All Activity

In many ways, the macOS is the ideal platform to support visual project management. Here, we've gathered the best project management software for Mac-based teams. The post 10 Best Project Software for Mac Users in 2026 appeared first on project-management.com. View the full article

President Donald The President is facing perhaps the most daunting question of the war with Iran, one that could define his time in office: Will he put U.S. troops on the ground in Iran to secure some 970 pounds of enriched uranium that Tehran could potentially use to build nuclear weapons? The President has offered shifting reasons for launching the war, but he has been consistent in articulating that a primary objective in joining Israel in the military action is ensuring that Iran will “never have a nuclear weapon.” The president has been more circumspect about how far he’s willing to go to follow through on his pledge to destroy Iran’s weapons program once and for all, including seizing or destroying the near-bomb-grade nuclear material that Iran possesses. Much of it is believed to be buried under the rubble of a mountain facility pummeled in U.S. bombings The President ordered last June that he had claimed “obliterated” Tehran’s nuclear program. It’s a risky, complicated project that many nuclear experts say cannot be done without a sizable deployment of U.S. troops into Iran, a dangerous and politically fraught operation for the Republican president, who has vowed not to entangle the U.S. in the sort of extended and bloody Middle East conflicts that still loom large on America’s psyche. At the same time, lawmakers and experts remain concerned that if Iran hard-liners emerge from the fighting, they’ll be more motivated than ever to build nuclear weapons as they look to deter the U.S. and Israel from future military action, a dynamic that makes taking control of Iran’s enriched uranium even more critical. That stockpile could allow Iran to build as many as 10 nuclear bombs, should it decide to weaponize its program. Some lawmakers, like Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., say they remain deeply fearful that the president has put the nation on a path that will require putting troops inside Iran for what he called The President’s confused and chaotic objectives. “Some of the objectives that he continues to espouse simply cannot be achieved without a physical presence there — securing the uranium cannot be done without a physical presence,” said Blumenthal, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Meanwhile, Republican allies of The President stress that there are plans in place to deal with the enriched uranium. Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman James Risch, R-Idaho, on Wednesday cited “a number of plans that have been put on the table.” He declined to elaborate. Others acknowledged the complications of deploying troops into Iran. “No one has given me a briefing on how you would do it without boots on the ground,” said Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “It doesn’t mean you can’t. But no one’s ever briefed me about it.” Scott added it’s not tenable to allow the stockpile to remain: “I think it would be helpful to get rid of it.” The President and his advisers are rigidly obtuse Nearly three weeks into a conflict that’s left hundreds of people dead, tested longtime alliances and brought pain to the global economy, The President and his top advisers have been rigidly obtuse about their deliberations over Iran’s uranium stockpile. “I’m not going to talk about that,” The President said last week when asked about the enriched uranium. “But we have hit them harder than virtually any country in history has been hit, and we’re not finished yet.” Later that day, during an appearance in Kentucky, The President appeared to claim the strikes had already neutralized the threat. “They don’t have nuclear potential,” he said. Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters earlier this week that the administration sees no point in telegraphing “what we’re willing to do or how far we’re willing to go” while asserting “we have options, for sure.” Experts say it’s doable but won’t be easy Richard Goldberg, who served as director for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction for the National Security Council during The President’s first term, said that seizing or destroying the enriched uranium is certainly doable, if the president decides to go that route. The U.S. and Israeli forces have been making strides toward creating the conditions — namely, establishing total air superiority — that would allow for special operations forces operators, who are trained in blowing up centrifuges and dealing with nuclear material, to conduct such an operation if the president decides to go that route. To be certain, a troops-on-the-ground effort is expected to be far more complicated than other recent high-profile, lightning-strike insertion operations, such as the January capture of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro or the May 2011 killing of Osama bin Laden, Goldberg said. And the likely need to remove rubble to get to the canisters of enriched uranium adds another layer of complexity, because it would require heavy construction equipment. “But if you actually own the airspace and you can have close air support and drones and everything else up in the sky for pretty wide perimeter, presumably you could do a lot,” said Goldberg, who is now a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi told reporters in Washington this week that the assumption is much of the enriched uranium remains in the trio of Iranian nuclear sites bombarded last year by the U.S. “The impression we have … is that it hasn’t been moved,” said Grossi, adding that a bulk of the material is beneath the rubble at Iran’s Isfahan facility while lesser amounts are at the Natanz and Fordow facilities that were destroyed in last year’s American strikes. Testifying before a Senate committee on Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard in her prepared remarks said that the U.S. attacks on Iran had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment program and buried underground facilities. Gabbard said the U.S. has been monitoring whether Iran’s leaders will try to restart its nuclear program but said that they have not tried to rebuild their nuclear enrichment capability. She added that the clerical authority overseeing Iranian government has been degraded in Israel’s strikes on its leadership but remains intact. Brandan Buck, a senior foreign policy fellow at the Cato Institute, said that an effort to extract or dilute the enriched material would likely take more than 1,000 troops at each Iranian site and would take time to complete. On the other hand, not acting to secure the enriched uranium also comes with risk. Should Iran’s hard-liners remain in power, and with enriched material, they will now have greater motivation to build a nuclear weapon. “The President has put himself between a rock and a hard place,” Buck said. “Throughout this, he has had maximalist aims, but he’s wanted to maintain minimal effort in order to keep the costs low.” Associated Press writers Stephen Groves, Matthew Lee and Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report. —Aamer Madhani and Seung Min Kim, Associated Press View the full article

Two top housing platforms disagree on the best week to list in 2026, but both agree a rare window for sellers is opening this spring. View the full article

Economists fear the Iran war will drive up inflationView the full article

Trailers of two of Hollywood’s most anticipated upcoming movies came out this week. Warner Bros. Discovery’s Dune: Part Three and Marvel Studios’s Spider-Man: Brand New Day premiered a day apart. But what’s most interesting is the marketing strategy behind the trailers—in which promos and short clips of the trailers were released ahead of the full trailers. On Tuesday, Warner Bros. Discovery hosted a livestreamed event on the official Dune account on TikTok. It featured director Dennis Villeneuve and some of the cast talking about the upcoming movie to a live audience before airing the trailer, which was simultaneously revealed at the end of the stream before being rolled out on other platforms like Instagram and YouTube. Videos with the star-studded cast—including Zendaya, Robert Pattinson, Anya Taylor-Joy, and Javier Bardem—urging fans to watch the trailer circulated online, and were later shared from the Warner Bros. Discovery and IMAX social accounts. Meanwhile, Marvel Studios released the official trailer for Spider-Man: Brand New Day on Wednesday. But the day before, Tom Holland announced on Instagram that he and the studio were “doing something that has never been done before” and that “some of our greatest fans are going to help us release pieces of” the trailer. Holland tagged an Instagram account of a fan in Peru, who shared a two-second clip from the trailer featuring Spider-Man swinging through the air holding someone. That fan then tagged another fan in Ohio, who shared a separate bite-sized clip from the trailer. Throughout the day, fans from different parts of the world tagged each other, showing different seconds-long clips before the full trailer debuted the next day. This isn’t the first time that Marvel Studios has released its trailers in a non-traditional way. In December, the studio premiered four different trailers for Avengers: Doomsday during theatrical showings of Avatar: Fire and Ash. It was the only way that fans could access the trailers immediately, since they weren’t officially released online until a few days later. Short cuts Trailers have historically served as a marketing tool for films, but sharing microclips from trailers to get fans excited about trailers themselves seems to be a new marketing trend all on its own. It’s certainly a sign of the times, especially as short-form content and microdramas become even more popular while the attention spans of a generation weaned on TikTok get shorter. But it’s also indicative of the fluctuating nature of the theatrical business. While box office numbers have gone up since the pandemic, they have not reached pre-pandemic levels. The North American box office grossed $9 billion last year, which is above the numbers of 2020, but still low compared to the years prior. Marvel movies also continue to see a downturn at the box office, while AMC Theatres recently announced its plans to shut down several “underperforming” locations across the United States after a decline in attendance. Networks and streaming services have already played around with releasing bite-sized clips of its shows on social media to get users to watch full seasons of its shows. The movie industry, meanwhile, has long accepted that it needs social media to promote its new movies, whether that means hiring TikTok creators to make fan trailers or creating viral moments to grab attention. But as studios and theater chains desperately try to reach young fans on social media, generating more hype around movie trailers might be the next thing they’re experimenting with to actually get audiences into theaters. View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication. The Razer Wolverine V3 Tournament Edition wired gaming controller is down to $54.99 on Woot right now, which is the lowest price it has ever hit. It usually goes for around $99.99 on Amazon, and even previous deals didn’t dip below about $59, according to price trackers. If you’re a Prime member, you get free shipping, while others pay an extra $6. This deal is live for 12 days or until stock runs out, and Woot only ships within the contiguous U.S. Razer Wolverine V3 Tournament Edition Wired gaming controller $54.99 at Woot $99.99 Save $45.00 Get Deal Get Deal $54.99 at Woot $99.99 Save $45.00 This is essentially the same controller as the Wolverine V3 Pro, minus the wireless battery. That means it’s wired only, using a long 10-foot cable. For PC setups, that’s rarely a problem—in fact, it’s part of the appeal. The controller supports a 1000Hz polling rate, which only works over a wired connection, and it’s built for players who care about responsiveness. Inputs feel sharp and clicky, more like a high-end gaming mouse than a standard controller. You also get six extra programmable buttons, which can make a real difference in games where reaction time matters. In something like a fast-paced shooter, mapping reload or weapon swap to a rear button can shave off just enough time to feel noticeable. The Hall Effect sticks are designed to avoid drift over time, and the textured grips help during longer sessions. All said, it feels solid in hand, though slightly heavier than you might expect. Where it falls short depends on how you plan to use it. This is not a living-room controller. There’s no wireless option, no Bluetooth, and no flexibility if you like to game from the couch. The customization also leans on Razer’s software, which you’ll need to download to remap buttons or enable that 1000Hz mode. It works well and lets you create profiles for different games, but it does add an extra step. You also can’t tweak everything, like the main button layout or D-pad. Still, if you mostly play on PC and want something that feels closer to a competitive tool than a casual controller, this deal makes a strong case. Our Best Editor-Vetted Tech Deals Right Now Apple AirPods 4 Active Noise Cancelling Wireless Earbuds — $148.99 (List Price $179.00) Apple iPad 11" 128GB A16 WiFi Tablet (Blue, 2025) — $299.00 (List Price $349.00) Sony WH1000XM6- Best Wireless Noise Canceling Headphones — $398.00 (List Price $459.99) Apple Watch Series 11 (GPS, 42mm, S/M Black Sport Band) — $299.00 (List Price $399.00) Blink Video Doorbell Wireless (Newest Model) + Sync Module Core — $35.99 (List Price $69.99) Ring Indoor Cam Plus (2025) — $39.99 (List Price $59.99) Fire TV Stick 4K Max Streaming Player With Remote — $34.99 (List Price $59.99) Deals are selected by our commerce team View the full article

The Visibility Governance Maturity Model (VGMM) is about something most SEO programs lack: clear ownership, documented processes, and decision rights that keep your work from being undone by teams who don’t understand it. So how do you actually score that? Each domain uses a bank of governance questions tailored to the business. They’re not about how SEO is executed. They’re not about tools. And they’re not an audit. What VGMM questions are designed to reveal VGMM questions go to managers and the C-suite — the people who should know about governance but often don’t. Meanwhile, you (the SEO practitioner) actually know whether standards are documented, whether QA is in place, and whether processes exist. VGMM diagnoses organizations where SEO knowledge lives in practitioners’ heads, rather than in documented, governed processes. If VGMM surveyed only practitioners, it would measure whether you know what to do (you do). But governance maturity measures whether the organization can sustain capability when you’re on vacation, when you get promoted, or when you leave. Questions go to managers because governance gaps show up as: “I don’t know the answer to that.” “I’d have to ask Sarah.” “We used to have a process, but it’s not enforced anymore.” “Each team does it differently.” “That’s documented somewhere, I think?” When managers can’t answer governance questions, that’s the signal. It means processes aren’t institutionalized. Dig deeper: Why most SEO failures are organizational, not technical Your customers search everywhere. Make sure your brand shows up. The SEO toolkit you know, plus the AI visibility data you need. Start Free Trial Get started with The SPOF reality check Single point of failure (SPOF) questions can cap your organization at Level 2 maturity until they’re resolved. Here are some examples of SPOF question: “If [key person] left tomorrow, could the organization maintain SEO standards without them?” “Is SEO knowledge documented in a way that’s transferable to new team members?” “Are there at least two people who understand how [critical system] works?” Right now, you’re probably the SPOF. You’re the person who knows where all the bodies are buried, how the redirects work, why that weird canonical setup exists, and what breaks if someone changes X. That feels like job security. It’s actually a job prison. When VGMM identifies you as an SPOF: Leadership realizes your knowledge needs to be documented. You get resources to create documentation. You get approval to train other people. You get your own tools, training, and conference budgets. (Yay!) Your expertise becomes institutional, not personal. You can take a vacation without disasters. The organization can’t move past Level 2 until SPOF conditions are cleared. This forces leadership to address hero-dependency. How domain scores become VGMM score Each domain model (SEOGMM, CGMM, WPMM, etc.) produces a maturity score based on its own question bank. Here’s how they roll up: Step 1: Domain assessment Each domain asks 30-60 governance questions tailored to that area. Questions are behavior-based, not opinion-based: “Do you think SEO standards are important?” (opinion) “Are SEO standards documented and approved by [role]?” (behavior) Step 2: Weighted scoring Answers are weighted based on impact. Not all governance failures are equal: Missing documentation = lower weight. No ownership for critical decisions = higher weight. SPOF identified = can cap maturity level regardless of other scores. Step 3: SPOF constraint If SPOF conditions exist, the domain score maxes out at Level 2 (emerging) even if other governance is strong. You can’t be structured (Level 3) when capability depends on one person. Step 4: Domain aggregation Domain scores average into the overall VGMM score with adjusted weighting based on: Your industry (ecommerce weights performance governance higher). Your business model (SaaS weights content governance higher). Your complexity (international weights workflow governance is higher). Step 5: Final maturity level The overall VGMM score maps to maturity levels: Level 1 (0-30%): Ad hoc/unmanaged Level 2 (31-50%): Aware/emerging Level 3 (51-70%): Structured/defined Level 4 (71-90%): Integrated/coordinated Level 5 (91-100%): Optimized/sustained Why questions change between models Domain questions adapt to the maturity model being used. SEOGMM questions focus on: Technical SEO governance (schema, redirects, crawl management). Content optimization standards. Performance monitoring and alerts. LVMM questions focus on: Location data governance across distributed sites. Google Business Profile management and ownership. Review response workflows and accountability. NAP (Name, Address, Phone) consistency IVMM questions focus on: Market-specific SEO governance across countries. Translation workflow and quality controls. Local compliance and regulatory requirements. Cross-market coordination and escalation. Same governance principles, different operational contexts. An ecommerce company doesn’t need LVMM. A restaurant chain with 500 locations absolutely does. Dig deeper: SEO’s future isn’t content. It’s governance Get the newsletter search marketers rely on. See terms. Why you can’t (and shouldn’t) compare scores VGMM scores are internal quality metrics, not competitive benchmarks. A 62% score doesn’t mean you’re ahead of another organization at 58%. Here’s why. Weighting varies by business model Ecommerce company: Performance governance weighted 30%. Information publisher: Content governance weighted 35%. Service company: Workflow governance weighted 25%. Domain combinations vary by organization Organization A: SEOGMM + CGMM + WPMM + IVMM (international). Organization B: SEOGMM + CGMM + WPMM + LVMM (multi-location). Not comparing apples to apples. Organizational context changes what scores mean Startup at 45% with 10 people = impressive, mature for size. Enterprise at 45% with 500 people = serious governance gaps. Strategic priorities shape the score Organization prioritizing organic visibility: SEOGMM weighted higher. Organization focused on technical debt: WPMM weighted higher. The only meaningful comparison is your organization against itself over time: Q1 2025: 42% (Level 2) Q3 2025: 58% (Level 3) ← Progress Q1 2026: 61% (Level 3) ← Sustained improvement Use VGMM to answer: Are we improving quarter over quarter? Which domains are holding us back? Where should we invest in governance? Are SPOF conditions getting resolved? Don’t use VGMM to answer: Are we better than Competitor X? What’s the industry average score? Should we publicize our score? What VGMM scoring means for you As an SEO practitioner, this scoring approach protects you. You’re not being blamed When governance assessment reveals gaps, managers are answering questions about organizational capability. They’re not evaluating your individual performance. The assessment asks, “Does the organization have documented standards?” not “Is the SEO person doing a good job?” SPOF detection is your escape hatch When SPOF questions flag that the organization depends entirely on you, leadership sees it as an organizational risk — not as proof you’re valuable. They can’t move to Level 3 until they fix it, which means resources for documentation, training, and knowledge transfer. Weighted scoring highlights systemic issues When content governance scores low, but SEO governance scores high, it shows other domains aren’t holding up their end. This redirects leadership attention to where governance actually needs strengthening. Progress tracking shows your impact When your organization moves from Level 2 to Level 3 over two quarters, you have concrete evidence that governance investments are working. This isn’t “traffic went up 15%,” it’s “organizational capability improved measurably.” Dig deeper: SEO execution: Understanding goals, strategy, and planning See the complete picture of your search visibility. Track, optimize, and win in Google and AI search from one platform. Start Free Trial Get started with The difference between hero work and sustainable SEO VGMM’s scoring approach is designed to: Diagnose organizational capability gaps without blaming individuals. Make your implicit knowledge visible as institutional risk. Force leadership to address hero-dependency. Track progress in ways that make governance investments defensible to finance. The assessment focuses on whether the organization can sustain your work without you. That’s the difference between being an indispensable hero (exhausting) and being a strategic professional whose expertise is institutionalized (sustainable). View the full article

Markets in Europe and the US reel after Iranian strikes on Qatari natural gas complexView the full article

Traders and analysts warn of lasting disruption after damage to facility that supplies a fifth of the world’s LNGView the full article

Pray for Asian naphtha consumersView the full article

The used-car e-commerce platform Carvana Co. (NYSE: CVNA) is planning to do something it has never done before: split its stock. If completed, the move will significantly reduce the per-share price of CVNA stock, without affecting the company’s total value. But first, it needs to be approved by shareholders. Here’s what you need to know about Carvana’s proposed stock split. What is a stock split? A stock split is a mechanism by which a company can increase or decrease the number of its shares by dividing those shares or combining them. There are two types of stock splits: a forward split and a reverse split. A forward split is the most common, and the type that Carvana is proposing. In a forward split, an individual share is divided into additional shares, reducing the value of each share. A forward split is usually just referred to as a “stock split.” On the other side of the coin, you have a reverse split. These are less common than forward splits. In a reverse split, multiple existing shares of a stock are combined into a single share, making each new share more valuable because there are fewer of them. While both types of splits change the value of a single share, they do not inherently affect the company’s overall market cap. This is because the total number of new shares and their new stock price still equals the same sum as the former number of shares and their price. For example, take an imaginary company, XYZ, with 1,000 outstanding shares each worth $100. The total value of the company, its market cap, is thus $100,000. But then XYZ decides to split its shares by a factor of 10-to-1. This increases the company’s 1,000 outstanding shares to 10,000, yet because there are now 10 times more shares, each share is worth 10 times less, so the company’s market cap remains $100,000. How much is Carvana splitting the stock by? Carvana has announced that it intends to split its stock 5-to-1. Last week, the company said that its board had approved the split at that ratio. That means that once the split takes place, there will be five times as many CVNA shares outstanding as there were before the split. However, since there will be five times as many shares, the post-split share price of CVNA stock will be five times lower than its pre-split price. When do Carvana’s shares split? It’s important to note that Carvana’s share split isn’t guaranteed. While the company’s board has approved the split, shareholders still need to vote on the move. If shareholders also approve the split, the company’s stock split will proceed. In a release announcing the proposed split, Carvana said that shareholders will be able to vote on the stock split at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders on May 5, 2026. If they approve the split, investors who own Class A and Class B common stock will receive an additional four CVNA shares for every share they currently own after the closing bell on Wednesday, May 6. When markets reopen on Thursday, May 7, CVNA shares will begin trading at their new split-adjusted price. What will Carvana’s new split-adjusted stock price be? That’s unknowable for now because no one knows what Carvana’s stock price will be seven weeks from now when the adjusted price would kick in. For now, all we can say for certain is that, if shareholders approve the split, the split-adjusted price will be one-fifth of the pre-split price. Currently, CVNA stock is trading at around $290 per share. Assuming CVNA trades at that price at the close of markets on May 6, Carvana’s post-split stock price would open at around $58 per share on May 7. Why is Carvana splitting its stock? Given that stock splits don’t change the fundamental value of the company—or inherently make existing investors any richer—many wonder what the benefit of a stock split is. The greatest benefit to a forward stock split is that it lowers the cost of buying into the company for new investors. This is especially true for retail investors who may not have hundreds each month to sink into a new stock. If a person only has about $150 a month to invest in the market, Carvana, at its current share price of around $290, is unaffordable for them. But if CVNA shares are suddenly at $58 each, that same investor could scoop up at least a few shares. And if enough retail investors do this, it could actually help boost the overall stock price—triggering a wave of fresh investment in the company’s shares. Another reason companies typically split their shares is to make them more affordable for the company’s own employees, who often participate in employee stock purchase plans (ESPP). If a company’s share price is lower, employees can get more shares via their ESPP contributions. This often increases employee loyalty within the company and can be a motivating factor in their work. After all, if you own shares in the company you work for, you want that company to do as well as possible so those shares continue to rise. Indeed, when announcing the proposed stock split, Carvana chief financial officer Mark Jenkins said, “This is the first split in Carvana’s history, and we believe it achieves the important goal of keeping our stock accessible to all of our team members.” How have Carvana’s shares performed in 2026? CVNA shares have had a rough start to 2026. While the company’s share price climbed to over $480 in January, it has since seen a massive decline. The stock took its greatest hit this year in February after Carvana reported its Q4 2025 earnings. While the company did achieve net revenue growth of 58% to $5.6 billion, it missed hard on adjusted EBITDA, which came in at $511 million. As a result, the company’s stock price fell nearly 16% in one day. Since then, CVNA shares have continued to be hit, largely due to a relatively bearish market for growth stocks, especially after America’s attack on Iran and the ongoing economic uncertainty. Yesterday, CVNA shares fell nearly 7.5% to $291.17. Year-to-date, CVNA shares are now down 31% as of yesterday’s close. Yet, over the past 12 months, Carvana has performed remarkably well. Since this time last year, CVNA shares have risen nearly 75%. View the full article

Global energy prices soared Thursday after Iran attacked two oil refineries in Kuwait and a key natural gas facility in Qatar that can supply one-fifth of the world’s liquified natural gas. The attacks added to fears the energy crisis triggered by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to tanker traffic may be longer and more extensive than feared, with lasting damage to oil and gas production. Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose nearly 6% to $113.77 per barrel, up from less than $73 per barrel on the eve of the war. U.S. benchmark crude was less affected by the latest attacks in the Middle East, rising less than 1% to $96.26 per barrel. The European TTF benchmark for natural gas prices traded 17% higher on Thursday and has doubled in the past month. The Iranian attack hit the Ras Laffan terminal for shipping out liquefied natural gas in Qatar. Qatar normally supplies some 20% of the world’s consumption of LNG, which can be carried by ship. The facility shut down after a drone attack. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz to most tanker traffic also left the gas with nowhere to go. If the disruptions from Iran’s attacks on its Gulf Arab neighbors’ energy infrastructure keep oil and gas prices high for long, they could create a debilitating wave of inflation for the global economy. Markets on Wall Street slipped before the opening bell. Futures for the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average each fell a 0.1%, while Nasdaq futures dipped 0.3%. On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve opted to leave its benchmark interest rate alone and projected just one more quarter-point cut this year due to ongoing elevated inflation and uncertainty about the ramifications the Iran war will have on the global economy. Prices for gold and silver also tumbled, dragging down major mining stocks with them. Gold fell 4% to $4,697 an ounce, while silver slipped 8.7% to $70.80. Most industrial metals also saw their prices fall. Shares in miners Hecla and Newmont slid 7.8%, while Freeport-McMoRan fell 4.6%. Markets in Europe and Asia were getting hit much harder than U.S. markets. Germany’s DAX lost 2.4% by midday, the CAC 40 in Paris fell 1.7% and Britain’s FTSE 100 shed 2.1%. In Asian trading, Tokyo’s Nikkei 225 fell 3.4% to 53,372.53 as the Bank of Japan also opted to keep its benchmark interest rate on hold at 0.75%, citing the war with Iran as one factor. In its monetary policy statement the BOJ said that “in the wake of increased tension in the Middle East, global financial and capital markets have been volatile and crude oil prices have risen significantly; future developments warrant attention.” Higher oil prices are a heavy burden for Japan, which like South Korea and Taiwan depends on imports of most raw materials for industries that rely heavily on oil and its derivatives. The Kospi in Seoul lost 2.7% to 5,763.22. In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng slipped 2% to 25,500.58, while the Shanghai Composite index shed 1.4% to 4,006.55. Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 lost 1.7% to 8,497.80 and Taiwan’s Taiex fell 1.9%. In India, which has also suffered from shocks to supplies of oil and gas, the Sensex lost 2.7%. “The combination of higher oil, rising U.S. yields, and a stronger dollar is acting as a macro wrecking ball across Asian assets and currencies,” Stephen Innes of SPI Asset Management said in a commentary. Business Writer Matt Ott reported from Washington. —Elaine Kurtenbach and David McHugh, AP Business Writers View the full article

“I have no idea if this is what they want me to do. I barely get any feedback.” This is a statement I often hear from leaders in my coaching calls, even those at a senior level. When these leaders were early in their careers, there was more frequent guidance and coaching on what success looked like for them and if their work met expectations. However, research by Amy Edmondson shows that the higher you rise in an organization, the less feedback you tend to receive, which can make it feel like you’re losing reassurance. In coaching calls with my clients, we often discover how reliant they were on their leader’s affirmation, and that this recognition served as motivation. In addition to getting less feedback from leaders, as your level of influence increases, transparency can decrease. Authority bias can take over as direct reports put their leaders on a pedestal and withhold critical feedback, assuming that their leader knows best or fearing the repercussions of sharing a divergent opinion. As you rise, there are simply fewer people in the organization who can guide you on your next steps. Here are some strategies you can leverage to get better feedback at work. ASK FOR ADVICE INSTEAD OF FEEDBACK People sometimes hesitate to give feedback, but most people love giving advice. A phrase I often use is this: “I’d love some advice on what I can try next time to make this meeting agenda clearer and more actionable for our group.” Recent research finds that framing the ask as advice rather than “feedback” helps reviewers focus on future-oriented, tangible suggestions instead of only dwelling on past performance. NURTURE PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY To create an environment where your team feels comfortable sharing advice or feedback, you can model vulnerability (this signals that it’s safe for others to take interpersonal risks). You can also explicitly invite input and questions from everyone (for instance, “What could we improve here?”) and respond in ways that reinforce openness (like thanking people for their honesty). In addition, you can also call out where you saw yourself needing improvement. This might sound like, “I noticed I started rambling at the end of that meeting. Where could I have shortened my message for better clarity?” AVOID VAGUE QUESTIONS Vague requests, like asking, “How can I improve this?” can lead to insubstantial or equally vague responses. Instead, focus on clearly defining your goal and ask for advice on how to do a better job reaching that goal. For example, instead of saying, “I want to improve my presentation skills,” you can instead lead with, “I want to improve my presentation flow for clarity and brevity.” It can also be helpful to set the purpose before you make the request. This means sharing why you want the feedback (for example, to be more influential in asking for resources for our team) and how you’ll use it. This can help people frame their thoughts in a way that moves you closer to your goal. If they have a shared interest in your outcome, this also incentivizes them to give you helpful input. BE INTENTIONAL ABOUT YOUR CIRCLE Leaders often end up surrounded by similar perspectives (people who think like them or report to them), which reduces the likelihood of honest challenge. If your current circle is limited, try exploring your industry or professionally affiliated groups. Because of the shared common interest in the type of work you do, this is a great place to foster connection. You can do this by participating in conferences, meet-ups, or even online forums. Ask them to challenge your viewpoints or provide evidence from their experience that contradicts your viewpoints. As you rise in the organization, your relationships with your colleagues to get work done can also be just as important as the relationship with your leader. This is especially true at executive levels when you often need resources from your peers’ teams to accomplish your own projects. To nurture these relationships, you can schedule recurring 1:1s with peers that allow them to also raise topics of importance. Another great way to build these relationships is to set up collaborative coworking sessions where advice naturally flows as you work alongside them. As you gain more visibility, seniority, and decision-making ownership in your organization, feedback will flow differently to you. You have to cultivate it intentionally, with clarity and from a new circle of sources. View the full article

Take a deeper look at crawl behavior, bot verification, and technical SEO signals through log file analysis. The post What Can Log File Data Tell Me That Tools Can’t? – Ask An SEO appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

Assessment from MPC adds to sell-off in gilts and prompts traders to increase bets on higher borrowing costsView the full article

Ride-hailing app to buy as many as 50,000 autonomous vehicles and invest an initial $300mn in California EV companyView the full article

As conversational search gains traction, the bigger question isn’t who has more users, but who can monetize them. Google enters this phase with a massive advantage: mature ad systems, deep advertiser adoption, and decades of optimization. Early AI Mode signals point to a measured rollout. The panic phase is over After a period of panic within the company, Google’s built-in advantages, coupled with massive capital expenditures, have helped it regain ground on category leader ChatGPT in LLM search. In December 2025, Google’s own code red became OpenAI’s code red. The dust will continue to settle, and analysts have different takes. But one signal stands out: in a major validation, Apple has chosen Google to power its own AI. It was perhaps premature to assume Google Search would simply lose to ChatGPT on product. That was the consensus at the start of 2025. Google shares fell about 30% from peak to trough before rallying 130%. Today, the company is valued at roughly $3.6 trillion, just behind Apple. Your customers search everywhere. Make sure your brand shows up. The SEO toolkit you know, plus the AI visibility data you need. Start Free Trial Get started with Why monetization will decide the winner Why did Google’s recent progress in LLM conversational queries — in the form of AI Overviews and AI Mode — have such a large impact on the company’s valuation in such a short time? Ultimately, it comes down to visibility of financial projections. In a company with so much to defend, Google’s CFO and leadership team needed to determine whether shifts in user behavior — in how search works and how it makes money — would weaken the business model or reinforce it. Net-net: Google before the shift: huge. Google after the shift: ditto. Google stock price. The market changed its mind. Visibility — in the sense of financial planning, not in the SERP — means a great deal to Google’s advertisers, too. A large proportion of your annual digital advertising budget is likely allocated to Google. You also still care about how you appear in organic results and increasingly, how your company appears in AI Mode, ChatGPT, Claude, and similar environments. “I’m fine with 30% less of my business coming in from Google, and figuring out lots of complicated ways to replace it,” … said no advertiser ever. How monetization will play out in AI search The competition between monetization models in LLM conversations — especially between the two leaders, ChatGPT and Google’s AI Mode — will play out differently from the broader race for overall user share. There are several moving parts to keep an eye on: Overall assumptions about ad formats and “how to monetize.” Pace of rollout. Whether users and public opinion recoil at ads. Advertiser success rates based on performance measurement. Advertiser adoption, including adoption by the agency ecosystem. Platform targeting options. Advantages of fuller-funnel ad journeys and data collection. Privacy, safety, policies, and enforcement. An all-encompassing consumer brand vs. a better mousetrap. And a few other factors. Right now, OpenAI is at a critical moment because it’s still so early in its monetization. It’s still testing an inefficient auction model confined to a small group of large advertisers. (Some ads, from their pilot, spotted here.) It may be some time before more mature tools and reporting emerge. Most recently, OpenAI brought ad platform Criteo (often used for retargeting) on as a partner. The Trade Desk, the world’s largest non-Google DSP for programmatic, is also in the mix. Some observers have speculated about deeper partnerships or even an acquisition of The Trade Desk, though that seems unlikely. In any case, outsourcing inventory to programmatic partners is a pragmatic step in OpenAI’s monetization strategy. It also underscores how early the company is in building a scalable ads business. Despite a broad rollout with partners, OpenAI is stepping back from “checkout in chat” integrations after limited adoption from both merchants and consumers. When your primary competitor has a 25-year head start, the learning curve is steep. So does it make sense now for advertisers to lean into evolving Google user behavior and figure out how to ride the wave? AI Mode considerations for Google advertisers Expect the transition to more AI Mode sessions — and eventual monetization — to be smoother than initially anticipated. If you’re an advertiser, AI Mode need not equal panic mode. How do these LLM sessions look to users? Obvious to you and me, but likely less so for many searchers. Depending on how you search, AI Overviews may appear above other results on the SERP. That’s becoming a natural extension of Google Search sessions. But that’s not the real conversational layer. The LLM workflow happens in AI Mode. How often users go there remains to be seen. It’s improving quickly. Unlike ChatGPT, Google AI Mode downplays how it finds information, whether it is “reasoning,” and which model is being used. The experience feels relatively seamless. It’s still early, but ads are already appearing in some cases. The key question is how this evolves, and what advertisers should be paying attention to. The key areas to watch are: Extent of monetization. Different ways to monetize. Advertiser control and campaign types. Reporting. Funnel stage. 1. Extent of monetization AI Mode is in a popularity contest and a price war with ChatGPT. Google will likely try to grind down competitors in LLM conversations by monetizing lightly and gradually. Perplexity and Anthropic, for their part, are completely shunning ads. An ad-free AI Mode results page. We’re going to see a lot of this. The result will be less ad volume in this space than you might expect. It may also increase the commercial value of organic visibility in LLM-driven results, leading to renewed focus on content and reputation fundamentals. Forget ad campaign FOMO, then. It will be interesting to place ads alongside AI-driven sessions, but don’t break the bank. Implement, watch, and learn at your own pace. 2. Different ways to monetize Experienced advertisers know there are a few ad formats to consider in any situation like this. The main ones would be: text ads triggered by keywords or similar signals, in a reasonably native format, and feed-based Shopping type ads. Another way to make money is to allow direct checkout — to take a cut of transactions. As noted above, OpenAI is backtracking on this approach, though not eliminating it entirely. How important it will be for Google merchants (and Google itself) remains to be seen. Google’s experience likely allows it, again, to play the long game, study the data, and bring partners and advertisers along for the ride, on an impressive scale. Recently, Loblaw inked an integration deal with OpenAI. A week later, it made a similar deal with Google. Get the newsletter search marketers rely on. See terms. 3. Advertiser control and campaign type In terms of execution, we’ll want to be on the lookout for which kinds of campaign types in Google Ads make your ads eligible to show in AI Mode. You can learn everything you want about how ads will show in AI Overviews in Google’s help files. Unsurprisingly, text and shopping campaigns from Performance Max, standard shopping, and keyword campaigns make your ad eligible to show in AI Overviews. Google says less about AI Mode in its documentation, for now. Our agency recently received a Google deck outlining a “Shopping Expansion” beta. There’s little mention of AI Mode, though one table, in a subtle way, refers to both AI Overviews and AI Mode. My expectation is that Google will gradually ease users into AI Mode and test ads sparingly. Even if ads appear in a small share of sessions — say 0.5% — that will still generate significant data and feedback. Advertiser control will likely be even more limited than it is today. In the world of feed-based ads, you have some levers, but the massive machine learning that controls matching is held by Google and the real-world behavioral ecosystem. To a lesser extent, that’s also how keyword matching works. Micromanagers won’t be too comfortable, but the impact of the ads could still be powerful, especially with data-driven attribution. Here’s hoping new signals, new reporting breakouts, and new levers become available to advertisers. Namely: audiences including cool personas; demographics; novel larger buckets around life stages; novel characteristics we haven’t even dreamt of yet, such as their language ability level or aspects of how they interact with the LLM. 4. Reporting The real question is: will reporting be transparent and insightful? We need to at least be able to look at all available metrics for ads that showed in AI Mode specifically. Time will tell. Microsoft seems to be the first out of the gate with AI-conversation-specific reporting breakouts. We expect no less from Google and are impatiently awaiting further guidance on this front — primarily on what kind of reporting will be directly available in the Google Ads interface. It would be easy for the casual observer to blindly believe that somehow, you’ll never be eligible to show up in AI Mode or AI Overviews unless you adopt certain Google Ads campaign types. There’s a lot of rhetoric around AI Max. I’d advise advertisers to do their own research and run their campaigns to suit themselves. Hint: AI Max isn’t the only magical gateway to AI-using users and might not even be a good or appropriate one for many advertisers. Once reporting is beefed up, you’ll want to know how well the AI-specific inventory is doing, however your campaigns wind up serving there. 5. Funnel stage But that leads us to a wrinkle. Although ads appearing astride AI Mode conversations could certainly be low-funnel (think Shopping ads in high-intent situations), much of the opportunity here is thematic. Your company may now enjoy new opportunities to associate itself with higher-order thinking, new audience definitions, and new intent characteristics. This opportunity probably comes to your door dressed up as “lower ROAS.” It may be tempting, therefore, to shy away. That’s a mistake. Why? Like what happened when everyone started using mobile phones, that’s where the consumer will be. Ugly early numbers shouldn’t blind us to the imperatives associated with scale. See the complete picture of your search visibility. Track, optimize, and win in Google and AI search from one platform. Start Free Trial Get started with When the funnel moves, everything moves Midsized to larger advertisers should step back and reimagine how they approach growth and market impact. There are meaningful opportunities for companies to align more closely with their audiences. This has little to do with AI Max, and everything to do with how LLM-driven research works. Compare how publishers have traditionally assembled consumer personas — often from fragmented behavioral signals — with the much richer context that can emerge from ongoing interactions with an LLM. A net shift up-funnel could follow. Imagine a world where a significant share of Google search sessions takes place within conversational experiences. Your ads will need to show up there, where appropriate. If that happens, your funnel — and your competitors’ — will move with it. Will you be ready? View the full article

Darren Graves will become Big Four firm’s new chief if approved by colleaguesView the full article

If you’ve spent any time on social media lately, it’s easy to believe that video is the be-all and end-all. Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts, TikToks, LinkedIn’s video feed: it’s everywhere, and it feels like every platform is building for it. If you’re looking to build an audience, “more video” is often touted as the answer. But is that true? It turns out — as is often the case with social media — it depends. Video certainly performs best on some platforms, but it’s not quite as cut-and-dried on others. This data comes from our 2026 State of Social Media Engagement report, which analyzed millions of posts across all major platforms. And, at the risk of sounding like a clickbait-y video hook (sorry) — the results might surprise you. While video often gets the spotlight, it’s not always the best path to engagement. Let’s examine how different content types perform on Threads, TikTok, LinkedIn, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest, and Bluesky. Before we dig in, the usual Ts and Cs: The best content for you depends on your target audience. Every audience is different, so there is no one-size-fits-all approach that’s going to work for every social media account. To pinpoint what works best for you, I’d encourage you to start with a social media content strategy and, from there, experiment with different types of content in your social media content calendar. Use the data in this article as a starting point to help you figure out what kind of content is most likely to resonate with your followers. Jump to a section: Key takeaways Best content format by platform — at a glance The best content format on TikTok The best content format on Instagram The best content format on Facebook The best content format on Threads The best content format on LinkedIn The best content format on X The best content format on Pinterest The best content format on Bluesky So, which content format is the best? Key takeawaysLinkedIn carousels (PDF posts) earn a median engagement rate of 21.77% — 196% more than video and 585% more than text posts — the highest of any format across all platforms in this analysis.Instagram carousels drive 109% more engagement per person reached than reels — but reels reach 2.25× more people than single-image posts, making format choice goal-dependent.TikTok video earns 77% more engagement than carousels and photos (3.39% vs. 1.92% median engagement rate).Pinterest video earns 83% more engagement than images (5.75% vs. 3.15%), despite the platform's image-first reputation.Threads video leads engagement at 5.55% — nearly double text posts (2.79%) — on a platform primarily associated with conversation.Facebook is the most format-agnostic platform in this dataset: images, video, and text posts all fall within one percentage point of each other.On X, text leads with a 3.56% median engagement rate — but images have narrowed the gap to just 5%.Reach and engagement often point in opposite directions: the format that reaches the most new people (usually video or reels) is rarely the format that drives the deepest engagement from existing followers (usually carousels).On to the data. Here are the best types of social media content for each platform in 2026. Best content format by platform — at a glance Platform Best format for engagement Engagement rate Runner-up LinkedIn Carousels (PDF posts) 21.77% Video: 7.35% Pinterest Video 5.75% Images: 3.15% Threads Video 5.55% Images: 4.55% Instagram Carousels 6.9%* Single images: 4.4%* Facebook Images 5.20% Video: 4.84% TikTok Video 3.39% Carousels/photos: 1.92% X Text 3.56% Images: 3.40% Bluesky Video 5 interactions† Images: 4 interactions† *Instagram engagement rate measured as a percentage of reach. Note: Reels outperform all formats for reach — 2.25× more than single-image posts. †Bluesky uses median total interactions rather than engagement rate; data is early-stage. ✨Did you know? Whether it's a video, carousel, image or text-post, you can schedule it right in Buffer! Get started for freeThe best content format on TikTokOn TikTok, video earns a median engagement rate of 3.39% — 77% higher than carousels and photo posts — making it the clear top-performing format on the platform. To say that video reigns supreme on TikTok feels a bit like stating the obvious. The short-form video-sharing platform is, after all, just that. Despite TikTok introducing carousels (multi-photo posts) in recent years, videos are still the TikTok algorithm's bread and butter. What's interesting is how much of a gap remains between the two formats. In this analysis, we measured success by median engagement rate. We found that videos pulled well ahead of carousels and photo posts. Here's a closer look at the numbers: 🏅 Videos claimed the top spot, earning a median engagement rate of 3.39% — 77% higher than carousels and photo posts at 1.92%.🥈 Carousels and photos placed second, but with a significant gap behind video.If you're aiming for engagement on TikTok, video isn't just a good bet — it's a significantly better one. 💡Using the median (middle value) rather than the average helps give a more realistic picture of how content performs for most creators and brands, without extreme outliers distorting the numbers.⏰Read more → The Best Time to Post on TikTokThe best content format on InstagramIt often feels like Instagram has gone all-in on video, with Instagram Reels getting their own discovery feed and even a dedicated video editing app. But our latest data says something different: carousels lead the platform with a 6.9% median engagement rate — higher than reels, single images, and stories. However, performance looks completely different when you look at reach, rather than engagement rate. Here's the engagement picture first. We looked at median engagement rate as a percentage of reach — in other words, how many of the people who saw your post actually interacted with it. 🏅 Carousels led the way, with a median engagement rate of 6.9% — the highest of any format on the platform.🥈 Stories came in second at 5.1%, though the sample size here is small (n=520), so treat that one with caution.🥉 Single images followed in third at 4.4%.4️⃣ Reels landed last, with a median engagement rate of 3.3%.But wait! cue video rewind sound effect This analysis is not the whole story. Here, we measured engagement rate. But reels are often optimized for views rather than these kinds of interactions, so a lower engagement rate doesn't necessarily mean reels aren't working. It may just mean people are consuming them differently. Also, the format breakdown above doesn't capture the full picture, because reach and engagement point in different directions on Instagram. A separate analysis of 4M+ posts published via Buffer between January 2022 and October 2024 showed us that: Reels tend to get the most reach Reels vs carousels: 1.36× the reach (+36%)Reels vs single-image posts: 2.25x the reach (+125%)Instagram has a dedicated reels discovery tab, so reels have a built-in advantage for reaching people who don't already follow you — formats that live only in the regular feed don't get that same boost. Carousels keep people on the post longer, meaning more chances to save, share, and comment, and potentially multiple chances to reappear in-feed. It's a bit like Instagram is two different platforms in one, depending on where you post your content. And which 'platform' you choose depends on the goal of your content. Fascinating, right? So while reels are great for discoverability (and getting more followers on Instagram), if your goal is deeper engagement from your existing audience, carousels might deserve more space in your content plan. The "best format on Instagram" has no single answer — it really depends on your goals. The short version: use Instagram Reels when you want to reach people who don't follow you yet, and carousels when you want to deepen engagement with the audience you already have. ⏰Read more → The Best Time to Post on Instagram in 2026The best content format on FacebookOn old faithful Facebook, images still lead at 5.2% — but the real story is how close the race has become. Images, videos, and text posts are all clustered within one percentage point of each other. Here's a look at the numbers: 🏅 Images took first place for engagement rate on Facebook at 5.2%, edging out the other formats.🥈 Videos followed closely in second at 4.84% — only 7% behind images.🥉 Text posts were close behind at 4.76%, just 9% below images.4️⃣ Posts with links came in last at 4.43%, drawing the lowest engagement of all content types on the platform.The really notable thing here isn't who won, but rather, it's how close the race has become. The clearest signal in this data is actually at the bottom: links continue to underperform everything else, which fits with the broader trend toward zero-click content. Platforms and their users increasingly prefer to stay put. ⏰Read more → Best Time to Post on Facebook in 2026The best content format on ThreadsThreads surprised me in our last analysis — and it's done it again, just in a different direction. This time, video has taken the top spot with a 5.55% median engagement rate, up from second place in our previous data. The numbers: 🏅 Videos claimed first place for engagement rate on Threads at 5.55% — 22% ahead of images and nearly double text posts.🥈 Images followed in second at 4.55%, still well ahead of the text-based formats.🥉 Text posts landed in third at 2.79%, with 19% more engagement than link posts.4️⃣ Posts with links came in last at 2.34%.What I find most interesting here is the continued gap between visuals (video and images) and text or links. For a platform that's built around conversation, visuals seem to stop the scroll more effectively. Worth noting if you're looking to grow on Threads! That said, Threads is still a young platform, and its algorithms are actively evolving — so keep a close eye on your own analytics here, and watch the Buffer blog for updates. ⏰Read more → The Best Time to Post on Threads in 2026The best content format on LinkedInIf you've read any of our previous data studies, this one won't shock you: LinkedIn carousels are still on top. Carousels earned a median engagement rate of 21.77%, 196% more than video and 585% more than text posts. The numbers: 🏅 Carousels (document posts) earned a median engagement rate of 21.77% — 196% more than videos, 234% more than images, and 585% more than text-only posts.🥈 Videos came in second at 7.35%, with 13% more engagement than images.🥉 Images followed in third at 6.52%.4️⃣ Links landed in fourth at 3.81%, drawing more engagement than text-only posts.5️⃣ Text posts came in last at 3.18%.Those carousel numbers are tough to ignore. A 21.77% median engagement rate is exceptional for any platform, let alone one as crowded as LinkedIn has become. That said, the advice I gave last time still stands — LinkedIn is evolving fast, and video is clearly the format the platform is pushing. In an episode of our podcast, Buffer Chat, LinkedIn's Head of Premium Content & Community Strategy, Callie Schweitzer, recommended that creators lean into video. "Video, Video, Video, Video," she said, when I asked for her growth advice. If you have the time and energy to do both, carousels for engagement and video for reach is a solid combination. ⏰Read more → The Best Time to Post on LinkedIn in 2026The best content format on XText still sees the most median engagement on X (formerly Twitter). Even with the social network’s much-talked-about desire to become “the everything app,” X remains true to its microblogging roots. Here's a closer look: 🏅 Text posts saw a median engagement rate of 3.56% — 5% ahead of images, 20% ahead of videos, and 58% ahead of link posts. 🥈 Images followed closely in second at 3.40% — the gap between first and second is now razor-thin. 🥉 Videos landed in third at 2.96%, with 32% more engagement than link posts. 4️⃣ Posts with links came in last at 2.25%.X is fundamentally a text-first platform — hot takes, real-time reactions, and punchy one-liners are what it was built for. But images have crept up to almost match text in engagement rate, which is a shift worth watching. Short video clips can also give you an edge over static posts if you have them. ⏰Read more → The Best Time to Post on Twitter/XThe best content format on PinterestI'll admit — I wasn't expecting this one. Pinterest is basically synonymous with beautiful still images, so video leading on engagement feels counterintuitive. But the numbers are pretty clear. The numbers: 🏅 Videos earned a median engagement rate of 5.75% — 83% higher than images. 🥈 Images followed in second at 3.15%.Pinterest has been investing heavily in video, and the data suggests those efforts are paying off in engagement. If you're using Pinterest primarily as a visual catalogue — which, honestly, is how most people still use it — it might be worth testing a few video pins to see if the engagement bump holds for your audience. The best content format on BlueskyBluesky is the newcomer on this list, and we're working with earlier-stage data — so treat this as a first look rather than a final verdict. That said, the early signal is clear: video leads with a median of 5 interactions, 25% more than images. The numbers: 🏅 Videos earned a median of 5 total interactions — 25% more than images. 🥈 Images followed with a median of 4 interactions. 🥉 Links and text posts tied in last, both earning a median of 3 interactions.A few caveats worth keeping in mind: Bluesky's user base is still relatively small compared to the other platforms in this analysis, and video content on the platform is far less common than images (253K video posts vs. over 2 million image posts in our dataset). We'll be watching this one closely as the platform matures. So, which content format is the best?As I touched on above, that really depends on you and your audience. What works for most creators or brands might not be the sweet spot for you, and it’s always, always worth experimenting with other content types to see what works. Perhaps even more importantly: What is the content format you’re going to be able to create most consistently? In other studies, we’ve found that content performance on all platforms is strongly linked to consistency. (In fact, it might yield as much as 5x more likes, comments, and shares across the board.) So if you’re going to be able to show up more consistently with text-based posts, great — stick to those. Back to video: while it performs well across nearly every platform — and is often really great for reach — it’s not universally the highest engagement format. On some platforms, like LinkedIn and Facebook, carousels and photos steal the show. On X, text still rules. My (probably oversimplified) summary of all these numbers: video is fantastic for reach and discoverability, helping you attract new followers and audiences. Other formats (carousels, images, text) can be better for engagement, deepening connections with your existing audience. Ultimately, the best content format is the one you can produce consistently — and the one that resonates with your target audience. View the full article

When electricity demand is set to surge—say, from a new power-hungry data center—the default response from a utility is often to build a new (and expensive) power plant and other infrastructure. A new report released by a cross-industry coalition called Utilize argues that we can make better use of existing power on the grid instead. Roughly half of the total capacity goes unused most of the time because the grid was built to meet spikes in demand. But as technology has shifted, it’s become easier to unlock that extra power. Smart thermostats, for example, can pre-cool your house when demand is lower. EVs can charge at optimal hours (and, in some cases, send power back to the grid when it’s needed.) Networks of home batteries, being rolled out by startups like Base Power, can also store power when demand is low and then provide it later. Data centers and other large power users can use load flexibility, moving their power use to certain times of the day. Sensors, software, and other new tech can help transmission lines carry more power. A mix of these solutions added together, along with others, can free up more power for new uses, from data centers and factories to millions of drivers charging new EVs. If new electric demand can be added without a major new investment in infrastructure—and more customers are actually sharing the same fixed costs—the cost of electricity can go down for everyone. The same solutions can also make the grid more resilient in extreme weather. “We’ve heard a lot about affordability of electricity in the last year,” said Utilize executive director Ian Magruder at a press conference yesterday. (The group includes members like Google, Carrier, and Tesla.) “We think that there are a lot of solutions being proposed, but our view is that this solution of grid utilization is one of the only near-term solutions that can meaningfully reduce the cost of electricity at scale in short order.” The report modeled what could happen at a typical midsized utility, and then calculated what the approach could mean nationally. By increasing grid utilization by 10% as electricity demand increases, the report says that consumers could save between $110 billion and $170 billion on electric bills over the next decade. That’s on top of savings that people could get from participating in specific utility programs that pay consumers to use appliances or charge EVs at certain times. Virtual power plant programs already exist throughout the country, and there are a variety of ways that they can scale up. Base Power, for example, owns the batteries that it deploys at homes (consumers save on electric bills and have backup power if the grid goes down, while Base Power makes money by selling the power it stores back to utilities). Utilities lead other programs. Hyperscalers could also help. “One interesting emerging model is referred to as the ‘bring your own distributed capacity’ model, where a hyperscaler like Google could come into a utility service territory where the hyperscaler is hoping to develop a new data center, and actually pay for these resources themselves,” says Ryan Hledik, a principal at the Brattle Group, a consultancy that partnered on the report. “For example, pay to expand the utility’s energy efficiency and demand response portfolio beyond what the utility was already planning to do. And then take credit for the new capacity that creates on the system.” Utilize is advocating for new policies that can help grid utilization grow, such as a newly passed bill in Virginia that will require utilities to provide grid utilization metrics to regulators for the first time, and incorporate those metrics into planning. “We see this as an exciting first step, and we think that other states are already interested in following,” Magruder told Fast Company. “We’ve received a lot of inbound [interest] from red, blue, and purple states. This is not a partisan issue.” The U.S. has been slower than some other countries to adopt grid utilization, but there’s more interest now. “I think the urgency hasn’t been there in the past,” says Magruder. “For 25 years, we had very stable load growth in this country. Electricity demand wasn’t meaningfully changing. The price of electricity that Americans pay was relatively stable. We’re in a very different environment now in the last couple of years, and that’s creating new political and economic pressures that are forcing us to think differently.” View the full article

Prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi have hit the headlines—not least because of their role in making some people filthy rich off the back of the Middle Eastern war. But they’ve also drawn the attention of legislators concerned about their growing prominence. Many officials have privately raised concerns about platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi. Arizona’s attorney general has gone further, charging Kalshi with offering what the state alleges are illegal bets on election outcomes. “Kalshi may brand itself as a ‘prediction market,’ but what it’s actually doing is running an illegal gambling operation and taking bets on Arizona elections, both of which violate Arizona law,” said Kris Mayes, the state’s attorney general, in a statement. At the same time, Sen. Chris Murphy and Rep. Greg Casar, both Democrats, have introduced the BETS OFF Act, which would ban wagering on government actions, terrorism, war, assassination, and events where an individual knows or controls the outcome. The recent developments are “wild,” says John Holden, associate professor of business law and ethics at the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. “This is the most aggressive we have seen a state be with going after any of the prediction market sites.” Gaming law specialist lawyer Daniel Wallach adds that “this represents a true inflection point.” For Holden, what stands out is that Arizona is pursuing Kalshi under both general betting laws and specific prohibitions on election wagering. “Election wagering is something that many states prohibit via specific statutes,” he says. That approach could criminalize betting on elections, rather than relying solely on civil enforcement. “This is clearly an escalation,” says Karl Lockhart, assistant professor of law at DePaul University. The strategy itself marks a shift. “Arizona, and actually a lot of states, have these laws that forbid people from gambling on elections,” says Lockhart. Using those statutes to argue that Kalshi cannot serve customers in the state is a novel attempt to rein in the platform. “Arizona is going to be the first to test this, to see if this election betting law approach works,” he says. The companies’ expansion into a wider range of markets has helped regulators begin building a potential case against them—while also underpinning their rapid growth. In December, Kalshi was valued at $11 billion. But that diversification is also part of the companies’ defense. Lockhart says prediction market firms have broadened their offerings by arguing they are tied to real economic outcomes that users may want to hedge, from weather events to government decisions. The goal, he suggests, is to avoid resembling traditional sportsbooks. “They don’t want to just be purely offering sports contracts, because then it seems very, very clear that this is just what they’re doing,” he says. By offering contracts on elections, policy outcomes, and other real-world events, the companies can argue they are something more expansive—and more financially legitimate—than gambling sites. That argument has come under increased scrutiny alongside the BETS OFF Act. “Too often, prediction markets are becoming yet another place for rich and powerful people to cash in on insider information,” said Rep. Casar in a statement. “This bill will put a stop to that.” However, Wallach doesn’t believe this is going to be a perceived problem solved through legislation alone. “This battle over the legality of event contracts is going to be waged in the courts,” he says. More broadly, Arizona’s approach marks a significant escalation in enforcement. “The criminal charges are a different approach from the civil litigation that has been going on in a seemingly ever-growing list of states,” says Holden. “Ultimately, however, it looks like the ends that the state is looking for would be roughly the same, stopping prediction market sites from serving customers in the state, if they are not licensed and registered through the same channels as other gaming companies.” A Kalshi spokesperson said in a statement: “Sadly, a state can file criminal charges on paper-thin arguments. States like Arizona want to individually regulate a nationwide financial exchange, and are trying every trick in the book to do it.” (Polymarket did not respond to Fast Company‘s request for comment.) If Arizona succeeds in applying criminal election-wagering statutes to a federally regulated prediction market, other states may follow. “There are a number of states that have these election wagering specific statutes,” says DePaul’s Lockhart. “So it will be interesting to see if there are other states that are willing to sort of take this escalating the stakes for Kalshi.” For now, he says, it is a “very, very interesting, quickly evolving situation.” View the full article

It’s one of the trickiest questions for any leader, especially in times of transformative change: when to follow the herd and when to go it alone. Since taking the reins as CEO of Tubi in September 2023, Anjali Sud has been finding a unique path for the Fox-owned streamer. The biggest streaming services in the world—Disney+, Netflix, Prime—battle for premium content and subscription dollars. Tubi, meanwhile, has gone all in on free, with its on-demand streaming app and library of more than 300,000 movies and shows. Tubi was the first streamer to add a TikTok FYP-style video scroll to its mobile interface to help users discover new shows by replicating the UX of the social media app that competes for their attention. (Netflix has since launched its own version.) All of this aligns with the streamer’s strategy to target young people who have never had a cable subscription and prefer rabbit holes to broad buckets of content (an approach Sud has called “niche as core”). Tubi’s genre-spanning library includes everything from blockbusters like Jurassic World and originals like the young adult sports romance Sidelined: The QB and Me to content from a growing roster of social media creators including Jubilee, Kinigra Deon, and FunnyMike. It’s working. While user growth seems to have slowed after exploding from 64 million in February 2023 to 97 million by the end of 2024 (Tubi now has more than 100 million users), profitability has arrived earlier than expected. Tubi generated $1.1 billion in fiscal year 2025 revenue and closed its second consecutive EBITDA-profitable quarter at the end of last year, powered by 19% year-over-year revenue growth and a 27% surge in user engagement. I spoke to Sud about how she got here—and how she plans to maintain Tubi’s momentum in the face of ferocious competition. When you left Vimeo for Tubi in 2023, you wanted to redefine the streaming experience, especially for younger users. Take us back to that moment. What was your vision for Tubi? I had spent almost a decade at Vimeo, helping to provide tools for creators to tell their stories. What I learned from that experience was that creators need audience, and it helps if the experience is free. Gen Z, Gen Alpha—they expect that streaming should feel as easy and personalized as when they open up Instagram or TikTok. Where Tubi has approached it a little bit differently is that most of the [free advertising-supported television] platforms out there [e.g., Pluto TV and Roku] were taking live linear television and putting that [up] for free. You open up an episode guide, you scroll through channels, and you watch. We made a different bet: free on-demand streaming. Think of it like a free Netflix. We have Hollywood movies and TV series all on demand. We make original movies, we now have creator content on the platform—all on demand. Audiences want what they want when they want it. Tubi’s fans seem to both love it and gently mock it. I’m curious how you see that. Does Tubi have to be cool? Or does Tubi just have to be thought of with affection, as long as people are using it. I love it [the mocking]! I really do. For years, Tubi, we’ve had a little shade, particularly, I’d say, Hollywood, this questioning of, well— The B movies, yeah. Wait, are you premium? But actually, I’ll tell you, I think the root [question] for consumers is more like: What’s the catch? In a world where streaming prices are dramatically increasing while the amount of original content is going down, you’ve got Tubi improving its value proposition, growing its content library. There is no catch. Andrew Boyle Well, the catch for any ad-supported medium is that the user is the product. You get something for free, advertisers sell to you. Fair enough— we’ve been willing to make that deal for a long time. But let’s go a little bit deeper on the modern economics of free. What does it take to make free TV profitable right now? Scale. It’s a typical flywheel business. The more people we have watching Tubi, the better we are at understanding what they want. That allows us to monetize through ads that engage, which then allows us to reinvest in the content and the experience. If you look at Tubi’s growth in engagement, it’s not coming from a single hit [show or movie], it’s coming from that flywheel. As we get better at that—as that flywheel spins faster and faster—our margins will improve. That profitability and that improvement doesn’t come through cost cutting. It comes through growth. Is there a particular ad tech or feature that you feel has especially high potential? With the latest foundation models and machine learning, there’s still plenty of room to improve personalization. The average person today, when they turn on their television, it takes them over 10 minutes to figure out what to watch. It’s got to go down to seconds, and I do think it’s possible. Something like 20% of us just give up and start scrolling [social media] on our phone. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t get to a point where you’re immediately like: Oh, there’s something here I want to watch. And then with advertisers, it’s the same thing. It’s our job to make ads feel seamless, helpful, and useful to our audiences. We will use AI to analyze every single millisecond of content on our platform and contextually target an ad based on the scene, based on the sentiment and the feeling that the scene is evoking. What’s an example of that? Imagine you’re watching Fast & Furious, and you pause during a car-racing scene. First of all, we should be able to pop up stats and things that are relevant to that scene that you might find interesting. We should also be able to pop up a car ad that has the same sentiment and feeling—and maybe even makes a contextual reference—to the scene you were just watching. Let’s talk about “niche as core,” your strategy of embracing these culturally specific fandoms. First, we’re very committed to continuing to grow our library. Having a large library, it’s a listening tool. It’s a way for us to make sure we aren’t being prescriptive about what audiences want but letting them tell us what they want. We’ve recently added quite a lot of stories from creators. For each individual viewer, we know there’s a paradox of choice. When every viewer opens Tubi, we want to surprise them with something that our data tells us they might like, even though they wouldn’t know it. How do you define success for emerging storytellers on Tubi versus YouTube or TikTok? What is the pitch to them? It’s about expanding the pie for creators. We definitely don’t want to create a scenario where we’re saying: Don’t put your content on YouTube, or only put your content on Tubi. We’re not creating a walled garden. We’re not trying to own their IP or limit their creative freedom. And I think that approach is somewhat unique in the industry. When we talk to creators, what we hear from them—especially the ones that have already built thriving businesses—is that they just want to elevate their storytelling. They want to take more creative risks, they want to graduate into Hollywood in some instances, maybe they want to do more with longer-form formats. And if you look at the direction a lot of the other social platforms are going, they’re moving into even more short form. What is the default business model for creators on Tubi? Do you just calculate engagement and you give them a share of advertising, or is it more complicated than that? It’s actually the same pyramid we use for Hollywood content. We have nonexclusive content. Anyone can just work with us, and we will put their content on Tubi for a revenue share, very similar to what YouTube does. And then we listen. And when we see that our audience is really interested or fans are really interested in more from this creator, we will pay a licensing fee for an exclusive window on Tubi, all the way up to creating and producing and funding an original. You led Vimeo, which evolved into a SaaS company that made tools for creators. What did you leave behind as you transitioned to Tubi, and what did you bring with you? Both are businesses where technology is meeting creativity and storytelling, and you need to find a way to bring those two cultures together. And I actually think it’s very hard. We have to be at the intersection now of Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and Madison Avenue. You have engineers who are deep into ML [machine learning] research, having to work hand in hand with creatives on the Hollywood lot who are producing content, and then you’re having to translate all that to brands. And I think what I’ve learned is that those different cultures tend to be very siloed and there’s a lot of internal friction. How do you solve for that? First, the incentives have to be aligned. At Tubi, we have a single metric that we use to define success, which is viewer engagement. And increasingly, it’ll be viewer passion. It’s not just: Did somebody watch something? It’s: Did they love it? Did they comment on it? And every single [employee] has to feel like they will only succeed and fail if we are all together in that one thing. We just gathered our top 50 leaders in Orlando, Florida, last week, and we spent a lot of time together kind of working through the tensions and the trade-offs. What were some of the main tensions that you worked through? We have a core model and a business that’s working and growing, and yet there are so many other things we can expand into. There are so many different things that seem great, but which of these are just “shiny object syndrome” and which are actually leading indicators that this is the future? There’s no playbook for what Tubi is trying to do. The things we debate the most are: What are we going to stop doing? What are we going to say no to? Yeah, it’s such a hard question. There’s so much that you can do. Technology enables almost anything. But there’s only so much that you should do. We try hard to avoid the “let’s do this because other people are doing it” or because there are a lot of articles right now about how this is the new thing. That’s always a warning sign to me. And in our industry, there’s a lot of that. We try to think only about our audience. Instead of spending hours reading what everyone’s saying on podcasts and who’s buying who or all of that, it’s: How much time are we spending on Reddit or Wattpad understanding what fans are excited about? How much are we educating ourselves and taking the pulse on our culture and what our audience in particular cares about? How does your audience inform your leadership team? A diversity of perspectives leads to better decisions and better businesses. I’ve always been a big believer in that. The leadership team at Tubi is diverse. We are diverse from a gender, ethnicity, and industry perspective. We have the Silicon Valley technologists, we have the social-first brand builders, we have the Hollywood born-and-bred studio people. We just launched what we call the Tubi Builders Program for AI and machine learning. We have engineers right out of college, and we are letting them immediately build stuff on Tubi. We need the people who are AI-native, who are naturally embracing these new tools. And we have to hire people who represent the generation that we serve. If you look at our marketing team, there are a lot of Gen Z, socially native people on that team, as there should be. One of the best ways to have empathy for your customers is to have your customers on your team. Explore the full 2026 list of Fast Company’s Most Innovative Companies, 720 honorees that are reshaping industries and culture. We’ve selected the companies making the biggest impact across 59 categories, including advertising, applied AI, biotech, retail, sustainability, and more. View the full article

More than 50% of K-1 work now hits in a three-month crunch, By CPA Trendlines Go PRO for members-only access to more CPA Trendlines Research. View the full article

More than 50% of K-1 work now hits in a three-month crunch, By CPA Trendlines Go PRO for members-only access to more CPA Trendlines Research. View the full article

Get the scoop on monday.com with this comprehensive review. We'll take a look at its features, pricing and more to help you decide if it's the right tool for you. The post monday.com Review: Features, Pricing, Pros & Cons appeared first on project-management.com. View the full article