much as 10%. (Musk did not respond to Fast Company‘s request for comment.) Still, despite Tesla’s recent financial setbacks—including a near-10% drop in revenue—Ives remains optimistic about the company’s future. “This was the time to close one dark chapter and open a brighter one for the Tesla story, with autonomous and robotics front and center,” he says. Some view Musk’s exit from government and return to the private sector as a strategic move to salvage his personal brand. “His brand is damaged,” Cooper says. “He is seen as an extreme right-wing person who cares nothing except about helping the wealthy like him to survive.” While Musk may have held such views for years, it was his highly visible government role that solidified them in the public eye. Because of that, the challenges facing the entrepreneur and world’s richest man are only growing. But Musk has faced crises before—and is likely to try everything to turn things around. “Musk is almost certain to try to pull a rabbit out of a hat of merging xAI with Tesla to position Tesla as an AI business,” Daisley says. “There’s a much bigger multiple [there], and his talk of robotics gives another horizon to chase rather than the EV one that he’s currently losing ground on.” View the full article

The way mortgage firms address distressed military borrowers will become less regimented as the Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase program gets phased out. View the full article

Senior Russian military officer assassinated as US envoy’s plane approached capital View the full article

The world of work has undergone a seismic shift, with remote collaboration no longer a niche but a mainstream reality. As global teams navigate time zone differences, communication preferences, and the inherent challenges of working at a physical distance, a powerful ally has emerged: artificial intelligence (AI). View the full article

The Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) “traces ” the project’s deliverables by establishing a thread for each requirement—from the project’s initiation to the final implementation. The post What is a Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM)? appeared first on project-management.com. View the full article

The AI revolution is redefining business and tech leadership—and no one is standing more squarely on the front lines than product leaders. Once seen as a behind-the-scenes role, the CPO is now one of the most powerful voices in the executive suite. In 2020, only 4% of the Fortune 1000 had a CPO, a number that has since ballooned to almost 50%. In the next few years, we expect to see that figure grow to 70%. At Products That Count, the nonprofit for product managers I chair, we’ve spent the past year talking to almost 1,000 CPOs at companies ranging from startup unicorns to Fortune 100 giants like Salesforce, Walmart, and Microsoft. What we’ve heard is clear: The organizations that are winning with AI aren’t just using it to move faster. They’re rethinking how product is fundamentally built, who builds it—and who leads the charge. Here’s what the top product leaders are doing differently to get and stay ahead in the AI era. 1. They see AI as acceleration, not just automation While headlines focus on job replacement, leading CPOs are focused on capability expansion. They’re not asking, “How can we do the same work with fewer people?” They’re asking, “How can we build something completely new and disruptive in a fraction of the time it used to take?” One CPO at a global retailer told us that PMs using their internal generative AI platform are “almost doubling their efficiency.” These AI-powered product managers are running competitive research, generating specs, mocking up interfaces, and even writing basic code—without waiting for a 10-person engineering team to get looped in. This shift is also reshaping org charts. The once-standard 10-to-1 engineer-to-PM ratio is giving way to a new reality where PMs are full-stack strategists. AI isn’t replacing the workforce—it’s supercharging it. 2. They’re hiring business builders, not tech nerds Today’s most effective PMs aren’t former engineers. They’re high-context thinkers who know how to ask the right questions, not necessarily write the code themselves. “A computer science background was pretty important 20 years ago,” one B2B SaaS CPO told us. “Now? Only one of my PMs has one.” This new breed of generalist “Super PM” blends product instinct, customer obsession, and AI fluency. They’re cross-functional by design and comfortable leading without a road map. And they’re rising fast because they can adapt fast and they deliver business value right off the bat. 3. M&A is central to their strategy Product velocity has become the currency of innovation—and most CPOs know they can’t build everything in-house. More than 75% of the CPOs we surveyed say M&A will be a critical growth driver in the next one to three years. But unlike in the past, product leaders aren’t just involved after the deal closes—they’re often the ones scouting, evaluating, and sponsoring acquisitions. As one healthcare CPO put it, “AI and data are fast becoming the central focus. M&A will be critical to assembling that solution suite.” Another said, “As CPO, I’m the sponsor of acquisitions.” That shift—from M&A as a finance function to M&A as product acceleration—marks a massive evolution in how CPOs are expected to operate. 4. They’re obsessively focused on success metrics Revenue still matters. As Checkr CPO Ilan Frank told us, “At the end of the day, most of us are working for a for-profit company. If that’s the case, then the metric is profit. That’s what we’re here to drive.” Particularly when assessing how to implement and leverage AI, product leaders are keenly aware of the bottom line. And they know that revenue and profit are not the only numbers that tell the story. Today’s top CPOs are expanding their focus to include metrics like time-to-value, customer retention, and long-term engagement. They’re not just looking at quarterly ARR—they’re looking at how quickly customers see value, and how long they stick around once they do. That shift isn’t just philosophical. It’s structural. It encourages smaller, faster product experiments, tighter feedback loops, and stronger cross-functional alignment. As Frank put it, “NPS won’t tell me if we have the right pricing or packaging,” but time-to-value will. Defining the AI Era All told, product leaders are winning the AI era by working smarter, not harder. They’re moving fast—but not just by working more. They’re reimagining what the product function can be: a strategic growth engine, a talent magnet, and a seat at the very top of the company. They’re prioritizing adaptability over pedigree, collaboration over control, and outcomes over ownership. Rather than stripping down head counts, they’re doubling down by investing in more generalists and product professionals to keep their feet on the accelerators. They’re blending human instinct with AI horsepower—and building teams that can ship smarter, not just faster. The companies that empower this kind of leadership aren’t just navigating the AI era. They’re defining it. View the full article

Branded is a weekly column devoted to the intersection of marketing, business, design, and culture. This week Chipotle Mexican Grill announced plans to crack a market that already has plenty of Mexican-food options: Mexico. Specifically, the Colorado-founded, California-based burrito concern said it would work with Mexican firm Alsea—which operates Latin American and European locations of various chains, including Starbucks, Domino’s Pizza, and Burger King—to begin opening Chipotle restaurants in Mexico by early 2026. It’s a confident move at a time when many fast-casual chains are struggling, and businesses in general are scrambling to game the fallout from the The President administration’s ever-evolving tariff regime. On Wednesday Chipotle posted mixed results for the first quarter of 2025 that it attributed mostly to economic headwinds as consumers remain cautious about spending in the volatile trade atmosphere: Comparable-store sales are slightly down, and the revenue of $2.88 billion fell slightly short of analyst estimates. Still, the chain’s quarterly revenue was up 6.4% over last year, thanks mostly to opening new locations—and expansion abroad is one way it says it will continue that strategy. Chipotle currently has more than 3,700 locations, and while most are in the U.S., it also has a presence in Canada, the U.K., Germany, France, and the Middle East. In short, the chain clearly seems focused on international growth. Still, while plenty of U.S. restaurant brands have gone global, selling an Americanized version of local cuisines hasn’t always played out well. Domino’s Pizza spent several years trying to hook Italians on its speedily delivered pies before concluding that infiltrating one of the world’s proudest culinary cultures wasn’t going to happen. And in a more direct comparison to Chipotle’s plans, Taco Bell has made two attempts to sell an American version of Mexican food to actual Mexicans. Both fizzled. Taco Bell’s first venture into Mexico began in 1992, when it already had thousands of U.S. locations but relatively few abroad. The problems, according to a Vice timeline of the chain’s Mexican forays from 2017, included a mismatch between its menu offerings and the expectations of Mexican diners: Crisp-shelled tacos were “an anomaly” there, for instance, and had to be rebranded as “tacostadas” in an attempt to reference tostada crunch. The bigger problem may have been a lack of demand—like “bringing ice to Antarctica” as one Mexican cultural critic put it at the time. Within two years, the chain withdrew. It tried again in 2007, this time opening in a higher-end shopping mall (next to a Dairy Queen) near Monterrey and making no particular attempt to be authentic, even keeping french fries on the menu. As one Taco Bell marketing executive put it, the chain would “not pretend to be Mexican food.” It would simply be Taco Bell food, with an emphasis on value and convenience. “Foolish gringos,” one Monterrey food writer commented dismissively at the time. Taco Bell withdrew again. Chipotle hasn’t addressed this comparison directly (and declined to comment to Fast Company), but its statement about the Mexico venture alludes to an emphasis on authenticity in its appeal to the Mexican palette, promising its offerings “will resonate with guests in Mexico,” according to Nate Lawton, chief business development officer at Chipotle. “The country’s familiarity with our ingredients and affinity for fresh food make it an attractive growth market for our company.” Alsea CEO Armando Torrado added that his firm would leverage its “vast knowledge of the Mexican consumer.” Chipotle’s menu doesn’t seem to have tacostada-level issues, but some Mexican-food experts have questioned the chain’s authenticity in the past, complaining that its burritos are a mass-market take on the form, emphasizing heft over variety. And its current hit offering, a honey chicken burrito, sounds suspiciously tailored to American palettes. Still, it’s worth acknowledging that, Mexico aside, Taco Bell today has more than 8,000 locations around the world, including hundreds in Central and South America. And U.S. chains have of course spread across the planet, sometimes adjusting their menus market by market (McDonald’s famously tweaks its menu in different markets to add local flavor, like teriyaki chicken sandwiches in Japan and a dosa masala burger in India). Chipotle has reportedly worked for years to diversify its ingredient and farming supply chain across the Caribbean and Latin America as well as the U.S., but still sources roughly half its avocados from Mexico, making them tariff vulnerable. Given how unpredictable global trade rules are becoming, and Chipotle’s stated growth goals and strategy, it makes sense that the chain would try to diversify its customer base beyond the United States. What’s less certain is whether Mexican diners are looking to add Chipotle’s burritos to their diet. View the full article

Leaders of today’s workplace recognize coaching as a core leadership skill. More and more companies are expecting managers to actively develop their employees and support their growth through regular development conversations. For leaders who embrace this responsibility, coaching can be incredibly rewarding. But it’s not always clear how to do it well. Most managers feel comfortable helping employees build technical skills or prepare them for their next role. But when it comes to coaching social and emotional skills, leadership qualities, or behavioral changes, many leaders get stuck. Because the path to success is less clear-cut, more complex, and requires sustained effort over time. How to coach for behavioral change As companies increasingly expect managers to step up as coaches, we’re seeing more and more resources that help leaders build their coaching skills. Doing that requires leaders to learn how to build trust, ask open-ended questions, actively listen, and provide constructive feedback. Frameworks like the GROW model provide a structured approach to coaching conversations. But when it comes to coaching employees on behavioral changes and social-emotional skills, many managers hit a wall. Traditional coaching methods don’t always work. That’s where an evidence-based framework—originally used by executive coaches—can help. The Development Pipeline The Development Pipeline, created by David Peterson and Mary Dee Hicks, breaks down the often complex process of personal growth into five essential conditions for lasting development. It’s a game-changer for managers because it helps them diagnose and address where employees might be stuck in their development process. This method relies on five key elements to facilitate behavioral development: Insight, Motivation, Capability, Practice, and Accountability. Think of them as interconnected pipelines—each one needs to stay open and balanced for growth to happen. If one element is blocked, progress can stall. As a manager, keeping these five conditions in mind will help you guide your direct reports through meaningful conversations. Here’s how you can help facilitate the presence of these conditions in your regular coaching chats as part of your one-on-ones 1. Insight: Do they understand what to develop and why it matters? Development starts with awareness. Employees must recognize the gap between their current behaviors and desired outcomes. Sabina, a Customer Success Director, wanted to help one of her team members exude more confidence in high-stakes meetings. In their one-on-one, Sabina highlighted specific moments where this happened and discussed the impact. This helped her direct report see why building confidence was crucial—not just for herself, but not to undermine her credibility and influence. They made it a specific development goal. 2. Motivation: Are they motivated and committed to making a change? Even with insight, change won’t happen without motivation. Employees need to see personal value in their development goals. One way to gauge motivation is to ask, “On a scale from 1 to 10, how motivated do you feel to work on this?”. Pay attention to verbal and nonverbal responses to gain a greater understanding of how motivated your employee feels to put in the time and effort it takes to change. The key is ensuring the goal aligns with what matters most to them. That means their values, career aspirations, and measurement of success in their role. 3. Capability: Do they know how to improve? Employees need clear, practical ways to develop a skill or shift a behavior. Without knowing how to improve, insight and motivation alone won’t lead to progress. Naomi, a Product VP, needed to coach an employee on receiving feedback without shutting down. The employee wanted to handle feedback more gracefully but didn’t know where to start. Together, they broke down the goal into small actionable steps: proactively asking for feedback, deeply breathing while listening, taking notes, visualizing feedback landing in front of her, and looking at it more neutrally from a distance. Doing this allowed the employee to move from awareness to action. 4. Practice: Are they actively experimenting and refining? New behaviors require practice and repetition. Employees need opportunities to test, tweak, and refine their skills in real situations. Michael, an Engineering VP, wanted to support his direct report in being more positive and encouraging in team discussions. So they worked on being more positive in meetings. First, he focused on recognizing team contributions. Later, he practiced framing ideas more constructively—acknowledging a colleague’s perspective before sharing his own. Over time, this intentional practice made positivity more of a habit. 5. Accountability: Are they following through? Progress stalls without follow-ups. You need to conduct regular check-ins to keep the momentum going. Simple questions like “How is it going with [goal]? What’s getting easier? What’s still challenging? What do you want to focus on next?” help reinforce commitment. The importance of keeping development on track At any given time, your employee may be stuck in different parts of their development. As their manager, your job is to identify the bottleneck and provide specific support. Are they lacking insight? Do they need a clearer action plan? Do they require more practice opportunities? By focusing your coaching conversations on the specific condition that needs reinforcement, you can help them sustain progress. You don’t need to know this ahead of your conversation, but you can explore this together by asking open-ended questions and fully listening to what emerges. Remember, meaningful development doesn’t happen overnight. It requires your support along the way. Regular, short coaching conversations—rooted in curiosity and attentive presence—can make a significant impact over time. View the full article

Last week, scientists from the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Washington shocked the internet by announcing they’ve discovered a new color that can be experienced only when firing a laser into your retinas. Only five people have seen this color, a blue-green shade called “olo.” But over the weekend, artist-provocateur Stuart Semple decided to widen the pool by synthesizing olo into an acrylic paint color he named Yolo. Ironically, Yolo is a color you cannot see—at least not accurately—unless you buy a bottle of the acrylic paint and see it with your own eyes. A 150-milliliter bottle costs $10,000 ($35 if you’re an artist) and is decidedly more accessible than olo. But can it ever be the same? Liberating color This isn’t Semple’s first foray into the superlative world of colors. Over the past few years (fueled by various feuds with the artist Anish Kapoor) Semple has created the world’s pinkest pink, followed by the world’s blackest black. In 2021, he hacked Tiffany’s trademarked blue and made his own version, Tiff Blue, which everyone could buy. A self-described color nerd, Semple has been on a mission to “liberate” color, as he puts it. If olo really is a new color—a claim that’s been contested—he believes more than five people should be able to experience it. “Can’t everyone have a go?” Apparently, they’d like to. “Within minutes, my DMs were crazy,” he says of the requests that poured in from artists and friends alike. Semple spent all night developing Yolo and put it up on his website on Saturday. “My sister messaged me about it the following day, and I was like, ‘already done it,’” he says with a laugh. Within 48 hours of launching Yolo, Semple had sold close to 500 bottles. From lasers to pigments The human eye can perceive about 10 million colors known as the visible light spectrum. We see these colors thanks to three kinds of cone cells in our retinas that respond to three specific bands of light: long (red), medium (green), and short (blue). But we don’t just see the world in RGB. Our brains blend signals from these cones to fill in the gaps, conjuring colors like oranges, teals, and purples. To re-create olo, Stuart pored over the recent study, which was published in the scientific journal Science Advances, and pulled the color’s chromatic coordinates. These told him where on the visible light spectrum his own color should sit. Then, he set out on a surprisingly low-tech journey of mixing bases and pigments until he landed on the right formula. “It’s like baking a cake and tasting it,” he says, except instead of his taste buds, he used a spectrometer to see how close each swatch came to olo’s coordinates. But Semple didn’t focus only on pigments—he also looked at texture. In the world of paint, a glossy finish reflects more light than a matte finish, which scatters light in all directions. If you shine a light on a smooth snooker ball, it will bounce off a very small point; but if you shine that same light on a fuzzy tennis ball, the light will get diffused, flattened. Semple’s Black 3.0 paint—the blackest, flattest acrylic paint available on the planet—absorbs 99% of all the visible spectrum. Yolo does the opposite. It reflects 96% of light, but only in the narrow green-blue slice of the spectrum. The other wavelengths are absorbed by the paint. “That’s why it looks like it’s glowing,” Semple says. You have to see it to believe it The color you see on this screen comes close, but you can’t fully experience it here, or even in a book, because neither can reproduce the exact wavelength the paint captures: Screens use red, green, and blue pixels; printers use cyan, magenta, yellow, and black. To truly experience Yolo, you have to see it in person, which suits Semple just fine: “I make things for people with eyes, not computers,” he says. Still, the artist claims Yolo is the closest we can get to olo without having a laser fired into our eyeballs. He acknowledges that the litmus test would be to show Yolo to one of those five people, but the scientists did not respond to our requests for comment. If a screen can’t fully capture Yolo, then what kind of color can we expect? Over the course of a 30-minute phone call, Semple used the word weird four times until, finally, he landed on “a weird luminous teal.” View the full article

On Main Street in the village of Freeville, New York, on a 2.8-acre lot where a dilapidated single-family house once stood, there are now a dozen tiny storybook-like cottages surrounded by the property’s pine trees. The development, completed last year, is helping bring new life to the village. It’s one example of what’s possible when towns don’t have overly restrictive zoning. It’s charming. The design encourages neighbors to know one other. And it offers housing for far more people on the same amount of land. The project is the third tiny house village in the region from a local developer, Bruno Schickel. His career started as a typical general contractor—he built and renovated single-family homes. But in the late 1990s, while reading a children’s book to his daughters, he was inspired by an illustration of a Gothic cottage in Maine. “I said, ‘You know, I gotta design something that looks like this,’” he says. “And so that’s what I set out to do.” 140 fairy-tale cottages on 40 acres Schickel owned a large property in a rural area nearby that had been part of a farm. One winter 29 years ago, when regular work slowed down, he asked his crew to build three rental cottages on the site, each with the same gingerbread design as the house in the children’s book. People loved them, so he built another three the next winter. The cottages range in size from 540 square feet to 1,100 square feet, but even the smallest units have a second-story loft for a bedroom and feel relatively spacious. There are now 140 of the homes, called Boiceville Cottages, on the 40-acre site. “The more I built, the better people liked them,” he says. “It was an interesting dynamic, because originally people were drawn to the fairy-tale cottage. And then people started being drawn to the community that was created.” A sense of community When I visited on a recent spring day, a group of neighbors was sitting at a picnic table next to the community’s meeting house while children played on a playground. While I was talking to a retired woman, teenagers playing basketball called out a greeting to her. Everyone seemed to know one another. “I lived in a suburb of Chicago for 45 years,” one resident, Christine Uliassi, told me. “My husband and I raised our kids there. But I know my neighbors here much better than I knew my neighbors there.” The cottages in the development are clustered in groups of three, each carefully angled so that when someone looks out their own window, there’s still a sense of privacy. But they’re so close together that people continually run into each other. At the meeting house, neighbors pick up their mail, use the on-site gym, and gather for book clubs and other events. The road between the cottages winds around curves, so people drive slowly, and it feels safe to walk. Despite the rural location, there’s also a bus stop at the property, so it’s technically possible to live there without a car. The development doesn’t have the density of a large apartment complex. But the specific layout—and the bucolic country setting, which draws people outside—makes it more likely that neighbors become close. ‘Zoning chokes off innovation’ In many places, it would be impossible to build. “The one reason why I ended up building there was because there was no zoning in Caroline [the rural town where the site is located],” says Schickel. “I am a guy who thinks zoning, by design, just chokes off innovation, creativity. It creates uniformity. If you go to existing cities or towns or villages around the country and you say, ‘Oh, look at this, this is great,’ I can almost guarantee you their zoning would not allow that to be built today.” It also wouldn’t be possible in Caroline now. Last year, after a bitter fight, the town passed a zoning law that required large lots for any new home. Longtime rural residents opposed the law; wealthier transplants to the area tended to support it. “People said, ‘We love Boiceville. We want to make sure Boiceville can be built.’ But the fact is that they don’t,” Schickel says. “The result will be that they’ve preserved it for large suburban housing.” In Freeville, a zoning ordinance existed, but was flexible enough that it allowed for the conversion of the single-family lot. Neighbors were happy to see the former rundown house replaced, Schickel says, even if they were initially taken aback to learn that they’d suddenly be living next to 12 tiny houses. (The Freeville houses, in a departure from the original gingerbread design, are inspired by old railway stations and Freeville’s rail history.) In a third location nearby, where Schickel built 60 tiny cottages on a hillside overlooking a lake, the community passed a zoning law after the project happened. “There’s a complete discrimination against rentals,” he says. “And there’s a discrimination against small [houses].” Tiny house villages can help struggling communities—and the housing crisis In the rural areas where Schickel built, the neighborhoods can help struggling economies. Caroline would have lost population without Boiceville Cottages; a popular local store, Brookton’s Market, probably couldn’t survive without it. And the approach can add more housing as rents continue to rise. (To be fair, the cuteness of the cottages means that Schickel can charge a premium for rent, but as in any housing market, adding supply helps moderate prices.) It’s a model that Schickel says others want to replicate in other parts of the country. He continually fields calls from potential developers and city officials. “I just heard from a senior planner on Long Island,” he says. “He called me up and said, ‘How can we do something like that down here?’ I said, ‘I can tell you right now, your biggest problem is zoning.’” View the full article

People are often under the false impression that making their language complex or using jargon enhances their credibility. That might be true in certain circumstances. If you’re an academic talking to other academics or a software engineer talking to other software engineers, using jargon makes sense. However, if you‘re talking to people outside of your field of expertise, it can alienate them. And when you alienate someone, it can cause them to switch off. It also reduces the likelihood that they take away anything useful or do what you’d like them to do. That’s probably the last thing you want to happen when communicating with someone. So if you’re prone to using jargon, you might want to consider taking the time to figure out how to communicate in simpler language. Why people use complex language Many people often use complex language because they’re insecure. When a person ties a big part of their identity to academic prowess, but they don’t feel particularly successful, they can use complexity to serve as a “security blanket” that hides them. It’s a way of making people perceive them as clever, or even obfuscate the truth. After all, it’s a lot harder to question or challenge something that your conversation partner doesn’t understand. Secondly, many gifted executives simply lack social awareness. Unfortunately, many leaders don’t give emotional intelligence the same weight they assign to developing technical expertise when climbing the corporate ladder. Quite simply, that means that there’s a disconnect between what you find meaningful and important as the communicator, and what your audience finds meaningful. And when you choose to ignore the audience’s perspective in your communication, issues arise. If you want the audience to listen to what you have to say, you need to consider how your audience would prefer to consume the information. Once you have that information, you can present the information in a way that will engage them and make them more likely to listen to you. The best communicators communicate simply I’ve heard the argument before that history, physics, software engineering, and so on, are too complex to explain in a nontechnical way. I disagree. It is always possible distill complex subject matter down to simple language for a nontechnical audience. My argument is to look at Professor Brian Cox, who is a professor of particle physics at the University of Manchester. Few subjects are as complex as astrophysics. Yet Professor Cox explained it so well and so simply that he filled auditoriums on a Friday night with people wanting to learn about physics. If he can do it, anyone can do it. It simply comes down to whether you’re prepared to put in the effort to learn the art of simple communication. The “acid test” for simple communication I often use this question with my clients: “Would a 10-year-old child understand what you just said?” If the answer to that question is no, then, I encourage my clients to go back to basics. In the same way that children’s stories often contain an underlying message, you can use analogies and stories to engage your audience, evoke emotion, and simplify complex topics. Understanding what matters to your audience If you’re trying to convince people to take a specific course of action, it will benefit you to walk people through it in a clear, step-by-step way. To do that well, you need to get into the mind of the audience and use the language that they use, not the language that you are comfortable with. Whether you are talking to the board or trying to convince a customer to buy—you need to understand the factors that will convince them. Make sure to find out what’s important to them and structure your communication around those key things. Being a successful executive shouldn’t be about being the smartest-sounding person in a room. Rather, it’s about being able to persuade and influence others to buy in and work towards your vision. No amount of jargon is going to do that, but distilling complex concepts down in a way that your employees understand can go a long way. View the full article

Less than a year after announcing plans to establish a hydrogen-based aviation fuel hub at Pittsburgh International Airport, Pennsylvania-based natural gas producer CNX has quietly taken down the website on which it advertised the hub. The move comes as the fate of the much-vaunted hydrogen industry—seen by the Biden administration as a way to power America while reducing climate-altering emissions—is in upheaval. While a Biden-era rule dealt a blow to those in the gas and oil industry hoping to invest in hydrogen technology and offered greater financial incentives to the renewable energy sector, President Donald The President is showing preference for fossil fuel-powered hydrogen. Meanwhile, the fate of those Biden-era tax credits—whether for renewable energy or fossil fuel—is up in the air as Congress wades through the budget reconciliation process. Under The President’s guidance, the Department of Energy has indicated it plans to kill Biden-era funding for four renewable-powered hydrogen hubs in primarily Democratic regions while retaining funds for fossil fuel-powered hubs in mostly red states, such as South Dakota, Ohio, and Kentucky. California, along with Oregon, Washington and other regions, are on the Department of Energy’s “cut” list, according to Politico, which said it obtained a spreadsheet of the projects. If the recommendations are ultimately adopted by the The President administration, Pennsylvania would very much become a state divided. While a proposed hub in the Appalachian region that would run on fossil fuels is marked for approval, a hub mostly reliant on renewable energy near Philadelphia is marked for denial. The seven Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs were a main plank of former President Joe Biden’s climate agenda, a $7 billion effort to establish a national network of hydrogen producers to slow the use of the fossil fuels largely blamed for global warming. But with four of the hubs eliminated, the envisioned national hydrogen grid would become a patchwork, seemingly drawn along political lines and primarily powered by polluting sources of energy. “The hydrogen hubs program was intended to spur innovations and demonstrations on how best to advance hydrogen as a tool in the clean energy economy,” said Julie McNamara, associate policy director for the Climate & Energy program at the nonprofit Union of Concerned Scientists. “Blatantly co-opting these funds for use as handouts to political supporters and favored polluters would be shameful, and fully undermine the program’s ability to achieve those aims.” While the Pennsylvania hub fueled by natural gas would use methane to provide energy for the production of so-called blue hydrogen, the other hub would use renewable energy such as wind and solar to produce what’s known as green hydrogen. By itself, the burning of hydrogen doesn’t produce carbon dioxide emissions. CNX was originally involved in the former hub, known as ARCH2, but told the Pittsburgh Business Times in March that it had paused involvement in the project because of the uncertainty surrounding federal funding. CNX’s name was also deleted from the ARCH2 website. CNX did not respond to requests for comment on the status of the hydrogen hub and the sustainable aviation fuel site in Pittsburgh. A spokesperson for the airport said it “is continuing to move forward with its plans to become one of the first airports to have sustainable fuel production on-site.” CNX was initially one of 15 companies enlisted in the hub, with plans to contribute “low carbon” natural gas to power hydrogen production, which entails using steam to draw off the hydrogen atoms from methane molecules, an expensive and energy intensive process. But the company’s evolving relationship with the hydrogen industry appears to have soured when the Biden administration finalized a long-awaited federal rule on a tax credit for hydrogen production called 45V. That final rule, CNX argued, was “overly restrictive,” and failed “to create sufficient economic incentives” for the company to expand its production of methane released from abandoned coal mines, which it said was key to the growing hydrogen economy. CNX pitched its involvement in the Sustainable Aviation Fuel project in Pittsburgh as being dependent upon the outcome of the 45V rule. “We saw the fossil fuel industry view 45V as a lucrative chance for profit,” McNamara said. “Not by truly reducing emissions, but by introducing loopholes that made it easier to qualify.” CNX had previously lobbied for the intricacies of 45V to work out in its favor. A little more than a year ago, a CNX lobbyist pushed Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s office to lobby the federal government to ensure the Treasury Department’s hydrogen rule was lucrative for coal mine methane—a request to which the Shapiro administration agreed, Capital & Main reported at the time. The value the rule gave to coal mine-derived natural gas came down to a series of arcane specifics in a formula that measures life-cycle emissions from beginning to end of the creation of a single kilogram of hydrogen. CNX urged the Treasury Department to treat coal mine methane as carbon-negative with the assumption that it would otherwise leak into the atmosphere from inactive coal mines, releasing a more potent greenhouse gas than if it were captured and burned, which would release carbon dioxide. (Both are greenhouse gases, but methane is well understood to be around 80 times more potent in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide over a 20-year timeframe.) By ascribing to this captured methane a negative value, a tiny portion of it could be blended into a natural gas hydrogen feedstock and qualify for the highest tier of the 45V tax incentive, the same level as hydrogen produced with renewable energy. But the final rule went against the pleas of CNX and companies like it, including the ARCH2 hub itself, which urged the Treasury Department to pass a methane-friendly rule in 2024, arguing it could “lead to a loss of $6 billion in private investments” otherwise and have “far-reaching consequences” for the hydrogen industry. “It’s like the Treasury Department went out of its way to say, ‘We hear what you’re saying. And the answer is no,’” said Sean O’Leary, senior researcher at the nonprofit think tank Ohio River Valley Institute. The ruling was seen as a win for environmentalists, who urged the Treasury Department to ensure that any projects receiving subsidies under the guise of being “clean” were in fact clean. They feared CNX’s proposal, and that of other fossil fuel producers, would’ve given natural-gas based hydrogen a tax boost equal to that for renewable, emissions-free sources of hydrogen. How and whether the rule will be upheld by the The President administration—which has shown strong support for fossil fuels and a general disdain for renewable energy—remains an open question, and one of concern to environmentalists. According to Bloomberg, the American Petroleum Institute, a national oil and gas trade group, has lobbied the White House to ensure fossil fuels can qualify for the highest tier of the hydrogen tax credit. O’Leary sees CNX’s apparent exit from ARCH2 as a sign of the hub’s strained economics. In October, O’Leary authored a paper in which he noted that the hub had lost four of its development partners, while a handful of others were showing signs of financial stress. “This is not a resume that inspires confidence among prospective investors,” O’Leary wrote. CNX’s reluctance to move forward signals a broader trend within the industry, O’Leary said in an interview with Capital & Main. “The wheels are coming off,” O’Leary said. “Even after subsidies are taken into account, the economics still aren’t there to make many of these projects work.” Another project development partner for ARCH2, KeyState Energy, is also showing signs of uncertainty. In February, a primary customer for its blue hydrogen, Nikola Corporation, a transportation company that had planned to use the hydrogen for a zero-emission truck fleet, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company plans to sell its assets. KeyState CEO Perry Babb told Capital & Main the company had pivoted from its energy production project with Nikola to a new ammonia fertilizer project that has a committed customer, and will still rely on hydrogen and receive funds from ARCH2. The first payment from the hubs program has been doled out and KeyState will invoice for reimbursement soon, he said. Babb said he still meets regularly with the remaining ARCH2 project partners, who are “all positive in expressing a way forward.” But he noted that, for years, he’s weathered regulatory uncertainty; the final 45V rule was the nail in the coffin for Keystate’s original plans to produce blue hydrogen under ARCH2. He said the company has also put its participation in the Pittsburgh Sustainable Aviation Fuel hub “on pause.” “Last May, I began to notice dozens of hydrogen projects being canceled,” he said. “I had thought that it was essentially because the business case wasn’t sound. “With the continued uncertainty around tax credits through the end of the Biden administration . . . we said, ‘That’s it. We’re done. We’re going to go where there’s a market that’s predictable.’” While failing to find a partner in the Biden-era Treasury Department, CNX could soon turn to the state, where Gov. Shapiro is reupping a $49 million tax credit for hydrogen production as part of his “Lightning Plan,” a six-pronged portfolio of legislation designed to speed up the commonwealth’s clean energy economy. Though supported by some state environmental groups, the plan caught the ire of others, like Karen Feridun, cofounder of the grassroots Better Path Coalition, who said in a statement that the Lightning Plan would “continue and even expand fossil fuel production.” On March 11, a group of Democratic senators and representatives introduced 12 cosponsorship memos, six in each chamber, carrying out Shapiro’s plan. “He’s going to do whatever he needs to do to try to keep [hydrogen] going,” Feridun said of Shapiro in an interview with Capital & Main. “It’s a nice way to kind of provide cover for having a continued fossil fuel plan,” one that “sounds really good to voters.” Should ARCH2 unravel, Feridun fears grassroots environmentalists would be tasked with tracking individual projects, without the cohesion of a hub offering guidance. Even so, she said there never was “a clear map that defined what the footprint of all of this was,” which left frontline communities in the dark. Like O’Leary, Danny Cullenward, senior fellow at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said he now sees the hydrogen “hype” bubble beginning to burst. Though he believes hydrogen has an important, if niche, place in the clean energy transition, its economics don’t make sense in all uses unless heavily subsidized. “We basically set up a structure that said, at the end of this rainbow is a giant pot of gold. And everybody said, ‘We’d all like to do that. That all sounds great to us,’” he said. “I think now the cold, hard reality of, ‘Does hydrogen make sense? And in what applications would it make sense?’ is becoming a little bit more real.” The whiplash of all this impacts Pennsylvania communities, many that are former oil, gas, and coal towns learning that major projects they’d once planned for are no longer. “It’s immensely damaging,” O’Leary said. “State or even county and municipal level governments, they’re making economic development choices based on these expectations.” “The distraction impact of what’s going on is just staggering.” This piece was originally published by Capital & Main, which reports from California on economic, political, and social issues. View the full article

To help a North Carolina community recovering from Tropical Storm Helene, a tulip farm in the Netherlands gave the gift of flowers. Dutch Grown runs a tulip farm in Voorhout, South Holland, and a warehouse in West Chester, Pennsylvania, where it ships out its flower bulbs to customers across the U.S. After Helene devastated western North Carolina last September, Marco Rosenbruck, a Dutch immigrant who moved to the region, reached out to the company with photos of the devastation asking for a few boxes of bulbs. Dutch Grown ended up sending 31 boxes filled with 10,000 bulbs for tulips, daffodils, and peonies. “At Dutch Grown, our motto is: ‘To plant a garden is to believe in tomorrow.’ When tulips bloom in spring, they bring hope and joy to the entire community. Dutch Grown co-owner Ben Rotteveel tells Fast Company. The company’s generosity has now helped Rosenbruck’s new home of Swannanoa, North Carolina, beautify a local park. Rozenbroek engaged the help of a local student for some landscape design to plant the bulbs, and they’re expected to bloom for the first time this spring. “Flowers give hope,” Rozenbroek told Blue Ridge Public Radio. North Carolina officials estimate Helene did $59.6 billion worth of damage in the state, and Swannanoa, a community of more than 5,000 people about a hour north of the South Carolina border, was especially devastated. The storm took out a bridge and damaged homes, but in the aftermath of the storm, Grovemont Park, where the flowers were planted, became a hub for the community where meals were distributed. Gardening can have unexpected benefits for communities recovering from disasters. Research into community gardens in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina and New York City after Hurricane Sandy found these spaces help build resilience because they empowered residents and helped connect them with each other, strengthening the social bonds needed to rebuild together. Grovemont Park has already done that for Swannanoa, and now the flowers will serve as a reminder. Landscape design can make our public areas more welcoming. By beautifying and intentionally designing outdoor spaces that people are meant to spend time in and enjoy, landscape design gives a physical dimension to community. Through this massive planting endeavor in North Carolina, Rozenbroek created an inviting, functional, and visually harmonious space as the community continues to rebuild from Helene. “After the storm, we figured out that community is the basics of everything,” says Rozenbroek. “People are willing to help each other and to make beauty. Isn’t that where humanity is meant to be?” Tulips don’t help build bridges or homes, but that doesn’t mean Dutch Grown’s gift won’t have an impact. The tulip garden shows the practical benefits of beautification; creating a relatively low-lift project that allows those recovering from disaster to grow closer and rebuild together; and allowing community members to rest their eyes on the perennial joys and habits of spring. View the full article

Remember when Netflix cost $9 per month and The New York Times website was free? Well, the days of online media feeling like a bargain are long gone. Today, it’s become a costly convenience. But there are still great deals to be had, thanks to cheap yearlong introductory subscriptions, budget bundles, and libraries. One thing to skip: those one-month free trials that are easy to sign up for but even easier to forget to cancel. Here are some of the best ways to truly save on digital media. Free content with ads or from the library Free news sources include the Associated Press, the BBC, DW (Germany’s international broadcaster, available in English), The Free Press, The Guardian, and NPR. Many other sites offer a portion of their content free. You can also tap into free content newsletters and podcasts from typically paid sources such as Forbes, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal. In fact, most podcasts are free to stream (though they may include ads), from Joe Rogan to Jon Stewart. Meanwhile, a library card can help you score a world of free media through apps. Libby provides e-books and audiobooks on phones, tablets, and the web. Hoopla has e-books, audiobooks, movies, TV shows, music, and comics, with apps for phones, tablets, and smart TVs. Your library may not have every title you want, or there may be a waitlist. But it’s a great place to start. For more TV and movies, skip Hulu and Netflix in favor of Amazon FreeVee, Pluto TV, the Roku Channel, and Tubi. They are ad-supported, but nowadays so is the basic tier of most paid services. If you can handle commercials every few songs, check out the free tiers of Deezer, SoundCloud, Spotify, and YouTube Music. Long-term introductory subscriptions Many news outlets offer steeply discounted introductory rates for digital and digital/print subscriptions. As of this writing, deals include: six months of The New York Times for $4 a month; a year of The Wall Street Journal for $8 a month; and The Washington Post for just $40 a year. The San Francisco Chronicle offered three months for 25 cents, and the Los Angeles Times had four months for a single dollar. (For even more options, check out DiscountMags.) At the end of the introductory period, newspapers may offer further discounts to keep you from canceling. Streaming deals change more often, so keep an eye out. They have included a year of Hulu at 99 cents per month or three free months of Peacock (both with ads). Spotify’s ad-free Premium plan is free for three months. Shared subscriptions You may save with a subscription that allows you to add one or more people at a discount, or even for free. For example: Two people can get one year of The Washington Post for $60. Depending on the plan, Netflix lets you add either one or two people at $6.99 a month for service with ads or $8.99 without. Spotify offers a dual ad-free subscription for $16.99 a month and a six-person family plan for $19.99 (versus $11.99 for one person), but everyone has to live at the same address. Amazon Family allows a Prime member to add one adult (related or not) and up to four children and four teens to share e-books and some other media for free. Apple Family Sharing allows up to six people to access much of what the first person subscribes to, such as AppleTV+, at no extra charge. Bundled subscriptions Savings on video bundles are often small, and may not help if the individual streamers are offering their own discounts. One to consider is the bundle of Hulu, Disney+, and Max (including HBO, Studio Ghibli, CNN, Food Network, The CW, and others) for $16.99 a month with ads or $29.99 without. For news, you can get Barron’s, The Wall Street Journal, MarketWatch, and Investor’s Business Daily at $16 a month for one year. For $12.99 a month, Apple News+ provides a selection of content from over 500 sources, including The Atlantic, Bon Appétit, National Geographic, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, The Wall Street Journal, and (ahem) Fast Company—all shareable with five other people. Look closely at bundles with wireless carriers. For instance, T-Mobile’s $85-a-month Experience More plan adds AppleTV+ and Netflix (with ads) for $35 more per line, per month than its Essentials Saver plan. But subscribing to both streamers on your own costs only $17.98. Experience More may be worthwhile for its additional wireless features, but not just for streaming. Buying a significant piece of Apple hardware (it varies by service) gets new users three free months of AppleTV+, Apple Music, Apple News+, Apple Fitness+, and Apple Arcade. The company’s Apple One bundle starts with TV+, Music, Arcade, and 50GB of iCloud storage for $19.95 a month, versus $28.96 if bought separately. For $25.95, you can share all that, plus 200GB of storage, with five people. Throwing in Fitness+, News+, and 2TB raises the price to $37.95. Student, teacher, and military discounts The pricey Financial Times is free to pre-college students and their teachers at participating schools. Students and teachers can get a digital subscription to The Economist for 75% off. In addition, universities may offer free subscriptions to news outlets for students, faculty, and staff. Hulu offers students its ad-supported plan for $1.99 a month. Spotify bundles that plan plus its ad-free Premium service for $5.99. Apple charges the same for ad-free Music and (for a limited time) TV+. Peacock runs $2.99 (versus $7.99) for the first year. (The site Student Beans keeps track of deals on media subscriptions and many other items.) There are several options for military personnel, such as Peacock Premium at $3.99 a month for 12 months. Paramount+ offers a 50% discount for the life of any subscription plan. (Military discount sites The Exchange and GOVX list more deals.) You may be feeling overwhelmed by all these cheap and free offerings for all kinds of people and all kinds of media, but that’s better than being overwhelmed with big bills. View the full article

Let’s be clear: We shouldn’t expect kids to be experts in financial literacy. As much as they love YouTube, I doubt many spend their time watching videos of Warren Buffett. However, the oldest members of this Gen Alpha group will become adult consumers soon enough, and between the way they approach money and their perception of spending, two things are quite clear. The first is that regardless of their industry, companies will be put to the test by this generation. The second is that Gen Alpha may have a rude awakening when faced with the harsh realities of life. We’ve done several studies on Gen Alpha, with the most recent focusing on their thoughts and interactions within five key industries: beauty, automotive, financial services, food, and luxury. And while we uncovered many great insights, I can’t help but focus on the spending. Seventy percent of respondents say they have a basic understanding of money, and again, at their age, we shouldn’t necessarily assume that to be the case. However, other findings paint a picture of a generation that has a taste for the finer things in life, high expectations, and increasing influence. Luxury possessions are of value to Alphas Typical toys and video games aren’t the only things catching the attention of Gen Alpha; they have big dreams about the life they’ll one day lead. Thirty-five percent aspire to own a luxury car when they are older, and who could blame them? But did you know that 68% already own a luxury product by the time they turn 10 years old? While they place plenty of value on digital goods and their digital identities, 66% say they would pay a premium for real-life products. Alphas believe they are entitled to what they want, when and how they want it How will they pay for these luxury high-end items? Early signs indicate it won’t be through traditional institutions but through e-wallets and online banks. Alphas’ top five favorite financial brands are PayPal, CashApp, Visa, Apple Pay, and Venmo. Companies that don’t offer these digital payment options may miss out on purchases. Additionally, others that don’t provide flexibility on the products themselves could face similar pushback because Alphas want to customize. In fact, 58% of respondents would rather customize a car than save money by purchasing a standard model. I’m sure you’re noticing the theme of a lack of frugality, which aligns with an eye-opening mindset: 75% of Alphas say they deserve to get most of the things they want. Parents are giving Alphas a meaningful decision-making voice Perhaps this financial ambition and confidence stems from the parents, who say their children play a central role in many decisions within their households. For example, 61% believe their kids have final say on which car the family purchases, and the same percentage believe their kids have influence over what the family eats. While they have a voice in the choice, we must also acknowledge that they likely aren’t feeling the impacts of those decisions because they aren’t yet financially responsible for the purchases. Kids dream big, and that’s a good thing. That inspiration and imagination should never be discouraged, and there are only so many real-world considerations they can apply when they’ve had minimal experience. That being said, companies that aren’t keeping Gen Alpha’s perspectives at the forefront of their strategies could find themselves drastically off the mark when these consumers reach purchasing age. At the same time, Alphas appear to be experiencing a false sense of reality on the accessibility and affordability of luxury or customized products. Both trends could impact the way this generation budgets and manages money, how it prioritizes desired purchases, and its brand loyalty. Of course, they are still young, and these feelings could change quickly. But based on the data we have today, the companies that meet Alphas’ experiential needs in areas like flexible options and digital payments could have an advantage. And to the social media creators posting financial literacy content, I don’t think you’ll have a hard time getting engagement from Alphas once they start paying their own bills. View the full article

A strong résumé can make all the difference. It demonstrates to hiring managers that you’re the best person for the job by summarizing your career highlights and accomplishments. We know it’s important to customize your résumé for each job you apply to, and to ensure that you’re including quantitative accomplishments whenever possible, to show the impact you’ve had. But despite the amount of time we all spend writing and refining our résumés when job searching, there’s still a fair amount of debate about the ideal format. One common question is whether or not to include an objective statement at the top of your résumé in order to provide a snapshot of the type of position you hope to acquire. Does it help you stand out to recruiters or does it look dated? We asked four career experts what they recommend: When it makes sense to skip an objective statement Objective statements can come off as generic and full of tired clichés, says Amanda Augustine, a résumé writer, career expert at résumé.io, and Fast Company contributor. “Including a career objective on your résumé can actually hurt, more than help, your candidacy,” she says. The statement may date you: Hiring managers instantly recognize it as an old-school practice, she says. “At one time, it was common advice to put a career objective at the top of your résumé, but if you’re still following that advice, it’s time to update your approach,” says Augustine. Even though an objective shares what you’re hoping your next career move will be, some job experts say adding the statement states the obvious and your employment history should speak for itself. What to focus on instead Highlight your qualifications instead, says Stacie Haller, chief career adviser at ResumeBuilder, as those are more relevant to companies looking for a strong candidate. “The focus has become more on what the candidate’s qualifications are rather than what [the candidate] wants,” Haller explains. After all, you only have a few seconds to capture a recruiter or hiring manager’s attention, Haller notes, and the top of your résumé is prime real estate. “Use the top of your résumé to capture a recruiter’s attention,” says Haller. “This concise segment should highlight your most relevant skills and accomplishments that align with the job you’re applying for. It is not a place for stating career objectives; rather, it’s an opportunity to showcase why the candidate is the ideal fit for the role.” Another tip is to tailor the top section for a specific position, so hiring managers will want to delve deeper into your résumé. Create a summary that’s impactful, succinct and directly related to the job you’re applying to. For example, she says, if you were applying for an accounting job, yours might say: “Detail-oriented and results-driven accountant with a bachelor’s degree in accounting and CPA certification. Skilled in financial reporting, budgeting, and compliance, with proven success in managing audits and streamlining accounting processes to improve accuracy and efficiency. Adept at using QuickBooks, Excel, and ERP systems to analyze data and support sound financial decision-making. Committed to delivering value to organizations through accurate financial stewardship and strategic insights.” Why keywords matter more than ever Instead of including a tired objective statement packed with clichés, use the space on your résumé to include keyword-rich words to match a job description, says Jasmine Escalera, career expert at LiveCareer. Tech-savvy job seekers know that companies are using AI in the recruitment process, and according to a MyPerfectResume report, 39% of HR professionals now use AI for résumé screening and analysis. “Résumés have to be optimized to show how they match the role,” says Escalera. A vague objective about what you want won’t help you get through the AI screening, but she insists a “targeted professional summary with the skills, keywords, and achievements that match the job sure will.” When an objective statement makes sense If you’re a recent college graduate, adding a career objective is acceptable, says Haller with ResumeBuilder. “College grads are an exception to this as they do not typically have as much direct experience to highlight,” she says. But Haller thinks even entry-level applicants should still make sure to demonstrate when their skills align with the job description. But when they do include an objective or statement, Haller emphasizes it should not just be “seeking an opportunity to learn and grow with an organization,” but more focused on what the job is and what they can offer. Likewise, Jill Chapman, director of early talent programs at Insperity, agrees that including a career objective or mission statement on your résumé can be a smart move, especially for new graduates or those pivoting into a new industry. “This is especially valuable because many candidates, particularly recent graduates, may not check every traditional box on a job description,” Chapman explains. “Hiring managers are looking for people who are coachable, motivated, and aligned with their mission. A strong objective signals all of that, right from the start.” She says this type of objective statement includes your intended career direction, a glimpse of what drives you, and how you can contribute. “Keep it under 50 words and use it to connect the dots between who you are and the opportunity in front of you,” she recommends. View the full article

Being the great-grandson of the French artist Henri Matisse can be complicated. Alex Matisse grew up in the Northeastern United States, and being a Matisse meant being immersed in art. It’s what his family talked about at the dinner table; the walls of his home were full of paintings usually seen only in museums. By the time he was in elementary school, Alex could recite his great-grandfather’s most notable works, like La Danse and the Nu Bleu series. Like many of the Matisse children, Alex had artistic inclinations. Throughout his school years, he thrived in art classes, and in fourth grade he fell in love with pottery in an after-school program. But when Alex began to think about his future, he struggled to see how he could become an artist. “I really wanted to escape my great-grandfather’s legacy,” he says. “I felt like if I became an artist, there would always intrinsically be a comparison to Henri’s work.” Alex Matisse So Alex forged his own path as an artisan potter, eventually founding the renowned North Carolina pottery company East Fork. Now he’s resurfacing his family roots with the new Matisse Collection, launching online today. It features famous motifs from Henri’s work displayed on dinner plates, dessert plates, and mugs. The company has also developed a new dark blue color, which it is calling La Sirène (the Mermaid), inspired by a color often used in Henri’s palette, bridging Matisse’s saturated, graphic sensibilities to East Fork’s rustic craft. Forging a new path for the Matisse name When he was starting out as a ceramist, Alex fell in love with a community of potters who had settled in North Carolina, creating rugged utilitarian pieces. He apprenticed with the legendary potter Mark Hewitt. In 2009 he bought a piece of land that was once home to an old tobacco farm in Asheville, North Carolina, and set about starting his own practice as a potter. “I didn’t really know what it was going to be,” he says. “But I had this feeling that if I tucked myself away in the mountains for a little bit, I’d figure it out.” And he did. He met his wife, Connie, and another potter, John Vigeland. The three of them, still in their twenties, decided to launch East Fork in 2009. Over the next few years, they developed a unique look for their pottery, inspired by the heavyweight, wood-fired aesthetic of North Carolina potters but also blended with a minimalism that would appeal to millennials. They sold their plates, serving dishes, and mugs directly to customers through their website, and spread the word through Instagram. Over the past decade, East Fork has thrived. The company now has a team of more than 100 people at its headquarters in Asheville, where there is a large factory. The company also has physical stores in Asheville, Atlanta, and Brooklyn. The pottery has become iconic, particularly among millennials. It’s common for couples to put East Fork’s dishes on their wedding registries. Many consumers don’t know, or care, that it is made by the great-grandson of a famous French painter. In many ways, Alex did what he set out to do: He created his own artistic legacy that had nothing to do with his ancestors. “We’re not trying to play in the art world,” he says. “Its proper pottery. We sell beautiful objects that are functional, durable, useful.” But then something interesting happened. Alex felt a shift inside himself; he wanted to reconnect with his heritage. He wanted to somehow find a way to nod to Henri’s most beloved paintings through his work at East Fork. He is doing so for the first time with this collection. Matisse motifs Alex chose the motifs for the Matisse Collection very carefully. He wanted them to be recognizable but also blend in perfectly with the East Fork aesthetic. “We thought really hard about how to pay homage to his work in an honest, complete presentation, without distorting it or cutting it up,” he says. Henri’s best-known portraits are very spare; just thick black lines made in aquatint, a printmaking technique. Some of his most famous ones are Nadia au regard sérieux (Nadia With a Serious Look) and Bédouine au grand voile (Bedouin With Headscarf). In this collection, East Fork has captured these portraits on plates. Henri is also famous for his Nu Bleu (Blue Nude) series, which features blue paper cutouts on canvas designed to reflect the human form. In the East Fork collection, these images are rendered on plates and mugs. “We just went through everything,” Alex says. “We kept trying different paintings until we found ones that fit perfectly wrapped around the mug.” In some Nu Bleu paintings there are also images of palm fronds. In the East Fork collection, this motif is isolated and displayed on cake plates. On one serving platter, there is a large image of a tree taken from La Platane (The Plane Tree), which is made up of thick black strokes. An homage to family lineage in an East Fork line For Alex, it felt like a serious responsibility to identify and incorporate these motifs. This is partly because the Matisse family has been very judicious about licensing Henri’s art to create products, which is quite different from other well-known artists, like Vincent Van Gogh. This year, much of Henri’s art enters the public domain, which allows companies to use it without having to pay fees. (Some of the earlier work is already in the public domain.) Alex wants to make sure Henri’s work is represented in the very best way through this collection. “It was a moment where we felt we could shepherd Henri’s work into the world in a thoughtful way,” Alex says. The East Fork team worked hard to render the images perfectly on the pottery. In the end, it was easiest to put them on as decals. They found a company in France that was able to translate the images into decals, and then East Fork applied them to the pottery and finished it off with a glaze. This collection is the first in what Alex wants to be an ongoing part of the East Fork line. Over time, the company will introduce different aspects of Henri’s work onto pottery, finding ways to draw new attention to the Matisse heritage. But in an interesting twist of fate, Alex believes there are some customers who are East Fork purists and who only want the brand’s minimal pieces that aren’t adorned with Henri’s work. “We have tried very hard to make this collection very aesthetically similar to what we already make, so our existing customers will be intrigued by it,” he says of East Fork’s Matisse wares. “But there are others who won’t care about this collection. And that’s fine too.” View the full article

Sign of relief for foreign businesses comes as Donald The President insists talks are under way to reduce leviesView the full article

Draft terms require non-EU nations to negotiate agreements before their defence industries can get accessView the full article

Picture this: A teenager stares at their phone, paralyzed by headline after headline about the climate crisis, political dysfunction, and societal division. They want to act but feel overwhelmed by the sheer scale of the problem. This scene plays out millions of times daily, and it represents a critical challenge for brands: 80% of Gen Z globally report being personally affected by climate change, yet their engagement with sustainable solutions is declining. Looking to the future, many young people are asking, “What’s the point?” Instead of feeling empowered to act, young people are becoming paralyzed by anxiety, overwhelmed by complexity, disillusioned by a lack of leadership, and increasingly disconnected from the very solutions they seek. This isn’t just anecdotal. It’s a pattern we’re seeing globally, and it challenges everything we thought we knew about young consumers and sustainability. The Aspirational Paradox In 2015, we identified the rise of the “Aspirational Consumer”—a youthful, values-driven segment hungry for brands that unite performance, purpose, and new possibilities for the role of business in society. A decade later, many of these Aspirationals are now parents and remain the most committed to sustainable living. In fact, our latest research of over 30,000 consumers across 31 markets shows that they’re significantly more likely to engage in sustainable purchasing behaviors across categories. But something has shifted with the next generation. Despite feeling the most impacted by climate change and expressing the highest levels of environmental concern, young people today are becoming increasingly disengaged. Around the world, Gen Z is significantly more likely than baby boomers and older to say they’ve been “greatly affected” by climate change (49% versus 38%, respectively), yet their engagement with sustainable behaviors is declining. The number of Gen Z globally who feel “indifferent” about sustainability has increased from 22% to 31% since 2021, while “enthusiasts” have dropped from 30% to 21%. This isn’t because they don’t care. If anything, they care too much. Consider this: 38% of Gen Z globally say they feel stressed or anxious “all” or “most of the time”—a full 21 points higher than baby boomers+ (which encompasses baby boomers and everyone older than them). American youth are also more stressed than their global peers (44% versus 38%, respectively). We’re witnessing what happens when awareness meets overwhelm. The generation with the most at stake in a sustainable future is feeling a real lack of agency to shape it. The Hidden Opportunity Without visible leadership or meaningful opportunities to act, young people are losing faith in the commitment of business and brands to deliver a sustainable future. But here’s where it gets interesting: While a whopping 77% of Gen Z in the USA currently falls into “inactive” and “indifferent” segments, two-thirds of those who didn’t buy sustainable products in the last month say they would have done so if they could have. The desire for better choices exists, but barriers—like price, knowledge, and availability—block the path between intention and action. This represents both a crisis and an opportunity. For brands committed to remaining relevant to the next generation while building resilience for a world in flux, this moment demands a fundamental shift in how we approach sustainability. How to Win Back Gen Z Drawing on decades of research in psychology and social science, we’ve identified five core principles that transform sustainability from obligation into opportunity. Each principle bridges the gap between intention and impact, helping brands move from incremental progress to transformative change. 1. Lead with Truth David Bowie was right then, and it’s still true today: Young people are “quite aware of what they’re going through.” Sixty percent of Gen Z in the USA feel “extremely worried about current and future harm to the environment caused by human activity and climate change.” Yet, when brands face challenges with radical honesty, they earn respect. According to Marsha Linehan, the creator of Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, acknowledging difficulties actually increases optimism and supports resilience. Being honest about challenges helps build trust while illuminating pathways forward. Companies like Tony’s Chocolonely are confronting harsh realities like labor exploitation in their industries by making their supply chains traceable and transparent. Oatly’s provocative messaging—like their “F*ck Oatly” online archive of criticisms—acknowledges difficulties while maintaining optimism. Rapanui helps customers see the exact journey of their clothes. And Seventh Generation is honoring the origins of their name and repairing relationships with Indigenous communities by redesigning their corporate foundation to champion community-led philanthropy focused on Indigenous sovereignty, climate justice, and environmental protection. When brands are honest about challenges while offering solutions, they build credibility. 2. Make Power Personal Our beliefs about our own capabilities directly shape our actions. Psychologist Albert Bandura proved that this sense of self-efficacy is the foundation of human agency; when we believe we can meaningfully affect our circumstances, we’re more likely to act. But there’s a crisis of agency among young people: 42% of those aged 18–24 globally say they feel “individually powerless to do much to save the environment.” We can help transform climate anxiety into creative agency by showing how small actions can spark immediate impact. When consumers feel powerful, they’re more likely to transform challenges into choices, repeat sustainable behaviors, and share brands with others. Companies like Sojo are empowering consumers to help their clothes last longer by making garment repair as convenient as food delivery with on-demand repair and tailoring services. The Ordinary is democratizing high-quality skincare by stripping away the frills to ensure quality products are affordable. Beautycounter’s “The Never List” turns complex chemistry into clear decisions by providing consumers a list of potentially harmful ingredients that are never in their formulations. And brands like Bower and Trashie make recycling clothing and other everyday items easy and rewarding by providing simple take-back systems paired with incentives from partner brands and charities. By removing practical barriers—be it price, availability, ambiguity, or simply inconvenience—while building psychological confidence, brands can help people move from feeling overwhelmed to feeling capable. 3. Create Connection Loops When anxiety gets in the way of individual action, community creates momentum. Our research reveals a powerful pattern: Young people gravitate toward sustainable behaviors that create connection. In the U.S., Gen Z is significantly more likely than older generations to embrace collective consumption models. This isn’t just about reducing waste—it’s about building new relationships between people, products, and the planet. When sustainability becomes social, anxiety transforms into shared purpose. Consider Notpla, whose seaweed-based packaging alternatives aren’t just eliminating plastic—they’re bringing nature-based packaging into large-scale cultural events to promote learning and evangelism. Ireland’s peer-to-peer clothes-swapping platform Nuw builds local sharing communities by hosting hybrid digital and in-person events. And Back Market celebrates peer relationships and repair culture as the global marketplace for reborn tech. These brands understand that lasting change happens in community with others. By creating connection loops, they’re helping transform individual eco-anxiety into collective creativity—and making sustainable living less about sacrifice and more about belonging to something bigger than ourselves. 4. Invite Joy When sustainability connects to fundamental human needs for joy, growth, and vitality, it becomes self-sustaining, especially in difficult times. For psychologist Martin Seligman, the experience of human flourishing requires more than just removing negatives—it demands positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment. When we focus the benefits of sustainability solely on reducing harm, we miss the opportunity to support genuine well-being. Our research confirms this insight: More than 75% of Gen Z globally views both healthy and sustainable lifestyles as “enjoying the good things in life” rather than sacrifice. For them, sustainability isn’t about having less—it’s about living more fully. Consider Pangaia, a collective of scientists, technologists, and designers using bio-based materials and bright colors for sustainable fashion that feels fresh, smart, and stylish rather than austere. NotCo uses AI to create plant-based alternatives that replicate the flavor and texture of animal products in favorites like mac and cheese, hot dogs, and ice cream. And Who Gives A Crap transforms everyday paper products into playful, design-forward objects of joy while supporting global sanitation efforts. When sustainability contributes to all dimensions of well-being, it shifts from sacrifice to a source of joy and gives brands new opportunities to increase relevance, differentiation, and loyalty. 5. Weave New Stories “The stories we tell about ourselves and the world become the lenses through which we see reality,” notes the philosopher Charles Eisenstein. And when 77% of Gen Z in the U.S. feels disconnected from current sustainability messaging, we need new narratives that reconnect and reengage. And it is possible: Our data show that despite the challenges young people face every day, they are significantly more optimistic about the future than their elders. Gen Z in the USA is much more likely than baby boomers+ to believe that in 10 years, most people will be driving electric cars (51% versus 21%, respectively), buying secondhand (51% versus 20%), renting items instead of owning them (43% versus 19%), and living waste-free (40% versus 15%). This is a powerful moment to help young people write a new chapter and to tell stories that help make sense of today while showing what’s possible tomorrow. Vestiaire Collective understands this, making secondhand fashion feel aspirational and luxurious while building community around preloved style in their peer-to-peer, vintage and designer marketplace. Selena Gomez’s Rare Beauty is destigmatizing mental illness and fostering conversations around hope and agency. And Too Good To Go reimagines food waste as an opportunity for daily adventure through deliveries of “surprise bags” from local cafes, bakeries, or restaurants. These brands aren’t just selling products—they’re helping people see their role in a better story, one that unites individual well-being with collective flourishing. By reflecting consumers’ realities and amplifying their aspirations, brands can weave new stories that shape our identities, build our communities, and shift culture for a more sustainable future. The Next Frontier: From Insight to Action The opportunity is clear but challenging. By designing products, services, and experiences that inspire confidence and build momentum toward better living, brands can help transform sustainability from a source of anxiety into a path toward agency, creativity, and joy. This isn’t just about selling more stuff. It’s about helping people express their values, connect with others, and participate in positive change. It’s about making sustainable choices more affordable, accessible, and rewarding so they feel less like sacrifice and more like possibility. The data show that young people are ready for this shift. They just need the truth, better tools, and a like-minded community to create it. “Young people’s eco-anxiety deserves a sacred space for mourning and fury, rather than dismissing their feelings as weakness or offering empty reassurances that everything will be fine,” says Ariana Gomez, the founder and CEO of Technology for Impact. “Their deep care about the climate crisis is a powerful fuel for building a better future—yet they can only access this potential when we honor their emotions and support them through the process.” The time for incremental progress has passed. The next generation is calling for deeper transformation. Brands that can make sustainable living feel both honest and hopeful, aspirational and accessible, and unite individual well-being with collective flourishing will define the future of consumption—and help design a future with more joy and thriving. This is about more than market share or brand relevance. It’s about helping an entire generation move from anxiety to agency, from paralysis to purpose, from being overwhelmed to taking action. The tools exist. The demand is clear. The only question is: Who will have the empathy and creativity to lead? View the full article

Over the last century of glorious, tragic, turbulent, and innovative human endeavour, the cover of the New Yorker magazine has used only the illustrated image to communicate talking points of American—and specifically New York City—life and culture. Beyond the masthead and issue date, no set typography has ever been allowed, maintaining a unique wordless space in magazine publishing where only an image connotes the idea. The absence of copy is arresting, the silent core of what the solely visual can communicate. Though notably, the majority of weekly sales are by subscription, not impulse buys. There are few of the New Yorker’s 1925 newsstand contemporaries left. Meanwhile, publications like Time, Newsweek, and Fortune have not resisted the dominant orthodoxy of photography with multiple cover lines to gain sales. While photography delivers celebrity and the spectacle of modern life, the New Yorker has maintained a belief in visualizing without written explanation to reach those readers who seek something more. But how can a magazine whose survival depends on sales maintain appeal with such apparently humble graphic means? The magazine’s strategy for success has been to employ a succession of brilliant art editors (just four in 100 years—somewhat unique in magazine publishing) who understand how illustration, in the right hands, can offer appeal, surprise, entertainment and imaginative freedom to invent what French poster artist Cassandre called “a visual incident.” Posters and magazine covers have a similar task: both vie to grab the attention of a public subjected to evermore intrusive image assault. From simple street hoardings and news vendors in 1925, to broadcast then digital media today, the changes over the last 100 years have been immense and profound. This audio-visual bombardment of words, images, sound and movement simply did not exist back then. This golden age of the printed poster and magazine cover appears now to belong another world—so how can preservation of these ideals be viable in a 21st century weekly magazine? Illustration and its reinvention as an agile alternative to the over-saturation of audio-visual and written media is one key. The choice of illustration as communication remains underrepresented. Other than courtroom reporting, there have been few front pages that have used a drawing, but its popular appeal evidences a relevance to complex modern lives. As a discipline, illustration is closely related to the cartoon and its sequential form, the comic strip. Many New Yorker cover artists operate across these practices, demonstrating the common ground of drawing. Illustrations are used for associative value—they conjure up an expressive or reflective mood, provide a seasoned commentary, or capture concisely a cultural moment. In the context of fake news, illustrations don’t purport to be objective—they best work through a coherent convincing visual language that offers more than words. For the majority of the New Yorker’s audience, illustration has an affectionate, unsophisticated association with successive stages of development, starting in childhood. From early picture books to comics, graphic novels, music and lifestyle, illustrated communication allows interpretation and relatability. Illustration can be successful in performing the elusive act of being inclusive and appealingly anonymous. The New Yorker recognizes that diversity in content is reliant on the real-life experience of its artists. Since the 1930s when most journalists and illustrators were male and white, the magazine has sought to make a weekly visual statement of the contemporary by prioritising images that represent the diversity of New York. There is a disposable deal in buying a magazine—it is not designed to be a keeper. Certain images of “a moment” can later become the visual signature of an age, though it may not always be apparent at the time. The early consistency of New Yorker art deco covers expressed both wonderful visual ideas and a graphic language for modernity. The skyscrapers, bridges and lights of the quintessential modern metropolis are beautifully shown in Adolph Kronengold’s cover from March 1938. Barry Blitt’s 2008 “politics of fear” cover, showing Barack Obama in Muslim clothing and Michelle Obama in combats with a gun slung over her back, expressed much more than portraits in an American presidential campaign. It provocatively articulated media exaggeration and control, forces that dominate today. And then there are the images that transcend a stylistic era and which are elevated above beyond specific facts in a way that helps us see the world in a new way, like Saul Steinberg’s “view of the world from 9th Avenue” cover from 1976. The viewpoint is literally floating above the street, not so high that local details are unrecognisable, yet just beyond the Hudson are diminishing deserts and prairies and over the Pacific ocean you can see Japan. A wonderful satire on the attitude of global centrality and specifically a New Yorker’s idea of their own importance, the image has been copied and referenced ever since its publication. The completely black cover by Art Spiegelman and New Yorker art director Françoise Mouly for September 24 2001 achieved the impossible task of visualising the feeling of loss following the world trade centre attacks. Mouly has been the art director since 1993 and possesses a supreme visual intelligence that has driven the success of the pictorial cover for more than three decades. She maintains that artists are able to say new things about the same themes year after year—something AI cannot do as it refers only to the past. The present, however, is elusive and the province of the artist gathering energy like a lightning conductor. Plus, crucially, AI doesn’t doodle. New Yorker artists are people who can present a dilemma, an issue, a moment or a spectacle visually, not abstracted, but through emotional empathy. The covers are non-linear but require “reading”. The multiple layers of meaning are often open to interpretion. The beauty of the New Yorker cover lies in not equating it with a written description, but rather in prompting an emotional response to what it is to be alive in that moment, whether good times or bad. That’s a pretty wonderful objective and guiding principle for a weekly publication. Geoff Grandfield is an associate professor at the Illustration Animation Department at Kingston University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article