Podcasts about Emory University

How can the church make the biblical text come alive for those who may never pick up a Bible? In this inspiring conversation, the Reverend Dr. Tyreanna Harris—a theologian, womanist preacher, photographer, and digital strategist—joins Candler School of Theology at Emory University to explore the intersection of ministry, technology, and Christian faith. Dr. Harris shares how digital innovation and creative ministry can help church life become more accessible, communal, and spiritually nourishing, especially for those who experience faith outside traditional spaces.Learn more at https://candlerfoundry.emory.edu/With warmth and wisdom, Dr. Harris reflects on the importance of preparation, devotion, and presence—both behind and in front of the camera. She invites us to see God in the details of technology, from taping cords to lighting, and to recognize how digital discipleship can foster authentic community and Christian leadership. Her story reminds us that theological education and Bible study are not confined to the pulpit but can flourish wherever people gather, online or in person.Follow The Candler Foundry on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/candlerfoundry/As you consider your own journey of faith and innovation, how might you embody the call to make the gospel accessible and alive in new ways?

0:30 - IL Primary Results 33:26 - Thune with Baier 53:33 - Republican candidate for Illinois US Senator, Don Tracy, plans to take on the culture of dependency and Illinois' culture of corruption. Join Don on the campaign trail dontracyforil.com 01:11:11 - Michael Rubin, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and Director of Policy Analysis for the Middle East Forum, on how the U.S. can reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Keep updated with Michael on X @mrubin1971 01:33:32 - ICE Deportations in 2025 01:43:50 - Noted economist Stephen Moore on How to Hollow Out Your State’s Economy. Get more Steve @StephenMoore 01:50:39 - Daniel DePetris, fellow at Defense Priorities and a syndicated foreign affairs columnist at the Chicago Tribune: Is an Off-Ramp With Iran Possible? Follow Daniel on X @DanDePetris 02:09:51 - Mark Bauerlein, professor of English at Emory University & senior editor at First Things: We need to get kids reading whole books again — here’s how Check out Mark’s most recent books The Dumbest Generation and The Dumbest Generation Grows UpSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How much do you really know about orgasms? In this episode, we answer common questions about climax and explore the concept of orgasm equity, including what it really means to close the orgasm gap. We'll also discuss strategies for experiencing more pleasure, and whether becoming multi-orgasmic is something you can actually learn. My guest is Dr. Candice Nicole Hargons, an award-winning Associate Professor at Emory University's Rollins School of Public Health, where she studies sexual wellness and liberation. With over 70 published articles, Dr. Hargons has made substantial contributions to the field. Her work has also been featured widely in the popular media. Her latest book is titled Good Sex. Some of the specific topics we explore in this episode include: Who’s responsible for your orgasm during partnered sex? What do porn and popular media get wrong about how orgasms are portrayed? Why do some people feel like they need to fake orgasms? Is it ever okay to fake an orgasm? Scientifically, what actually is an orgasm anyway? Check out Candice’s website to learn more about her work. Got a sex question? Send me a podcast voicemail to have it answered on a future episode at speakpipe.com/sexandpsychology. *** Thank you to our sponsors!  Load Boost is a supplement designed to improve the taste, volume, and overall health of your semen. If you want to elevate your sexual performance, check out Load Boost from VB Health. Visit vb.health to learn more and save 10% with code JUSTIN. Passionate about building a career in sexuality? Check out the Sexual Health Alliance. With SHA, you’ll connect with world-class experts and join an engaged community of sexuality professionals from around the world. Visit SexualHealthAlliance.com and start building the sexuality career of your dreams today. *** Want to learn more about Sex and Psychology? Click here for previous articles or follow the blog on Facebook, Twitter, or Bluesky to receive updates. You can also follow Dr. Lehmiller on YouTube and Instagram. Listen and stream all episodes on Apple, Spotify, or Amazon. Subscribe to automatically receive new episodes and please rate and review the podcast! Credits: Precision Podcasting (Podcast editing) and Shutterstock/Florian (Music). Image created with Canva; photos used with permission of guest.

My guest this week is Nir Eyal, whose two books ('Hooked' and ‘Indistractable') have sold over 1 million copies in over 30 languages. This week he published his latest - Beyond Belief: The Science-Backed Way to Stop Limiting Yourself and Achieve Extraordinary Results. In our chat, Nir and I discuss: Why beliefs can help us perform at our top potential (or vice versa) The difference between facts, faith, and belief How beliefs can benefit us, even if they're not “true” The importance of cognitive flexibility And, the power of prayer, even for non-believers Nir also shares a powerful story about the thing he learned by buying his mother birthday flowers from the “wrong” florist. Nir's work has been featured in the New York Times, Forbes, Harvard Business Review, Psychology Today, and many more. He attended The Stanford Graduate School of Business and Emory University. Please ⁠rate and review⁠ ⁠⁠Reasonably Happy⁠ ⁠HERE⁠⁠  (DO IT!) Read ⁠Paul's ⁠⁠Substack newsletter⁠⁠⁠ ⁠HERE⁠  Learn more about Nir on his website. 

Dr. Mary Rosser, obstetrician gynecologist and director of Fazzalari Women's Health at NewYork-Presbyterian The One and Columbia, joins us to explain how the endocrine system functions and how external chemicals can disrupt hormonal signals that influence metabolism, fertility, cancer risk, and long-term health. She details the most common sources of endocrine disruptors — including plastics, personal care items, cleaning products, and pesticides — and shares clear, manageable strategies for reducing everyday exposure. Dr. Rosser's guidance empowers listeners to make small, sustainable changes that can help protect hormonal well‑being.   Chapters: 00:00:00 — Understanding Hormones and Endocrine Disruptors 00:05:01 — Health Effects Linked to Endocrine Disruptors 00:09:55 — Everyday Sources and How to Reduce Exposure 00:17:28 — Can the Body Recover? Practical Steps and Final Takeaways   Key Topics Covered What hormones are and how the endocrine system works What endocrine disruptors are and how they interfere with hormone signaling How endocrine disruptors enter the body (skin, food, air) Health impacts: metabolism, fertility, cancer risk, and chronic conditions Common sources of disruptors (plastics, BPA, phthalates, cosmetics, cleaning products, pesticides, microplastics) Practical ways to reduce exposure in daily life How to monitor hormone health and when to talk to a doctor The body's ability to recover once exposure is reduced   Takeaway Message This episode empowers listeners to understand how everyday chemicals can interfere with the body's delicate hormonal system — and shows that small, practical changes in the products we use and the foods we choose can meaningfully reduce exposure.   Expert Guest Dr. Mary L. Rosser, M.D., Ph.D., NCMP is an obstetrician gynecologist and the director of Fazzalari Women's Health at NewYork-Presbyterian The One and Columbia. She is the Richard U. and Ellen J. Levine Assistant Professor of Women's Health (in Obstetrics and Gynecology) at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians & Surgeons. She joined the faculty of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Columbia University in April 2018 to provide routine gynecology care and to further develop a comprehensive well-woman program. She has been a practicing obstetrician gynecologist for more than 20 years, starting in private practice and then joining the faculty at Montefiore Medical Center in Bronx, NY. While at Montefiore, she created, launched, and led the forty-person Division of General Obstetrics and Gynecology. Dr. Rosser received her undergraduate degree at Emory University and a Ph.D. in Endocrinology at the Medical College of Georgia. She attended Wake Forest University School of Medicine and completed her residency at Emory University. She is also a NAMS Certified Menopause Practitioner, able to provide high-quality care for patients at menopause and beyond. Primary care and heart disease in women have always been areas of focus for Dr. Rosser. She conducted basic science research on heart disease during graduate school and was the Chair of the "Women & Heart Disease Physician Education Initiative" for District II of the American College of Obstetrics & Gynecology. She continues to conduct clinical studies around patient awareness and understanding of heart disease and well-woman care. Dr. Rosser serves on the Medical Leadership Team of the Go Red for Women movement of the American Heart Association and she is ACOG's liaison to the American College of Cardiology.  

Robert Miller, associate professor of law at the University of South Dakota, joins the Business Scholarship Podcast to discuss his paper Liability Management Exercises Mature. This episode is hosted by Andrew Jennings, associate professor of law at Emory University, and was edited by Alec Johnson, a law student at Emory University.

The best decision-makers aren't better at deciding. They're better at controlling when, where, and how they decide. It took me twenty years to figure that out. Most people spend that time trying harder: more discipline, more willpower, more resolve to think clearly under pressure. It doesn't work. That's when mindjacking wins. Not through force. Through the door you left unguarded. The answer isn't trying harder. It's building systems that protect your thinking before the pressure hits. By the end of this episode, you'll have four concrete strategies for doing exactly that, and a one-page system you'll build before we're done. And I have something else to share at the end. Something I've been working toward for twenty years. Let's get into it. Why Willpower Fails and Design Works Ulysses knew his ship would pass the island of the Sirens. He also knew the song was irresistible. Sailors who heard it became incapacitated and drove straight into the rocks. He didn't try to be stronger than it. He had his crew fill their ears with wax and tie him to the mast, with strict orders not to release him, no matter what he said when the music reached him. His calm self setting rules for his compromised self. That's the core of everything in this episode. These are called commitment devices. The decision gets made early, when your thinking is clear, before you're tempted to take the wrong path. Studies tracking self-imposed contracts found that when people added meaningful stakes to their commitments, their follow-through nearly doubled. Not because they became more virtuous, but because they'd taken the choice off the table at the moment they were most likely to get it wrong. Stop asking "How do I resist?" Start asking, "What can I decide now, so I don't have to decide under pressure?" Before you can build the right commitments, you need to know exactly where your thinking breaks down. Not decision-making in general. Yours. Finding Your Personal Vulnerability Think back across the last few months. Where did your thinking most clearly cost you? Some people stall. They keep researching past the point of useful information, using "I need more data" as cover for avoiding a commitment they know they need to make. Others make their worst calls at the end of long days. Saying yes when they mean no, because no requires energy they've already spent. Some get caught by urgency. A deadline appears, the pressure closes off their thinking, and they move fast. Only later do they discover the deadline was manufactured to do exactly that. Others walk into a room with a clear position and walk out agreeing with the loudest voice, unable to explain exactly when they shifted. And some defend decisions past the point where the evidence says stop, because stopping would mean admitting something about themselves they're not ready to face. Identify yours. Write it down before we go further. Your primary vulnerability is a design target, not a character flaw. You can't build around something you haven't named. Four Strategies for Protecting Your Judgment Strategy 1: Control When You Decide Every morning I put on the same thing: a black golf shirt, blue jeans, and cowboy boots. Same brands, same routine, no decisions. My wife tolerates it. I've stopped apologizing for it. It's not a fashion choice. It's a cognitive load choice. Your brain has a finite amount of decision-making capacity each day. Every trivial choice draws from the same reserve you need for the decisions that actually matter. What to wear, what to eat, which route to take. Eliminating those choices doesn't just save time. It protects the mental fuel you'll need later. Decision-making capacity isn't flat across the day. It peaks early, when you're rested and fresh. It degrades, measurably, as conditions erode. The same call made at 8 a.m. and at the end of your seventh consecutive meeting aren't equivalent. Same person, different machine. Pull up your calendar from the last two weeks. Look at when your biggest decisions actually happened. For most people, it's not in a calm moment with a clear head. It's in the hallway, on a rushed call, in the last fifteen minutes of a meeting that ran over. That's not bad luck. That's the default you haven't changed yet. Write a standing rule: no significant, hard-to-reverse commitments after a certain hour or after a certain number of back-to-back meetings without a mandatory pause. Hold it like a policy, not a preference. Because preferences are exactly what disappear under the conditions where you need them most. Strategy 2: Build Your Kitchen Cabinet One of the things I credit most for whatever success I've had in my career isn't a framework or a methodology. It's four people. I call them my kitchen cabinet. They've seen my best decisions and my worst ones. They know when I'm rationalizing. They know when I'm avoiding. And they are not afraid to call me out when I'm off the tracks. Here's what surprises people when I describe them. They're not senior executives. They're not peers from inside my industry. They don't work in any organization I've ever worked for. They're a deliberate mix: different backgrounds, different areas of expertise, different ways of seeing the world. One of them has been in my cabinet for nearly thirty years. I trust them completely, and everything we discuss stays between us. That independence is the whole point. The people inside your organization have something at stake in your decisions. Your peers have their own agendas, even when they don't mean to. Your boss has a preferred outcome. None of that makes them bad advisors. It just means they can't give you the one thing you need most when a decision gets hard: a perspective with no skin in the game. Your kitchen cabinet can. Because they have nothing to gain or lose from what you decide, they can ask the question everyone else in the room is avoiding. They can tell you what you don't want to hear. And they'll do it before you've committed, when it still matters, not after the fact, when all they can do is watch. Build yours deliberately. Four to six people is enough. Prioritize independence over seniority. Look for people who will push back, not people who will reassure. And make the relationship reciprocal. You show up for their decisions too. The cabinet only works if the trust runs both ways and the conversations stay private. You don't need them for every decision. You need them for the ones where you're most at risk of fooling yourself. Strategy 3: Write Your Position Before the Room Fills Up I've sat in enough rooms where I walked in with a clear position and walked out having said almost none of it. Not because I was wrong. Because by the time the senior voice spoke and the heads started nodding, my own analysis felt less certain than it did twenty minutes earlier. The brain doesn't just nudge your answer when social pressure arrives. It rewrites your perception. What you saw before entering the room changes to match what the room already believes, before you've consciously registered the pressure. Before any consequential group decision, write down where you stand. Three sentences. What you believe. What evidence supports it. What would genuinely change your mind. A note on your phone is enough. It doesn't need to be formal. It needs to be external, because your memory will quietly revise itself once the social pressure arrives. Those three sentences are a record of what you actually concluded before the room had a chance to work on you. When the discussion moves toward a position, you can then distinguish between "I'm updating because I heard something new" and "I'm caving because the silence is uncomfortable." Without that record, those two experiences feel identical in the moment, and one of them will reliably win. Strategy 4: Assume the Failure Before You Commit In August 2016, Delta Air Lines ran a routine scheduled test of the backup generator at their Atlanta data center. A transformer caught fire. Three hundred of Delta's 7,000 servers, improperly connected to a single power source, went dark. They couldn't fail over to backups. The servers that stayed online couldn't communicate with the ones that hadn't. The entire system collapsed: passenger check-in, baggage, websites, kiosks, and airport displays. Gone. Delta cancelled 2,100 flights over three days. $150 million in losses. Thousands of passengers slept on airport floors. The system had redundancy designed in. The backup had been tested. The specific failure mode, servers with no alternate power connection, was a known vulnerability that nobody had ever stopped to question. A year before the fire, cognitive psychologist Gary Klein, the researcher who developed the pre-mortem, had written a thought experiment describing almost this exact scenario. Imagine, he wrote, that an airline CEO gathered top management and asked: "Every one of our flights around the world has been cancelled for two straight days. Why?" People would think terrorism first. The real progress, Klein said, would come from mundane answers: a reservation system down, a backup that didn't activate, a cascade nobody had traced in advance. Delta built what Klein described. Without running the question that would have found it. The pre-mortem is that question. Before you commit to a significant decision, assume it's six months later, and the decision failed. Not possibly, but definitely. Then ask: What went wrong? What did you know but not say? What did someone sense but find too awkward to raise in the room? "What could go wrong?" produces hedged answers. People soften concerns to preserve harmony. "It failed. What happened?" changes the psychology entirely. You're not being negative. You're being forensic. The things that surface, the concerns that felt impolitic, the risks that seemed too small to mention, are frequently the ones that end up mattering most. Each of these four strategies is a designed defense against the same thing: the systematic capture of your judgment before you notice it happening. That's mindjacking. And now you have four ways to make it harder. But strategies only work if you remember to use them. And you won't remember. Not when you're depleted at 7pm, not when the room is staring at you, not when your identity is on the line. That's not a character flaw. That's just how it works. So we're going to take everything you just learned and put it on one page. A page you'll sign. A page you'll keep somewhere you'll actually see it. Your calm self, right now, is building the system your future self will thank you for. The people who shape outcomes consistently aren't necessarily the sharpest thinkers in the room. They're the ones whose judgment is still intact when everyone else's has degraded. That's a practice, not a talent. The full video and written deep-dive on mindjacking are linked below at philmckinney.com/mindjacking. Your Decision Constitution Remember the Ulysses insight from the beginning of this episode. Your calm self setting rules for your compromised self. That's exactly what this is. A Decision Constitution is one page. Five commitments. Written when your thinking is clear, so the version of you under pressure has something to stand on. Not a to-do list. Not a productivity hack. A contract with yourself. Here's what goes in it. Your Timing Rule. You already know that your judgment degrades as the day runs long. So name it. What are the specific conditions (time of day, number of back-to-back meetings, hours of sleep) that disqualify you from making a high-stakes, hard-to-reverse call without a mandatory pause first? Write that line. Hold it like a policy. Your Pre-Decision List. Think of the situations where you consistently make choices you later regret. The late-day request you said yes to when you meant no. The urgency that overrode your better judgment. Pick three. Write a standing rule for each, specific enough that you can invoke it without having to think. "I don't make new commitments without sleeping on it." That's a rule. "I'll try to be more careful" is not. Your Pre-Meeting Anchor. Before any meeting where a significant decision will be made, you write down where you stand. Three sentences. What you believe, what evidence supports it, and what would genuinely change your mind. Not in the car on the way. Before. That record is what protects your thinking from the room. Your Pre-Mortem Trigger. Name the threshold that makes a decision significant enough to require a pre-mortem. A dollar amount. An impact on more than a certain number of people. A commitment lasting longer than six months. Whatever your threshold is, write it down. Once a decision crosses it, the pre-mortem is non-negotiable. Your Kitchen Cabinet Trigger. Your cabinet is only useful if you engage them before you've decided, not after. So name the conditions that require you to bring a decision to them first. A decision that's hard to reverse. A situation where you have significant personal stakes in the outcome. A moment where you notice everyone around you wants you to decide a certain way. A decision you find yourself avoiding thinking about clearly. Any one of those is enough. Two or more is non-negotiable. Now print out your decision constitution. Sign it. Put it somewhere you'll actually see it before the moments that count. This is your Ulysses contract. Your clear-headed self, right now, is setting the terms your compromised self will have to honor when the pressure is real, and the easy path is pointing the wrong way. Closing That's Part 2 of the Thinking 101 series. Fifteen episodes. If you've been here from the beginning, you've built something real. The series has been running for 21 weeks. The show behind it has been running for 20 years. And how we got here traces back to a single conversation. Twenty years ago, a mentor of mine, Bob Davis, gave me a challenge I couldn't shake. I'd asked him how I could ever repay him for what he'd done for my career. He laughed and said I couldn't. The only option, he said, was to pay it forward. That's why this show exists. That's why it has always existed. The show was called Killer Innovations because that's what felt right in 2005. Bold, a little provocative, built for a moment when podcasting was brand new, and nobody knew what it was supposed to be. Tens of millions of downloads later, we're still here. We have regular listeners in more than 50 countries. Some of you are younger than the podcast itself. But somewhere along the way, the show became something more specific. It stopped being about innovation tips and started being about the innovation decisions that actually shape outcomes. About the patterns underneath the decisions. About the skills that matter most when the pressure is real. On March 23rd, the show's 20th anniversary, we're making major changes. The podcast. The YouTube channel. All of it. And if you have thoughts about where we've been or where we're going, I want to hear them. There's a contact form at philmckinney.com. Send me a note. I'll see you on the 23rd.   Endnotes  "their follow-through nearly doubled": Gharad Bryan, Dean S. Karlan, and Scott Nelson, "Commitment Contracts," Yale Economics Department Working Paper No. 73 / Yale University Economic Growth Center Discussion Paper No. 980 (October 23, 2009). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1493378. The research draws on Karlan and co-founders' development of StickK.com, a commitment contract platform launched in 2008 at Yale. Platform data consistently shows that users who add meaningful stakes — financial or reputational — to their commitments achieve their goals at roughly double the rate of those who don't. The underlying mechanism was established in Karlan's earlier field research in the Philippines: Nava Ashraf, Dean Karlan, and Wesley Yin, "Tying Odysseus to the Mast: Evidence From a Commitment Savings Product in the Philippines," Quarterly Journal of Economics 121, no. 2 (May 2006): 635–672. doi:10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.635. https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/121/2/635/1884028. Pre-commitment works not by increasing virtue but by removing the decision from the moment of temptation. For accessible application, see Ian Ayres, Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (New York: Bantam, 2010), ISBN 978-0-553-80763-9. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/6794/carrots-and-sticks-by-ian-ayres/.   "a finite amount of decision-making capacity each day": Roy F. Baumeister, Ellen Bratslavsky, Mark Muraven, and Dianne M. Tice, "Ego Depletion: Is the Active Self a Limited Resource?" Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, no. 5 (1998): 1252–1265. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252. https://roybaumeister.com/1998/03/16/ego-depletion-is-the-active-self-a-limited-resource/. Also see Roy F. Baumeister and John Tierney, Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength (New York: Penguin, 2011). Baumeister's strength model of self-control proposes that willpower, decision-making, and self-regulation all draw from a single, depletable resource — what he termed "ego depletion." Subsequent work has debated the precise mechanism, with some researchers arguing the effect is motivational rather than metabolic. The practical implication, however, is consistent across studies: decision quality degrades as the day progresses, and the effect is most pronounced for complex, high-stakes choices. For a summary of the current scientific debate on the mechanism, see Michael Inzlicht and Brandon J. Schmeichel, "What Is Ego Depletion? Toward a Mechanistic Revision of the Resource Model of Self-Control," Perspectives on Psychological Science 7, no. 5 (2012): 450–463. doi:10.1177/1745691612454134. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26168503/.   "It rewrites your perception": Gregory S. Berns, Jonathan Chappelow, Caroline F. Zink, Giuseppe Pagnoni, Megan E. Martin-Skurski, and Jim Richards, "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity and Independence During Mental Rotation," Biological Psychiatry 58, no. 3 (August 1, 2005): 245–253. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.012. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15978553/.  This fMRI study at Emory University extended Solomon Asch's classic conformity experiments by imaging participants' brains as they conformed to or resisted incorrect group answers. The key finding: when participants went along with the group, the activity appeared not in the prefrontal cortex — the seat of conscious decision-making — but in the occipital-parietal network responsible for visual and spatial perception. In other words, participants who conformed weren't consciously deciding to lie; the group had altered what they actually perceived. Standing alone, by contrast, activated the amygdala, a region associated with emotional distress — consistent with the experience of social dissent as genuinely uncomfortable rather than merely inconvenient.   "Three hundred of Delta's 7,000 servers": Yevgeniy Sverdlik, "Delta: Data Center Outage Cost Us $150M," Data Center Knowledge, September 8, 2016. https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/outages/delta-data-center-outage-cost-us-150m.  Also see W. H. Highleyman, "Delta Air Lines Cancels 2,100 Flights Due to Power Outage," Availability Digest (September 2016). https://availabilitydigest.com/public_articles/1109/delta.pdf. On the morning of August 8, 2016, a fire triggered during a routine backup generator test at Delta's Atlanta data center caused a transformer failure. Approximately 300 of Delta's 7,000 servers were improperly connected to a single power source with no alternate feed, and when that feed failed, those servers went dark. Because those servers couldn't communicate with the rest of the system, the entire network collapsed. Delta cancelled roughly 2,100 flights over three days, leaving an estimated 250,000 passengers stranded. Total losses reached $150 million.   "cognitive psychologist Gary Klein, the researcher who developed the pre-mortem": Gary Klein, "Performing a Project Premortem," Harvard Business Review 85, no. 9 (September 2007): 18–19. https://hbr.org/2007/09/performing-a-project-premortem.  Klein developed the pre-mortem method over several decades of applied research in naturalistic decision-making. The technique asks teams to assume, before committing to a plan, that the plan has already failed — definitively, not possibly — and then work backward to identify causes. Klein's research found that this reframing dramatically increases the willingness of team members to surface concerns they would otherwise suppress to preserve group harmony. The method has since been endorsed by Nobel laureates Daniel Kahneman and Richard Thaler as a practical tool for reducing overconfidence in planning. For Klein's broader framework of naturalistic decision-making, see Gary Klein, Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998). https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262343251/sources-of-power/. 

Meet the Fantastic—and Controversial—Dr. David Healy Psychiatric Drug Companies-- What Are They NOT Telling Us? Today, we are thrilled to interview the famed and courageous Dr. David Healy. I have admired his work for many years, but never imagined I'd have the chance to meet him and chat with him. First things first. You may know Dr. David Healy for some of his highly controversial books, like "The Antidepressant Era," "Let Them Eat Prozac," and "Pharmageddon." But who is he, really? According to AI, Dr. David Healy is a prominent Welsh psychiatrist, psychopharmacologist, and critic of the pharmaceutical industry known for his research on antidepressants, their links to suicide, and exposing industry practices like ghostwriting and disease-mongering, operating through initiatives like RxISK.org to promote drug safety. He has a long history of challenging Big Pharma, facing academic backlash (like losing a University of Toronto post) for his views, and serving as an expert witness in legal cases involving psychotropic drugs, advocating for greater transparency and patient safety.  Healy initially worked with pharmaceutical companies, gaining firsthand knowledge of how SSRIs were marketed despite their trial weaknesses, focusing on the oversimplified serotonin hypothesis. He then became a vocal critic, highlighting issues like ghostwriting articles and manipulating academic opinion to sell drugs, leading to conflicts with industry-funded institutions. He founded RxISK.org, a platform for patients to report adverse drug reactions, aiming to make medicines safer. His strong stance (on research linking SSRI antidepressants to increased suicidal thoughts and urges) led to intense and corrosive controversy, including losing a professorship at the University of Toronto (though later settled as a visiting role) and harassment, noted here and here. In recent years, he has acted as an expert witness in cases involving drug-related suicides and homicides, bringing issues to regulators.  In essence, Dr. David Healy is a significant, often controversial, figure dedicated to drug safety, academic integrity, and patient awareness in psychiatry, challenging established narratives and industry power.  Taking a deeper dive, AI has added this critically important information: David Healy has discussed numerous examples of conflicts of interest that mainly involve the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on medical research, publication, and practice.  Key examples he has highlighted include: Ghostwriting of Articles: Pharmaceutical companies hire medical communication firms to draft research articles or reviews, and then get prominent academics or clinicians to put their names on the papers as the sole or primary authors, a practice known as ghostwriting. The named authors often have little to no involvement in the actual research or writing. Hiding or Misrepresenting Data: Drug companies have concealed unfavorable data or miscoded raw data on drug risks, such as the link between antidepressants and suicidal acts. This manipulation can make a drug appear safer or more effective than it actually is. Biased Clinical Trial Design: Healy notes instances where clinical trials are designed with "tricks," such as using inadequate or excessive doses of comparison medications to make the company's own drug look superior. Marketing-Driven Education: A large portion of continuing medical education (CME) classes for doctors are sponsored by industry. Healy argues this leads to a bias in the information presented to doctors, with an emphasis on the benefits of brand-name drugs rather than an objective assessment of all treatment options. Gifts and Payments to Physicians: Drug companies spend billions annually on marketing directed at doctors, including free samples, sales visits, and small non-educational gifts or lunches. Healy points out that while many doctors believe these gifts don't affect their own prescribing, studies show they influence prescribing patterns and create subtle biases. Industry Influence on Academia: Healy's own experience with a job offer being rescinded at the University of Toronto, which had received a large donation from a drug company (Eli Lilly), is a prominent case he uses to illustrate how industry funding can infringe upon academic freedom and stifle critical research. "Disease Mongering": Healy argues that the pharmaceutical industry often engages in "disease mongering," marketing conditions to the public and physicians to create a market for their products rather than simply addressing genuine medical needs.  So that hopefully gives you some idea of the scope of his work, and his vision of transparency and integrity in the reporting one the effectiveness and risks of psychotropic medications. In our conversation today, he emphasized the importance of listening to patients who describe side effects of medications, such as SSRIs, in described the efforts of Big Pharma to suppress such complaints, giving psychiatrists "talking points" to reassure and quiet concerned patients. In general, a main focus of his career has been to challenge and confront the efforts of drug companies to suppress negative information about their products and troublesome and dangerous side effects. He said that one of the rationales the drug companies use is to say that disseminating that type of information will discourage many potential patients from using their products, and therefore miss out on the potential benefits of the medications. In fact, they have a name for this, "treatment hesitancy," and discourage open discussion of negative effects for this reason. I asked Dr. Healy if he's experienced direct negative pushback from drug companies, and he gave a surprising answer—he said no, that the major pushback he's gotten has actually been from colleagues—psychiatrists who have bought the party line disseminated by the drug manufactures. For example, when he gave his famous talk at the University of Toronto on the increase in suicidal urges associated with SSRI antidepressants, a famous psychopharmacologist, Dr. Charlie Nemeroff, got him fired. Here's the story on Dr. Nemeroff, According to AI: In the late 2000s, Nemeroff faced investigations and sanctions from Emory University for failing to disclose significant speaking and consulting fees from pharmaceutical companies like GlaxoSmithKline, raising questions about research integrity and conflicts of interest, notes The BMJ and The New York Times.  Although the antidepressant effects of SSRIs are controversial and hotly debated, their effects on the nervous system are not. Dr. Healy's research indicates that they have a suppression effect on the nervous system, which dulls the senses, and this can happen within 1 to 2 days. One of the more troublesome of these effects is called "genital numbing," which affects 9 out of 10  people talking SSRIs. This can result in difficulties with sexual arousal and greatly delayed orgasm, and apparently these effects can persist long after drug discontinuation. He said that these sensory effects can develop quickly, within a day or two of starting the medications. Even more chilling, he said that the problem can actually get worse when you discontinue the medication, and can sometimes persist for life. In addition, quite a few individuals have "bad trips" on SSRIs, although a minority clearly have "good trips." He said the best thing to do for a bad trip is to take the patient off of the medication immediately—and NOT increase the dose. He confirmed my impression that a common error with all antidepressants is to increase the dose—which simply increases the side effects. In addition to the genital numbing described above, he said the SSRIs cause "emotional numbing," which means a decreased capacity for joy as well as sorrow. One of the main activities in David Healy's life has been listening to patients, rather than discounting their complaints when they describe negative effects of medications. When asked about what alternatives to drugs he might recommend to someone struggling with depression, he said that sometimes, just doing nothing will be helpful, since most mood problems clear up spontaneously in 12 to 14 weeks. He said that most are simply human problems, not "mental disorders," but real-life problems, like relationship conflicts or social issues. Although we did not discuss it extensively on the show, I would point out that skillful, drug-free therapy with TEAM CBT can sometimes help as well, and that recent research has confirmed rapid often dramatic mood improvements with individuals using the Feeling Great app, which has been entirely free to anyone since the summer of 2025.  Finally, we do not advise anyone to discontinue or modify the dosages of any medications you have been prescribed without consultation with your doctor. The information in the Feeling Good podcast is of a strictly educational nature, and is not intended as treatment or medical advice. We thank you for listening to today's shocking but incredibly important dialogue with one of the pioneers and champions of greater ethical integrity and transparency in the psychiatric profession. It is sad, indeed, that we don't have more visionary critical thinkers like Dr. David Healy! David (H), Rhonda, and David (B)

Overweight and obesity may cause 10% of new cancer diagnoses annually in the US. In this JAMA Review in the Translational Science series, author Neil Iyengar, MD, of Emory University discusses the biological pathways that may promote cancer in people with overweight or obesity and potential therapies with JAMA Deputy Editor Mary McDermott, MD. Related Content: Obesity and Cancer

Tayari Jones is the author of four novels including An American Marriage, which was an Oprah's Book Club Selection and also appeared on Barack Obama's summer reading list as well as his year-end roundup. The novel was awarded the Women's Prize for Fiction Aspen Words Literary Prize and an NAACP Image Award. It has been published in two dozen countries.  Her other works include Leaving Atlanta, Silver Sparrow, and The Untelling. Her new novel is Kin. Jones is a graduate of Spelman College, University of Iowa, and Arizona State University. She is an Andrew D. White Professor-at-Large at Cornell University and the Charles Howard Candler Professor of Creative Writing at Emory University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to Mysteries to Die For.I am TG Wolff and am here with Jack, my piano player and producer. This is a podcast where we combine storytelling with original music to put you in the heart of a mystery. All stories are structured to challenge you to beat the detective to the solution. Jack and I perform these live, front to back, no breaks, no fakes, no retakes.In the world's most dangerous working environments it can seem like everything is out to kill you. The equipment you use. The materials you work with. The very air you breathe. Stored energy is a coiled viper waiting for the right moment to lash out. Owners, manufacturers, contractors, and beyond have developed safety protocols to combat STCKY, that is, Stuff That Can Kill You. Gravity, Motion, Mechanical, Electrical, Pressure, Sound, Radiation, Biological, Chemical, Temperature. This season is all about the means of murder as authors put our STCKY detective skills to the test. This is Season 9, Stuff That Can Kill You.This is Episode 5, where gravity is our STCKY means of death. This is Flat by Robert J. BinneyHenri has real motivation to put his state certificate to use. He's accused of helping developer Austin Coleman go splat. He needs our help if he's going to avoid being sentenced to life in prison orange. Here are his suspects in the order we met them:Carl, construction site foremanDesiree Normandy, ex-wife #1Crystal Watters, almost ex-wife #2Quentin Lockwood, Commissioner and candidate for governorWesley Brownstein, one-man protesterABOUT Robert J. BinneySeattle screenwriter Robert J. Binney has chronicled Henri's adventures previously on Mysteries to Die For. His essays on being the butt of Jimmy Carter's jokes, joyriding with the Salt Lake City police, find-ing career advice in the Himalayas, and hanging with Peter Frampton have appeared in The Los Angeles Times, the Kelp Journal, and more. “Restoration Software” was recently featured in Level Best Books' The Best Private Eye Stories of 2025. He is a regular contributor to Thrill Ride magazine and the Starlite Pulp Review. A former titan of industry with movie-star good looks, he holds an MBA from Emory University and an MFA from UC Riverside.Website: www.ThirdActMedia.comFacebook: RJBinneyInstagram: RJBinneyWRAP UPThat wraps this episode of Mysteries to Die For. Support our show by subscribing, telling a mystery lover about us, and giving us a five-star review. Check out our website m2d4podcast.com for links to this season's authors.Mysteries to Die For is hosted by TG Wolff and Jack Wolff. Flat was written by Robert J. Binney. Music and production are by Jack Wolff. Episode art is by TG Wolff. Join us next week for a Toe Tag, which is the first chapter from a fresh release in the mystery, crime, or thriller genre. Then come back in two weeks for our next original story where electricity is our STCKY means of murder. It's Charbroiled by Jim Winter.

Can Democrats Keep Flipping Red Seats? Thom reviews the interesting recent election results. Also what's up with the Epstein Walk of Shame Near the White House? Kash Patel ousted FBI staff with Iran expertise right before Trump declared war on them. Say what?! Plus ~ Can Sci Fi help save the future? Information Scientist Martin Halbert, PhD reveals the meaning of Helmsman: Book One of the Sojourner Saga.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome to Transmission Interrupted! In this episode, host Jill Morgan sits down with the principal investigators of NETEC—Dr. Aneesh Mehta, Dr. Vikramjit Mukherjee, and Dr. John Lowe—to reflect on a decade of advancing special pathogen preparedness across the U.S. healthcare system. Together, they revisit the origins of NETEC, tracing back to the transformative events of the 2014 Ebola outbreak, and share their unique journeys as infectious disease experts, critical care clinicians, and scientists on the front lines. The conversation dives into the challenges and lessons learned while building a national network equipped for high-consequence infectious diseases, the evolution from isolated specialty units to a system-wide approach, and the critical importance of healthcare worker safety. You'll hear insights on what it takes to maintain readiness in a landscape of ever-changing threats, the value of interdisciplinary collaboration, and a call to expand this “tight-knit club” of preparedness champions. Whether you're a healthcare professional, public health advocate, or just curious about how the U.S. prepares for medical crises, this episode delivers an inspiring look at the past, present, and future of special pathogen response—and why it matters to us all. Guests John-Martin Lowe, PhD John-Martin Lowe, PhD, is the director of the Global Center for Health Security, assistant vice chancellor for health security training and education, and professor of Environmental, Agricultural and Occupational Health at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. At the University of Nebraska Medical Center, he leads research and training initiatives to advance environmental risk assessment and infection control for high consequence pathogens. As a virologist and environmental exposure scientist, Dr. Lowe has worked extensively throughout the U.S., Africa, Asia and Europe as an educator, researcher, and in health emergency risk management related to infectious disease, infection control and emergency response. As a professor of environmental and occupational health, his expertise focuses on infectious disease risk assessment and management of risk for clinical, community and industrial environments. Dr. Lowe also has extensive experience in emerging pathogens and health security. He is co-PI for the U.S. National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center, established an international network for emerging infectious diseases, and served lead investigator for a multi-country bio-surveillance network in Africa. He has experience in a broad range of health security topics from surveillance, public health response and clinical response to health emergencies. Dr. Lowe led successful COVID-19 efforts in 2020 at the National Quarantine Unit and Nebraska Biocontainment Unit to provide monitoring and care for repatriated U.S. citizens exposed to and infected with SARS Coronavirus 2. He also led early and continued efforts to characterize the transmission dynamics of SARS Coronavirus 2 which were presented to in a joint meeting hosted by the Academy of Medicine and American Public Health Association on April 15, 2020. Dr. Aneesh Mehta, MD, FIDSA, FAST Aneesh Mehta is a Professor of Medicine and of Surgery at Emory University School of Medicine, and also serves as the Chief of Infectious Diseases Services and Assistant Director of Transplant Infectious Diseases at Emory University Hospital. He is a board-certified infectious diseases physician, who received an MD from the University of Oklahoma and completed Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases training at Emory University. Aneesh has been one of the core physicians of the Emory Serious Communicable Diseases Unit (SCDU) since 2009. He was admitted physician for Emory's first patient with Ebola Virus Disease and was highly involved in care of the four patients with EVD, one patient with Lassa Fever, and several PUIs cared for by the Emory SCDU. During the Ebola activation, Aneesh was involved in all aspects of unit management, patient care, laboratory handling, and research. Aneesh is a co-Principal Investigator at NETEC. He also has been involved in development of the Special Pathogens Research Network Biorepository and evaluation of Medical Countermeasures. Vikramjit Mukherjee, MD, FRCP (Edin) Vikramjit Mukherjee is an intensive care physician who serves as the Chief of Critical Care at NYC Health+Hospitals/Bellevue. He also is the Chief of Bellevue's Special Pathogens Program. Dr. Mukherjee is an Associate Professor of Medicine in the Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine. Dr. Mukherjee serves as co-Principal Investigator for NETEC, as a steering committee member for the National Special Pathogens System of Care, and as an executive member of the Task Force for Mass Critical Care. His research interests include special pathogen preparedness and mass critical care. Vikramjit Mukherjee completed his medical training at Armed Forces Medical College, India, before arriving in the United States. Here, he completed his residency and chief residency at Georgetown University/Washington Hospital Center and fellowship and chief fellowship in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at New York University Medical Center. Following completion of training in 2015, he joined faculty in the Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine at New York University Grossman School of Medicine. Host Jill Morgan, RN Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, GA Jill Morgan is a registered nurse and a subject matter expert in personal protective equipment (PPE) for NETEC. For 35 years, Jill has been an emergency department and critical care nurse, and now splits her time between education for NETEC and clinical research, most of it centering around infection prevention and personal protective equipment. She is a member of the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), ASTM International, and the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI). Resources About NETECNETEC LeadershipTransmission Interrupted PodcastNational Special Pathogen System (NSPS)NETEC Resource Library About NETEC A Partnership for Preparedness The National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center's mission is to set the gold standard for special pathogen preparedness and response across health systems in the U.S. with the goals of driving best practices, closing knowledge gaps, and developing innovative resources. Our vision is a sustainable infrastructure and culture of readiness for managing suspected and confirmed special pathogen incidents across the United States public health and health care delivery systems. For more information visit NETEC on the web at www.netec.org. NETEC Consultation Services Assess and Advance Your Readiness for Special Pathogens with Free, Expert Consulting. NETEC offers free virtual and onsite readiness consulting to help health care facilities and EMS agencies prepare for special pathogen events. Our targeted support services are delivered by experts selected and assigned to each inquiry based on the unique needs of your organization. Have a question? Ask a NETEC expert. For more information visit: netec.org/consulting-services.

How will customers decide which decisions to hand over to AI? As AI agents move to the front of the customer journey, brands are no longer competing for attention. They're competing for selection. And in many cases, they don't even realize they're being bypassed. This conversation goes beyond tools and technology to examine the psychology of decision-making, trust, empathy, and what happens when AI becomes the primary decision-maker on behalf of customers.

Mitochondrial diseases can affect multiple organs, present at any age, and are frequently misdiagnosed. So how can clinicians recognize the signs sooner?On this episode of Top Docs, Jeremy Bonfini welcomes Dr. Heather Gatcombe, board certified radiation oncologist at Emory University, for a powerful conversation on diagnosis, biochemical testing, treatment options, lifestyle considerations, and support resources for families.Whether you are a clinician, caregiver, or advocate, this episode offers insight you will not want to miss.

Governor Brian Kemp increased the 2026 state budget by nearly 1.4 billion dollars to help fund his priorities before it passed Wednesday; A new report from Emory University and reproductive-rights groups finds Georgia's abortion law continues to complicate health care for many pregnant and post-partum patients; A program from the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights trains volunteers to take notes in court and report back any misconduct.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this week's episode of You Are What You Read, we are joined by Tayari Jones and her new novel, which hits shelves today, Kin. Tayari is the author of five novels, including An American Marriage, which was an Oprah's Book Club selection and also appeared on Barack Obama's summer reading list and his year-end roundup. An American Marriage won the Women's Prize for Fiction, the Aspen Words Literary Prize, and an NAACP Image Award and has been published in two dozen countries. Tayari is the C.H. Candler Professor of English and Creative Writing at Emory University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Jason Blitman talks to Oprah's Book Club pick Tayari Jones about Kin, her long-awaited new novel, nearly a decade in the making.Conversation highlights include:

When neuroscientists scanned the brains of people going along with a group, they expected to find lying. What they found instead was something far stranger. The group wasn't changing people's answers. It was changing what they actually saw. We'll get to that study in a minute. But first, I want you to remember the last time you were in a meeting, and you knew something was wrong. The numbers didn't add up. The risk was being underestimated. And someone needed to say it. Then the most senior person in the room spoke first: "I think this is exactly what we need." Heads nodded. Finance agreed. Marketing agreed. The consultant agreed. And by the time it was your turn, you heard yourself saying, "I have some minor concerns, but overall I think it's solid." You're not alone. Research shows that roughly half of employees stay silent at work rather than voice a concern. And among those who stayed quiet, 40% estimated they wasted 2 weeks or more replaying what they didn't say. Two weeks. Mentally rehearsing the point they should have made in a meeting that's already over. That silence isn't a character flaw. It's your neurology working against you. And today I'm going to show you exactly why it happens and how to stop it.  It starts with what was happening inside your head during that meeting you just remembered. Why Your Brain Surrenders to the Group Most people know about the Asch conformity experiments from the 1950s. People were asked to match line lengths, and seventy-five percent went along with answers that were obviously wrong. That result gets cited everywhere. But the more important study came fifty years later, and it revealed something the Asch experiment never could. In 2005, neuroscientist Gregory Berns at Emory University put people inside an MRI machine and ran a similar conformity task, this time with three-dimensional shape rotation. Like Asch, he planted actors who gave wrong answers. But unlike Asch, he could watch what was happening inside people's brains while the conformity was occurring. Berns expected the MRI to show activity in the prefrontal cortex, the brain's decision-making center, when people went along with wrong answers. That would mean they were knowingly lying to fit in. Just a social calculation. That's not what the scans showed. People who conformed showed no increased activity in decision-making regions. Instead, the activity showed up in the parts of the brain that handle visual and spatial perception, the occipital and parietal areas. The group wasn't changing people's answers. It was changing what they actually saw. Their brains were rewriting their experience to match the room. And the people who resisted the group? Their scans told a different story. Heightened activity in the amygdala, the brain's threat detection center. The same circuitry that fires when you encounter physical danger lit up when someone disagreed with the group. Berns put it plainly. The fear of social isolation activates the same neural machinery as the fear of genuine threats to survival. When you caved in that meeting, your neurology wasn't malfunctioning. It was doing exactly what it was designed to do. Keep you safe inside the tribe. This is why what I call mindjacking works so well. Algorithms manufacture social proof by showing you what's trending, what your friends liked, and what similar people chose. Your wiring responds the same way it does at the conference table. You're fighting your own threat-detection system every time you try to hold an independent position within a group. You can't turn off the wiring. But you can learn to catch it in the act. And that starts with one critical distinction. The First Skill: Separating Updating from Caving Sometimes the people around you know something you don't. Changing your mind in a group isn't always a surrender. Sometimes it's the smartest move in the room. The real skill is knowing which one just happened. You can test this in real time. When you feel your position shifting in a group, ask yourself three questions. First: Did someone introduce information I didn't have before? If the CFO reveals a data point that genuinely changes the calculus, updating your view isn't a weakness. It's intelligence. That's new evidence. Second: Can I articulate why I changed my mind, in specific terms? If you can say, "I shifted because of the margin data in Q3 that I hadn't seen," that's a real update. If you can only say, "I don't know, everyone seemed to think it was fine," that's capitulation. Third: Would I have reached this same conclusion alone, with the same information? This is the killer question. If the answer is no, and you only arrived at this position because others were already there, you haven't updated. You've surrendered. Getting this wrong is costly. And not just the one time. When you capitulate and call it updating, you train yourself to stop trusting your own analysis. Do it enough times, and you won't even bother preparing, because you already know you're going to defer. That's how capable people slowly become passengers in rooms where they should be driving. Capture those three questions somewhere you'll see them. They're your real-time check on whether you're being open-minded or spineless. Those questions work when you're already in the meeting and the pressure is live. But what if you could protect your thinking before the pressure even starts? The Pre-Meeting Lock-In The most important thing you can do to protect your independent thinking doesn't happen during the meeting. It happens before. I call it the Pre-Meeting Lock-In, and it takes less than two minutes. Before any meeting where a decision will be made, write down three things:  Your position  Two or three key reasons supporting it What would it take to change your mind Put it on paper. Put it in a note on your phone. Just get it out of your head and into a form you can reference. Why does this work? Because once the discussion starts, your mind is going to quietly edit your memories of what you believed. You'll start thinking, "Well, I wasn't really sure about that point anyway." Your pre-meeting notes are an anchor against that self-deception. They're a record of what you actually thought before the social pressure arrived. You want to see what happens when someone has the analysis but doesn't lock it in?  The night before the Challenger launch in January 1986, engineer Roger Boisjoly and his team at Morton Thiokol had the data. They knew the O-ring seals were dangerous in cold weather. They'd written memos. They'd run the numbers. They recommended against launching. But when NASA pushed back hard on the teleconference, Thiokol management called an off-line caucus and excluded the engineers from the room. When the call resumed, management reversed the recommendation. Boisjoly had the analysis. His managers had heard it. But under pressure from their biggest customer, the conclusion got edited in real time. Boisjoly later described it as an unethical forum driven by what he called "intense customer intimidation." He fought like hell, but the room won. That's the most extreme version of the problem. Life and death. But the mechanics are the same in every conference room. The analysis exists. The pressure arrives. And without something anchoring you to what you actually concluded, the room rewrites the story. There's a bonus effect to the Lock-In, too. When you've documented what it would take to change your mind, you've given yourself permission to be genuinely open. You're not being stubborn for the sake of it. You're saying, "Show me evidence that meets this threshold, and I'll update." That's intellectual honesty with a backbone. But you can know exactly what you think and still fail if you can't get anyone else to hear it. How to Dissent and Actually Be Heard Most dissent fails not because it's wrong, but because it's delivered badly.  Blurting out "I think this is a mistake" when the group is already aligned feels like an attack. People get defensive. Your point gets ignored, not because it lacked merit, but because your delivery threatened the group's cohesion. You triggered the same threat response in them that you've been learning to manage in yourself. Charlan Nemeth, a psychologist at UC Berkeley, has studied dissent for decades. You'd expect her research to show that dissent helps groups when the dissenter is right. When someone spots a flaw that everyone else missed. That makes intuitive sense. But that's not what she found. Nemeth discovered that when someone voices a genuine minority opinion, the entire group thinks more carefully. They consider more information, examine more alternatives, and reach better conclusions. And the group benefits even when the dissenter turns out to be wrong. Even when you're wrong, the act of dissenting makes the group smarter. Your disagreement forces everyone out of autopilot. Decades of research by Moscovici supports this. Minority voices don't just influence people in the moment. They shift perception afterward, in private, long after the meeting ends. That's the good news. The catch is in how the dissent happens. Nemeth tested what happens when dissent is assigned rather than authentic, when someone plays devil's advocate because they were told to. It doesn't produce the same effect. Groups can tell when disagreement is performative. The cognitive benefits only show up when the dissent is authentic. When someone actually believes what they're saying. That means the goal isn't just to voice disagreement. It's to voice it in a way that people can actually receive. And the hardest version of this isn't when you have a minor concern about an otherwise good plan. It's when the whole direction is wrong, and finding something to praise would be dishonest. In those moments, the move is to separate the people from the position. "I respect the work that went into this, and I know this isn't what anyone wants to hear, but I think we're solving the wrong problem." You're honoring the effort while challenging the direction. You're not attacking the tribe. You're trying to save it from a bad bet. When the stakes are lower, and you do see genuine merit, you can lead with that. "The market timing argument is strong, and I want to make sure we've stress-tested one thing before we commit." Same principle. You're working with their wiring instead of against it. Either way, your dissent has value beyond being right. Remember that. It's worth holding onto when your amygdala is screaming at you to stay quiet. Everything so far has assumed you're in a room with other people. Your amygdala can't tell the difference between a conference table and a phone screen. The Rooms You Can't See You're not just in meetings. You're in invisible rooms all day long. And most of the time, you don't even know you've walked into one. Every time you scroll past a post with ten thousand likes and think, "I guess that's the right take." Every time you read three articles with the same conclusion and stop questioning it. Every time an algorithm shows you what similar people chose, and you choose it too. Those are rooms full of nodding heads. And your amygdala responds to them the same way it responds to the conference table. Think about the last time you researched a major purchase. You probably started with some idea of what you wanted. Then you read reviews. Then you checked what was trending. Then you asked friends. By the time you decided, how much of that decision was yours? How much of it was the room? Or think about how you form opinions on topics you haven't studied deeply. You read a few articles. They mostly agree. You adopt the consensus. That feels like research. But Berns' scans tell us what's actually happening. Your brain isn't independently weighing the evidence. It's detecting a consensus and rewriting your perception to match. The same process that happens at the conference table is happening every time you open your phone. Mindjacking doesn't need to override your thinking. It just needs to make sure you never finish thinking for yourself before the crowd's answer arrives. And once it arrives, your neurology does the rest. The group doesn't just influence your answer; it shapes it. It rewrites your perception. The Lock-In works for these invisible rooms, too. Before you research a major purchase, write down what you actually want and what you're willing to pay. Before you dive into reviews and opinions, commit your criteria to paper. Before you ask friends what they think about a decision you've already analyzed, record your conclusion. Give yourself the same protection from algorithmic conformity that you'd want before walking into a boardroom. The skill isn't being contrarian. It's being first. First, to your own conclusion, before the room, any room, gets a vote. This is your challenge for the week. Think of one meeting you have coming up where a decision will be made. Before you walk in, open your notes app and type three lines. Line one: what you think. Line two: why. Line three: what would change your mind. That's it. Then sit in that meeting and watch what happens to your thinking when the room pushes back. I think you'll surprise yourself. What if the person you can't resist isn't your boss, your colleagues, or the algorithm? What if it's you? What happens when the decision you need to make threatens something deeper, when being wrong would mean something unbearable about who you are? That's where we're headed next. Closing If this episode gave you something useful, hit that subscribe button. I'm building a complete thinking toolkit here in the Thinking 101 series. If you got value today, share it with someone who could use it, especially anyone heading into a big meeting this week. Drop a comment and tell me: what's the hardest group you've ever had to disagree with? I read every comment and reply. Thanks for watching, and I'll see you in the next episode. Endnotes/References "roughly half of employees stay silent at work rather than voice a concern" / "forty percent estimated they wasted two weeks or more": VitalSmarts, Costly Conversations: Why The Way Employees Communicate Will Make or Break Your Bottom Line (Provo, UT: VitalSmarts, December 2016). In a study of 1,025 employees, 70 percent reported instances where they or others failed to speak up effectively when a peer did not pull their weight. Half wasted seven days or more avoiding crucial conversations. Forty percent estimated they wasted two weeks or more ruminating about the problem. A 2021 follow-up study by Crucial Learning (formerly VitalSmarts) of 1,100 people found the rumination figure had risen to 43 percent. The script's "roughly half" is drawn from the VitalSmarts finding that the majority of the workforce reported conversation failures, with half losing seven or more days to avoidance behaviors. Primary source: https://www.vitalsmarts.com/press/2016/12/costly-conversations-why-the-way-employees-communicate-will-make-or-break-your-bottom-line/. Follow-up study: https://cruciallearning.com/press/costly-conversations-how-lack-of-communication-is-costing-organizations-thousands-in-revenue/ "the Asch conformity experiments from the 1950s": Solomon E. Asch, "Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments," in Groups, Leadership and Men, ed. Harold Guetzkow (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Press, 1951), 177–190. The expanded report was published as Solomon E. Asch, "Studies of Independence and Conformity: I. A Minority of One Against a Unanimous Majority," Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 70, no. 9 (1956): 1–70. Asch conducted the line-judgment experiments at Swarthmore College. Participants judged which of three comparison lines matched a standard line, with confederates unanimously giving incorrect answers on critical trials. Across conditions, approximately 75 percent of participants conformed at least once, and the mean conformity rate was approximately one-third of critical trials. Group sizes varied across experiments, typically with 6–8 confederates and one real participant. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1952-00803-001 "neuroscientist Gregory Berns at Emory University put people inside an MRI machine": Gregory S. Berns, Jonathan Chappelow, Caroline F. Zink, Giuseppe Pagnoni, Megan E. Martin-Skurski, and Jim Richards, "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity and Independence During Mental Rotation," Biological Psychiatry 58, no. 3 (August 1, 2005): 245–253. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.012. The study used functional magnetic resonance imaging with a mental rotation task. Participants (n=32, ages 19–41) judged whether three-dimensional shapes were rotated versions of each other while four confederates provided answers. Conformity was associated with functional changes in the occipital-parietal network (visual and spatial perception regions), not the prefrontal cortex. Independence was associated with heightened activity in the right amygdala and right caudate nucleus, regions linked to emotional salience and threat detection. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15978553/ "The group wasn't changing people's answers. It was changing what they actually saw": Berns et al., "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity," 245–253. The researchers isolated the specifically social element of conformity by comparing brain activation when wrong answers came from a group of people versus when they came from computers. Conformity to group-sourced wrong answers produced greater activation bilaterally in visual cortex and right intraparietal sulcus, overlapping the baseline mental rotation network. Berns interpreted this as evidence that social conformity operates at a perceptual level rather than merely at a decision-making level. Full text PDF: https://pdodds.w3.uvm.edu/files/papers/others/2005/berns2005.pdf "Heightened activity in the amygdala": Berns et al., "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity," 245–253. Participants who gave independent (correct) answers when the group was wrong showed significantly increased activation in the right amygdala and right caudate nucleus. The amygdala is associated with processing emotionally salient stimuli and threats. Berns described these findings as "consistent with the assumptions of social norm theory about the behavioral saliency of standing alone." The script's characterization that "the fear of social isolation activates the same neural machinery as the fear of genuine threats to survival" is an accessible paraphrase of this finding, consistent with the broader social pain literature (e.g., Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003), though Berns' paper does not use that exact language. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15978553/ "engineer Roger Boisjoly and his team at Morton Thiokol had the data": Roger M. Boisjoly, "Ethical Decisions — Morton Thiokol and the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster" (paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Annual Meeting, December 13–18, 1987). First presented as a talk at MIT in January 1987. Boisjoly, a specialist in O-ring seals and rocket joints at Morton Thiokol, documented how engineers recommended against the January 28, 1986 launch based on concerns about O-ring performance in cold temperatures. During the pre-launch teleconference, Thiokol management called an off-line caucus, excluded the engineers, and reversed the no-launch recommendation under pressure from NASA. Boisjoly described the forum as constituting "the unethical decision-making forum" driven by customer pressure. He was awarded the Prize for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The Online Ethics Center at the National Academy of Engineering hosts Boisjoly's full account: https://onlineethics.org/cases/ethical-decisions-morton-thiokol-and-space-shuttle-challenger-disaster-introduction. See also Russell P. Boisjoly, Ellen Foster Curtis, and Eugene Mellican, "Roger Boisjoly and the Challenger Disaster: The Ethical Dimensions," Journal of Business Ethics 8, no. 4 (April 1989): 217–230. doi:10.1007/BF00383335. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00383335 "Nemeth discovered that when someone voices a genuine minority opinion, the entire group thinks more carefully": Charlan J. Nemeth, In Defense of Troublemakers: The Power of Dissent in Life and Business (New York: Basic Books, 2018). Nemeth's research program at UC Berkeley, spanning four decades, demonstrated that exposure to minority dissent stimulates divergent thinking, broader information search, consideration of more alternatives, and higher-quality group decisions. The finding that dissent improves group performance even when the dissenter turns out to be wrong is documented across multiple studies. See also Charlan J. Nemeth, "Minority Influence Theory," IRLE Working Paper No. 218-10 (Berkeley: Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, May 2010). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1pz676t7 "Decades of research by Moscovici": Serge Moscovici, Elisabeth Lage, and Martine Naffrechoux, "Influence of a Consistent Minority on the Responses of a Majority in a Color Perception Task," Sociometry 32, no. 4 (December 1969): 365–380. In the original experiment, participants viewed blue slides while two confederates consistently called them green. The consistent minority condition produced a shift in approximately 8 percent of majority judgments toward the minority position, and roughly one-third of participants conformed at least once. In the inconsistent minority condition, the effect was negligible (approximately 1.25 percent). The script's claim that "minority voices don't just influence people in the moment — they shift perception afterward, in private" draws on Moscovici's subsequent conversion theory and research on the delayed and private effects of minority influence, including afterimage studies showing genuine perceptual shifts. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786541 "Nemeth tested what happens when dissent is assigned rather than authentic": Charlan J. Nemeth, Joanie B. Connell, John D. Rogers, and Keith S. Brown, "Improving Decision Making by Means of Dissent," Journal of Applied Social Psychology 31, no. 1 (2001): 48–58. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02481.x. Groups deliberated a personal injury case under three conditions: authentic dissent (a genuine minority viewpoint), assigned devil's advocate (a member told to argue the opposing side), and no dissent. Authentic dissent was superior in stimulating consideration of opposing positions, original thought, and direct attitude change. The devil's advocate condition did not produce the same cognitive benefits, suggesting that groups detect and discount performative disagreement. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02481.x. See also Charlan Nemeth, Keith Brown, and John Rogers, "Devil's Advocate versus Authentic Dissent: Stimulating Quantity and Quality," European Journal of Social Psychology 31, no. 6 (2001): 707–720. doi:10.1002/ejsp.58.

This episode opens with our remembrance of artist Sal Buscema, who passed away on January 24, 2026. Then, enjoy a double-sized episode featuring an interview with Ron Frenz and Tom DeFalco about their history with the Venom character and the recent backup story they did for Venom #252, an “anniversary” celebration of Amazing Spider-Man #252, which kicked off their run and introduced the world to the black-suited Spider-Man. Then, Dan sits down with Professor Charlie Michael from Emory University’s Film and Media Department. He’s just released the paperback version of his book Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse – Youth, Race and the Hypertext, which is an incredible dissection of the film that we are eager to share with our audience. We’ll be doing a follow-up interview with Charlie about the book, but we wanted to give you a chance to read it along with us. You can order a copy of the book here: https://www.routledge.com/Spider-Man-Into-the-Spider-Verse-Youth-Race-and-the-Hypertext/Michael/p/book/9780367764524 Rick Coste edited this episode. Alex Galucki edited the video version of this podcast. Our artwork is handcrafted by artists Ron Frenz, Sal Buscema, and Nick Cagnetti. Our theme songs were produced by Ryland Bojack, Tony Thaxton, and Spider-Maj. Our animated introduction to the show is by Josh Sutton of Panels to Pixels. Watch the show on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOPCnjzQZNViyEnoOuckaVQ We would also love to see you join our Amazing Spider-Slack community board. If you'd like to join in on our amazing conversations, click this link to get started: https://join.slack.com/t/amazingspider/shared_invite/zt-42tsfhs2-yBaH6KkRmOWiW_8gCf9SmQ This week's Patreon podcasts include a review of Amazing Spider-Man (vol. 7) #21, our interview with Ron Frenz and Tom DeFalco about Venom #252, and two episodes of the Whatever a Spider Can Diaries, which documents Dan’s process of writing a book about Spider-Man. If you'd like to follow along with our reviews as they are released, please check out our Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/superiorspidertalk Read our B-Title reviews, collecting memories, and more in the Amazing Spider-Talk Substack! http://www.amazingspider.substack.com You can email questions to our show at amazingspidertalk@gmail.com or by clicking here. You can also BUY MARK'S BOOK, 100 Things Spider-Man Fans Should Know & Do Before They Die. The post Our Amazing Friends: Black Suit Debut Creators (Ron Frenz & Tom DeFalco) Discuss Venom #252 appeared first on Amazing Spider-Talk.

How can public health detect invisible threats before they become crises? In this episode, we explore two powerful approaches shaping the future of preparedness: wastewater surveillance and radiological emergency response.  First, Allison Wheeler, Manager, Wastewater Surveillance Unit Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment shares how her team detected measles in wastewater before clinical cases appeared, helping local partners identify an outbreak early and act quickly. She explains how wastewater surveillance is evolving beyond COVID-19 to monitor emerging and re-emerging diseases, track antimicrobial resistance, and strengthen early warning systems across communities.  Then, Dr. Ziad Kazzi, Professor of Emergency Medicine at Emory University and President of the American College of Medical Toxicology breaks down what a radiological incident really looks like, from accidental exposures to nuclear incidents, and why these events may be more manageable than many people assume. He discusses how mass gatherings, like global sporting events, prepare for rare but high-impact scenarios, the importance of detection and decontamination, and how health systems and emergency responders work together to protect both patients and communities.Subscribe | ASTHOMeeting Home PageMeeting Home Page

There are many ways to describe Donald Trump’s second term, especially given how many of his policies and executive orders related to education and other areas have been tied up in federal courts. Legal challenges seem to follow nearly every move. Still, one recent court development hasn’t received much attention from major news outlets. Some have called it a “win for academic freedom,” but Dr. Beverly Daniel Tatum sees it as more complicated than that. Also on today’s “Closer Look with Rose Scott,” Emory University’s Dr. Crystal R. Sanders and Dr. Karida L. Brown discuss the life and legacy of Dr. Carter G. Woodson, the founder of what would eventually become Black History Month. They share his dangerous pursuit of accurately telling the story of contributions made by African descended people.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/korean-studies

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/japanese-studies

Nationalism today depends on the perception of victimhood. The historical memory of past suffering endows nationalist movements with political legitimacy and a sense of moral superiority. Koreans recall Japanese colonial atrocities, while Japan commemorates the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Israel sanctifies the Holocaust and Poland trumpets the Nazi and Soviet occupations. Even Germany and Russia, perpetrators of historical crimes, today cast themselves as victims by pointing to national suffering. In this theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich book, Jie-Hyun Lim offers a new way to understand nationalism and its political instrumentalization of suffering, developing the concept of “victimhood nationalism” and exploring it in a range of global settings. Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age (Columbia UP, 2025) examines relations among Poland, Germany, Israel, Korea, and Japan, focusing on how memories of colonialism, the Holocaust, and Stalinist terror have converged and intertwined in transnational spaces. With an emphasis on memory formation, Lim scrutinizes how perpetrators in Germany and Japan transformed themselves into victims, as well as how nationalists in Poland, Korea, and Israel portray themselves as hereditary victims in order to rebut external criticism. He considers the construction of nations as victims and perpetrators, tracing the interaction of history and memory. Ultimately, the book contends, challenging victimhood nationalism is necessary to overcome the endless competition over national suffering and instead promote reconciliation, mutual understanding, and transnational solidarity. Dr. Jie-Hyun Lim is the CIPSH Chairholder of Global Easts, Distinguished Professor, and founding director of the Critical Global Studies Institute at Sogang University. In 2025–2026, he is the Class of 1955 Visiting Professor in Global Studies at Williams College. His many books include Global Easts: Remembering, Imagining, Mobilizing (Columbia, 2022). Visit the Critical Global Studies Institute's homepage: here Buy Victimhood Nationalism: History and Memory in a Global Age: here About the host: Leslie Hickman is an Anthropology graduate student at Emory University. She has an MA in Korean Studies and a KO-EN translation certificate from the Literature Translation Institute of Korea. You can contact her at leslie.hickman@emory.edu

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast we navigated the rapidly evolving treatment landscape of Metastatic Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer. We were joined by Dr. Kevin Kalinsky, Director of the Breast Cancer Program at the Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, to discuss the implications of new targeted therapies, optimal sequencing strategies, and practical toxicity management. Listen us on: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/31BXhY9FM4gPWG10WgE11o Follow us on social media: •⁠  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@oncologybrothers •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ The discussion covered: • The critical role of NGS testing (tissue vs. liquid biopsy) in identifying PIK3CA, ESR1, AKT1 and PTEN alterations. • Frontline management of high-risk, endocrine-resistant disease with the inavolisib triplet (INAVO120) and its overall survival benefit. • Choosing between CDK4/6 inhibitors (abemaciclib vs. ribociclib) in de novo metastatic disease. • Post-CDK4/6 inhibitors on progression we covered, the use of oral SERDs (imlunestrant) and AKT inhibitors (capivasertib). • The "ADC explosion", sequencing T-DXd (DESTINY-Breast06), sacituzumab govitecan (TROPiCS-02), and datopotamab deruxtecan (TROPION-Breast01). • Clinical pearls for managing toxicities: stomatitis, hyperglycemia, rash, neutropenia, and ILD. Join us as we break down the latest data and provide actionable insights for the practicing oncologist. Don't forget to subscribe for more episodes in our breast cancer algorithm series! #MetastaticBreastCancer, #HRPositive, #ADCsequencing, #PIK3CA-AKT, #OncologyPodcast, #OncologyBrothers

Biblical scholar James Tabor says that Mary – the mother of Jesus – is “the best known, least known woman in history.” This hour, we’ll get to know Mary a little better and talk about why some people are obsessed with preserving her purity at the expense of her humanity. And, we talk with (The Reverend) Amey Victoria Adkins-Jones from Emory University about Mary mythology, Black Madonnas and the myriad ways Mary is depicted in art and culture. GUESTS: James D. Tabor is a biblical scholar, and a retired professor of religious studies at the University Of North Carolina at Charlotte. He’s the author of The Lost Mary: Rediscovering the Mother of Jesus. (The Rev.) Amey Victoria Adkins-Jones is Assistant Professor of Theology and Africana Studies at Emory University. She’s a constructive theologian and scholar of Black religion specializing in Mariology, Black feminist and womanist thought, and theological anthropology. She’s the author of Immaculate Misconceptions: A Black Mariology. MUSIC FEATURED (in order): Mary On A Cross – Ghost Along Comes Mary – The Association The Wind Cries Mary – Jimi Hendrix Mary Rock the Baby – Jarell Smalls Like a Prayer – Madonna Lady Madonna (Theme from Grace Under Fire) – Aretha Franklin Mary, Did You Know? – The Braxtons Join the conversation on Facebook and Twitter. The Colin McEnroe Show is available as a podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, TuneIn, Listen Notes, or wherever you get your podcasts. Subscribe and never miss an episode! Subscribe to The Noseletter, an email compendium of merriment, secrets, and ancient wisdom brought to you by The Colin McEnroe Show. Colin McEnroe, Robyn Doyoon-Aitken and Dylan Reyes contributed to this episode.Support the show: http://www.wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From the Close Reading For The 21st Century Symposium, hosted by Emory University. Why is close reading best understood as a conversation? What are its evaluative standards? How does it extend the conversation beyond literary studies? Cast (in order of appearance): Johanna Winant, Matt Seybold, Farah Bakaari, Nathan Suhr-Sytsma, Dan Sinykin, Kimberly Quiogue Andrews, Oren Izenberg, Beci Carver, Brian Glavey, Miranda Hickman, Patrick Sui, Jeff Dolven, Katie Kadue, Omari Weekes, Lisa Lee, Daniel Reynolds, Julie Orlemanski, Joshua Kotin Date Recorded: November 7, 2025 Music: Danny Weiss Quartet, Moby Episode Webpage: TheAmericanVandal.Substack.com/Collarbone

Farshad Ghodoosi, assistant professor of business law at California State University, Northridge, and Tal Kastner, associate professor of law at Rutgers University, join the Business Scholarship Podcast to discuss their article Against the Drafter: An Empirical and Theoretical Analysis of the Doctrine of Contra Proferentem. This episode is hosted by Andrew Jennings, associate professor of law at Emory University, and was edited by Alec Johnson, a law student at Emory University.

What does customer experience look like when AI starts acting on behalf of the customer? As AI agents increasingly understand customer context, remember past behavior, and reduce friction, they begin to insert themselves between companies and customers. That shift has major implications for CX, branding, differentiation, and how organizations stay relevant when customers stop visiting websites, apps, and even stores. This conversation focuses entirely on the customer's perspective, not internal AI efficiency. It's about what happens when customers trust AI agents to search, filter, recommend — and sometimes even buy for them. Best Quote from the Episode "When your customer experience isn't good enough, you get replaced by something that is." — Colin Shaw Key Questions Discussed What happens to customer experience when AI starts making decisions for customers instead of customers interacting directly with companies? If AI becomes the primary filter of choice, how do brands stay visible — and avoid becoming invisible? Which parts of today's customer journey are most at risk of disappearing altogether? Why You Should Listen If you're responsible for customer experience, strategy, marketing, or growth, this episode challenges some deeply held assumptions about how customers discover, evaluate, and choose brands. Rather than focusing on internal AI use cases, this conversation looks outward — at how customer behavior is shifting and what that means for organizations that want to remain visible, relevant, and chosen in an AI-first world. This episode doesn't give you a checklist. It gives you something more valuable: a new way of thinking about where CX is heading — and why waiting is risky. Resources Mentioned Colin Shaw - https://www.linkedin.com/in/colinrjshaw/ Professor Ryan Hamilton - http://linkedin.com/in/ryan-hamilton-49b3321  About the Hosts: Colin Shaw is a LinkedIn 'Top Voice' with a massive 286,000 followers and 87,000 subscribers to his 'Why Customers Buy' newsletter. Shaw is named one of the world's 'Top 150 Business Influencers' by LinkedIn. His company, Beyond Philosophy LLC, has been selected four times by the Financial Times as a top management consultancy. Shaw is co-host of the top 1.5% podcast 'The Intuitive Customer'—with over 600,000 downloads—and author of eight best-sellers on customer experience. Shaw is a sought-after keynote speaker. Follow Colin on LinkedIn.   Ryan Hamilton is a Professor of Marketing at Emory University's Goizueta Business School and co-author of 'The Intuitive Customer' book. An award-winning teacher and researcher in consumer psychology, he has been named one of Poets & Quants' "World's Best 40 B-School Profs Under 40." His research focuses on how brands, prices, and choice architecture influence shopper decision-making, and his findings have been published in top academic journals and covered by major media outlets like The New York Times and CNN. His work highlights how psychology can help firms better understand and serve their customers. Ryan has a new book launch in June 2025 called "The Growth Dilemma: Managing Your Brand When Different Customers Want Different Things" Harvard Business Press Follow Ryan on LinkedIn. Subscribe & Follow Apple Podcasts Spotify

This is a re-release with a major 2026 Update! Jennifer Evans was a rising pre-med senior at Emory University when she vanished in the summer of 1995.  As investigators backtracked Jennifer's steps, they discovered she had been chatting with Dustin “Dusty” Turner.  When they found him, he appeared to be an upstanding citizen.  But…when his story kept changing, investigators dug deeper and what they discovered would send shockwaves through the Navy SEAL community.  But…was the truth revealed at trial….or is an innocent man behind bars? Join Margot as she explores the tragic story of Jennifer Evans and two promising Navy SEAL candidates who were weeks away from SEAL training graduation. Check out the Target of Opportunity Documentary on Amazon Prime:  https://amzn.to/4tlfDnF ⸻

Running a multi-location urgent care is rarely about bold growth moves. More often, success comes from discipline, culture, and getting the fundamentals right before scaling.In this episode, Michael sits down with Andrew Shulman, CEO of ModernMD Urgent Care, for a candid conversation about what it really takes to lead a 14-location urgent care organization serving underserved communities across Brooklyn and Queens.With more than 20 years of healthcare leadership experience, Andrew brings a rare perspective shaped by hospitals, occupational health, national employer services, and now direct-to-consumer urgent care. Since stepping into the CEO role in 2024, he has focused on stabilizing operations, restructuring management, strengthening culture, and building systems that support sustainable growth.Together, they explore why spreadsheet management alone fails in urgent care, how patient experience is driven by frontline leadership, and what metrics actually matter when you are responsible for multiple locations. This episode is a practical look at urgent care leadership from someone actively in the trenches.

Boortz joins Tug and Los to talk about not getting his Hall of Fame banner, the new courses offered at college's like Emory University, his high school swimming career, the Olympics, and the Bad Bunny and TPUSA halftime showsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The first of three episodes based on the "Close Reading For The 21st Century Symposium" hosted by Emory University. The symposium's opening address is followed by short provocations on "Freedom," "The Best," "Language," and "Difficulty," after which a there is a lengthy Q&A. Cast (in order of appearance): Dan Sinykin, Matt Seybold, Johanna Winant, Beci Carver, Joshua Kotin, Julie Orlemanski, Omari Weekes, Anthony Cuda, John Lysaker, Dez Miller, Jeff Dolven, Oren Izenberg, Benjamin Reiss, Miranda Hickman, Emma Davenport, Farah Bakaari Date Recorded: November 7, 2025 Music: Danny Weiss Quartet, Moby Episode Webpage: TheAmericanVandal.Substack.com/RedWheelbarrow

Boortz joins Tug and Los to talk about not getting his Hall of Fame banner, the new courses offered at college's like Emory University, his high school swimming career, the Olympics, and the Bad Bunny and TPUSA halftime showsAtlanta's ONLY All Conservative News & Talk Station.: https://www.xtra1063.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A lifelong seeker of truth, Dr. Chava Green has always been drawn to exploring the complexities of the world. As a college student she explored different areas of thought, eventually learning more about Judaism and strengthening her Jewish identity. In turn, Chava's journey guided her to the rich tradition of Jewish mysticism.Chava Green is the founder of The Hasidic Feminist Platform. She completed her PhD in religion at Emory University, writing her dissertation on Hasidic feminism. Chava is currently working on a book entitled The Geulah is Female.Now, she joins us to answer eighteen questions on Jewish mysticism with Rabbi Dr. Benji Levy including the role of women in the Messianic Era and how we can see God in the everyday. Here are our questions: What is Jewish mysticism?How were you introduced to Jewish mysticism?In an ideal world, would all Jews be mystics?What do you think of when you think of God?What is the purpose of the Jewish people?How does prayer work?What is the goal of Torah study?Does Jewish mysticism view men and women the same?Should Judaism be hard or easy?Why did God create the world? Can humans do something that is against God's will?What do you think of when you think about Moshiach?Is the State of Israel part of the final redemption?What is the greatest challenge facing the world today?How has modernity changed Jewish mysticism?What differentiates Jewish mysticism from the mysticism of other religions? Does one need to be religious to study Jewish mysticism?Can mysticism be dangerous? How has Jewish mysticism affected your relationships with yourself and with others?What is a Jewish teaching that you always take with you?

With only a few weeks left to his time in office, Dr. Raphael Bostic reflects on his time as the 15th president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. In front of a live “Closer Look” audience, Bostic shared what it took to oversee the economic wellbeing of all or most of Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Louisiana – a region that is far from a monolith. Speaking with host Rose Scott, he dispels any suspicion that he’s leaving because of the Trump Administration’s economic policies, evaluates whether he accomplished what he came to office to do, discusses how the bank addresses economic disparities, and shares what a happy retirement looks like to him. Bostic also took questions from the live audience, which included business school students from Emory University. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Black mothers in America often navigate a path layered with anxiety, fear, and concerns for their own wellness in a system that has too often failed them. This book captures that complex reality—where the intersection of race, gender, and motherhood brings both obstacles and profound moments of joy. Yet, amid every challenge, these mothers find strength, beauty, and grace as they push through to the other side. With images from past and present and heartfelt stories, Moms In Focus reveals the diversity of Black motherhood, shattering stereotypes and showing that it is anything but a monolith. Each mother's journey is a story of transformation, whether through navigating infertility, enduring grief, altering generational curses, adjusting to change or embracing mental health support. Just as a lotus blooms from the mud, these mothers rise, reminding us that even during trying times, there is an extraordinary beauty in Pushing Thru. In today's episode I sit down with Keisha and RaQuita who are phenomenal women in their own right, trailblazers in their respective fields. We discuss how they met, came together, and combine their expertise in storytelling and visual execution to bring the Moms in Focus Project to life—a powerful masterpiece that captures the essence of motherhood with intention and artistry. Bios Keisha Reaves is the clinical director and owner of Push Thru Therapy. She is a licensed mental health therapist who is also certified in perinatal mental health. Keisha Reaves, specializes in assisting birthing parents navigating diverse challenges, from fertility issues to perinatal mood and anxiety disorders. In 2023 she completed her fellowship at Emory University's Psychoanalytic Institute. She also served on the Georgia Department of Public Health Maternal Mortality Review Committee. Keisha has also co-authored the published research study, Enhancing Obstetric Healthcare Providers' Knowledge of Black Maternal Mental Health: A Feasibility Study. RaQuita Weathers is a professional photographer and creative strategist based in Atlanta, GA, celebrated for her expertise in personal branding and portrait photography. As the founder of Belle Rouge Photography, Flarehaus Creative Agency, and co-founder of Photography BAE Studios, RaQuita has dedicated her career to helping women of color tell their stories boldly and authentically through dynamic visual storytelling. With a keen eye for detail and a passion for empowering others, she creates visual narratives that resonate with authenticity and purpose. With a Master's degree in Business Administration and a background in Corporate Finance, RaQuita seamlessly combines her analytical expertise with artistic vision. https://www.momsinfocusproject.com/ Become a Sisters in Loss Birth Bereavement, and Postpartum Doula Here Living Water Doula Services Book Recommendations and Links Below You can shop my Amazon Store for the Book Recommendations You can follow Sisters in Loss on Social Join our Black Moms in Loss Online Weekly Grief Support Group Join the Sisters in Loss Online Community Sisters in Loss TV Youtube Channel Sisters in Loss Instagram Sisters in Loss Facebook You can follow Erica on Social Erica's Website Erica's Instagram Erica's Facebook

Sean Vanatta, senior lecturer in financial history and policy at the University of Glasgow, joins the Business Scholarship Podcast to discuss his book Private Finance, Public Power: A History of Bank Supervision in America, which he co-authored with Peter Conti-Brown. This episode is hosted by Andrew Jennings, associate professor of law at Emory University, and was edited by Alec Johnson, a law student at Emory University.

In this interview I'm joined by Dr. Stephen Haynes to discuss the life, thought, and legacy of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. We pay special attention to the way he has been co-opted by radically different groups, each seeking to draw on portions of his thought to justify their own ends. Stephen R. Haynes holds a Ph.D. in Religion and Literature from Emory University, the M. Div. from Columbia Theological Seminary, an M. A. from Florida State University, and a B. A. from Vanderbilt University. Professor Haynes has been at Rhodes since 1989 and offers courses on the Holocaust, the Bible and its reception, mass incarceration, and religion and addiction. Read the Book: The Battle for Bonhoeffer: https://amzn.to/46mHAkUWant to support the channel? Here's how!Give monthly: https://patreon.com/gospelsimplicity  Make a one-time donation: https://paypal.me/gospelsimplicityBook a meeting: https://calendly.com/gospelsimplicity/meet-with-austinRead my writings: https://austinsuggs.substack.com/Support the show

How are you really using AI — and how does that compare to others? In this episode, Colin Shaw introduces a simple behavioural framework for understanding how people are actually using AI today — not in theory, but in practice — and why this matters enormously for the future of Customer Experience. Rather than treating AI as a technology maturity model, Colin reframes it as a behavioural curve, shaped by confidence, trust, intent, and the consequences of being wrong. Drawing on real usage examples, ChatGPT analytics, and current research, Colin outlines four AI usage patterns that people tend to move through over time. Most people touch more than one. Very few stay in just one forever. The episode challenges listeners to ask: Where am I on this curve? Where are my customers today? And where will they be in 3–5 years? This is Part One of a new AI series exploring the implications of changing customer behaviour — and what organisations should be doing now to prepare. Best Quote from the Episode "This isn't a technology maturity model. It's a behavioural one. People don't adopt AI in a single way — they move through patterns depending on trust, confidence, and what's at stake." Colin Shaw, Founder & CEO, Beyond Philosophy Why You Should Listen If you're: wondering how AI will really change Customer Experience unsure whether your organisation is preparing for the right future or trying to understand how customer decision-making is evolving …this episode gives you a clear, practical way to think about AI adoption — grounded in behaviour, not hype. Resources Mentioned Colin Shaw - https://www.linkedin.com/in/colinrjshaw/ Professor Ryan Hamilton - http://linkedin.com/in/ryan-hamilton-49b3321  About the Hosts: Colin Shaw is a LinkedIn 'Top Voice' with a massive 284,000 followers and 87,000 subscribers to his 'Why Customers Buy' newsletter. Shaw is named one of the world's 'Top 150 Business Influencers' by LinkedIn. His company, Beyond Philosophy LLC, has been selected four times by the Financial Times as a top management consultancy. Shaw is co-host of the top 2% podcast 'The Intuitive Customer'—with over 600,000 downloads—and author of eight best-sellers on customer experience, Shaw is a sought-after keynote speaker. Follow Colin on LinkedIn.   Ryan Hamilton is a Professor of Marketing at Emory University's Goizueta Business School and co-author of 'The Intuitive Customer' book. An award-winning teacher and researcher in consumer psychology, he has been named one of Poets & Quants' "World's Best 40 B-School Profs Under 40." His research focuses on how brands, prices, and choice architecture influence shopper decision-making, and his findings have been published in top academic journals and covered by major media outlets like The New York Times and CNN. His work highlights how psychology can help firms better understand and serve their customers. Ryan has a new book launch in June 2025 called "The Growth Dilemma: Managing Your Brand When Different Customers Want Different Things" Harvard Business Press Follow Ryan on LinkedIn.  Subscribe & Follow Apple Podcasts Spotify  

Episode 190 - Meryl Kaufman is a speech-language pathologist with over 30 years of clinical practice specializing in speech and swallowing rehabilitation for patients with head and neck cancer. She has worked in multidisciplinary academic medical centers throughout the Southeast, including the Medical College of Georgia, the Medical University of South Carolina, the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Emory University. She is also a co-founder and former long-term board member of the Head and Neck Cancer Alliance, a nonprofit organization dedicated to prevention, early detection, and awareness of head and neck cancer.  In 2018, she founded Georgia Speech and Swallowing, LLC, a company focused on national advocacy, outreach, education, and product development for individuals who have undergone laryngectomy surgery (removal of the voice box/larynx). She has recently developed, patented, and licensed an alternative method of voice production, offering a low-cost and accessible voice rehabilitation option for laryngectomy patients worldwide. She collaborated with Noah McNeely at Product QuickStart in developing the CAD designs and prototypes to support the product launch. https://www.headandneck.org/team/meryl-kaufman-med-ccc-slp-bcs-s/   https://leader.pubs.asha.org/doi/10.1044/leader.PA2.19092014.30 Product QuickStart: Noah McNeely https://productquickstart.com 'opu probiotics by Tiffany Krumins: https://www.opuprobiotics.com Podcast Website: https://productgeniuspod.com Slightly Annoying Co-Host: Steven Julian https://www.infinitywmg.com/  Podcast Producer: Jodey Smith https://www.jodeysmith.com/ 

Why do some moments feel enormous while others vanish from memory? Why do two people experience the same event and walk away with completely different interpretations? And why do we so often repeat stories about ourselves that keep us stuck? In this episode, we explore narrative identity—the science-backed idea that who we are is shaped not just by what happens to us, but by the story we tell about what happens. But small shifts in perspective can radically change those narratives. In this episode we unpack what it means to notice the script, question it, and rewrite it. We also dive into the research showing that the ability to find agency and redemption in our stories is one of the strongest predictors of mental health. Here are links to some of the resources mentioned in the episode: Emory University blog: Changing the narrative of your self Leo Babauta for ZenHabits.net: Mental Badassery: Becoming Aware of the Stories We Tell Ourselves Listen to David Foster Wallace's commencement speech at Kenyon College. Samantha Boardman for Psychology Today: Take Control of the Story You Tell About Yourself Bruce Feiler for The New York Times: The Stories That Bind Us What Fresh Hell is co-hosted by Amy Wilson and Margaret Ables. We love the sponsors that make this show possible! You can always find all the special deals and codes for all our current sponsors on our website: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.whatfreshhellpodcast.com/p/promo-codes/ What Fresh Hell podcast, mom friends, funny moms, parenting advice, parenting experts, parenting tips, mothers, families, parenting skills, parenting strategies, parenting styles, busy moms, self-help for moms, manage kid's behavior, teenager, tween, child development, family activities, family fun, parent child relationship, decluttering, kid-friendly, invisible workload, default parent, narrative identity, personal narratives, storytelling and identity, self story psychology, meaning making, memory and perception, how the brain creates meaning, cognitive bias, sense of self, psychology of storytelling, rewriting your story, mental health and narratives, agency and redemption, neuroscience of identity, parenting and mindset, family narratives, personal growth podcast, self awareness psychology, behavioral psychology, mindset shifts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Send us a textBarriers don't bury the church; they clarify the mission. The Book of Acts reveals a pattern in which every barrier is followed by a fresh witness to Jesus. In this episode, Bishop Wright has a conversation with Bishop Justin Holcomb using Acts as the centerpiece. From language and culture gaps to political pressure and outrage cycles, they discuss how a consecrated voice—rooted in promise, not panic—cuts through the noise and opens doors for real renewal. Their conversation points toward a practical path forward: witness over winning, promise over pressure, and trust that the Holy Spirit will write the next paragraph of the church's story. Listen in for the full conversation.The Rt. Rev. Dr. Justin S. Holcomb was ordained and consecrated as the fifth bishop of the Diocese of Central Florida on June 10, 2023. He was elected at a special Diocesan Convention on Jan. 14, 2023.A native Floridian, the bishop earned his Ph.D. in theological studies from Emory University and has both a Master of Arts in theological studies and a Master of Arts in Christian thought from Reformed Theological Seminary as well as a B.A. in biblical studies from Southeastern University. He also studied at the University of Oxford during the summer of 1996.Support the show Follow us on IG and FB at Bishop Rob Wright.

Mary Dudziak, Asa Griggs Candler Professor of Law at Emory University, and Christopher Nichols, Wayne Woodrow Hayes Chair in National Security Studies and Professor of History at the Ohio State University, sit down with James M. Lindsay to unpack a new CFR survey of historians on the best and worst foreign policy decisions in U.S. history.   Mentioned on the Episode:   Christopher McKnight Nichols, Promise and Peril: America at the Dawn of a Global Age   Joshua Kurlantzick, A Great Place to Have a War   CFR.org, The Ten Best and Ten Worst U.S. Foreign Policy Decisions   Opinions expressed on The President's Inbox are solely those of the host or our guests, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.