Podcasts about atlantic

Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Jennifer Senior has had insomnia for 25 years. Her new piece in The Atlantic, "Why Can't Americans Sleep?," is about her often futile attempts to fall asleep, and about the latest research into insomnia and the medications and therapies used to treat it. Also, TV critic David Bianculli reviews a new HBO Max documentary about Ms. magazine.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

On today's episode of The Right Time, Bomani Jones discusses the New York Knicks hiring Mike Brown and T.J. Watt holding out. Bo begins the show by saying why this Mike Brown hire is interesting (1:59) because the Knicks should win the Eastern Conference with Jayson Tatum and Tyrese Haliburton injured (2:45). Bo continues by explaining why the Knicks do have an unreal amount of pressure on them and the clock is already ticking on this roster (10:28). Transitioning to the NFL, Bo talks about T.J. Watt holding out because he wants a Myles Garrett-type contract (18:25) and that this current Pittsburgh Steelers team reminds him of the Philadelphia Eagles 'Dream Team' because their roster is full of aging vets - which does not work in today's NFL (25:22). And finally, we have another round of If You Haven't Heard stories involving why Americans are sleeping less, billionaires going crazy and Gen Z having less sex (32:15). Then Bomani listens to some voicemails about the craziest thing you've seen someone do to get their money back. (44:34) If You Haven't Heard Contributors: Isabel Fattal, The Atlantic, "How Sleeping Less Became an American Value" https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2025/06/how-sleeping-less-became-an-american-value/683331/ David Frum, The Atlantic, "Why Do Billionaires Go Crazy? "https://www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/archive/2025/06/david-frum-show-tina-brown-iran-nuclear-program/683320/ Jia Tolentino, New Yorker, "Are Young People Having Enough Sex?" https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/06/30/the-case-against-the-sexual-revolution-louise-perry-book-review-the-second-coming-carter-sherman . . . Subscribe to Supercast for Ad-Free Episodes: https://righttime.supercast.com/ Subscribe to The Right Time with Bomani Jones on Spotify, Apple or wherever you get your podcasts and follow the show on Instagram, Twitter, and Tik Tok for all the best moments from the show. Download Full Podcast Here: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6N7fDvgNz2EPDIOm49aj7M?si=FCb5EzTyTYuIy9-fWs4rQA&nd=1&utm_source=hoobe&utm_medium=social Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-right-time-with-bomani-jones/id982639043?utm_source=hoobe&utm_medium=social Follow The Right Time with Bomani Jones on Social Media: http://lnk.to/therighttime Support the Show: Go to zbiotics.com/BOMANI to learn more and get 15% off your first order when you use BOMANI at checkout. Celebrate the progress you've already made. Visit ⁠BetterHelp.com/BOMANI⁠ today to get 10% off your first month. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back Described as having “something approaching rock star status” in her field by The New York Times Magazine, Joan C. Williams is a scholar of social inequality and a prominent public intellectual. Williams is the author of 12 books and 116 academic articles in law, sociology, psychology, medical and management journals. She is the 11th most cited legal scholar both in critical theory and employment law. She is a Sullivan Professor and the Founding Director of the Equality Action Center at UC Law San Francisco, former Founding Director of the Center for WorkLife Law. She has three TED/TEDx talks, including one with over 1.3 million views. Her 2016 essay on why Trump attracted so many non-college voters went viral, with over 3.7 million reads, becoming the most-read article in the 90-year history of Harvard Business Review. She is widely known for “bias interrupters,”—an evidence-based metrics-driven approach to eradicating implicit bias introduced in the Harvard Business Review in 2014. The website  biasinterrupters.org with open-sourced toolkits for individuals and organizations has been accessed over 500,000 times. She was profiled in Financial Times and has published on class dynamics in American politics in The New York Times, Washington Post, The Atlantic, The New Republic, Politico, The Hill, the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere. Her work on class includes her upcoming book Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class – And How to Win Them Back (forthcoming St. Martin's, May 2025) and her critically acclaimed 2017 book White Working Class – one of three books President Biden carried, dog-eared and annotated, during his 2020 presidential campaign, according to the Washington Post. Her work on gender includes What Works for Women at Work: Four Patterns Working Women Need to Know (NYU Press, 2014) and her prize-winning Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What To Do About It (Oxford, 1999). Williams' work helped create the field of work-family studies, modern workplace flexibility policies, and the study of maternal wall bias in sociology. Her work on race includes eight studies documenting how racial and gender bias play out in today's workplaces, including two focused specifically on women of color: Pinning down the Jellyfish: Racial and Gender Bias against Women in Tech (2022) and Double Jeopardy? Gender Bias against Women of Color in STEM (2014). She is a leading voice on diversity, equity, and inclusion; with her team, she has published 39 articles published in Harvard Business Review. In 2014, she launched Bias Interrupters, a data-driven approach to interrupting bias in organizations whose website has been downloaded over half a million times. Williams has received awards in several different fields. For her contributions to the legal profession, she is one of the few people to receive both the American Bar Foundation's Outstanding Scholar Award (2012) and the ABA's Margaret Brent Women Award for Lawyers of Achievement (2006).  For her contributions to the work-family field, she received the Work Life Legacy Award from the Families and Work Institute (2014) and MSOM Responsible Research Award in Operations Management (2022). For her contributions to women's advancement in engineering, she received the President's Award from the Society of Women Engineers (2019). For contributions to psychology, she received the Distinguished Publication Award from the Association for Women in Psychology (2005). Her work has been funded by three National Science Foundation grants, as well as grants from Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the W. W. Kellogg Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. She holds degrees from Yale, Harvard, and MIT as well as an honorary PhD from Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Twice Weekly Happy Hour Hangout's !  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-8770Written by: Dino--DrawsSummary: Divers investigate an anomalous shipwreck at the bottom of the Atlantic.Support the Patreon to see Exploring videos early and vote on new ones!: http://bit.ly/1U9QkPhJoin the Discord!: https://discord.gg/beRYZgbbgPSupport the Series with official Merch!: https://t.co/aH0HApXp7vFollow me on Twitter for updates!: https://twitter.com/TES_ManggListen on Podcasts: https://anchor.fm/theexploringseriesExploring SCP Foundation Playlist: https://bit.ly/2whu8NAExploring Dungeons and Dragons Playlist: https://bit.ly/348IZZuExploring Warhammer 40k Playlist: https://bit.ly/2DoFZguExploring Celtic Mythology Playlist: https://bit.ly/2rTuHLmExploring Norse Mythology Playlist: http://bit.ly/2EAHTdaExploring Elder Scrolls Playlist: http://bit.ly/2fgqQoYExploring Star Wars Playlist: http://bit.ly/2lNtlN0Exploring Middle-Earth Playlist: http://bit.ly/2cGNctyExploring the Cthulhu Mythos Playlist: http://bit.ly/25OI9jYExploring History Playlist: https://bit.ly/2w7XMqMVideo Game Stories Playlist: https://bit.ly/3hhgbqKMy Gaming Channel: youtube.com/user/ManggsLPsThumbnail:Luca Pascal: https://www.artstation.com/lucapascalMusic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eoo0shDkGUContent relating to the SCP Foundation, including the SCP Foundation logo, is licensed under Creative Commons Sharealike 3.0 and all concepts originate from http://www.scp-wiki.net and its authors. This video, being derived from this content, is hereby also released under Creative Commons Sharealike 3.0.

Welcome to the Sustainable Clinical Medicine Podcast! In this episode, Dr. Sarah Smith sits down with Dr. Jessi Gold, psychiatrist, author, and Chief Wellness Officer for the University of Tennessee system. Together, they delve into Dr. Gold's fascinating journey through medicine—from her early days resisting the pull of psychiatry, despite her father's influence, to finding her true calling in supporting healthcare workers and college students through mental health challenges. Dr. Gold shares candid stories about her own mental health struggles, the barriers to seeking help in medicine, and how the COVID-19 pandemic reshaped her clinical focus to frontline healthcare workers. She opens up about recognizing burnout in herself, the subtlety of its symptoms, and the lessons she learned about self-care, connection, and setting boundaries. Along the way, Dr. Gold offers practical strategies for identifying burnout early, building resilience, and creating sustainable ways to care for ourselves and each other in healthcare. If you've ever wondered how to stay well while caring for others—or found yourself feeling isolated in your own struggles—this episode is for you. Join us as Dr. Gold brings wisdom, vulnerability, and humor to the vital conversation about humanity in medicine, and learn simple, actionable steps you can take to support your own mental health. Let's dive in! Here are 3 key takeaways from this episode: Burnout Creeps in Subtly: It's rarely one big event. The signs can include relentless fatigue, irritability with routine work tasks (like inbox overload!), and gradual withdrawal from friends and family. Often, they go unnoticed until things become critical. Check in With Yourself—Intentionally: Gold emphasizes the importance of pausing after tough clinical interactions to genuinely ask yourself, “How am I doing?” This simple self-awareness practice is more powerful than it sounds and is a foundational skill in building emotional resilience. Connection is Medicine, Too: Vulnerability among colleagues and strong social connections are not just “nice to have”—they're protective against burnout. Sharing how you're really doing creates a culture of support and reduces feelings of isolation in tough times. Meet Dr. Jessi Gold: Jessi Gold, MD, MS is the Chief Wellness Officer of the University of Tennessee System and an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center. This inaugural leadership position encompasses all five University of Tennessee campuses, UT Knoxville, UT Chattanooga, UT Southern, UT Martin, and UT Health Science Center, and includes over 62,200 students and 19,0000 faculty and staff. In her clinical practice, she sees healthcare workers, trainees, and young adults in college. Dr. Gold is also a fierce mental health advocate and highly sought-after expert in the media on everything from burnout to celebrity self-disclosure. She has written widely for the popular press, including for The New York Times, The Atlantic, InStyle, Slate, and Self. Her first book, HOW DO YOU FEEL? One Doctor's Search for Humanity in Medicine came out in October 2024 from Simon Element and is a national bestseller. Dr. Gold is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania with a B.A. and M.S in Anthropology, the Yale School of Medicine, and Stanford University Department of Psychiatry, where she served as Chief Resident. You can find her book at https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/How-Do-You-Feel/Jessi-Gold/9781982199777 -------------- Would you like to view a transcript of this episode? Click here **** Charting Champions is a premiere, lifetime access Physician only program that is helping Physicians get home with today's work done. All the proven tools, support and community you need to create time for your life outside of medicine. Learn more at https://www.chartingcoach.ca **** Enjoying this podcast? Please share it with someone who would benefit. Also, don't forget to hit “follow” so you get all the new episodes as soon as they are released. **** Come hang out with me on Facebook or Instagram. Follow me @chartingcoach to get more practical tools to help you create sustainable clinical medicine in your life. **** Questions? Comments? Want to share how this podcast has helped you? Shoot me an email at admin@reachcareercoaching.ca. I would love to hear from you.

Natalia Mehlman Petrzela is a historian of contemporary American politics and culture. She is the author of CLASSROOM WARS: Language, Sex, and the Making of Modern Political Culture (Oxford University Press, 2015), and FIT NATION: The Gains and Pains of America's Exercise Obsession (University of Chicago Press, 2023). She is Executive Producer and host of the podcast EXTREME (BBC/Novel) and host of WELCOME TO YOUR FANTASY ( Pineapple Street Studios/Gimlet). She is a columnist for MSNBC, a frequent media guest expert, public speaker, and contributor to outlets including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and Atlantic.Natalia is a Carnegie Corporation Fellow and a recipient of a National Endowment for the Humanities Public Scholars Grant. She is currently working on two new books, a short history of the school culture wars, and a history of the Hamptons, with historian Neil J. Young. She is executive producer of a documentary series based on FIT NATION, in development with TIME Studios. Natalia began her career as a public school teacher, and she is currently Lead Historian on the Jewish American Hidden Voices curriculum for the New York City Department of Education, forthcoming in 2025.Natalia is Professor of History at The New School, co-founder of the wellness education program Healthclass 2.0, and a Premiere Leader of the mind-body practice intenSati. Her work has been supported by the Spencer, Whiting, Rockefeller, and Mellon Foundations, the Carnegie Corporation, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. She holds a B.A. from Columbia and a Ph.D. from Stanford and lives in New York City.Want a Better Relationship With Your Teen Children? Exercise With Them. -WSJNatalia's WebsiteNatalia's InstagramSupport the show

Tonight's guest comes to us from Athens, Greece. In this firsthand account, Greek radio operator Polo Spentzos recounts an extraordinary encounter in the heart of the Bermuda Triangle. Aboard the merchant vessel M/V Pothiti in the autumn of 1978, Spentzos and his crew witnessed a large glowing cloud-wrapped object and two smaller orbs hovering above the Atlantic, followed by an even stranger phenomenon where time itself began to unravel. Mechanical clocks spun out of control, quartz watches lagged, communication systems failed, and the crew's bodies slowed as if trapped in a gravitational field. In this rare and deeply technical testimony, Spentzos links his experience not to fantasy but to Einstein's relativity and the infamous Twin Paradox, while drawing parallels to other disappearances, such as that of pilot Frederick Valentich. Because Polo's first language is Greek, his testimony has been translated and voiced in English for clarity and accessibility. This is not a story of lights in the sky, but a case of measurable and documented time distortion aboard a real ship, told by the man who lived it.More information on this episode on the podcast website:https://ufochroniclespodcast.com/ep-341-the-m-v-pothiti-incident/Hidden Cults (Promo)It is a documentary-style podcast that digs deep into the world's most extreme, elusive, and explosive fringe groups. Listen on all podcast apps: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Q0kbgXrdzP0TvIk5xylx1Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-cults/id1816362029If you enjoy this podcast, please support the show with a virtual coffee:https://ko-fi.com/ufochroniclespodcastFollow and Subscribe on X to get ad free episodesX: https://x.com/UFOchronpodcast/Want to share your encounter on the show?Email: UFOChronicles@gmail.comOr Fill out Guest Form:https://forms.gle/uGQ8PTVRkcjy4nxS7Podcast Merchandise:https://www.teepublic.com/user/ufo-chronicles-podcastHelp Support UFO CHRONICLES by becoming a Patron:https://patreon.com/UFOChroniclespodcastAll Links for Podcast:https://linktr.ee/UFOChroniclesPodcastThank you for listening!Like share and subscribe it really helps me when people share the show on social media, it means we can reach more people and more witnesses and without your amazing support, it wouldn't be possible.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/ufo-chronicles-podcast--3395068/support.

Shout out to everyone who was in the streets on July 4! Read the recap from around the country here and the report from DC here. We are sharing an interview with Leah Litman, one of the hosts of the Strict Scrutiny podcast and author of the best-selling book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes. Read her article from The Atlantic: How to Hide a Constitutional Crisis and for Democracy Docket: How the Supreme Court Gerrymandered the Law to Serve the GOP.Then, we share the audio from Sunsara Taylor's speech in DC on why and how we can actually win the demand Trump Must Go Now. Connect with the movement at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠RefuseFascism.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, text NOTRUMP to 855-755-1314, follow @RefuseFascism on social media (@RefuseFashizm on TikTok) and our YouTube channel: @Refuse_Fascism. Support:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/refusefascism⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠donate.refusefascism.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Venmo: Refuse-Fascism⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy merch⁠⁠⁠⁠Music for this episode: Penny the Snitch by Ikebe Shakedown

For Washington media, the decade of Donald Trump has proved to be challenging, unnerving and rewarding. On a special edition of Washington Week with The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg speaks with Kara Swisher, one of the great analysts and interpreters of our communications future, about the Trump era and the future of the media.

Not sure if you should listen to this episode? Well, we're talking about 1997's I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER so… what are you waiting for, huh?!! That's right, the 90s Summer slasher - the hit screens in the Fall - is in our hooks, so how does this measure up next to Scream? We get into it all, including an exploration into the origins of the film, Kevin Williamson's first full swing at a slasher flick, a deep dive into Sylvester Stallone movies we both did and didn't get to see, the truly wild plot machinations of IKWYDLS that made us doubt our own sanity, and the secret sauce that this film possesses that we wish every other slasher tried to incorporate!! All this, plus fish stink, hot boys, tank top terror, the healing waters of the Atlantic, Galecki stacks, free-hinged performances, the two big reasons for JLH's success as Julie James, and then the hook brings you back for another edition of Choose Your Own Deathventure!! Cast your nets and catch our latest killer episode today, people!! Part of the BLEAV Network.Get even more episodes exclusively on Patreon! Artwork by Josh Hollis: joshhollis.com Kill By Kill theme by Revenge Body. For the full-length version and more great music, head to revengebodymemphis.bandcamp.com today! Our linker.ee Click here to visit our Dashery/TeePublic shop for killer merch! Join the conversation about any episode on the Facebook Group! Follow us on IG @killbykillpodcast!! Join us on Threads or even Bluesky Check out Gena's newsletter on Ghost!! Check out the films we've covered & what might come soon on Letterboxd!

I'm a big fan of Nathalia (Nat) Holt's books, and am so excited to have the opportunity to talk to her about her new book, The Beast in the Clouds: The Roosevelt Brothers' Deadly Quest to Find the Mythical Giant Panda. I first met Nat when her book Cured: The People Who Defeated HIV came out and I attended a book event at Dartmouth Medical Center. She is so smart and curious and in this episode we will be talking about the process of researching elusive history, where her ideas come from, and who gets to tell what stories. Nathalia Holt's websiteTranscript below!EPISODE 455 - TRANSCRIPTJess LaheyHey, AmWriters! It's Jess Lahey here. I am so excited to talk about a new series that I am putting out there on the Hashtag AmWriting platform called From Soup to Nuts. I interview and work with and mentor an author—a nonfiction author—who has subject matter expertise and a killer idea, frankly, that just knocked me sideways. This author really thinks this is the time and place for this idea. And I agreed, and I asked her—I begged her—if I could mentor her through this process in a series. We're having to work together on agenting and proposal and all the stuff that you've got to do, from soup to nuts, to get a book out into the world. This series, From Soup to Nuts, is subscriber-only. The first episode is free, so you can go back and listen to that. That's for everyone. But if you want to join us for the whole process and learn from her mistakes—and learn from the stuff that I'm working on right now too—you have to subscribe. So consider supporting the Hashtag AmWriting podcast. It helps us bring you stuff like this—these extra series—not to mention the podcast itself. Alright, it's a lot of work. Help us support our podcast and these extra bonus series. By becoming a supporter, you'll get a sticker for it. You'll get your hypothetical, figurative sticker for being a good Hashtag AmWriting.Multiple speakers:Is it recording? Now it's recording, yay. Go ahead. This is the part where I stare blankly at the microphone. I don't remember what I'm supposed to be doing. All right, let's start over. Awkward pause… I'm going to rustle some papers. Okay, now one, two, three.Jess LaheyHey, this is the Hashtag AmWriting podcast. This is the podcast about writing all the things—writing the short things, writing the long things, writing the queries, the proposals, the poetry, the fiction, the nonfiction. This is the podcast actually, at its heart, about getting the work done. I am Jess Lahey. I am your host today. I'm the author of the New York Times best-selling The Gift of Failure and The Addiction Inoculation. And you can find my journalism at The New York Times and The Atlantic and The Washington Post. And today I am interviewing an author I respect deeply. I have known this author since she wrote her first book, which overlapped with some work that my husband does and some work that I had done in a previous career, and she has gone on to have a glorious and enviable career in nonfiction. My dream has always been to be one of those people that can, like, get curious about a topic and then just go off and write about that topic. And this is what she does. So Natalia—NAT—Holt, I am so excited to introduce you to our listeners. They are deep, deep, deep lovers of the nuts and bolts and the geeky details of the writing and the process. So welcome to the Hashtag AmWriting podcast.Nathalia HoltThank you so much. I'm excited to talk to you today.Jess LaheySo we have a book on HIV—the first book, Cured, which is the way that I got to know you. Also, full disclosure, we share an agent. Laurie Abkemeier is our agent, and I think she actually may have introduced us in the first place. Yeah, your first book—yeah, your first book, Cured, about the Berlin patients. Really interesting—if you've never heard of the Berlin patients, listeners, just, just Google it. It's really a fascinating story. I'll go over—I'll go read Cured. Cured is all about the Berlin patients. And then we have The Queens of Animation—the women behind, sort of, the way Disney does what they do. And—and—and then we also have Rise of the Rocket Girls, which is another fascinating book out there about the women behind a lot of the math and the planning and the work that was done to get us into space. And so when I heard about your new book, I'm like, "Oh, NAT's working on a new book. Great! What women are we going to talk about this time?" And it's such a departure for you, and it is such a fascinating topic for you. And, well, for me, it's like—it's deep in my geeky, Jess-book-loving nonfiction zone. Could you tell us a little bit about it and where the idea came from for this book?Nathalia HoltSure. The book is called The Beast in the Clouds, and it's about an expedition that the two eldest sons of President Theodore Roosevelt took in 1928 and 1929. And they went to China and Tibet in search of the giant panda, which at that time was unknown to Western scientists. And even in China, there were very few people that were aware of where this animal lived, what it ate—so little was known. So during this time period, the 1920s, you have all of these expeditions going to China, trying to find this black-and-white bear that no one is really sure exists. It's just a crazy period of history, because you have all of the other bears at that time—even polar bears—were known and even were in zoos. But the panda was not, and many people even thought it would be a ferocious bear. They thought this was going to be, you know, a combination of polar and black bears.Jess LaheyYeah, yeah.Nathalia HoltSo that's what the Roosevelts are going to. And so the expedition ends up being torturous, deadly. They're going through the Himalayas. They're not very well prepared. They lose all their food. They're attacked. They get lost. Just every crazy thing happens to them. But it's also a journey of transformation. They're documenting all of the ecology around them, and it really ends up changing their own worldview. And so it was such a fun book to research and to write. And I spent a lot of time also going into many of the other ex—many of the other members of the expedition, which was—which was fun, and maybe a little bit different than other books in this genre. But yeah, for me, you know, it's scary to be writing a part of history that is very different than what I've done before—but it's also fun.Jess LaheyWhere'd the germ of the idea for the book come from? Because I had never heard this story before. I guess it had just never occurred to me—like, where do we—how do we know about the panda bear?Nathalia HoltYeah, it's not a topic that has been written about much before, and I came across it while I was researching my last book, which is called Wise Gals, and is about women that helped form the CIA. And as part of that book, I was looking into the Roosevelts' role in World War Two. And it's so confusing when you research the Roosevelts, because they all have the same name. It's just Theodore and...Jess LaheyActually, I have to tell you, Tim's a huge fan—my husband, Tim, who you also know, is a big fan and has read a lot about—and he's like, "Well, which Roosevelt?" So you—and I'm like, "Oh, that's a really good question. I don't know which Roosevelt... like, the adventuring ones." He's like, "Well..." [unintelligible]Nathalia HoltYeah, there's so many of them, and they all have the same name. And so as I was trying to parse out son and father—who are both named Kermit Roosevelt and both served in World War Two—I kind of stumbled across this expedition that the elder Kermit Roosevelt had taken. So he and his older brother, Theodore, who were the sons of President Theodore Roosevelt, and so it just kind of—it came from there. Just sort of came from wanting to learn more about it. And I always love a challenge. If there's a topic that's difficult to research, that seems impossible to find anything about—I'm there. I want to know everything.Jess LaheyYeah. So, okay, so here's a—really a question that I—well, first of all, you and I are both research geeks. I just—I have said I could just keep researching books and not actually write the books. I just love that process. So aside from the easy answer, which is Google, like, where do you start with a story that hasn't been told yet? How do you start diving into that story, and where do you find information?Nathalia HoltIt's difficult, and it depends on the topic. For this one, I went through a number of different archives, and that was great. I was able to get old letters that the Roosevelts had. But I really wanted to bring in other voices. I was really, really persistent in my desire to bring in Jack Young, who was this young, 19-year-old, Hawaiian-born translator and naturalist on the trip. And I was fortunate enough that I was able to track down some interviews he had done with another author back in the 1990s, and I just was persistent. I just pleaded until I got these tapes and was able to get all these interviews with him. And then I also contacted his daughter, who lives in Hawaii, and was able to get his unpublished autobiography. And it gives such an interesting perspective, because Jack Young went on and became a very impressive person and really deserves a biography all of his own, but he was also very close friends with the Roosevelts. They had a real connection—a real bond. And you get a different sense of the story when you're hearing it through his descriptions of what it was like, because he is young, and he is sort of really documenting things for the first time. And then, in addition, I was so lucky with this book because I was able to also get the field journals from a scientist that was on the expedition, as well as all the writings from another naturalist. So it was fascinating, because there were so many different accounts of the same events, which really lets you go into detail about what it was like, what people were feeling, what they were seeing. And I don't think I've ever had that before—where I have so many different accounts of the exact same events.Jess LaheyThat's really cool, because it gives you that ability to, you know—if we went with just Jack Young's account, then you've got the Jack Young lens. And as you well know, history gets to be told by certain people, unless someone like you comes along and says, "Oh, wait, this account has not been brought to the surface," whether it's the women who are the animators at Disney, or whether it's the women who are part of NASA. So how do you—if you go into something like this and you have a limited number of perspectives—it sounds like you had a fair number of perspectives going into this, but since the documentation happened—usually tends to happen among the more powerful, the more privileged people—how do you manage getting a full perspective on an event like this expedition when you may have limited perspectives?Nathalia HoltThat is the real challenge, because it's easy to get the Roosevelts' documentation.Jess LaheyYeah, yeah, yeah.Nathalia HoltI have all of their journals, all of their letters. I am able to get into real detail about what this expedition was like for them. Even the difficult parts—for them—they really documented that, and everything has been saved. For the others... it's much more difficult, and it really requires that persistence of being able to get the letters. Being able to get the autobiography was really key, because he goes into so much detail about what things were like. And these interviews that he did were also really, really helpful, because he goes into a lot of his feelings about what it was like to be with the Roosevelts on the expedition, about how he felt… Because his father was born in China, his mother was born in San Francisco, he himself was born in Hawaii—which, at that time, is not part of the U.S.—he feels like he doesn't have a country. He doesn't know where he is. So when he's in China, he can speak all of these languages, but he's still struggling to connect and be able to talk with people, because there are so many dialects.Jess LaheyYeah.Nathalia HoltAnd so to be able to get into what that was like, and how he felt—just gives such a perspective—a different perspective of the expedition than perhaps what is usually had in these kinds of books. And he also talks a lot about the guides on the expedition, which was really interesting. There were a lot of women that were part of this expedition. Half of the guides, who kind of act as Sherpas—they, you know, they carry things, they lead the way, they guide the route, they make camp. And so there are just some great moments with these guides—especially the women guides—where they are just protecting from crazy marauders that have come down and have attacked the group. And lots of great moments like that. That was really interesting to document. And in addition, another thing I was able to get for this book is—there was actually some early video and a lot of photographs that were taken.Jess LaheyOh my goodness.Nathalia HoltBy one of the members. And that is just such an incredible thing—to be looking at video of this expedition in the 1920s—it's just amazing.Jess LaheyOkay, so geek question here, since this is definitely what our listeners like the most. So I haven't laid hands on the book yet, because it's not out yet—did you put photographs in the book? Were you able to get access to photographs, and did you put them in the book? And I ask that because whenever I write a proposal or we're working on a book proposal, we have to indicate whether or not there's going to be artwork, and that changes things in terms of budget, and it changes things in terms of permissions and stuff. And I was curious about—I've never dealt with that side of it before, but maybe you have.Nathalia HoltI have. I've always sent photographs, and I love it. Because I feel like it helps when you read the book—especially a book like this.Jess LaheyYeah.Nathalia HoltYou know, when I'm describing what they look like, and where they are, you want to see it with your own eyes. And so it's really interesting to be able to see those photographs. And I had so many, and it's always a challenge to parse out—who has the permissions? Where do they come from? Finding the photographs—this always takes forever. Fortunately, this particular book was maybe a little bit easier, because a lot of the photographs are out of copyright, that had been published at that time. So that was nice. But yeah, no, it was still just a mess, as it always is. It's always a mess to figure out who do photographs belong to. I feel like I would love to become a lawyer—just for that moment in researching a book.Jess LaheyThat's a whole layer I've never had to go into. And it was easier for me to—rather than just say, "Yeah, I'd like to include this one thing," and then I realized the nightmare that's ahead of me in terms of accessing and getting permission and all that stuff. I'm like, "Eh! Let's just stick with what we got in the print." But, for something like this—and especially when you're writing about, for example, animation, or if you're writing about, you know, this expedition, and there's art available—you know, it sounds like it's really, really worth it for that aspect. I mean, that's definitely something I would want in this book. So I think I know the answer to this question. This is a heavily loaded question, but are you—when it comes to research and it comes to what you include in the book—are you an overwriter or an underwriter? Or do you land pretty much—like, when you're doing your editing, are you like, "Oh no, this was the perfect amount to include?"Nathalia HoltOh, I'm a terrible overwriter.Jess LaheyOh. So am I!Nathalia HoltIt's really a problem. But I worked very hard on this book at cutting, and it was not easy for me, because I do always tend to go way overboard. I'm always over the word count that I'm supposed to be at—with the exception of this book, where I did a very good job of cutting it down and really trying to focus and not, you know, getting too distracted.Jess LaheyYeah, we joke all the time with my other co-hosts and friends that my—like, my history sections in both of my books could have been half of the book or, you know... and all the stuff that ends up on the floor ends up getting told in cocktail parties. You know, "By the way, did you know how many, you know, kegs of beer there were on the ships that came over? I do. Can I share? Because I did all this work and I've got to put it somewhere." And there's this weird—there's this weird line between, "Look, look how thorough I am. Can I have an A+ for how thorough I am?" versus what your reader might actually be interested in. I keep some of my favorite notes from my former editor, and she's like, "Yeah, the reader... no. Reader doesn't care. Not going to care. You know, this may be really fun for you, but maybe not for your reader." So—but I can imagine with something like this, you know, the details of the flora and fauna and all that other stuff—it would be really easy to get off on tangents that are not necessary for the core mission.Nathalia HoltYes, absolutely. But in some ways it was easier than my past books, because it only takes place over a year, which is incredible. Most of my books take place over decades, and the cast of characters is much smaller as well. And unlike some of my past books, I feel like I need to include everyone out of fairness—which is kind of a weird way to approach a book. I don't recommend it. That's not the way to do things. But yeah, if you're really just looking at a few—a handful of people—over a year, it's much easier to stay on track. So that was a good exercise for me.Jess LaheyYeah, there's a—there's a line I love, where David Sedaris talks about the fact that what it takes for him to purchase something is if the clerk at the store has gone to the trouble to take it out of the case, to show it to him, and then he feels like he has to buy it because he—someone went through the trouble. And same thing for me. If, like, someone's going to go to the trouble to be interviewed, then cutting that entire interview, or cutting that whole through line, or whatever that person is a part of, is incredibly painful to do. And then I feel like—I feel obligated. So it's a difficult—it's a difficult balance, you know, between what your readers are going to actually want and what makes for a good book, versus doing right by the people who spent time talking to you. It's a hard balance to strike. Alright, speaking of being in the weeds and geek questions—so I'd love to talk to you a little bit. I was just—I'm mentoring someone for a little series we're doing for this podcast, sort of from soup to nuts, from the beginning of an—from the inception of an idea to getting a book out. And the very first thing she did was send something to me in a Pages document. And I had to say, "Hey, you might want to think about using Word or maybe Google Docs, because, like, I don't have Pages." So—some details about how you work. Number one, do you have a preferred app that you like to write in? Because I'm a Scrivener gal.Nathalia HoltI mean, I prefer Word because I feel like it is the most universal. It's the easiest to send to people... and so that's what I go with.Jess LaheyYeah, I use Scrivener only because it allows me to blank out the rest of the world really easily. Okay, and then organizing your research. This is something—the question of organizing your research, how you know you're done researching and really just need to actually start writing the words—are the two questions that I get the most. Because the research could go—especially on a topic like this—could go on forever. So number one, given this voluminous research that you had, how do you organize your research? Do you use folders on your computer? Do you use folders in—you know—how do you do all of that?Nathalia HoltI do folders on my computer, and then I also do hard copies that I actually keep organized in real folders, which helps me, because then, if I'm going into a specific topic, a lot of times it can be easier to actually hold on to those documents and being able to see them. So I do both. Um, and...Jess LaheyHas everything pretty much been digitized in this area? Do you feel like—or do you have to go into rooms and, like, actually look at paper documents, and sometimes they don't let you scan those? So, you know, how does that work for you?Nathalia Holt Yes, it's very difficult if they don't allow you to photograph them. Usually they do. Usually you can. So I have always had to digitize documents, and there's so many different ways to do it, but now it's much easier just to use your phone than anything else, which is great. Very happy about this development. And yeah, I think—I think maybe that's part of the reason why I do like to print things out is because that's how I was first introduced to the material, so it can be useful for me. But there's way too much material to print everything out. I mean, there's so many hundreds, thousands of pages even. And so it's always just going to be sort of key documents that end up making their way into the actual folders, and then the rest—it's just, you know, organized by topic. Make sure images are separate, by person.Jess LaheySo then, how do you know you're done? Like, how do you feel like you're at a place where I now know enough to come at this from—to come at the storytelling from an informed place?Nathalia HoltThat is really a good question, and I'm not sure I can answer it, because I feel like you're never done. You're always going to be researching. There's no real end to it.Jess LaheyBut you have to start. Well, and this—this takes—this is separate from the question of, like, how much research—how much research do you have to have done for the book proposal? Like take it for example, for example, The Addiction Inoculation, where I needed to learn, really, a whole new area... that was a year-long process just to write the proposal for that book, and then another couple years for the book. So, for me—and I'm very happy to say—I got to ask Michael Pollan this question, and he had the same answer that I feel like is my instinctual answer for this, which is when I start to say, "Oh, I'm starting to repeat. Things are starting to repeat for me," and/or, "Oh, I already knew that," and so I'm not finding out new stuff or encountering things I don't already know at the same rate. It's starting to sort of level off. Then I feel like, "Oh, I've got this sort of, like, you know, mile-high view of the—of the information," and I maybe have enough in my head to start actually being an expert on this thing.Nathalia HoltThat's a good answer. That sounds responsible. I'm not sure that I do that, though. I think for myself, there's not a bad time to start, because it's going to change so much anyway, that for me, I almost feel like it's part of the learning process. Is that you start to write about it, and then as you go along, you realize, "Oh, this is not right. I'm going to change all of this," but it's all just part of helping you move along. And I think even from the beginning, if you start writing even just bits and pieces of how you want to write the scene, you want to think about this or outline it, that can be helpful, and it doesn't matter, because it's all going to change anyway.Jess LaheyThat's true. I actually find I write—the way I write is very specific, in that each topic I'm going to write about in a chapter has a narrative arc, story that goes with it. So I—that narrative arc story gets written first, and then I drop the research in as I go along. But I remember, with The Gift of Failure, a book came out that had a key piece of research that then I had to go back and figure out, "Oh my gosh, this impacts everything." And so I had to figure out how to sort of drop that in. And I couldn't have done it at any other time, because the research didn't exist or I hadn't found it yet. So that's a tough thing to do, is to go back and sort of link the things to something new that you think is important. But the research part is just so much fun for me. Again, I could do that forever and ever and ever. Do you? So the other thing I wanted to ask... and this is selfishly... do you have large boxes in your home of all the research that you feel like you can't get rid of, even though you wrote the book, like, five years ago, ten years ago?Nathalia HoltI do not. I pare down.Jess LaheyYou do?!Nathalia HoltAfter time, yes. It's hard to do, though, because it's hard to throw things away, and I definitely have folders that I keep. They're just full of things that I can never get rid of. And obviously it's all digitized as well, but there are things like that that mean a lot to me, that I can't get rid of.Jess LaheyWell, there's actually—this was a very selfish question, because I actually just went through and finally got rid of a whole bunch of stuff that... I felt like it was at the heart—it was the main research for The Gift of Failure, and I used it to mulch my gardens. I put—and so it was like this metaphorical kind of, like, knowledge feeding the thing that I care about the most right now. And so I used it to mulch all the paths in my gardens and create new garden beds and stuff like that. But I'm always curious about that. Like, I every once in a while see something on, like, "X"—what used to be Twitter—or someplace like that, like, can I get rid of the research from the book I wrote 25 years ago? Or is that too soon? Well, so when exactly does the book come out? Give us your—give us your pub date.Nathalia HoltIt comes out July 1st.Jess LaheyOkay. And I have to say... cover is gorgeous. How did you land on that cover image?Nathalia HoltOh, I really didn't get much say.Jess Lahey Okay.Nathalia HoltThe one thing I—I mean, you know, they have whole people that have skills that do these things, but one thing I was very passionate about was keeping the brothers on the cover in their expedition gear. So originally, the publisher had wanted them to be in suits on the front, and I just hated it. I hated it so much, because I feel like they need to be on the trail. You need to see them as they were on the trail. And so that's one thing I really pushed for. And I was fortunate that they—they listened, and they were okay with that.Jess LaheyWell, I'm just—I mean, this book is going to have such a great place alongside books like The River of Doubt and other, you know, really wonderful books that are about the expositions—that the expeditions that get taken by these historical fixtures—figures. And I'm just—I'm so excited for this book. I'm so happy for you about this book, because it is just—when I started telling people about the topic, they're like, "Oh, I would read that." And I'm like, "I know! Isn't that the best idea?" And that's part of the magic, is coming upon the really cool idea. And so I'm just really, really happy for you and really, really happy about this book and excited for it.Nathalia HoltThank you. Oh, that's so nice to hear, especially because this was a very difficult book to get published. I mean, there was a real moment where I wasn't sure I was going to find someone that would...Jess LaheyWell, can you—I didn't want to ask it. You know, this is—having—doing a podcast like this, where we often talk about the mistakes, we talk about the blunders, we talk about the stuff that went wrong. It can be really, really hard because you don't want to bite the hand that feeds you, or you don't want to, like, make anyone think that this book wasn't anything other than a 100% lovely experience from beginning to end. But I would love to talk about that, if you're willing.Nathalia HoltOh, sure. I don't really have anything bad to say about anyone. I think it's—I think it's understandable that people wouldn't naturally think I would be the best author to write this. I haven't written other books like it, and so it was a difficult book to sell. It wasn't easy, and it definitely crystallized to me how important it was that I write it. I really felt like this was my purpose. I really wanted to write it, and maybe it's good to have that moment, because it really makes it clear that this is something you need to do, even if it's not easy, even if it's tough to find a publisher. And I was fortunate that I did. You know, luckily, there was an editor that—sort of at the last minute—believed in it enough to give it a go. And yeah, it's just—it always feels like a miracle when the book comes to fruition and is actually published. It just seems as if that could never really happen, and this one was a difficult road to get there, for sure.Jess LaheyWell, especially since a big part of the proposal process is trying to convince someone that you're the—you're the person to write this book. And in this case, it's not so much because you're a subject matter expert going into it. It's that you're a really good researcher, and you're a meticulous writer and a meticulous researcher, and most importantly, this story speaks to you. And I think, you know, some of my very favorite nonfiction books that I recommend over and over and over again—narrative nonfiction—it's clear in the reading how excited the author was about the story, and I think that's part of the magic. So I think you're the perfect person to write it. I don't know what they could have—because if you are—if you're fired up about the story... And as an English teacher, and as someone who's had to convince middle school students why they need to be excited about this thing I want to teach them, the enthusiasm of the teacher is part of what can spark the engagement for the learner. So I think that's a really, really important part of any book. Plus, you got to—you're—as an author, you're going to have to be out there talking about this thing, and so you better love the topic, because you're going to be talking about it for ages.Nathalia HoltYes, absolutely. I mean, no matter what, this is many years of your life that's dedicated to a topic. But I think it's—it's a good lesson in general, that you can write in one genre and one kind of book for years, and then it might not be easy, but it is possible to actually break out of that and find other topics and other things you want to write about. We grow. We all change.Jess LaheyYeah, one of my—one of, as our listeners will know, Sarina Bowen, one of my co-hosts and one of my best friends—she's—she has written romance forever and ever and ever, and she's like, "You know what? I want to write a thriller," and it has been a really steep learning curve and also a huge effort to sort of convince people that she can do that too. But it's also really, really satisfying when you show your chops in another area. So—and I had an—as I was going through sort of the details about this book, and reading about this book, I was thinking, you know what this would be really, really good for? An exhibit at someplace like the Field Museum, or like an exhibit of—oh my gosh, that would be incredible. Like, if this is a story that hasn't been told, and there's a lot of art, and there may be video and photographs and all—and journals—man, that would make for an amazing—if anyone out there is listening, that would make for an amazing museum exhibit, I think. And of course, everyone's listening to me.Nathalia HoltThat would be amazing.Jess LaheyEveryone is listening to me...Nathalia Holt Oh, well, they should.Jess LaheyAll right. Well, thank you so, so much. Where can people find you? And is there anything else you'd like to talk about that you're working on or that you're excited about? Besides, you know, just getting this book out into the world?Nathalia HoltYou can find me at nathaliaholt.com and on Instagram and Facebook and X @NathaliaHolt. And yeah, right now I'm pretty much focused on this book. I have something else percolating, but it's still away a good days. So it's the fun research part. Isn't that...?Jess LaheyYou will notice I did not ask you what's next, because to be asked what's next when you haven't even birthed the thing you're working on now can be a little irritating. So as someone who's aware of this inside baseball, I didn't even. Later on—privately—I would love, because I'm a big fan, big excited about your work, and love, love introducing people to your work. So I think—and also, one of the things we talk about a lot on this podcast is having books that are exemplars of good research, of good storytelling. I have a stack of books that I keep near me when I need to dissect something to get at—oh, this person did a really good job with, for example, historical research, or this person did a really good job of using their expert voice, and I need to tap into that today. I think your books are—would be excellent, excellent selections for our listeners, for their pile of exemplars for really well-done research and telling other people's stories—historical stories that occur in a sort of in a modern context. Your books are really dissectible, and I know that's super high-level geek stuff, but they've really helped me become a better storyteller as well.Nathalia HoltThank you. That's so kind of you. I really appreciate that.Jess LaheyAll right, everyone—go get the book, read the book. Don't forget to pre-order, because that really matters to us authors, and don't forget to review it wherever you purchased it, once you have read it. And Nat, thank you so much. And I apologize for calling you Natalia at the top of the hour. I'm so just so used to doing that—Nat. And until next week, everyone, keep your butt in the chair and your head in the game.The Hashtag AmWriting podcast is produced by Andrew Perella. Our intro music, aptly titled Unemployed Monday, was written and played by Max Cohen. Andrew and Max were paid for their time and their creative output—because everyone deserves to be paid for their work. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit amwriting.substack.com/subscribe

The Atlantic's editor in chief Jeffrey Goldberg talks to Ken Casey, frontman for the Celtic punk band Dropkick Murphys, about the time he called out a fan in the audience who was wearing a MAGA shirt. The band has been around for three decades and has its working-class roots in Quincy, Massachusetts. At concerts, the band often dedicates its song “First Class Loser” to Donald Trump, and it sells T-shirts that say “Fighting Nazis since 1996.” Goldberg speaks with Casey about watching his fans and people he loves fall in love with Trump, and about how Democrats might be able to win them back. Get more from your favorite Atlantic voices when you subscribe. You'll enjoy unlimited access to Pulitzer-winning journalism, from clear-eyed analysis and insight on breaking news to fascinating explorations of our world. Atlantic subscribers also get access to exclusive subscriber audio in Apple Podcasts. Subscribe today at theAtlantic.com/listener. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

New England's coastal waters can be beautifully brutal, fueling adventures of an absolute lifetime. Ramsey Russell joins Codfather Charters' Capt. Randy Drago for a discussion that uncovers the raw realities of sea duck hunting the Atlantic. From eiders bombing the decoys in frigid gales to hard-earned lessons that shaped Drago's life as a guide, we get deep into species, strategies, weather, risks, and other need-to-know topics about chasing sea ducks---and a whole lot more. Discover why sea duck hunting ain't for the faint of heart--and why some will never, ever get enough!   ---------- Related Link: Codfather Charters New England Sea Duck Hunting with Randy Drago https://www.getducks.com/ushunts/new-england-sea-duck-hunting/ ----------   Visit the Legendary Brands That Make MOJO's Duck Season Somewhere Podcast Possible: MOJO Outdoors  Alberta Professional Outfitters Society Benelli Shotguns Bow and Arrow Outdoors Ducks Unlimited  Flash Back Decoys GetDucks.com HuntProof Premium Waterfowl App Inukshuk Professional Dog Food  Migra Ammunitions onX Maps  Use code GetDucks25 Sitka Gear Tom Beckbe USHuntList.com   Like what you heard? Let us know! • Tap Subscribe so you never miss an episode. • Drop a rating—it's like a high-five in the duck blind. • Leave a quick comment: What hit home? What made you laugh? What hunt did it remind you of? • Share this episode with a buddy who lives for duck season.   Want to partner? Have or know a story to share? Contact: Ramsey Russell ramsey@getducks.com    

This episode is presented by Create A Video – Helen Lewis wrote a very important piece at The Atlantic about the bubble of misinformation many liberals are trapped in regarding the effectiveness of youth gender medicine. Subscribe to the podcast at: https://ThePetePod.com/ All the links to Pete's Prep are free: https://patreon.com/petekalinershow Media Bias Check: If you choose to subscribe, get 15% off here! Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com Get exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How has the media distorted Israel's response to the October 7 Hamas attacks? In this powerful conversation from AJC Global Forum 2025, award-winning journalist and former AP correspondent Matti Friedman breaks down the media bias, misinformation, and double standards shaping global coverage of Israel. Moderated by AJC Chief Communications and Strategy Officer Belle Etra Yoeli, this episode explores how skewed narratives have taken hold in the media, in a climate of activist journalism. A must-listen for anyone concerned with truth in journalism, Israel advocacy, and combating disinformation in today's media landscape. Take Action: Take 15 seconds and urge your elected leaders to send a clear, united message: We stand with Israel. Take action now. Resources: Global Forum 2025 session with Matti Friedman:: Watch the full video. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: Untold stories of Jews who left or were driven from Arab nations and Iran People of the Pod:  Latest Episodes:  John Spencer's Key Takeaways After the 12-Day War: Air Supremacy, Intelligence, and Deterrence Iran's Secret Nuclear Program and What Comes Next in the Iranian Regime vs. Israel War Why Israel Had No Choice: Inside the Defensive Strike That Shook Iran's Nuclear Program Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript of the Interview: Manya Brachear Pashman: I've had the privilege of interviewing journalism colleague Matti Friedman: twice on this podcast. In 2022, Matti took listeners behind the scenes of Jerusalem's AP bureau where he had worked between 2006 and 2011 and shared some insight on what happens when news outlets try to oversimplify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Then in 2023, I got to sit down with Matti in Jerusalem to talk about his latest book on Leonard Cohen and how the 1973 Yom Kippur War was a turning point both for the singer and for Israel.  Earlier this year, Matti came to New York for AJC Global Forum 2025, and sat down with Belle Yoeli, AJC Chief Strategy and Communications Officer. They rehashed some of what we discussed before, but against an entirely different backdrop: post-October 7. For this week's episode, we bring you a portion of that conversation.  Belle Yoeli:   Hi, everyone. Great to see all of you. Thank you so much for being here. Matti, thank you for being here.  Matti Friedman:   Thanks for having me.  Belle Yoeli:   As you can tell by zero empty seats in this room, you have a lot of fans, and unless you want to open with anything, I'm going to jump right in. Okay, great.  So for those of you who don't know, in September 2024 Matti wrote a piece in The Free Press that is a really great foundation for today's discussion. In When We Started to Lie, Matti, you reflect on two pieces that you had written in 2015 about issues of media coverage of Israel during Operation Protective Edge in 2014. And this piece basically talked about the conclusions you drew and how they've evolved since October 7. We're gonna get to those conclusions, but first, I'm hoping you can describe for everyone what were the issues of media coverage of Israel that you first identified based on the experience in 2014? Matti Friedman:   First of all, thanks so much for having me here, and thanks for all of the amazing work that you guys are doing. So it's a real honor for me. I was a reporter for the AP, between 2006 and the very end of 2011, in Jerusalem. I was a reporter and editor. The AP, of course, as you know, is the American news agency. It's the world's largest news organization, according to the AP, according to Reuters, it's Reuters. One of them is probably right, but it's a big deal in the news world.  And I had an inside view inside one of the biggest AP bureaus. In fact, the AP's biggest International Bureau, which was in Jerusalem. So I can try to sketch the problems that I saw as a reporter there. It would take me seven or eight hours, and apparently we only have four or five hours for this lunch, so I have to keep it short. But I would say there are two main problems. We often get very involved. When we talk about problems with coverage of Israel. We get involved with very micro issues like, you call it a settlement. I call it a neighborhood. Rockets, you know, the Nakba, issues of terminology. But in fact, there are two major problems that are much bigger, and because they're bigger, they're often harder to see. One of the things that I noticed at the Bureau was the scale of coverage of Israel. So at the time that I was at the AP, again, between 2006 and the very end of 2011 we had about 40 full time staffers covering Israel. That's print reporters like me, stills photographers, TV crews. Israel, as most of you probably know, is a very small country. As a percentage of the world's surface, Israel is 1/100 of 1% of the surface of the world, and as a percentage of the land mass of the Arab world, Israel is 1/5 of 1%. 0.2%.  And we had 40 people covering it.  And just as a point of comparison, that was dramatically more people than we had at the time covering China. There are about 10 million people today in Israel proper, in China, there are 1.3 billion. We had more people in Israel than we had in China. We had more people in Israel than we had in India, which is another country of about 1.3 billion people. We had more people in Israel than we had in all of the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa. That's 50 something countries. So we had more people in Israel than we had in all of those countries combined. And sometimes I say that to Jews, I say we covered Israel more than we covered China, and people just stare at me blankly, because it's Israel. So of course, that makes perfect sense.  I happen to think Israel is the most important country in the world because I live there. But if the news is meant to be a rational analysis of events on planet Earth, you cannot cover Israel more than you cover the continent of Africa. It just doesn't make any sense. So one of the things that first jumped out at me– actually, that's making me sound smarter than I am. It didn't jump out at me at first. It took a couple of years. And I just started realizing that it was very strange that the world's largest organization had its largest international bureau in the State of Israel, which is a very small country, very small conflict in numeric terms. And yet there was this intense global focus on it that made people think that it was the most important story in the world. And it definitely occupies a place in the American political imagination that is not comparable to any other international conflict.  So that's one part of the problem. That was the scope, the other part was the context. And it took me a while to figure this out, but the coverage of Israel is framed as an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The conflict is defined in those terms, the Israeli Palestinian conflict, and everyone in this room has heard it discussed in those terms. Sometimes we discuss it in those terms, and that is because the news folks have framed the conflict in those terms. So at the AP bureau in Jerusalem, every single day, we had to write a story that was called, in the jargon of the Bureau, Is-Pals, Israelis, Palestinians. And it was the daily wrap of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. So what Netanyahu said, what Abbas said, rockets, settlers, Hamas, you know, whatever, the problem is that there isn't an Israeli=Palestinian conflict. And I know that sounds crazy, because everyone thinks there is.  And of course, we're seeing conflicts play out in the most tragic way right now in Gaza. But most of Israel's wars have not been fought against Palestinians. Israel has unfortunately fought wars against Egyptians and Jordanians and Lebanese and Iraqis. And Israel's most important enemy at the moment, is Iran, right? The Iranians are not Palestinian. The Iranians are not Arab. They're Muslim, but they're not Arab. So clearly, there is a broader regional conflict that's going on that is not an Israeli Palestinian conflict, and we've seen it in the past year. If we had a satellite in space looking down and just following the paths of ballistic missiles and rockets fired at Israel. Like a photograph of these red trails of rockets fired at Israel. You'd see rockets being fired from Iraq and from Yemen and from Lebanon and from Gaza and from Iran. You'd see the contours of a regional conflict.  And if you understand it's a regional conflict, then you understand the way Israelis see it. There are in the Arab world, 300 million people, almost all of them Muslim. And in one corner of that world, there are 7 million Jews, who are Israelis. And if we zoom out even farther to the level of the Islamic world, we'll see that there are 2 billion people in the Islamic world. There's some argument about the numbers, but it's roughly a quarter of the world's population. And in one corner of that world there, there are 7 million Israeli Jews. The entire Jewish population on planet Earth is a lot smaller than the population of Cairo.  So the idea that this is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Israelis are the stronger side, where Israelis are the dominant actor, and where Israelis are, let's face it, the bad guy in the story, that's a fictional presentation of a story that actually works in a completely different way. So if you take a small story and make it seem big. If you take a complicated regional story and you make it seem like a very small local story involving only Israelis and Palestinians, then you get the highly simplified but very emotive narrative that everyone is being subjected to now. And you get this portrayal of a villainous country called Israel that really looms in the liberal imagination of the West as an embodiment of the worst possible qualities of the age. Belle Yoeli:   Wow. So already you were seeing these issues when you were reporter, earlier on. But like this, some of this was before and since, since productive edge. This is over 10 years ago, and here we are. So October 7 happens. You already know these issues exist. You've identified them. How would you describe because obviously we have a lot of feelings about this, but like, strictly as a journalist, how would you describe the coverage that you've seen since during October 7, in its aftermath? Is it just these issues? Have they? Have they expanded? Are there new issues in play? What's your analysis? Matti Friedman:   The coverage has been great. I really have very I have no criticism of it. I think it's very accurate. I think that I, in a way, I was lucky to have been through what I went through 10 or 15 years ago, and I wasn't blindsided on October 7, as many people were, many people, quite naturally, don't pay close attention to this. And even people who are sympathetic to Israel, I think, were not necessarily convinced that my argument about the press was right. And I think many people thought it was overstated.  And you can read those articles from 2014 one was in tablet and one was in the Atlantic, but it's basically the two chapters of the same argument. And unfortunately, I think that those the essays, they stand up. In fact, if you don't really look at the date of the essays, they kind of seem that they could have been written in the past year and a half. And I'm not happy about that. I think that's and I certainly wrote them in hopes that they would somehow make things better. But the issues that I saw in the press 15 years ago have only been exacerbated since then. And October seven didn't invent the wheel. The issues were pre existing, but it took everything that I saw and kind of supercharged it.  So if I talked about ideological conformity in the bureaus that has been that has become much more extreme. A guy like me, I was hired in 2006 at the AP. I'm an Israeli of center left political leanings. Hiring me was not a problem in 22,006 by the time I left the AP, at the end of 2011 I'm pretty sure someone like me would not have been hired because my views, which are again, very centrist Israeli views, were really beyond the pale by the time that I left the AP, and certainly, and certainly today, the thing has really moved what I saw happening at the AP. And I hate picking on the AP because they were just unfortunate enough to hire me. That was their only error, but what I'm saying about them is true of a whole new. Was heard. It's true of the Times and CNN and the BBC, the news industry really works kind of as a it has a herd mentality. What happened was that news decisions were increasingly being made by people who are not interested in explanatory journalism. They were activists. Activists had moved into the key positions in the Bureau, and they had a very different idea of what press coverage was supposed to do. I would say, and I tried to explain it in that article for the free press, when I approach a news story, when I approach the profession of journalism, the question that I'm asking is, what's going on? That's the question I think you're supposed to ask, what's going on? How can I explain it in a way that's as accurate as as possible? The question that was increasingly being asked was not what's going on. The question was, who does this serve? That's an activist question. So when you look at a story, you don't ask, is it true, or is it not true? You ask, who's it going to help? Is it going to help the good guys, or is it going to help the bad guys?  So if Israel in the story is the villain, then a story that makes Israel seem reasonable, reasonable or rational or sympathetic needs to be played down to the extent possible or made to disappear. And I can give you an example from my own experience.  At the very end of 2008 two reporters in my bureau, people who I know, learned of a very dramatic peace offer that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had made to the Palestinians. So Olmert, who was the prime minister at the time, had made a very far reaching offer that was supposed to see a Palestinian state in all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, with land swaps for territory that Israel was going to retain, and a very far reaching international consortium agreement to run the Old City of Jerusalem. Was a very dramatic. It was so far reaching, I think that Israelis probably wouldn't have supported it. But it was offered to the Palestinian side, and the Palestinians rejected it as insufficient. And two of our reporters knew about this, and they'd seen a map of the offer. And this was obviously a pretty big story for a bureau that had as the thrust of its coverage the peace process.  The two reporters who had the story were ordered to drop it, they were not allowed to cover the story. And there were different explanations. And they didn't, by the way, AP did not publish the story at the time, even though we were the first to have it. Eventually, it kind of came out and in other ways, through other news organizations. But we knew at first. Why were we not allowed to cover it? Because it would have made the Israelis who we were trying to villainize and demonize, it would have made Israel seem like it was trying to solve the conflict on kind of reasonable lines, which, of course, was true at that time. So that story would have upended the thrust of our news coverage. So it had to be made to go away, even though it was true, it would have helped the wrong people. And that question of who does this serve has destroyed, I want to say all, but much, of what used to be mainstream news coverage, and it's not just where Israel is concerned.  You can look at a story like the mental health of President Biden, right. Something's going on with Biden at the end of his term. It's a huge global news story, and the press, by and large, won't touch it, because why? I mean, it's true, right? We're all seeing that it's true, but why can't you touch it? Because it would help the wrong people. It would help the Republicans who in the press are the people who you are not supposed to help.  The origins of COVID, right? We heard one story about that. The true story seems to be a different story. And there are many other examples of stories that are reported because they help the right people, or not reported because they would help the wrong people. And I saw this thinking really come into action in Israel 10 or 15 years ago, and unfortunately, it's really spread to include the whole mainstream press scene and really kill it.  I mean, essentially, anyone interested in trying to get a solid sense of what's going on, we have very few options. There's not a lot, there's not a lot out there. So that's the broader conclusion that I drew from what I thought at the time was just a very small malfunction involving Israel coverage. But Israel coverage ends up being a symptom of something much bigger, as Jews often are the symptom of something much bigger that's going on.  So my problems in the AP bureau 15 years ago were really a kind of maybe a canary in the coal mine, or a whiff of something much bigger that we were all going to see happen, which is the transformation of the important liberal institutions of the west into kind of activist arms of a very radical ideology that has as its goal the transformation of the west into something else. And that's true of the press, and it's true of NGO world, places like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which were one thing 30 years ago and are something very different today. And it's also true of big parts of the academy. It's true of places like Columbia and places like Harvard, they still have the logo, they still have the name, but they serve a different purpose, and I just happen to be on the ground floor of it as a reporter. Belle Yoeli:   So obviously, this concept of who does this serve, and this activist journalism is deeply concerning, and you actually mentioned a couple other areas, academia, obviously we're in that a lot right now in terms of what's going on campus. So I guess a couple of questions on that. First of all, think about this very practically, tachlis, in the day to day.  I'm a journalist, and I go to write about what's happening in Gaza. What would you say is, if you had to throw out a percentage, are all of them aware of this activist journalist tendency? Or you think it's like, like intentional for many of them, or it's sort of they've been educated that way, and it's their worldview in such a way that they don't even know that they're not reporting the news in a very biased way. Does that make sense? Matti Friedman:   Totally. I think that many people in the journalism world today view their job as not as explaining a complicated situation, but as swaying people toward the correct political conclusion. Journalism is power, and the power has to be wielded in support of justice. Now, justice is very slippery, and, you know, choosing who's in the right is very, very slippery, and that's how journalism gets into a lot of trouble. Instead of just trying to explain what's going on and then leave, you're supposed to leave the politics and the activism to other people. Politics and activism are very important.  But unless everyone can agree on what is going on, it's impossible to choose the kind of act, the kind of activism that would be useful. So when the journalists become activists, then no one can understand what's what's going on, because the story itself is fake, and there are many, many examples of it. But you know, returning to what you asked about, about October 7, and reporting post October 7, you can really see it happen. The massacres of October 7 were very problematic for the ideological strain that now controls a lot of the press, because it's counterintuitive. You're not supposed to sympathize with Israelis.  And yet, there were a few weeks after October 7 when they were forced to because the nature of the atrocities were so heinous that they could not be ignored. So you had the press covering what happened on October 7, but you could feel it. As someone who knows that scene, you could feel there was a lot of discomfort. There was a lot of discomfort. It wasn't their comfort zone, and you knew that within a few weeks, maybe a month, it was gonna snap back at the first opportunity.  When did it snap back? In the story of the Al Ahli hospital strike. If you remember that a few weeks in, there's a massive global story that Israel has rocketed Hospital in Gaza and killed about 500 people and and then you can see the kind of the comfort the comfort zone return, because the story that the press is primed to cover is a story about villainous Israelis victimizing innocent Palestinians, and now, now we're back. Okay. Now Israel's rocketing hospital. The problem was that it hadn't happened, and it was that a lot of stories don't happen, and they're allowed to stand.  But this story was so far from the truth that even the people involved couldn't make it work, and it had to be retracted, but it was basically too late. And then as soon as the Israeli ground offensive got into swing in Gaza, then the story really becomes the same old story, which is a story of Israel victimizing Palestinians for no reason. And you'll never see Hamas militants in uniform in Gaza. You just see dead civilians, and you'll see the aftermath of a rocket strike when the, you know, when an Israeli F16 takes out the launcher, but you will never see the strike. Which is the way it's worked in Gaza since the very end of 2008 which is when the first really bad round of violence in Gaza happens, which is when I'm at the AP.  As far as I know, I was the first staffer to erase information from the story, because we were threatened by Hamas, which happened at the very end of 2008. We had a great reporter in Gaza, a Palestinian who had always been really an excellent reporter. We had a detail in a story. The detail was a crucial one. It was that Hamas fighters were dressed as civilians and were being counted as civilians in the death toll, an important thing to know, that went out in an AP story. The reporter called me a few hours later. It was clear that someone had spoken to him, and he told me, I was on the desk in Jerusalem, so I was kind of writing the story from the main bureau in Jerusalem. And he said, Matti, you have to take that detail out of the story. And it was clear that someone had threatened him. I took the detail out of the story. I suggested to our editors that we note in an Editor's Note that we were now complying with Hamas censorship. I was overruled, and from that point in time, the AP, like all of its sister organizations, collaborates with Hamas censorship in Gaza.  What does that mean? You'll see a lot of dead civilians, and you won't see dead militants. You won't have a clear idea of what the Hamas military strategy is. And this is the kicker, the center of the coverage will be a number, a casualty number, that is provided to the press by something called the Gaza health ministry, which is Hamas. And we've been doing that since 2008, and it's a way of basically settling the story before you get into any other information. Because when you put, you know, when you say 50 Palestinians were killed, and one Israeli on a given day, it doesn't matter what else you say. The numbers kind of tell their own story, and it's a way of settling the story with something that sounds like a concrete statistic. And the statistic is being, you know, given to us by one of the combatant sides. But because the reporters sympathize with that side, they're happy to play along. So since 2008, certainly since 2014 when we had another serious war in Gaza, the press has not been covering Gaza, the press has been essentially an amplifier for one of the most poisonous ideologies on Earth. Hamas has figured out how to make the press amplify its messaging rather than covering Hamas. There are no Western reporters in Gaza. All of the reporters in Gaza are Palestinians, and those people fall into three categories. Some of them identify with Hamas. Some of them are intimidated by Hamas and won't cross Hamas, which makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't want to cross Hamas either. So either. And the third category is people who actually belong to Hamas. That's where the information from Gaza is coming from. And if you're credulous, then of course, you're going to get a story that makes Israel look pretty bad. Belle Yoeli:   So this is very depressing. That's okay. It's very helpful, very depressing. But on that note, I would ask you so whether, because you spoke about this problem in terms, of, of course, the coverage of Israel, but that it's it's also more widespread you talk, you spoke about President Biden in your article, you name other examples of how this sort of activist journalism is affecting everything we read. So what should everyone in this room be reading, truly, from your opinion. This is Matti's opinion. But if you want to you want to get information from our news and not activist journalism, obviously The Free Press, perhaps. But are there other sites or outlets that you think are getting this more down the line, or at least better than some, some better than others?  Matti Friedman:   No, it's just The Free Press. No. I mean, it's a question that I also wrestle with. I haven't given up on everyone, and even in publications that have, I think, largely lost the plot, you'll still find good stuff on occasion. So I try to keep my eye on certain reporters whose name I know. I often ask not just on Israel, but on anything, does this reporter speak the language of the country that they're covering? You'd be shocked at how rare that is for Americans. A lot of the people covering Ukraine have no idea what language they speak in Ukraine, and just as someone who covers Israel, I'm aware of the low level of knowledge that many of the Western reporters have. You'll find really good stuff still in the Atlantic. The Atlantic has managed, against steep odds, to maintain its equilibrium amid all this. The New Yorker, unfortunately, less so, but you'll still see, on occasion, things that are good. And there are certain reporters who are, you know, you can trust. Isabel Kirchner, who writes for The New York Times, is an old colleague of mine from the Jerusalem report. She's excellent, and they're just people who are doing their job. But by and large, you have to be very, very suspicious of absolutely everything that you read and see. And I'm not saying that as someone who I'm not happy to say that, and I certainly don't identify with, you know, the term fake news, as it has been pushed by President Trump.  I think that fake news is, you know, for those guys, is an attempt to avoid scrutiny. They're trying to, you know, neuter the watchdog so that they can get away with whatever they want. I don't think that crowd is interested in good press coverage. Unfortunately, the term fake news sticks because it's true. That's why it has worked. And the press, instead of helping people navigate the blizzard of disinformation that we're all in, they've joined it. People who are confused about what's going on, should be able to open up the New York Times or go to the AP and figure out what's going on, but because, and I saw it happen, instead of covering the circus, the reporters became dancing bears in the circus. So no one can make heads or tails of anything. So we need to be very careful.  Most headlines that are out there are out there to generate outrage, because that's the most predictable generator of clicks, which is the, we're in a click economy. So I actually think that the less time you spend following headlines and daily news, the better off you'll be. Because you can follow the daily news for a year, and by the end of the year, you'll just be deranged. You'll just be crazy and very angry.  If you take that time and use it to read books about, you know, bitten by people who are knowledgeable, or read longer form essays that are, you know, that are obviously less likely to be very simplistic, although not, you know, it's not completely impossible that they will be. I think that's time, that's time better spent. Unfortunately, much of the industry is kind of gone. And we're in an interesting kind of interim moment where it's clear that the old news industry is basically dead and that something new has to happen. And those new things are happening. I mean, The Free Press is part of a new thing that's happening. It's not big enough to really move the needle in a dramatic way yet, but it might be, and I think we all have to hope that new institutions emerge to fill the vacuum.  The old institutions, and I say this with sorrow, and I think that this also might be true of a lot of the academic institutions. They can't be saved. They can't be saved. So if people think that writing an editor, a letter to the editor of the New York Times is going to help. It's not going to help. Sometimes people say, Why don't we just get the top people in the news industry and bring them to Israel and show them the truth? Doesn't help. It's not about knowing or not knowing. They define the profession differently.  So it's not about a lack of information. The institutions have changed, and it's kind of irrevocable at this point, and we need new institutions, and one of them is The Free Press, and it's a great model of what to do when faced with fading institutions. By the way, the greatest model of all time in that regard is Zionism. That's what Zionism is. There's a guy in Vienna in 1890 something, and his moment is incredibly contemporary. There's an amazing biography of Herzl called Herzl by Amos Elon. It's an amazing book. If you haven't read it, you should read it, because his moment in cosmopolitan Vienna sounds exactly like now. It's shockingly current. He's in this friendly city. He's a reporter for the New York Times, basically of the Austro Hungarian empire, and he's assimilated, and he's got a Christmas tree in his house, and his son isn't circumcised, and he thinks everything is basically great. And then the light changes.  He notices that something has changed in Vienna, and the discourse about Jews changes, and like in a Hollywood movie, the light changes. And he doesn't try to he doesn't start a campaign against antisemitism. He doesn't get on social media and kind of rail against unfair coverage. He sits down in a hotel room in Paris and he writes this pamphlet called the Jewish state, and I literally flew from that state yesterday. So there's a Zionist model where you look at a failing world and you think about radical solutions that involve creation. And I think we're there. And I think Herzl's model is a good one at a dark time you need real creativity. Belle Yoeli:   Thank God you found the inspiration there, because I was really, I was really starting to worry. No, in all seriousness, Matti, the saying that these institutions can't be saved. I mean the consequences of this, not just for us as pro-Israel, pro-Jewish advocates, but for our country, for the world, the countries that we come from are tremendous.  And the way we've been dealing with this issue and thinking about how, how can you change hearts and minds of individuals about Israel, about the Jewish people, if everything that they're reading is so damaging and most of what they're reading is so damaging and basically saying there's very little that we can do about that. So I am going to push you to dream big with us. We're an advocacy organization. AJC is an advocacy organization. So if you had unlimited resources, right, if you really wanted to make change in this area, to me, it sounds like you're saying we basically need 15 Free Presses or the new institutions to really take on this way. What would you do? What would you do to try to make it so that news media were more like the old days? Matti Friedman:   Anyone who wants unlimited resources should not go into journalism. I have found that my resources remain limited. I'll give you an answer that is probably not what you're expecting or not what you want here. I think that the fight can't be won. I think that antisemitism can't be defeated. And I think that resources that are poured into it are resources wasted. And of course, I think that people need legal protection, and they need, you know, lawyers who can protect people from discrimination and from defamation. That's very important. But I know that when people are presented with a problem like antisemitism, which is so disturbing and it's really rocking the world of everyone in this room, and certainly, you know, children and grandchildren, you have a problem and you want to address it, right? You have a really bad rash on your arm. You want the rash to go away, and you're willing to do almost anything to make it go away. This has always been with us. It's always been with us.  And you know, we recently celebrated the Seder, and we read in the Seder, in the Haggadah, l'chol dor vador, omdim aleinu l'chaloteinu. Which is, in every generation, they come at us to destroy us. And it's an incredibly depressing worldview. Okay, it's not the way I wanted to see the world when I grew up in Toronto in the 1990s. But in our tradition, we have this idea that this is always gonna be around. And the question is, what do you do? Do you let other people define you? Do you make your identity the fight against the people who hate you? And I think that's a dead end.  This crisis is hitting the Jewish people at a moment when many of us don't know who we are, and I think that's why it's hitting so hard. For my grandfather, who was a standard New York Jew, garment industry, Lower East Side, poor union guy. This would not have shaken him, because he just assumed that this was the world like this. The term Jewish identity was not one he ever heard, because it wasn't an issue or something that had to be taught. So if I had unlimited resources, what I would do is I would make sure that young Jewish people have access to the riches of Jewish civilization, I would, you know, institute a program that would allow any young Jewish person to be fluent in Hebrew by the time they finish college. Why is that so important? Why is that such an amazing key?  Because if you're fluent in Hebrew, you can open a Tanakh, or you can open a prayer book if you want. Or you can watch Fauda or you can get on a plane to Israel and hit on Israeli guys. Hebrew is the key to Jewish life, and if you have it, a whole world will open up. And it's not one that antisemites can interfere with. It does not depend on the goodwill of our neighbors. It's all about us and what we're doing with ourselves. And I think that if you're rooted in Jewish tradition, and I'm not saying becoming religious, I'm just saying, diving into the riches of Jewish tradition, whether it's history or gemara or Israel, or whatever, if you're if you're deep in there enough, then the other stuff doesn't go away, but it becomes less important.  It won't be solved because it can't be solved, but it will fade into the background. And if we make the center of identity the fight against antisemitism, they've won. Why should they be the center of our identity? For a young person who's looking for some way of living or some deep kind of guide to life, the fight against antisemitism is not going to do it, and philanthropy is not going to do it. We come from the wisest and one of the oldest civilizations in the world, and many of us don't know how to open the door to that civilization, and that's in our hands. And if we're not doing it, it's not the fault of the antisemites. It's our own fault. So if I had unlimited resources, which, again, it's not, it's not going to happen unless I make a career change, that's where I would be putting my effort. Internally and not externally.  Belle Yoeli:   You did find the inspiration, though, again, by pushing Jewish identity, and we appreciate that. It's come up a lot in this conversation, this question about how we fight antisemitism, investing in Jewish identity and who we are, and at the same time, what do we do about it? And I think all of you heard Ted in a different context last night, say, we can hold two things, two thoughts at the same time, right? Two things can be true at the same time. And I think for me, what I took out of this, in addition to your excellent insights, is that that's exactly what we have to be doing.  At AJC, we have to be engaging in this advocacy to stand up for the Jewish people and the State of Israel. But that's not the only piece of the puzzle. Of course, we have to be investing in Jewish identity. That's why we bring so many young people to this conference. Of course, we need to be investing in Jewish education. That's not necessarily what AJC is doing, the bulk of our work, but it's a lot of what the Jewish community is doing, and these pieces have to go together. And I want to thank you for raising that up for us, and again, for everything that you said. Thank you all so much for being here. Thank you. Manya Brachear Pashman: If you missed last week's episode, be sure to tune in as John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, breaks down Israel's high-stakes strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and the U.S. decision to enter the fight. 

We're honored to be joined by retired USCG Chief Claude Morrissey—a veteran rescue swimmer with decades of gripping search and rescue tales. From cliffside hoists in Kodiak to extracting F-18 pilots from the Atlantic, Claude brings raw stories, grit, humor, and humility. He shares what it takes to make it through the brutal Rescue Swimmer A-School, the harrowing rescues that shaped his career, and what it's like to fly missions from the Bering Sea to Hurricane Katrina. This one's packed with adrenaline, emotion, and classic “so there I was” storytelling you won't find anywhere else. Stick around as we tease Fig for slacking, honor Claude's incredible service, and try not to get kicked off our recording platform again.

In March, The Atlantic's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, began receiving top secret messages from national security officials in the Trump administration after he'd been inadvertently added to an internal Signal chat. Many of those same officials oversaw recent military strikes against Iran. On this week's More To The Story, host Al Letson sits down with Goldberg to discuss what “Signalgate” taught him about the Trump White House and his concerns for the future of American democracy.Producer: Josh Sanburn, with help from Steven Rascón, Artis Curiskis, and Julia Haney | Editor: Kara McGuirk-Allison | Theme music: Fernando Arruda and Jim Briggs | Digital producer: Nikki Frick | Interim executive producers: Brett Myers and Taki Telonidis | Executive editor: James West | Host: Al Letson  Donate today at Revealnews.org/more Subscribe to our weekly newsletter at Revealnews.org/weekly Follow us on Instagram and Bluesky Listen: In Fallujah, We Destroyed Parts of Ourselves (Reveal)Read: The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans (The Atlantic)Read: All the Ways Trump Officials Are Downplaying the “War Plans” Group Chat (Mother Jones)Read: New Report: Trump Administration Just Got Hit With Another Signal Chat Scandal (Mother Jones) Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

America is turning 250. And we're throwing a yearlong celebration of the greatest country on Earth. The greatest? Yes. The greatest. We realize that's not a popular thing to say these days. Americans have a way of taking this country for granted: a Gallup poll released earlier this week shows that American pride has reached a new low. And the world at large, which is wealthier and freer than it has ever been in history thanks to American power and largesse, often resents us. We get it. As journalists, we spend most of our time finding problems and exposing them. It's what the job calls for. But if you only focus on the negatives, you get a distorted view of reality. As America hits this milestone birthday, it's worthwhile to take a moment to step back and look closely at where we actually are—and the reality of life in America today compared to other times and places. That reality is pretty spectacular. Could Thomas Jefferson and the men gathered in Philadelphia who wrote down the words that made our world—“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”—ever have imagined what their Declaration of Independence would bring? The Constitution. The end of slavery—and the defeat of Hitler. Astonishing wealth and medical breakthroughs. Silicon Valley. The most powerful military in the world. The moon landing. Hollywood. The Hoover Dam. The Statue of Liberty (a gift from France). Actual liberation (a thing we gave France). Humphrey Bogart and Tom Hanks. Josephine Baker and Beyoncé. Hot dogs. Corn dogs. American Chinese food. American Italian food. The Roosevelts and the Kennedys. The Barrymores and the Fondas. Winston Churchill (his mom was from Brooklyn). The Marshall Plan and Thurgood Marshall. Star Wars. Missile-defense shields. Baseball. Football. The military-industrial complex. Freedom of religion. UFO cults. Television. The internet. The Pill. The Pope. The automobile, the airplane, and AI. Jazz and the blues. The polio vaccine and GLP-1s, the UFC and Dolly Parton. The list goes on because it's really, truly endless. Ours is a country where you can hear 800 languages spoken in Queens, drive two hours and end up among the Amish in Pennsylvania. We are 330 million people, from California to New York Island, gathered together as one. Each of those 330 million will tell you that ours is not a perfect country. But we suspect most of them would agree that their lives would not be possible without it. So for the next 12 months, we're going to toast to our freedoms on the page, on this podcast and in real life. And we're doing it the Free Press way: by delving into all of it—the bad and the good and the great, the strange and the wonderful and the wild. And today—on America's 249th birthday—we're kicking off this yearlong event with none other than Akhil Reed Amar. Akhil has a unique understanding of this country—and our Constitution. Akhil is a Democrat who testified on behalf of Brett Kavanaugh, is a member of The Federalist Society, who is pro-choice but also anti-Roe—and these seeming contradictions make him perfectly suited to answer questions about the political and legal polarization we find ourselves in today. Akhil is a constitutional law professor at Yale and the author of the brilliant book The Words That Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760–1840. He also hosts the podcast Amarica's Constitution, and you might recognize his name from his work in The Atlantic. I ask him about the unique history that created our founding document, the state of the country, our political polarization, the American legal system, and what this country means to him. The Free Press earns a commission from any purchases made through all book links in this article. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

-- On the Show: -- David Graham, staff writer at The Atlantic and New York Times bestselling author, joins David to discuss his new book "The Project: How Project 2025 Is Reshaping America" -- The Senate passes Trump's tax-cut bill by gutting Medicaid and the ACA, stripping health coverage from at least 17 million people -- Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski votes yes on Trump's spending bill after securing Alaska funding, then freezes when asked about selling out national healthcare -- The Trump spending bill passes easily despite grassroots resistance, showing how power and pressure remain firmly in Republican hands -- Private sector jobs decline for the first time in over two years, raising fears that Trump's tariffs will deepen the slowdown -- Maria Bartiromo abruptly changes the subject on-air after reporting Trump-era job losses, dodging the bad economic news -- Trump rambles about washing machines, plastic straws, and heavenly water in a series of confused public appearances -- Trump calls for deporting natural-born US citizens he considers undesirable, embracing open authoritarian rhetoric -- Trump threatens to prosecute CNN employees and critics, cheered on by allies like Kristi Noem as he escalates attacks on free speech -- On the Bonus Show: Most Americans think ICE is going "too far," American pride at a new low, Trump's 60 Minutes lawsuit settled, and much more...

Day 1,225.Today, as Donald Trump's administration decides to halt shipments of certain air defence missiles bound for Ukraine, we assess the ramifications for trust in the United States, before hearing the latest domestic stories being reported inside Russia, and speak to a former Kremlin propagandist.Contributors:Francis Dearnley (Executive Editor for Audio). @FrancisDearnley on X.Dominic Nicholls (Associate Editor of Defence). @DomNicholls on X.James Kilner (Foreign Correspondent). @jkjourno on X.With thanks to our guest Andrew Ryvkin.Content Referenced:Gig in Kyiv by British Band Hardwicke Circus: https://www.mezzanine.kyiv.ua/afisha/hardwicke-circusJoin us at Scarborough Fair in Northern England on 9th July:https://scarboroughfair.uk/events/putins-folly-the-war-in-ukraine-three-years-on/ That Time I Was a Russian Propagandist (Andrew in The Atlantic):https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2024/09/russian-propaganda-putin-ukraine-invasion/680021/ Pentagon halting some promised munitions for Ukraine (POLITICO):https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/01/pentagon-munitions-ukraine In June 2025, Ukraine increased electricity exports by 2.5 times (ExPro):https://expro.com.ua/en/tidings/in-june-2025-ukraine-increased-electricity-exports-by-25-times- Germany still weighing Taurus missile supply to Ukraine, Merz says (Kyiv Independent):https://kyivindependent.com/germany-still-weighing-taurus-missile-supply-to-ukraine-merz-says/Learn more about the documentary ‘Kherson: Human Safari':https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-society/4008998-american-journalist-documents-wartime-reality-in-kherson-human-safari.html SIGN UP TO THE NEW ‘UKRAINE: THE LATEST' WEEKLY NEWSLETTER:https://secure.telegraph.co.uk/customer/secure/newsletter/ukraine/ Each week, Dom Nicholls and Francis Dearnley answer your questions, provide recommended reading, and give exclusive analysis and behind-the-scenes insights – plus maps of the frontlines and diagrams of weapons to complement our daily reporting. It's free for everyone, including non-subscribers.Subscribe: telegraph.co.uk/ukrainethelatestEmail: ukrainepod@telegraph.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why do so many kids seem unmotivated at school, and what can we do about it? In this episode of Psychologists Off the Clock, we're taking a look at what's really going on with student engagement, especially during those tricky adolescent years. Our guests, Rebecca Winthrop and Jenny Anderson, co-authors of The Disengaged Teen, join Emily to break it all down. From the four types of learners—the Passenger, Achiever, Resistor, and Explorer—to how we can help kids tap into curiosity and motivation, this conversation is full of eye-opening insights for both parents and educators. They also unpack the pressures of today's achievement culture, the influence of tech and AI, and most importantly, how parents and teachers can support teens in becoming more confident, engaged learners.Listen and Learn: Why Rebecca Winthrop and Jenny Anderson wrote a game-changing book to fix the student disengagement crisisWhy only 4% of teens feel truly engaged in school, and what you can do to change thatWhat true engagement looks like in your teen How boosting your child's engagement in learning can improve grades, motivation, and mental healthWhy the “age of achievement” hoop-jumping is harming your child and how to shift toward true agencyHow your child can shift between four learning modes and how you can help them thriveSpotting if your child's stuck in “passenger mode” and igniting their true learning sparkHow your neurodivergent or struggling child can unlock support and build resilienceHow your well-meaning expectations might be fueling your child's harmful perfectionismTurning your child's “resistor mode” into growth by truly understanding and supporting themWhy your child's curiosity and choices spark real learning skills that grades and rules can't teachHow your curiosity and relationship with your child can transform their learning mindsetResources: The Disengaged Teen: Helping Kids Learn Better, Feel Better, and Live Better:https://bookshop.org/a/30734/9780593727072Jenny's website: https://www.jennywestanderson.org/ Rebecca's website: https://www.rebeccawinthrop.com/Connect with Rebecca on social media: https://www.instagram.com/drrebeccawinthrop/?hl=enhttps://x.com/rebeccawinthrop?lang=enhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/rebecca-winthrop-b36b0617Connect with Jenny on social media: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/jennyandersonnythttps://x.com/jwestanderson?lang=enhttps://www.instagram.com/jennyandersonwrites/?hl=en About Rebecca Winthrop and Jenny AndersonRebecca Winthrop is a leading global authority on education, the director of the Center for Universal Education at Brookings and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. She is dedicated to ensuring that every child has the opportunity to thrive in life, work, and as an engaged citizen. She leads cutting-edge research and initiatives aimed at transforming education systems around the world to better support children's learning and development. Rebecca is a trusted advisor to both school communities and national and international organizations. Her expertise is sought by many including parent networks, schools, district education leaders, the White House, the United Nations, and Fortune 500 companies. Rebecca's work is centered on developing and advocating for evidence-based strategies that bring people together—families, educators, policymakers, and companies—to help children maximize their potential. She holds a PhD from Columbia University's Teachers College, an MA from its School of International and Public Affairs, and a BA from Swarthmore College.Jenny Anderson is an award-winning journalist, author, and speaker with more than 25 years of experience. Her work has appeared in some of the world's leading publications, including The New York Times, where she was on staff for 10 years, TIME, The Atlantic, the Wall Street Journal and Quartz.Related Episodes:369. Good News About Adolescence with Ellen Galinsky344. Differently Wired Kids with Deborah Reber332. Middle School Superpowers with Phyllis Fagell324. Toxic Achievement Culture with Jennifer Wallace319. Autonomy-Supportive Parenting with Emily Edlynn272. Middle School Matters with Phyllis FagellSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today we continue the Summer Echoes Series with a story by Kimberly Elkins. Kimberly is the author of the novel, WHAT IS VISIBLE, which was a New York Times Book Review Editors' Choice and named to several Best of 2014 lists. She's written for The Atlantic, The New York Times, The Iowa Review, The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Review of Books, Glamour, Slice, The Cincinnati Review, and Best New American Voices. She was a Finalist for the National Magazine Award, and has also won a New York Moth StorySlam. You can find her on X @GoodWordGirl. Kimberly's story was originally published in The Cincinnati Review and is the most unique essay I think we've ever gotten. It uses second person point of view and still, it's vulnerable. It's short. It's mighty. It's amazing.Writing Class Radio is hosted by Allison Langer and Andrea Askowitz. Audio production by Matt Cundill, Evan Surminski, Chloe Emond-Lane, and Aiden Glassey at the Sound Off Media Company. Theme music is by Justina Shandler.There's more writing class on our website including stories we study, editing resources, video classes, writing retreats, and live online classes. Join our writing community by following us on Patreon. A transcript of this episode is available here.Check out all the classes we offer on our website, writingclassradio.com.Join the community that comes together for instruction, an excuse to write, and the support from other writers. To learn more, go to www.Patreon.com/writingclassradio. Or sign up HERE for First Draft for a FREE Zoom link.There's no better way to understand ourselves and each other, than by writing and sharing our stories. Everyone has a story. What's yours?

Shoot us a Text.Episode #1085: Today we're diving into a high-stakes Senate budget bill that could end EV credits early, Hyundai's record-breaking U.S. sales run, and Cloudflare's bold move to make AI bots pay to crawl. Show Notes with links:The Senate passed a budget bill by a razor-thin 51-50 vote, with VP JD Vance breaking the tie. The bill, which moves to the House next, packs major implications for automakers and dealers alike.As we covered yesterday, the current version would kill EV tax credits by Sept. 30, 2025.CAFE penalties for fuel economy non-compliance would be eliminated, gutting enforcement.Car loan interest (up to $10,000/year) could be deducted for certain U.S.-built vehicle purchases from 2025-2028.An earlier AI regulation ban, which might've restricted state autonomous vehicle laws, was cut from the final bill.Electrification Coalition: Ending EV credits “would cede control over the future of transportation to China.”Hyundai just posted its best-ever U.S. sales performance in the first half of 2025, powered by strong EV momentum and a major new plant in Georgia. The automaker says this is only the beginning.Hyundai sold 439,280 vehicles in H1 2025, a 10% YoY increase—the most since its 1986 U.S. debut.Q2 and June also set new records with 235K+ (+10%) and 70K (+3%) vehicles sold, respectively.The IONIQ 5 remains a top EV performer with 19,092 units sold YTD; IONIQ 9 logged 1,013 units since May.The new Metaplant in Georgia can build 300K vehicles/year—expandable to 500K—with both IONIQ 5 and IONIQ 9 rolling off the line.With leases as low as $179/month and free home chargers on offer, Hyundai is “building momentum with every mile,” said North America CEO Randy Parker.Cloudflare is positioning to be the premier AI gatekeeper by blocking AI bots by default for new websites and launching a paywall-style marketplace for AI crawlers.New sites on Cloudflare will automatically block AI bots unless given explicit permission.Their new “Pay per Crawl” lets publishers charge bots for different kinds of data use.Condé Nast, TIME, and The Atlantic are on board after seeing steep traffic drops from AI-generated answers.OpenAI bots reportedly scrape 1,700 times per referral, while Anthropic scrapes 73,000 to one. Google is only 14 per referral“This could split the internet,” one analyst said, noting the potential divide between premium and freely scraped content.Join Paul J Daly and Kyle Mountsier every morning for the Automotive State of the Union podcast as they connect the dots across car dealerships, retail trends, emerging tech like AI, and cultural shifts—bringing clarity, speed, and people-first insight to automotive leaders navigating a rapidly changing industry.Get the Daily Push Back email at https://www.asotu.com/ JOIN the conversation on LinkedIn at: https://www.linkedin.com/company/asotu/

Ravi welcomes The Atlantic's Tyler Austin Harper back to the show for a wide-ranging conversation on some of the week's biggest headlines, from the Diddy verdict and the dangers of prosecutorial outreach to Bernie Sanders' recent appearance on Rogan and Trump's escalating legal attacks on the press. They then turn to Zohran Mamdani's win in the New York City mayoral primary and explore what the victory suggests about shifting ideas of political “moderation” and deep divides within Democratic messaging. Finally, Ravi and Tyler dive into Tyler's recent piece, "What We Lose When We're Priced Out of Our Hobbies," reflecting on the value of personal passions and their growing role as a political and social force. -- Leave us a voicemail with your thoughts on the show! 321-200-0570⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Ravi at @RaviMGupta Follow Tyler at @Tyler_A_Harper Listen to Tyler's podcast, Time to Say Goodbye, on Substack: https://goodbye.substack.com/ Notes from this episode are also available on Substack: https://thelostdebate.substack.com/ Follow The Branch at @thebranchmedia Listen to more episodes of Lost Debate on Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-lost-debate/id1591300785 Listen to more episodes of Lost Debate on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7xR9pch9DrQDiZfGB5oF0F

Senate Republicans are racing to get their sprawling bill to the House. The Wall Street Journal’s Richard Rubin joins to explain the financial maneuver Republicans are using to say that their tax-cut extensions will not impact the federal budget. As USAID is absorbed into the State Department, the Washington Post’s Katharine Houreld tells us funding how cuts are hurting people in Sudan. The Trump administration has repurposed an app from the previous administration to encourage migrants to self-deport. The Atlantic’s Nick Miroff has more. Plus, a victim of the attacks in Boulder died, why roads buckle in extreme heat, and how the WNBA is poised to expand. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.

What does a Pixar movie and an article from the Atlantic have in common? Also, the shooting in Idaho....it's evil, not politics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we talk about the NOAA, FEMA, and the SSMIS.We also discuss Arctic ice, satellite resolution, and automated weather observation stations.Recommended Book: Superbloom by Nicholas CarrTranscriptThe National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, is a US scientific and regulatory agency that tackles an array of environmental, climatic, and weather-related issues, alongside its responsibilities managing oceanic ecosystems.So it's in charge of managing fishing protections and making sure endangered species within US waters are taken care of, but it also does scientific exploration—mapping the ocean, for instance—it monitors atmospheric conditions and keeps tabs on the various cycles that influence global and US water, air, and temperature happenings, and it tracks macro- and micro-scale weather events.That latter responsibility means NOAA (which is the modern iteration of several other agencies, including the US Environmental Science Services Administration and the US Weather Bureau) also manages the US National Weather Service, which is the sub-agency that sends out hazardous weather statements when there are severe storms or tornadoes or other weather-related events of note in a given area, and which also provides weather forecast information that local experts on the ground use to make their own predictions.Most of what the National Weather Service puts out is in the public domain, which means anyone can access and use it, free of charge. That's a pretty big deal, because the data they collect and informational products they distribute, including all those hazardous weather statements, are at times life and death, but they're also a big part of what makes standard local weather services possible in the US—they help the FAA and other agencies do their jobs, and they help everyday people understand how hot or cold it's going to be, whether to pack and umbrella for the day, and so on.To accomplish all this, the NOAA and its sub-agencies make use of a bunch of facilities and other tracking resources to collect, aggregate, and interpret all those data points, crunching them and spitting them back out as something intelligible and useful to their many end-users.They've got weather observation stations across the US, many of them automated surface observing stations, which are exactly what they sound like: automated stations that collect data about sky conditions, wind direction and speed, visibility, present weather conditions, temperature, dew point, and so on—most of these are close to airports, as this information is also vital for figuring out if it's safe to fly, and if so, what accommodations pilots should be making for the weather and visibility and such—but they also collect data from smaller weather stations scattered across the country, around 11,000 of them, many operated by volunteers under the auspices of an effort called the Cooperative Observer Program that was established in 1890, and that's paired with another volunteer data-collection effort called the Citizen Weather Observer Program.There are also weather buoys and weather ships lingering across the surface of the ocean and other bodies of water, tracking additional data like sea surface temperature and wave height at various points. And there are weather balloons which collect additional information about happenings further up in the atmosphere, alongside the many satellites in orbit that capture various sorts of data and beam that data down to those who can make use of it.Again, all of this data is collected and crunched and then turned into intelligible outputs for your local weather forecasters, but also the people who run airlines and fly planes, the folks out on boats and ships, people who are managing government agencies, scientists who are doing long-term research on all sorts of things, and everyday people who just want to know if it'll be sunny, how hot it will be, and so on.There's one more major client of the NOAA that's worth noting here, too: the Department of Defense. And that relationship is a big part of what I want to talk about today, because it seems to be at the root of a major curtailing of weather-related data-sharing that was recently announced by the US government, much to the chagrin of the scientific community.—US President Trump has long voiced his skepticism about the NOAA.There have been claims that this disdain is the result of the agency having called him out on some bald-faced lies he told about hurricane projections during his first administration, when he reportedly altered an NOAA hurricane impact projection map with a Sharpie to support a misstatement he had previously made about a hurricane impacting Alabama; the hurricane in question was not anticipated to hit Alabama, Trump said it would, and he later altered a map in order to make it look like he was right, when all the data, and all the experts, say otherwise.Whether that's true or not, the NOAA later released an unsigned statement seeming to support his false assertion, and it's generally understood that the agency was forced to make that statement against the will of its staff and leadership by the then-president.It's also been posited that Trump doesn't care for the NOAA because of their connection with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA.FEMA became the target of several conspiracy theories on the US political right, which allege that liberal lawmakers, including former President Biden, used it as a sort of piggy bank for their personal projects and priorities; the agency provides funding and on-the-ground support for areas that have been impacted by hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, floods, and other such weather-related disasters, but as immigration became more of a focal point of right-leaning and far-right politics in the US, accusations that the Biden administration was using FEMA funds to help immigrants enter and stay in the US grew; there's no evidence this is the case, but that's the nature of conspiracy theories—evidence isn't necessary when something feels true to a big enough group of people.In any event, FEMA is now on the chopping block, the second Trump administration has said it could be dissolved as soon as December of 2025, the biggest changes to the agency coming just after the end of this year's hurricane season, which traditionally ends of November. Trump himself said FEMA would be giving out less money to states recovering from weather disasters, and that a panel he's appointed will figure out exactly how to restructure or replace the agency.To be clear, the president cannot kill off FEMA, only Congress can do that, and they have said they intend to reform the agency by making it easier for disaster survivors to access resources and by moving FEMA from its current position under the Department of Homeland Security into its own thing; a big contrast to Trump's ambitions for the agency, which basically seems to be that FEMA shouldn't do what it currently does, and the states should mostly or exclusively cover disaster costs and provide post-disaster resources, instead of the federal government helping out.So Trump seemingly has a thing against these sorts of agencies, has semi-regularly called climate change a hoax, doesn't seem to have any particular fondness for the idea of the US federal government helping out with local problems, or the local consequences of larger-scale problems like weather disasters, and has acted in a variety of ways to cut funding for science and public service related agencies and efforts across the board.All of that has been pretty fundamental to his platform since his first administration. And while the scientific community has sounded the alarm about these stances, saying what he's planning will put a lot of people and infrastructure at risk, and while this data and these resources are fundamental to reducing the damage, both human and otherwise, caused by such disasters, in the US and globally, to some degree, that doesn't seem to bother this administration, which usually cites cost-cutting as their rationale, but also regularly points at the concept of immigration to justify many of the decisions they make, including some of these ones.So that's the context shaping the perception of an announcement made by the NOAA in the latter-half of June 2025 that the agency would no longer be importing, processing, or distributing data from the Special Sensor Microwave Imager Sounder, or SSMIS system, as of June 30—which was yesterday, if you're listening to this episode on the day it's released.The agency cited recent service changes as their rationale for this cessation, and weather forecasters have been in a tizzy about this, because the SSMIS system is pretty fundamental to what they do, especially when it comes to hurricane forecasting.The SSMIS is a satellite-based system that passively maps the whole world twice a day from space in very, very high resolution, and in addition to hurricane-tracking and other weather-related tasks, it also allows scientists to monitor sea ice in the Arctic and other such long-term projects.The NOAA said that this cessation of service would not impact the quality of hurricane forecasting as we step into the beginning weeks of the traditional Atlantic hurricane season, but non-NOAA scientists and other experts, folks who aren't on the US federal governments' payroll, basically, have said this would blind them in this regard, and that while they can approximate some of the same forecasting powers using other data, it won't be the same, and it won't be nearly as good.This system is the only one that allows scientists to see inside the clouds as hurricanes develop, and before such data was available, hurricane projections were a lot less accurate, and powerful storm systems would often sneak up on unsuspecting areas, because we lacked the heightened resolution and power necessary to make more up-to-the-minute and fine-grained projections.Also, and this is perhaps less of an immediate concern, but might be an even bigger long-term issue than deadly hurricanes, is that there's a more than 40-year-old study that's been tracking changes to polar sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic that will no longer be feasible lacking this data, so everything that's influenced by global water cycles and sea levels, which is basically everything weather- and climate-related, and that means, well, everything on earth could also be impacted by this new, US government-imposed reduced visibility, all of that research is upended, made less useful, and all of us in turn could suffer some pretty significant consequences because we lack that high-resolution understanding of what's going on.What's worse is that this announcement was made just days before this source of data was scheduled to disappear, leaving them without time to cobble together less-good, but serviceable replacements for everything they'll be losing as a consequence of these changes; and again, all of this is happening right at the beginning of hurricane season, so the stakes are very high.Allegations of revenge as a motivation, or speculation that this is part of a larger effort by the Trump administration to systematically dismantle science and the public's ability to get objective information about the world aside, there have also been rumblings that this might have been a Department of Defense decision, since these satellites are operated by the NOAA for the DoD on behalf of the US Space Force, which has ultimate authority over all satellites owned by the government.In practice, that might mean that this is the consequence of the US military, or some facet of the US military, deciding that this information is too precious or dangerous to share broadly—as again, most of this information has been flagged public domain, so anyone can see and use it however they like—or it may be that this has been a miscommunication or the result of someone in the Navy making a decision without realizing the full implications of that decision.As of the day I'm recording this, on the day this data is scheduled to disappear from the public domain, and some reports have indicated it has, indeed, disappeared as scheduled, journalists have been trying to get in touch with the relevant people at the Navy for comment, thus far unsuccessfully, but that outreach and their hopefully eventual contact with those in charge could result in a change in these plans, if it is indeed just a miscommunication or misunderstanding situation.Either way, we'll hopefully know more what happened here, as that could help us understand how safe or vulnerable other major sources of vital data might be under this administration, and/or under the current leadership of the DoD and similar military entities.Show Noteshttps://abcnews.go.com/US/hurricane-season-meteorologists-losing-vital-tool-forecasting/story?id=123305760https://www.npr.org/2025/06/28/nx-s1-5446120/defense-department-cuts-hurricane-ice-weather-satellitehttps://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/06/29/italy-and-spain-bake-in-heatwave-as-cities-issue-red-alerts-and-regions-mull-work-banshttps://www.upi.com/Science_News/2025/06/28/Defense-Department-ends-satellite-data-hurricane-experts/7881751141308/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/28/noaa-cuts-hurricane-forecasting-climatehttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weather-forecasters-lose-crucial-hurricane-detection-microwave-satellite/https://www.kgw.com/article/news/nation-world/noaa-discontinues-data-website-trump-executive-order/507-f40d60d7-fb52-4cb4-a64b-f22bd1100562https://hackaday.com/2025/06/12/end-of-an-era-noaas-polar-sats-wind-down-operations/https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/5357564-trump-cuts-noaa-nasa-farmers-climate-change-food-supply/https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2025/05/14/national-weather-service-vacancies-hurricane-season/https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/us-hurricane-forecasting-cuts-1.7573024https://apnews.com/article/hurricane-season-disaster-weather-doge-fema-noaa-cd215947480de9099a53fe20669bb923https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/05/florida-weatherman-john-morales-funding-cuts-forecastshttps://www.frontiersin.org/journals/remote-sensing/articles/10.3389/frsen.2022.1021781/fullhttps://www.propublica.org/article/fema-grants-trump-emergencieshttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/us/politics/as-fema-shrinks-a-grassroots-disaster-response-is-taking-shape.htmlhttps://www.propublica.org/article/fema-grants-trump-emergencieshttps://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/27/is-alligator-alcatraz-detention-centre-funded-by-florida-hurricane-moneyhttps://www.npr.org/2025/06/26/nx-s1-5430469/faq-fema-eliminationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Atlantic_hurricane_warningshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Dorian%E2%80%93Alabama_controversyhttps://www.wusa9.com/video/weather/dod-stops-providing-noaa-with-satellite-data/65-a35e6409-20ad-4db1-83a1-0b281fcfb38bhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Weather_Servicehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmospheric_Administrationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Hurricane_Center This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

What do a Pixar movie and an article from The Atlantic have in common? Also, the shooting in Idaho….it's evil, not politics.

Send us a textNetflix's gripping documentary Titan: The OceanGate Disaster about the doomed submersible, peels back the layers of innovation, ego, and oversight that led to one of the most haunting maritime tragedies of the modern age. Through exclusive interviews, real-time footage, expert analysis, and chilling reconstructions, the film doesn't just chronicle the ill-fated descent to the Titanic wreck — it exposes a deeper story of blind ambition, ignored warnings, and the seductive pull of legacy. As the world watched the search unfold in real time, this documentary forces viewers to confront the hard questions left behind in the cold silence of the Atlantic.Support the showThe audio clips used in this podcast, including excerpts from movie/series/documentary trailers, are used under the principles of fair use and fair dealing for the purpose of criticism, commentary, and review. All rights to the original trailer content & music belong to the respective copyright holders. DMR (Dewey's Movie Reviews) is an independent production and is not affiliated with or endorsed by any film studios or distributors.

NPR's Rhaina Cohen has taken a close look at friend-powered parenting, joining shared households to see how neighbor-and-friend alliances can break the isolation of modern parenthood. We'll talk about the challenges of communal living and what parents gain—emotionally, practically, even financially—when they raise their kids with their friends. Cohen's recent piece for the Atlantic is “A Grand Experiment in Parenthood and Friendship.” Would you raise your kids with your best pals? Guests: Rhaina Cohen, producer and editor for the NPR Documentary podcast Embedded; author of "The Other Significant Others: Reimagining Life with Friendship at the Center" and the Atlantic piece, "A Grand Experiment in Parenthood and Friendship" Phil Levin, founder, Live Near Friends - helps people live right next door to friends and family Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 1735: Margo Aaron unpacks the psychology behind clickbait headlines, revealing why they're so irresistible and why that matters. She explores the tension between ethical marketing and effective persuasion, challenging creators to consider how attention is earned and what it costs. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://www.thatseemsimportant.com/marketing/clickbait-headlines/ Quotes to ponder: "Clickbait works because it leverages your need to complete the story." "You don't actually want to be tricked, but you do want to be teased." "It's easy to be morally righteous when you're not trying to get people to read your stuff." Episode references: Buzzfeed: https://www.buzzfeed.com/ Upworthy: https://www.upworthy.com/ The Atlantic article on clickbait: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/05/the-early-history-of-clickbait/361850/ Contagious by Jonah Berger: https://jonahberger.com/books/contagious/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jennifer Pastiloff joins Let's Talk Memoir for a conversation about getting out of our own way, practicing curiosity, feeling like we have a right to tell our stories and be creative, finding a way into our work, the yes and, tapping into other art forms, not throwing people under the bus, harnessing the mental space to write, accepting change as a necessary part of living, when “fine” is not fine, putting ourselves out there, sharing deeply, refusing to hide in shame, leaving her marriage, and her new book Proof of Life. Also in this episode:  -genre schmenre -getting past the inner a*shole -when change feels like it will equal death Books mentioned in this episode: The Chronology of Water by Lidia Yuknavitch Reading the Waves by  Lidia Yuknavitch From Under the Truck: A Memoir by Josh Brolin Everyone at This Party Has Two Names by Brad Aaron Modlin Stolen focus by Johann Hari Fired Up by Anna Durand The Creative Act: A Way of Being by Rick Rubin   Jennifer Pastiloff trots the globe as a public speaker and to host her retreats to Italy, as well as her one-of-a-kind workshops, which she has taught to thousands of people all over the world. The author of the popular Substack, also called Proof of Life, she teaches writing and creativity classes called Allow, and workshops called Shame Loss, when she isn't painting and selling her art. She has been featured on Good Morning America, and Katie Couric, and in New York magazine, People, Shape, Health magazine, and other media outlets for her authenticity and unique voice. She is deaf, reads lips, and mishears almost everything, but what she hears is usually funnier (at least she thinks so). The author of the national bestseller On Being Human, Pastiloff lives in Southern California with her son, Charlie Mel. Connect with Jen: Website: JenniferPastiloff.com Substack: https://proofoflifewithjen.substack.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jenpastiloff – Ronit's writing has appeared in The Atlantic, The Rumpus, The New York Times, Poets & Writers, The Iowa Review, Hippocampus, The Washington Post, Writer's Digest, American Literary Review, and elsewhere. Her memoir WHEN SHE COMES BACK about the loss of her mother to the guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and their eventual reconciliation was named Finalist in the 2021 Housatonic Awards Awards, the 2021 Indie Excellence Awards, and was a 2021 Book Riot Best True Crime Book. Her short story collection HOME IS A MADE-UP PLACE won Hidden River Arts' 2020 Eludia Award and the 2023 Page Turner Awards for Short Stories.  She earned an MFA in Nonfiction Writing at Pacific University, is Creative Nonfiction Editor at The Citron Review, and teaches memoir through the University of Washington's Online Continuum Program and also independently. She launched Let's Talk Memoir in 2022, lives in Seattle with her family of people and dogs, and is at work on her next book. More about Ronit: https://ronitplank.com Subscribe to Ronit's Substack: https://substack.com/@ronitplank Follow Ronit: https://www.instagram.com/ronitplank/ https://www.facebook.com/RonitPlank https://bsky.app/profile/ronitplank.bsky.social   Background photo credit: Photo by Patrick Tomasso on Unsplash Headshot photo credit: Sarah Anne Photography Theme music: Isaac Joel, Dead Moll's Fingers

Canada and the Blackface Atlantic: Performing Slavery, Conflict, and Freedom, 1812-1897 (Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2025) traces the origins of theatre, dance, and concert singing in Canada and their connection to British and American song and dance traditions. When theatrical acts first appeared in the late eighteenth century, chattel slavery had transformed into mass entertainment on minstrel stages across the Atlantic world. As railroads and theatres were built, local blackface troupes emerged alongside touring British and American acts. By the 1850s, blackface theatre could be found in remote Western outposts to stages in Central and Maritime Canada. This is one of the first books to connect the rise of Canadian blackface minstrelsy with the emergence of Black singers, and choral groups. It describes how Black performers who assumed minstrelsy's mask remapped plantation slavery on Canadian stages. It begins with the conflicts that shaped North America – the American Revolutionary War, and the War of 1812. Next, it connects these origins with eighteenth-century British immigration, which brought folk dances and masking traditions to North America. From there, it unmasks when and how “Jim Crow” became an Atlantic world sensation, which set the stage for blackface to expand. Finally, it considers how Black acts reimagined the parameters of their own freedom. Find Dr. Thompson on her website and the website of Mapping Ontario's Black Archives, on BlueSky, and on Substack. Find host Sullivan Summer at her website, on Instagram, and on Substack. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

Imagine logging 50,000 miles of solo sailing adventures, including a non-stop circumnavigation of the globe, and a 7800 km paddling journey across Canada from the Pacific to the Atlantic. Or, maybe you're more interested in entrepreneurship and making an impact in the lives of others using technology and artificial intelligence? Or, perhaps you have a desire to be an author?  If so, you're in luck, because in this episode I'm talking with a person who has done all that, and more, the remarkable polymath, Bert terHart.  Bert's certainly living his life in full, so much so it was hard to know where to begin our conversation. He blends exploration with science, and entrepreneurship with adventure, in a variety of unique ways. He shared how all this came about and what inspired him in his pursues. This is a not-to-be-missed episode. #Adventure #livingalifeinfull #sailing #entrepreneurship #ai #artificialintelligence #technology #exploration #climate #oceanography #circumnavigation #Canada #science #citizenscience

Everyone is bound to make a typo in an email. What's interesting though is the reader will often see that typo and alter the way they interpret your message – sometimes in a good way, sometimes in a bad way. Listen to discover how this works. https://www.businessinsider.com/typos-in-emails-2015-5 The science of weather forecasting has come a long way in the last few decades. Interestingly, forecasters are not only improving their accuracy but also how they communicate the information to you and me. With more and more extreme weather (hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, high winds/fires etc.), this becomes more important for everyone. Here to explain how and why is Thomas Weber, former executive editor of TIME who has taught journalism and publishing at Columbia University, New York University and Princeton. He is author of the book Cloud Warriors: Deadly Storms, Climate Chaos―and the Pioneers Creating a Revolution in Weather Forecasting (https://amzn.to/4edBLsY). While we are all human, there are interesting differences between us. Some of those differences, such as height, weight, skin color, even the size of your spleen, are dictated by where you live and where your ancestors came from. Listen as I discuss these amazing ways the human body adapts to its environment with Herman Pontzer. He is a professor of evolutionary anthropology and global health at Duke University whose work has been reported in the New York Times, the BBC, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, and Scientific American. He is author of the book Adaptable: How Your Unique Body Really Works and Why Our Biology Unites Us (https://amzn.to/4nucZsX). If you are keeping a secret right now (even if it is a good secret), it could be a bigger burden on you than you imagine. Listen as I explain why and offer a suggestion on what to do with that secret. https://now.tufts.edu/2012/06/12/how-burdensome-are-secrets Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Arash Azizi is a writer and historian. He is an incoming Postdoctoral Associate and lecturer at Yale University and a contributing writer at the Atlantic. His writings have appeared in numerous other outlets including New York Times, New York Review of Books, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Liberties, Newsweek, New Lines, Haaretz, Daily Beast, Jacobin, Foreign Policy and the Toronto Star. He is the author of “The Shadow Commander: Soleimani, the US and Iran's Global Ambitions” (Oneworld, 2020) and “What Iranians Want: Women, Life, Freedom” (Oneworld, 2024.) He is writing a book on Iran and Israel to be published by Public Affairs (a division of Basic Books.)https://x.com/arash_tehran-------------------------To learn more about psychedelic therapy go to my brother Mehran's page at: https://www.mindbodyintegration.ca/ or to https://www.somaretreats.org for his next retreat.***Masty o Rasty is not responsible for, or condone, the views and opinions expressed by our guests ******مستی و راستی هیچگونه مسولیتی در برابر نظرها و عقاید مهمان‌های برنامه ندارد.***--------Support the showhttps://paypal.me/raamemamiVenmo + Revolut: @KingRaam Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Molly Jong-Fast's new memoir, How to Lose Your Mother, is celebrity memoir meets real literary merit. As fans of Molly's podcast and political commentary, and also because we had Molly's mother, Erica Jong, on the show back in 2023, we were eager to connect with Molly to talk about mother-daughter dynamics, the buzz and controversy this book is getting, and—importantly—opening a vein on the page (in the tradition of Erica Jong). This interview explores betrayal, reclamation, dementia, alcoholism, narcissism, the theme of bad mother/bad daughter, and so much more. As Brooke said, this is the kind of nepo baby memoir she can get behind—so come find out why. Molly Jong‑Fast is a contributing writer at Vanity Fair and a political analyst at MSNBC. She also hosts the wonderful podcast, Fast Politics. She's the author of three previous books—Normal Girl, Girl [Maladjusted], and The Social Climber's Handbook—and has written for The Atlantic, The Daily Beast, Playboy, Glamour, Vogue, and The Forward. Her brand-new memoir, How to Lose Your Mother, just came out this month, and centers among other things her relationship with her mother, the novelist Erica Jong.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

While businesses on both sides of the Atlantic are hoping that the UK-US trade deal - which comes into effect today - will provide a much needed boost, we look at whether Canada can get a breakthrough in talks with their North American neighbour in Washington. Sam Fenwick discusses how backlogs are piling up at major shipping ports across Europe as logistic companies struggle to deal with US president Donald Trump's unpredictable trade policies, while unusually low water levels on the Rhine make it even harder for barges to move goods through Germany and the Netherlands. And have you ever tried to scam a scammer? We find out how an AI bots creator in Australia is tackling the growth of fake calls and text messages. The latest business and finance news from around the world, on the BBC.

In this revealing conversation, freelance journalist and former coach Linda Flanagan describes how youth sports have transformed from neighborhood fun into a $30 billion industry that's reshaping American families. Drawing from her book "Take Back the Game: How Money and Mania Are Ruining Kids' Sports and Why It Matters," Flanagan explores the cultural shifts since the 1970s that have turned children's athletics into high-stakes enterprises demanding extraordinary parental sacrifice.The Parental Pressure Paradox* Parents now spend an average of 202 minutes (over 3 hours) daily on their children's athletics* 36% of families reduce family vacations and struggle to save money due to sports expensesThe College Myth * Only 6-7% of high school athletes go on to play in college, and just 2% of these receive any athletic scholarship money.Red Flags to Watch For in Youth Sports* Family life revolving entirely around one child's sports schedule* Siblings feeling resentful or left behind* Parents' emotional wellbeing tied to their child's athletic performance* Pressure to specialize in one sport before adolescence* Sacrificing family relationships, activities, friendships, and personal interestsFlanagan's controversial but liberating advice: "Flee the bleachers at the middle school gym, skip the tournament at school across town, resuscitate your own interests and relationships instead."This isn't about not caring for your children—it's about showing them that:* Their activities belong to them, not you* Adult life has purpose and joy beyond child-serving* Independence and resilience are valuable life skills* Your wellbeing matters tooThe Bottom LineYouth sports can be wonderful for children when kept in proper perspective. The key is resisting cultural pressures that turn childhood athletics into family-consuming enterprises. By maintaining balance, protecting family relationships, and modeling fulfilling adult lives, parents can help their children enjoy sports without sacrificing everything else that makes life meaningful.Website: lindaflanaganauthor.comResources Mentioned* "Take Back the Game" by Linda Flanagan* Aspen Institute Sports and Society Program research* Beyond Stigma Documentary on Women in Collegiate SportsThanks for listening to The Reflective Mind Podcast and reading A Mind of Her Own! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.About Linda FlanaganLinda Flanagan is a freelance journalist, former cross-country and track coach, and author of "Take Back the Game: How Money and Mania Are Ruining Kids' Sports and Why It Matters." A graduate of Lehigh University with master's degrees from Oxford University and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, she was an analyst for the National Security Program at Harvard University. She is a founding board member of the New York City chapter of the Positive Coaching Alliance, a contributor to Project Play at the Aspen Institute, and a regular writer for NPR's education site MindShift. Her columns on sports have appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, and Runner's World, and she is currently co-producing a documentary series on mental health in collegiate women athletes. (A mother of three and a lifelong athlete, Flanagan lives in Summit with her husband and a small menagerie of pets. She is still floating over Malcolm Gladwell's recent claim that Take Back the Game was one of his favorite books last year.)Dr. Reid on Instagram: @jenreidmd and LinkedIn and her upcoming book, Guilt Free!Also check out Dr. Reid's regular contributions to Psychology Today: Think Like a Shrink.Seeking a mental health provider? Try Psychology TodayNational Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255Dial 988 for mental health crisis supportSAMHSA's National Helpline - 1-800-662-HELP (4357)-a free, confidential, 24/7, 365-day-a-year treatment referral and information service (in English and Spanish) for individuals and families facing mental and/or substance use disorders.Disclaimer:The views expressed on this podcast reflect those of the host and guests, and are not associated with any organization or academic site.The information and other content provided on this podcast or in any linked materials, are not intended and should not be construed as medical advice, nor is the information a substitute for professional medical expertise or treatment. All content, including text, graphics, images and information, contained on or available through this website is for general information purposes only.If you or any other person has a medical concern, you should consult with your health care provider or seek other professional medical treatment. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something that have read on this website, blog or in any linked materials. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your doctor or emergency services (911) immediately. You can also access the National Suicide Help Line at 1-800-273-8255 or call 988 for mental health emergencies. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit amindofherown.substack.com

David A. Graham is a staff writer for The Atlantic and author of The Project: How Project 2025 Is Reshaping America. David joins the Hometown Holler to unpack what Project 2025 actually is, how it's shaping Trump's second term, and the real-world consequences already unfolding for Americans. The conversation also explores the evolution of Trump's rhetoric, why public fear of crime often outpaces reality, the surge of nationwide anti-Trump protests, and why Southern communities may face the next Hurricane alone.

When a schoolteacher's borrowed BBC computer began displaying mysterious messages from a 16th-century scholar and beings from the year 2109, it sparked one of England's most bewildering paranormal cases.Join the DARKNESS SYNDICATE: https://weirddarkness.com/syndicateIN THIS EPISODE: In Victorian London, a grisly murder case involving Maria and Frederick Manning shocked society and caught the attention of Charles Dickens himself. What began as a love triangle turned into a chilling tale of greed, betrayal, and murder, culminating in a public execution that would challenge the very nature of capital punishment in Great Britain. (The Murderous Mannings) *** In 1720, amidst a perilous pirate attack on the Atlantic, a newborn's cry changed the course of destiny. Ocean-Born Mary, christened by buccaneers and gifted with a bolt of green silk, would grow from a maritime legend into a symbol of courage and resilience in colonial New England, her extraordinary birth weaving a tapestry of fact and fiction that continues to captivate imaginations centuries later. (A Pirate's Godchild, Ocean-Born Mary) *** On the morning of June 20, 2001, Andrea Yates shocked the nation by drowning her five children, one by one, in the family bathtub. Years of untreated mental illness, compounded by religious fanaticism and postpartum psychosis, culminated in this unimaginable tragedy. Was it the work of a tortured mind, or something darker at play? (Did The Devil Make Her Do It?) *** Deep in the ancient folds of the Appalachian Mountains, where time seems to slow and shadows linger, legends have taken root for millennia. These peaks have become a breeding ground for supernatural tales that blend seamlessly with the landscape. The sheer age and untamed nature of Appalachia have given birth to a rich tapestry of myths, from the Mothman, to ghosts, to the Devil himself. (Modern Mythology and Ancient Appalachia) *** In the heart of Preston, Ladywell Street is infamous for a chilling spectral presence capable of shifting forms—from eerie footsteps to a blood-soaked apparition known as the Bannister Doll. Once a beautiful young woman, Dolly Bannister met a tragic death at the hands of her father, a punishment for a crime she didn't commit. Now, her restless spirit seeks retribution, haunting the streets and striking fear into anyone who dares to cross her path. (The Haunting of Ladywell Street) *** In 1984, a sleepy English village became the unlikely stage for a mind-bending mystery when a schoolteacher's computer began receiving messages from a man claiming to be from 1546. As past and present collided through a BBC Micro, Ken Webster and his friends found themselves entangled in a web of Tudor English, future prophecies, and inexplicable phenomena that would challenge everything they thought they knew about time and technology. (Ctrl+Alt+1546: The Dodleston Messages Mystery)ABOUT WEIRD DARKNESS: Weird Darkness is a true crime and paranormal podcast narrated by professional award-winning voice actor, Darren Marlar. Seven days per week, Weird Darkness focuses on all thing strange and macabre such as haunted locations, unsolved mysteries, true ghost stories, supernatural manifestations, urban legends, unsolved or cold case murders, conspiracy theories, and more. On Thursdays, this scary stories podcast features horror fiction along with the occasional creepypasta. Weird Darkness has been named one of the “Best 20 Storytellers in Podcasting” by Podcast Business Journal. Listeners have described the show as a cross between “Coast to Coast” with Art Bell, “The Twilight Zone” with Rod Serling, “Unsolved Mysteries” with Robert Stack, and “In Search Of” with Leonard Nimoy.DISCLAIMER: Ads heard during the podcast that are not in my voice are placed by third party agencies outside of my control and should not imply an endorsement by Weird Darkness or myself. *** Stories and content in Weird Darkness can be disturbing for some listeners and intended for mature audiences only. Parental discretion is strongly advised.CHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Lead-In00:01:33.391 = Show Open00:05:27.341 = The Dodleston Messages Mystery00:27:16.141 = The Pirate's Godchild, Ocean-Born Mary00:32:01.707 = The Murderous Mannings00:41:10.624 = Modern Mythology and Ancient Appalachia00:48:42.848 = Did The Devil Make Her Do It?00:59:28.888 = The Haunting of Ladywell Street01:03:06.047 = Show CloseSOURCES AND RESOURCES FROM THE EPISODE…BOOK: “The Vertical Plane” by Ken Webster: https://amzn.to/4drgdH4“Ctrl+Alt+1546: The Dodleston Messages Mystery” source: Tony Walker, Medium: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/3pf7strv“The Murderous Mannings” source: Alexa Baczak, Medium: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8a6sta“The Pirate's Godchild, Ocean-Born Mary” sources: NewEngland.com: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/bdvz9by6; Sea Coast NH: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/3jy3bc3r; New England Historical Society:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p84pzrn“The Haunting of Ladywell Street” source: The Lancashire Post: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yckypttt; Deborah Contessa: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8zkern“Did The Devil Make Her Do It?” by Troy Taylor (used with permission): https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/swtmdth7“Modern Mythology and Ancient Appalachia” source: National Geographic: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yckjkbaw=====(Over time links may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2025, Weird Darkness.=====Originally aired: September 27, 2024NOTE: Some of this content may have been created with assistance from AI tools, but it has been reviewed, edited, narrated, produced, and approved by Darren Marlar, creator and host of Weird Darkness — who, despite popular conspiracy theories, is NOT an AI voice.EPISODE PAGE at WeirdDarkness.com (includes list of sources): https://weirddarkness.com/DodlestonMessages

Telepylos and Homer's Odyssey In Homer's Odyssey, Telepylos is described as the city of the Laestrygonians, a race of giants who ambush Odysseus and his crew. The vivid depiction includes towering cliffs, a narrow harbor entrance, and dramatic landscapes, suggesting a location of strategic maritime importance. Traditionally dismissed as myth, these detailed descriptions raise the question: could Telepylos have been a real place, its memory preserved through oral storytelling? By analyzing Homeric texts alongside physical data from the region between Malta and Sicily, this study investigates the plausibility of identifying Telepylos as a submerged site.Spanning approximately 80 square kilometers, the site lies at a depth of 250 meters between Sicily and Malta and features striking geometric formations. A central mound, comparable in scale to the Great Pyramid of Giza, and an encircling canal—529 meters wide and 50 meters deep—underscore the engineering sophistication of this ancient settlement. These features suggest a city of immense scale and importance, potentially serving as a waypoint for ancient mariners. Through a recalibration of sea-level models using datasets from EMODnet and GEBCO, this study proposes that the Mediterranean basin, isolated from the Atlantic during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), experienced a localized sea-level drop to approximately -250 meters, exposing vast landscapes suitable for human settlement. This stable plateau, lasting nearly 3,000 years, likely provided the conditions for Telepylos and similar civilizations to thrive before a gradual sea-level rise submerged the city by 8,600 BC. Unlike Atlantis, Telepylos's submersion was not sudden but marked by centuries of encroachment as nature slowly reclaimed the city. The findings challenge conventional paradigms about LGM sea levels and ancient Mediterranean civilizations.André Chaisson is a seasoned civil engineering designer with over 25 years of CAD experience, including five years as a senior designer shaping large-scale infrastructure projects. With a knack for crafting plans and maps—honed through work on urban designs, municipal systems, and bathymetric surveys—he built a career grounded in pragmatism. Yet beneath the surface, a lifelong fascination with the mysteries of the past, from Atlantis to the Great Pyramids, simmered quietly. Self-taught with years of college education, including naval architecture, he's now channeling his skills into a bold new chapter. Already, he's uncovered the lost city of Telepylos, a discovery he's determined to bring to the world's attention. With sights set on revealing Atlantis next, André is on a mission to rewrite the history of humankind. Humble yet driven, he aims to spark a renaissance in archaeology, blending meticulous expertise with an adventurer's heart to inspire future exploration.https://grahamhancock.com/author/andre-chaisson/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/earth-ancients--2790919/support.

President Trump and key members of his administration claim that U.S. airstrikes "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program, despite the leak of an initial intelligence report contradicting that assessment. Join moderator Jeffrey Goldberg, Shane Harris and Ashley Parker of The Atlantic, David Ignatius of The Washington Post and Andrea Mitchell of NBC News to discuss this and more.

Ali Velshi is joined by The Atlantic's Norman Ornstein, former Rep. Charlie Dent, NYC Comptroller Brad Lander, The Brookings Institution's Andre Perry, syndicated radio host Thom Hartmann.

Greg Jenner is joined by Dr Vanessa Heggie and comedian Stu Goldsmith to learn all about the perilous history of Arctic exploration.From the 15th to 20th Centuries, Europeans searched for the Northwest Passage, a supposed seaway between the Atlantic and Pacific through the Arctic Ocean. Indigenous groups had been traversing the passage for centuries, using small skin boats and dog sleds, but from 1497, European expeditions were launched to find and claim it. Most of these ended in failure, with explorers either returning home empty-handed or not returning at all. Some even got completely lost, arriving in Hawaii or North Carolina rather than Canada!In 1845, the most famous Arctic expedition, led by Sir John Franklin, was launched. Within a few months, his two ships, the Erebus and the Terror, with their crew of 129 souls, had vanished. It was not until 1906 that a Norwegian team, led by Roald Amundsen, finally navigated the passage. This episode explores the often fatal quest for the Northwest Passage, charting the various expeditions that tried and failed to find and traverse it, uncovering the men who lost their lives looking for it, and asking why Europeans were so keen to explore such a hostile region of the world. And we unravel the mystery of just what happened to John Franklin and his men out there on the ice.This is a radio edit of the original podcast episode. For the full-length version, please look further back in the feed.Hosted by: Greg Jenner Research by: Matt Ryan Written by: Matt Ryan, Emmie Rose Price-Goodfellow, Emma Nagouse, and Greg Jenner Produced by: Emmie Rose Price-Goodfellow and Greg Jenner Audio Producer: Steve Hankey Production Coordinator: Ben Hollands Senior Producer: Emma Nagouse Executive Editor: James Cook

The year is almost halfway over, and there have already been so many incredible new releases. Hosts Jim DeRogatis and Greg Kot share their best albums of 2025 so far. Plus, they'll hear picks from the production staff.Join our Facebook Group: https://bit.ly/3sivr9TBecome a member on Patreon: https://bit.ly/3slWZvcSign up for our newsletter: https://bit.ly/3eEvRnGMake a donation via PayPal: https://bit.ly/3dmt9lUSend us a Voice Memo: Desktop: bit.ly/2RyD5Ah Mobile: sayhi.chat/soundopsFeatured Songs:Viagra Boys, "Man Made of Meat," Viagr Aboys, Shrimptech Enterprises, 2025Tune-Yards, "Sanctuary," Better Dreaming, 4AD, 2025Sex Scenes, "I'm Not Your T.V.," Everything Makes Me Sick, Big Neck, 2025Jetstream Pony, "Bubblegum Nothingness," Bowerbirds and Blue Things, Spinout Nuggets, 2025Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs, "Toecurler," Death Hilarious, Rocket, 2025Pneu, "Egyptocratie Numéraire," Get Old Or Die Tryin, Head, 2025Lucy Dacus, "Big Deal," Forever is a Feeling, Geffen, 2025Trupa Trupa, "Sister Ray," Mourners, Glitterbeat, 2025Lambrini Girls, "Special Different," Who Let the Dogs Out, City Slang, 2025YHWH Nailgun, "Pain Fountain," 45 Pounds, AD 93, 2025Lady Gaga, "Abracadabra," Mayhem, Interscope, 2025Viagra Boys, "Bog Body," Viagr Aboys, Shrimptech Enterprises, 2025FKA Twigs, "Room of Fools," Eusexua, Atlantic, 2025mckusky, "autofocus on the prime directive," the world is still here and so are we, Ipecac, 2025Horsegirl, "Switch Over," Phonetics On and On, Matador, 2025Local H, "Bound for the Floor," As Good as Dead, Island, 2025See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Winners Find a Way, host Trent M. Clark welcomes Travis Luther, a five-time founder (with 2 successful exits), sociologist, and trauma-informed leadership coach. Travis shares deep, personal insights from his groundbreaking research: interviews with terminally ill individuals who opened up about what truly matters when time is no longer guaranteed. From rural poverty and taking custody of his brothers at 16 to building multiple successful companies and leading as a former EO Colorado President, Travis's path is one of grit, redemption, and relentless pursuit of meaning. This conversation is packed with transformational insights for entrepreneurs, executives, and anyone ready to stop waiting and start living intentionally. Key Highlights: Travis' powerful backstory: from poverty to purpose The turning point that led him to study people facing death—and what they regret most 4 transformational truths from his upcoming book: Stop pretending you have forever Love like you're leaving Don't waste time in unproductive relationships Design a life that feels authentically yours Why trauma-informed leadership is essential for high performers The difference between building success vs. building significance Upcoming Book Launch – July 2025 What We Learn When We Learn We Are Dying: Life Advice from the Terminally Ill Join the pre-order list and learn more at:

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel's military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel's early reach. It's unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president's actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president's decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court's odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration's immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you'll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta's departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel's military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel's early reach. It's unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president's actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president's decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court's odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration's immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you'll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta's departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.