Podcasts about Misinformation

“I do not believe we should be testing to test. We have to know, is this test going to change management and is it going to make a difference,” says pediatric allergist-immunologist Dr. Zachary Rubin. His knack for providing that sort of straightforward guidance explains why Dr. Rubin has become a trusted voice on allergies, asthma, and vaccines for his millions of followers on social media platforms. It's also why we couldn't ask for a better guide for our discussion on the rise in allergies, asthma, and immune-related conditions in children, and how families can navigate the quickly evolving science and rampant misinformation in the space. On this episode of Raise the Line, we also preview Dr. Rubin's new book, All About Allergies, in which he breaks down dozens of conditions and diseases, offering clear explanations and practical treatment options for families. Join host Lindsey Smith for this super informative conversation in which Dr. Rubin shares his thoughts on a wide range of topics including: What's behind the rise in allergic and immune-related conditions.Tips for managing misinformation, myths and misunderstandings. How digital platforms can be leveraged to strengthen public health.How to build back public trust in medicine.Mentioned in this episode:All About Allergies bookBench to Bedside PodcastInstagramTikTokYouTube Channel If you like this podcast, please share it on your social channels. You can also subscribe to the series and check out all of our episodes at www.osmosis.org/podcast

SummaryIn this episode of the Faith and Culture Now podcast, Scott Shiffer and guests discuss the multifaceted impact of AI on society, education, and spirituality. They explore both the benefits and concerns surrounding AI, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking and ethical considerations. The conversation highlights the role of AI in enhancing creativity, its implications for mental health, and the need for responsible usage in the church and beyond. Ultimately, the discussion calls for a balanced approach to integrating AI into our lives while maintaining human connection and discernment.takeawaysAI is a significant part of our culture and is here to stay.There are both benefits and concerns regarding AI's impact.AI can enhance efficiency in various tasks, including education and church activities.Critical thinking is essential when using AI tools.AI can help in creating content but should not replace authentic human creativity.The ethical implications of AI usage must be considered.AI can influence mental health and social interactions.Misinformation can be exacerbated by AI technologies.AI has the potential to free us up for more meaningful human experiences.The church must navigate AI's role in spirituality responsibly.Links: https://linktr.ee/faithandculturenowSupport: https://www.patreon.com/cw/FaithandCultureNow#AI #Technology #Ethics

0:11 - Tumbler Ridge mass shooting: What we know so far. 10:00 - We take your calls and texts on the Tumbler Ridge mass shooting. 29:08 - Facebook eyes Alberta as it expands AI data centre portfolio - what this means for the local economy. 39:41 -  Jasper considers increasing off-site levies; chamber of commerce raises concerns. 49:30 - Doctors warn against dangers of health misinformation from AI sources. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What can we do when we love our country, but feel exhausted by politics and unable to understand how the government actually works? Watch the video of this episode on YouTube here. In this episode, Russell–who this guest would lovingly call a “governerd”–welcomes Sharon McMahon, who has been called “America's government teacher,” known online as Sharon Says So and through her Substack The Preamble. They talk about why so many Americans feel either helpless or furious in the public square, and what it would look like to rebuild sanity without sliding into cynicism.  McMahon explains how she stays out of partisan leanings by anchoring herself to the Constitution and to moral commitments that can critique both sides—without dehumanizing the people who vote differently. The conversation ranges from digital burnout and practical tools to build better habits to what genuine civic hope looks like, and McMahon makes a case for a “small and mighty” faithfulness: history is shaped by ordinary people who keep doing the next needed thing. Ultimately, the conversation ends with a heed: spend less energy proving you're right and more energy living in a way that makes love believable. If the churn of back-and-forth political rhetoric has you feeling whiplash, anchor yourself in this conversation, which reminds that democracy isn't sustained by viral takes or ideological purity, but by normal people doing the next faithful thing. Sharon says so. Resources mentioned in this episode: The Small and the Mighty by Sharon McMahon We Are Mighty by Sharon McMahon (releasing May 2026). Keep up with Russell: Sign up for the weekly newsletter where Russell shares thoughtful takes on big questions, offers a Christian perspective on life, and recommends books and music he's enjoying. Submit a question for the show at questions@russellmoore.com  Subscribe to the Christianity Today Magazine: Special offer for listeners of The Russell Moore Show: Click here for 25% off a subscription. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Daily life in Gaza: airstrikes, shelling and aid restrictions - OCHAThe vital task of helping Sudan's survivors of sexual violence - UNICEFMeasles risk increases across Europe: WHO 

MIT and Stanford professor Alex "Sandy" Pentland, one of the most cited researchers in the world with over 165,000 citations, explains why the real AI advantage isn't smarter models but collective intelligence. It's smarter humans working together with AI as the connective tissue. Drawing from his latest book Shared Wisdom, Pentland reveals the frameworks behind community intelligence and why data ownership, not frontier AI, will determine who wins the next decade.You'll discover:✅ Why "people plus AI" consistently beats AI alone, and the hedge fund evidence that proves it✅ How "AI buddies" are replacing corporate manuals, newsletters, and hallway conversations to keep distributed teams aligned✅ The Deliberation.io tool that makes meetings more than twice as effective by neutralizing power dynamics and keeping groups focused✅ Why a 350,000-person multinational is cutting in-house staff to 150,000 while hiring 100,000 more project-based workers, and how AI enables that shift✅ How a doctor with zero technical background built a hospital operating system in 6 weeks using AI tools✅ The staggering stat: AI costs are dropping by 50% every 3.5 months, a factor of 1,000 over three years, and what that means for personal, on-device AI✅ Why China's Belt and Road and India's Citizen Stack (1.4 billion customers signed up) are quietly winning the global data game while Silicon Valley focuses on frontier models✅ Sandy's provocative proposal: a 10% equity contribution to sovereign wealth funds at company formation, which would have created a $10 trillion US fund if started in 1990⏱️ TIMESTAMPS0:00 Why AI alone loses money: the hedge fund reality check2:07 Shared wisdom, community intelligence, and organizational culture4:25 AI buddies: the brilliant librarian inside your company5:44 Deliberation.io: making meetings 2x more effective7:01 Using AI for exploration and long-range strategic thinking11:29 Who's to blame when AI fails: executives or the machine?14:28 Why AI can't do causality and what that means for leaders18:14 AI's killer app for remote work and distributed organizations21:09 A doctor built a hospital OS in 6 weeks: small teams, massive impact24:09 Job displacement, social safety nets, and the sovereign wealth fund idea27:01 Reinventing education: Costa Rica's bet and the MIT Media Lab model32:16 LLMs vs. older AI: why you need both (and the loyalagents.org initiative)37:13 Practical starting points for redesigning work with AI40:16 Misinformation, data provenance, and the billion-dollar North Korea problem48:50 The global data race: China, India, UAE, and why frontier models aren't the game54:00 Cybersecurity warning: agentic AI creates massive new attack surfaces

Latest News/Headlines | Traffic | Weather | Sports Topic I: Compassion: from Home to Humanity Topic II: Truth, Misinformation & Moral Responsibility in the Digital Age Presenter(s):
Imam Noorudeen Jahangeer Imam Muhammad Ather Guest(s): * Dr Aziz Hafiz * Mr Aidan McQuade * Dr Deborah Smith * Damian Watson and Emily Angus (panel interview) * Ms Yasmina Silva 
Producer(s): Aisha Batul Mannan and Aiysha Kanwal Nawaz Lead Producer: Hania Yaqub Researcher(s): Amna Marium, Raazia Choudhry, Hannan Ashraf, Tooba Malik, Zanubia Ateeq and Sadiya Rahman

In this episode I sit down with my colleague to dive into how sports nutrition is growing in the tactical and high-performance field. He also shares practical tips to spot nutrition misinformation, gives his take on the new dietary guidelines, and more!Brandon Lee, DHSc, RD, CSSD, CCRP, FAND, is a human performance practitioner, researcher, and educator dedicated to advancing athlete health, readiness, and resilience. A Registered Dietitian and Board-Certified Specialist in Sports Dietetics, he serves as a Dietitian within the U.S. Army's Holistic Health and Fitness (H2F) system, providing performance nutrition support to more than 4,000 Soldiers in the 10th Mountain Division. His work integrates evidence-based practice, interdisciplinary collaboration, and applied research to optimize tactical performance and enhance Soldier lethality and recovery.Brandon's background spans clinical nutrition, long-term care, collegiate teaching, sports performance, and human nutrition research. He has contributed to high-performance environments, including Minor League Baseball and the Obesity and Metabolism Unit at UC Davis, where he coordinated research on dietary patterns and metabolic health.An active scholar and speaker, Brandon has published peer-reviewed and professional articles on low energy availability, overtraining, and tactical nutrition, and he presents regularly at national and state conferences. He also serves on advisory boards and has held multiple leadership and service roles within professional organizations.Brandon earned his Doctor of Health Science from PennWest University and is recognized as a Fellow of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.In this episode Stevie chats with Brandon about:What is encompassed in the growing field of tactical nutritionCollaboration being key to be a better practitioner and to better support the individual athleteThe three pillars of evidence-based practiceHot takeaways from the new dietary guidelinesAnd so much more!Stay connected:Check out Brandon's professional profile hereFollow along with Brandon's work on LinkedInFollow Stevie on Instagram: @stevielynlynJoin Stevie's newsletter: Stevie Lyn Nutrition newsletter

Ahead of Israeli president Isaac Herzog's state visit to Australia, producer Gabriella Accaria breaks down his political background and the reception of his visit by politicians and activist groups. The findings from the coronial inquest into the Bondi Junction stabbing were recently handed down, highlighting the importance of housing for people living with a mental health condition. Habilis in Summer Hill provides low-cost housing for people living with a chronic mental health condition— their centre manager Linda Bowden joins us to explain how stable housing helps people get better access to mental health support. Have you ever had a family dinner ruined because your Worst Uncle decided to share his awful AI-informed hot takes? Molecular biologist and president of the Science Journalists Association of Australia Dr Jackson Ryan is here with some strategies on dealing with misinformation from your family and friends. Cinema workers at Village Cinema at the Crown Melbourne expressed concerns about their safety during a one-night only screening of Pauline Hanson's new animated film 'A Super Progressive Movie'. Producer Jessica D'Souza chats to the director of the Young Worker's Centre Victoria, Yolanda Robson to discuss the safety concerns cinema workers face during conservative film screenings. This episode of Backchat was produced by Gabriella Accaria, Dani Zhang, Holly Payne and Jessica D'Souza. Executive produced by Bec Cushway. Hosted by Tanita Razhagi and Eva Sikes-Gerogiannis. Aired 7 February 2026 on Gadigal land. Want to support our show? Follow us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts, leave us a five-star review, and share an episode with a friend. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jacob and the crew tear apart Super Bowl LX from every angle — how the Seattle Seahawks dominated the New England Patriots 29–13, the defensive masterclass that suffocated rookie QB Drake Maye, and how Kenneth Walker III emerged as the game's MVP for the first time by a running back in decades. We break down the key plays, the Patriots' offensive struggles, Jason Myers' record-setting five field goals, and all the big storylines your timeline is talking about today. Then it's onto the NFL MVP controversy — Matthew Stafford beat out Drake Maye by the closest margin in years for the 2025 AP MVP award, and the fallout online and in the league has been wild. We react to why the vote was so tight, what the pundits and fans are saying, and how this award feels totally separate from Super Bowl narratives yet is dominating conversations. Hosts & Guests: Jacob Gramegna is joined by professional sports bettor and CEO of The Hammer, Rob Pizzola, basketball originator Kirk Evans, and sophisticated square Geoff Fienberg for hot takes, hot mic moments, and season-defining reactions you don't want to miss.

After 30 years bridging the gap between public policy and communities, Darolyn Davis knows why most public health engagement efforts fail—and more importantly, how to fix them. In this episode of The Healthy Project Podcast, host Corey Dion Lewis speaks with Darolyn Davis, founder of D&A Communications, about the critical disconnect between well-intentioned public health initiatives and the communities they aim to serve. This conversation goes beyond surface-level community engagement to explore what it really takes to build institutional trust.Darolyn shares the pivotal moment in her career when she realized that policymakers were making decisions for communities without including the voices of those most affected. Working in the California State Legislature, she witnessed firsthand how missing perspectives—particularly women and people of color—led to unintended harmful consequences in public policy. This realization launched three decades of work focused on equity-first communication strategies, where community voices aren't just heard, but actively shape outcomes.Key Discussion Points:Why Traditional Outreach Fails Darolyn explains why treating outreach as a distribution problem rather than a relationship problem dooms most initiatives from the start. Sending mailers, holding meetings, and posting information online doesn't equal meaningful engagement—and communities see right through it.The Trust Gap in Healthcare. The conversation addresses uncomfortable truths about why communities, particularly communities of color, distrust healthcare institutions. With Black women facing maternal mortality rates 3-4 times higher than white women, and Black Americans comprising only 5-7 percent of clinical trial participants despite representing 14 percent of the population, historical and ongoing systemic failures shape present-day healthcare decisions.Measuring What Actually Matters Most agencies measure engagement success by counting meetings held or materials distributed. Darolyn argues for a completely different approach: measuring sentiment, behavioral change, and whether you've actually moved people from one understanding to another. She reveals why superficial metrics waste resources and erode trust further.Real-World Case Study: Six Years to Build Trust Darolyn shares the remarkable story of working with the Bayview Hunters Point community in San Francisco. When a public agency wanted to build a new 62 million dollar community facility, residents initially refused—they didn't trust that promises would be kept. It took six years of consistent relationship-building, honest dialogue, and demonstrating follow-through before the community agreed. The result: a state-of-the-art Southeast Community Facility that now serves as a healthcare, education, workforce training, and community hub.This case study illustrates a critical truth: meaningful change takes time, and there are no shortcuts to building trust.Institutional Responsibility vs. Personal Choice One of the most important reframings in this episode is shifting from "Why don't communities trust us?" to "What are we doing that earns trust?" When trust is treated as an institutional responsibility rather than a personal choice, the burden shifts from communities to the organizations that serve them.What Keeps Failing After 30 Years Darolyn identifies recurring problems: communities brought in too late in the decision-making process, equity treated as a checkbox, budgets too small for genuine engagement, organizations moving faster than relationships allow, and failure to acknowledge historical harms that shape current perceptions.The Question Every Public Health Leader Should Ask Before launching any campaign or initiative, Darolyn advises asking: "Who is not at the table?" This simple but profound question forces organizations to identify missing voices and perspectives before making decisions that will impact those very communities.About This Episode's Guest:Darolyn Davis is the founder of D&A Communications, an equity-first communications agency that has spent three decades specializing in public health, education, transportation, and workforce development. Her work focuses on authentic community engagement that doesn't just inform communities about decisions already made, but involves them in shaping outcomes. She built her agency on the principle that all people deserve a voice in policies that affect their lives.Why This Conversation Matters:Public health professionals, healthcare administrators, policy makers, and community organizers face increasing challenges in building trust and achieving meaningful health outcomes. Misinformation spreads rapidly, historical harms create justified skepticism, and communities increasingly push back against initiatives designed "for them" without "with them."This episode provides both diagnosis and treatment for broken engagement systems. Whether you're launching a vaccination campaign, developing health policy, running a community health center, or working in any capacity where trust matters, this conversation offers practical wisdom earned through decades of on-the-ground experience.Connect with Darolyn Davis: Website: https://davisimpact.com/About The Healthy Project Podcast: The Healthy Project Podcast brings you conversations with leaders, innovators, and changemakers in public health who are transforming how we approach community health, equity, and wellbeing.Host: Corey Dion LewisShow NotesEpisode Summary: Darolyn Davis, founder of D&A Communications with 30 years of equity-focused communication experience, reveals why most community engagement efforts fail and shares the six-year journey it took to build trust for a $62 million community facility in San Francisco's Bayview Hunters Point neighborhood.Key Topics Covered:The policy-making disconnect: Why decisions made without community input failEquity-first communication: Moving from "for communities" to "with communities"The distribution vs. relationship problem in public health outreachWhy communities feel ignored despite official "engagement" effortsTrust as institutional responsibility rather than personal choiceHistorical context of healthcare distrust in communities of colorHealthcare disparities: Black maternal mortality, clinical trial participation, pain treatmentHow to measure engagement impact beyond attendance numbersThe true cost of superficial community engagementCase study: Bayview Hunters Point Southeast Community FacilityWhat keeps failing after three decades in the fieldHow quickly trust can be lost versus how long it takes to buildSocial media's role in spreading both information and misinformationThe most important question to ask before launching any public health campaignNotable Statistics Discussed:Black women are 3-4 times more likely to die in emergency rooms compared to white womenBlack Americans represent 14% of the U.S. population but only 5-7% of clinical trial participantsBlack patients receive pain treatment approximately 22% less often than white patientsThe Southeast Community Facility project cost: $62 millionTime investment to build community trust for the facility: 6 yearsFeatured Case St...

What happens when a biblical scholar with degrees from Oxford and Exeter decides to take on misinformation where it lives... on TikTok? Dr. Dan McClellan has built a following of nearly one million people by doing something radical: telling the truth about what the Bible actually says. In this conversation, Dr. McClellan takes us on his journey from serving as an LDS missionary in Uruguay, to getting kicked out of college, to earning his PhD and becoming one of the most recognized voices in public biblical scholarship. His motto is "data over dogma," and he's not afraid to challenge the assumptions that have shaped how Christians read Scripture for centuries.This episode goes deep. We explore Dr. McClellan's argument that "the Bible doesn't say anything" on its own, and why that statement isn't an attack on faith but an invitation to read more honestly. We dig into what the Bible actually says about same-sex relationships (hint: the ancient world had no concept of sexual orientation), and we unpack what Scripture really teaches about hell and eternal punishment. If you've ever been told "the Bible clearly says" something and felt like there had to be more to the story, this conversation is for you.In this episode you will learn:- Why Dr. McClellan says "the Bible doesn't say anything" and what that means for how we interpret Scripture- The difference between how scholars study the Bible and how it's taught in most churches- What the concept of "univocality" is and why it's the foundation of most biblical misinformation- What Leviticus and the New Testament actually say about same-sex intercourse in their ancient context- Why the ancient world had no concept of homosexuality as a sexual orientation- The three different views of hell found in the New Testament (annihilation, temporary punishment, eternal torment)- Why eternal conscious torment became the dominant view and what the Bible actually indicates- How Dr. McClellan balances scholarship and faith without needing to "deconstruct"Connect with Dr. Dan McClellan:TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@maklelanInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/maklelanPodcast: Data Over Dogma- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/data-over-dogma/id1681418502Book: The Bible Says So: What We Get Right (and Wrong) About Scripture's Most Controversial Issues — https://a.co/d/fJuNxi0Website and Online Classes: maklelan.orgPatreon: patreon.com/maklelanSubscribe to The Dig In Podcast on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@thejohnnyovaFollow Johnny Ova and stay connected: https://linktr.ee/johnnyovaGrab Johnny's book, The Revelation Reset: https://a.co/d/hiUkW8H

Ever feel overwhelmed by conflicting nutrition advice? One influencer swears by seed oils while another demonizes them. Your feed is flooded with "80 grams of protein" meal challenges, and you're left wondering: what should I actually believe?In this episode, I sit down with Colleen Christensen, registered dietitian, recovering perfectionist, and the compassionate voice behind the wildly popular @No.Food.Rules Instagram account. Colleen shares her personal journey from competitive dietetics student to her struggle with eating disorders, and ultimately to becoming one of the leading voices helping people unlearn decades of diet culture programming.This conversation is a masterclass in cutting through nutrition misinformation. Colleen breaks down why seed oils have become the internet's latest villain, what's really happening with the protein obsession, and why authority bias keeps us trusting the wrong "experts." But more importantly, she shares the one thing that changed everything for her recovery: learning to experiment with food instead of following rigid rules.In this episode, you'll learn:Why reading the headline isn't enough, and how to actually evaluate nutrition studiesThe two biggest nutrition myths getting in the way of normal eating right nowHow to become your own best experiment (and why that's more powerful than any meal plan)Why the education piece matters just as much as the inspirationWhat it really means to find joy in midlife eating, beyond just saying "all foods fit"Connect with Colleen:Instagram: @NoFoodRulesRelated Episodes You'll Love:EP #137: 5 Tips for Spotting Nutrition Misinformation with Dr. Emma BeckettEP #138: 5 Things I Wish I Had Known About Intuitive Eating 10 Years AgoEP #123: You Are More Than What You Eat with Dr. Emma BeckettWhat did you think of this episode? Click here and let me know!

In today's episode of the MX3 Podcast, we dive into the growing trend of celebrities using their platforms to push political opinions—and whether it helps or hurts their credibility.We discuss customer service, media bias, celebrity influence, Billie Eilish's controversial Grammy moment, and why context matters in today's news cycle. We also break down how misinformation spreads and why personal responsibility still matters.At MX3 Podcast, our mission is to talk about money, motivation, and relevant events that impact real people. We believe in honest conversations and critical thinking in a world full of noise.

Apply for coaching here00:00 Understanding Weight Loss Challenges Over 4003:00 Debunking Myths: The Role of Hormones and Inflammation05:32 The Truth About Metabolism and Aging07:46 Empowerment vs. Misinformation in Fat Loss Messaging10:00 The Importance of Caloric Deficit and Actionable Strategies

Roo revealed he was hung out to dry by AI engine ChatGPT after he was given incorrect stats about the NFL Super Bowl at a party in Caulfield. Catch Mick in the Morning, with Roo, Titus & Rosie LIVE from 6-9am weekdays on 105.1 Triple M Melbourne or via the LiSTNR app. Mick In The Morning Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/molloy Triple M Melbourne Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/triplemmelb Triple M Melbourne TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@triplemmelbourne Triple M Melbourne Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/triplemmelbourneSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

EPISODE 299 BLACK HISTORY MONTH 2026 . Summary . In this episode, the hosts celebrate Black History Month by discussing the impact of iconic artists like Cheryl “Salt” James. Her new single, “Kings & Queens” is featured as a tribute. They also address serious issues such as mental health and missing people. They discuss Trump's racist post depicting President & First Lady Obama as primates and how it degrades America and the Office Of President. . #BlackHistoryMonth #SaltNPepa #hiphop #mentalhealth #racism #TheObamas #politicaldiscourse #SuperBowl #Grammywinners #musicindustrycontroversies #chakakhan #culturallegacy #Eugenics . Chapters . 00:00 Celebrating Black History Month and Iconic Artists 04:09 The Impact of Salt-N-Pepa on Hip Hop Culture 06:09 Tragic News: Remembering Lil Jon's Son 10:15 Savannah Guthrie's Missing Person Case 14:04 Political Discourse and Public Reactions 15:21 Accountability and Complicity in Leadership 16:17 Political Satire and Public Perception 17:41 Disillusionment with Political Figures 18:47 Scams and Misinformation in Healthcare 20:13 Cultural Commentary on Celebrity Relationships 25:12 Tributes to Music Legends 27:40 Reflections on Personal Growth and Relationships 29:41 Critique of Celebrity Behavior and Public Image 31:44 The Impact of Celebrity on Music Sales 34:30 Grammys Recap: Celebrating Achievements in Music 37:31 Talk Show Dynamics and Industry Changes 38:44 Chaka Khan's Legacy and the Importance of Bands 40:39 Celebrating New Beginnings and Personal Milestones 47:20 The Importance of Voting and Civic Engagement . All Episodes At: https://www.castropolis.net/

We love talking about marine science on Out of the Blue, especially when it brings good tidings for our ocean ecosystems.  Translating scientific nuance into news stories, however, can be a minefield for misinformation.In this episode, Tessa Campisi speaks to Dr Gabi Mocatta, senior research fellow in climate communication at the University of Tasmania, to unpick how research findings indicating increased coral cover in the great barrier reef unwittingly provided fodder for climate denial in the news media. Link to research: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-025-00235-4Image credit: Australian Insititue of Marine Science (AIMS)

How did the bot-assisted fake journalism of “Victoria Goldiee” happen? And why editors should be very worried for journalism's future. Lori Wilson reads The Phantom Writer Who Fooled the Internet About AMIAMI is a not-for-profit media company that entertains, informs and empowers Canadians who are blind or partially sighted. Operating three broadcast services, AMI-tv and AMI-audio in English and AMI-télé in French, AMI's vision is to establish and support a voice for Canadians with disabilities, representing their interests, concerns and values through inclusion, representation, accessible media, reflection, representation and portrayal.Find more great AMI Original Content on AMI+Learn more at AMI.caConnect with Accessible Media Inc. online:X /Twitter @AccessibleMediaInstagram @AccessibleMediaInc / @AMI-audioFacebook at @AccessibleMediaIncTikTok @AccessibleMediaIncEmail feedback@ami.ca Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Chuck Eesley, a professor of management science and engineering, studies entrepreneurship across diverse contexts – from refugee entrepreneurs in Uganda to semiconductor startups navigating U.S.-China economic policy. His research on recent export controls revealed a counterintuitive outcome: Rather than solely strengthening U.S. semiconductor innovation, these policies accelerated Chinese investment in its own domestic chip industry, boosting startups there as much as – or more than – here. This finding underscores how global technology markets are deeply interconnected: Barriers can produce unintended consequences that accelerate innovation abroad rather than protecting it at home. Open technology trade and investment create larger markets for American innovations, strengthen collaborative partnerships, and demonstrate that interconnected markets drive progress for all participants. “Entrepreneurial talent exists everywhere,” Eesley tells host Russ Altman on this episode of Stanford Engineering's The Future of Everything podcast.Have a question for Russ? Send it our way in writing or via voice memo, and it might be featured on an upcoming episode. Please introduce yourself, let us know where you're listening from, and share your question. You can send questions to thefutureofeverything@stanford.edu.Episode Reference Links:Stanford Profile: Charles (Chuck) EesleyConnect With Us:Episode Transcripts >>> The Future of Everything WebsiteConnect with Russ >>> Threads / Bluesky / MastodonConnect with School of Engineering >>> Twitter/X / Instagram / LinkedIn / FacebookChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionRuss Altman introduces guest Chuck Eesley, a professor of management and engineering at Stanford University.(00:03:04) Why Study Entrepreneurship?Chuck explains why entrepreneurs are drivers of modern economic growth.(00:03:30) Defining EntrepreneurshipBroad vs. narrow entrepreneurship, from startups to large organizations.(00:04:33) Institutional EnvironmentsHow policies and culture both shape entrepreneurial outcomes.(00:05:44) Studying Institutions & EntrepreneurshipMeasuring ​institutional shifts to isolate entrepreneurial outcomes.(00:08:12) Founder & Talent IncentivesWhat's needed for high-opportunity-cost talent to start companies.(00:09:36) AI EntrepreneurshipThe impact of data and compute concentration on startup dynamism.(00:11:28) Designing AI RegulationHistorical examples of regulation enabling startups to compete fairly.(00:13:43) Incentives Inside Big TechWhy some incumbents support startups while others tilt the playing field.(00:15:28) Ad Placement & Misinformation FundingHow digital advertising can unintentionally fund low-credibility content.(00:21:24) Misinformation Market SolutionThe disclosure mechanisms that may reduce misinformation incentives.(00:25:23) Semiconductors & EntrepreneurshipThe importance of startups in a field often dominated by large incumbents.(00:29:30) Unintended Policy EffectsHow U.S. policy may be accelerating Chinese semiconductor investments.(00:31:09) Competing Industrial PoliciesWhy evaluation and iteration are essential for effective policy design.(00:32:31) Global EntrepreneurshipEmerging entrepreneurship models spreading across regions and contexts.(00:36:26) The Universal Entrepreneurial MindsetShared entrepreneurial traits across cultures, contexts, and countries.(00:37:14) Future In a MinuteRapid-fire Q&A: democratizing entrepreneurship, context, and equitable inclusivity.(00:41:02) Conclusion Connect With Us:Episode Transcripts >>> The Future of Everything WebsiteConnect with Russ >>> Threads / Bluesky / MastodonConnect with School of Engineering >>>Twitter/X / Instagram / LinkedIn / Facebook Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When a Romulan defector claims there's a secret military base in the DMZ—but offers no evidence—Picard must decide whether this is a genuine attempt to stop a war—or classic Romulan misdirection. When it's revealed that Tomalak is exploiting the claim as part of a disinformation campaign to spark war, Sarah and Allie get political. Again. Visit our website at humanisttrek.com Support the show at patreon.com/humanisttrek Pick up your merch at humanisttrek.com/merch Support our show by visiting our sponsors & partners: Modiphius | UnderOutfit Socials: Bluesky Mastodon Discord YouTube Thanks to Star Trek Avatar Creation

Are birds real—or are they government surveillance drones?

This is Episode 28 of Let's Get Real and I'm not here to whisper. I'm here to say the part out loud: when “safety” starts looking like chaos, somebody's lying… and regular people are the ones paying the price.This episode is part of the Black History Month Series, and we're talking about the BS swirling around ICE operations, the stories that shift, the fear that spreads, and the way it gets weaponized to keep us arguing with each other instead of holding power accountable. If the details are still unfolding, cool… that's even more reason to slow down and demand receipts, not rumors.Here's what I'm focused on: what tragedy does to people. It can shatter trust… or it can create unison. It can isolate families… or it can wake up communities. The question is whether we turn pain into purpose, or pain into posts.And then we get to the part everybody skips: the plan. Not motivational bullshit. Not “thoughts and prayers.” A real move: clarity, community, cash, consequences. You'll hear exactly what those mean and how to apply them without burning out or getting played.Watch the episode on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/VKGqWtB6smYAs always we ask you to comment, DM, whatever it takes to have a conversation to help you take the next step in your journey, reach out on any platform!Twitter, FaceBook, Instagram, Tiktok, LinkedinDISCLOSURE: Awards and rankings by third parties are not indicative of future performance or client investment success. Past performance does not guarantee future results. All investment strategies carry profit/loss potential and cannot eliminate investment risks. Information discussed may not reflect current positions/recommendations. While believed accurate, Black Mammoth does not guarantee information accuracy. This broadcast is not a solicitation for securities transactions or personalized investment advice. Tax/estate planning information is general - consult professionals for specific situations. Full disclosures at www.blackmammoth.com.

Steve Kerr apologizes for admitting he was wrong about ICE agents arresting a 5 year old. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It was another dumping of Epstein files from the US Department of Justice this past week, this time releasing some three million pages of material from their investigations. And as the chunky, black blocks continue to make their way through the documents, so do names of some of the most powerful men in the world.In a stunning update, the Clintons have now agreed to testify in Congress in regards to allegations that connect the couple to the convicted sex offender.Host Caryn Ceolin speaks to Sarah Sahagian and Sadaf Ahsan, journalists and hosts of The Reheat, to break down the updates (or lack thereof) from the latest round of Epstein files, and to discuss what we could see unfold. We love feedback at The Big Story, as well as suggestions for future episodes. You can find us:Through email at hello@thebigstorypodcast.ca Or @thebigstory.bsky.social on Bluesky

Bombarded with health headlines? Unsure how to discern fact from fiction? Social scientist Matthew Facciani breaks down identity politics and the psychology that shapes our most deeply held views. He discusses how healthcare professionals can do better at communicating public health policy to everyday people and why following someone whose viewpoint you disagree with can help you reflect on your biases.Talk Featured3 questions to ask before buying into health trends - Dr. Karen DaweLearn more about our flagship conference happening this April at attend.ted.com/podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The media didn't just get this story wrong, they got caught laundering credibility. From a widely quoted “doctor” later linked to a militant hierarchy, to the viral casualty-numbers firestorm and how selective framing turns statistics into propaganda, the panel walks you through how to spot the tricks in real time...who benefits, what gets omitted, and why “we can't independently verify” only seems to apply when it's convenient. Then the conversation swings into Trump's “phase two” talk and the fantasy that Hamas will disarm, before closing with a cathartic “Scumbag of the Week / Hero of the Week” gauntlet that turns outrage into a practical playbook: how to counter narrative warfare without constantly playing defense.

In this episode, we sit down with three disinformation researchers whose new paper found something surprising about both our resistance and our susceptibility to both true news we wish was fake and fake news we wish was true.Our guests are three of the scientists exploring a newly named cognitive distortion, one that every human being is prone to exhibiting, one that is so common and so easily provoked that nefarious actors depend on it when distributing disinformation and propaganda.Samuel Woolley, Katie Joseff, and Michael Schwalbe will share their methods, findings, and takeaways. They will also explain the troublesome nature of something they are calling concordance over truth bias – a distortion that most often appears in those who have the most (undeserved) confidence in their own (not-so-objective) objectivity. - How Minds Change- Show Notes- Newsletter- David McRaney's BlueSky- David McRaney's Twitter- YANSS Twitter- Why Do We Share Our Feelings With Others?- Concordance Over Truth Bias- Samuel Wooley- Katie Joseff- Michael Schwalbe- Geoffrey Cohen Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit rethinkingwellness.substack.comResearcher Maxine Ali joins us to discuss how wellness micro-influencers and practitioners construct “authentic” online personas to spread misinformation.We explore the ways that creators with smaller platforms build trust in seemingly less commercial ways than macro-influencers, including: personal stories of illness, medical encounter memes, and hyper-simplified straw man formats. Then Maxine explains why these ways of sharing can lead to powerful parasocial influence that undermines the perceived expertise of medical professionals worldwide.Behind the paywall, Christy and Maxine unpack what influencers are doing when they're “truth-telling,” why conspirituality and conspiracy theories thrive online, and how the rise of “mythbusting” has warped into insidious platitudes.Paid subscribers can hear the full interview, and the first half is available to all listeners. To read the full post and upgrade to paid, go to rethinkingwellness.substack.com. More from Christy:Christy's second book, The Wellness Trap, is available wherever books are sold! Order it here, or ask for it in your favorite local bookstore. If you're looking to make peace with food and break free from diet and wellness culture, check out Christy's Intuitive Eating Fundamentals online course.Subscribe on Substack for full interviews and more! Support the podcast by becoming a paid subscriber, and unlock great perks like extended interviews, subscriber-only Q&As, full access to our archives, commenting privileges, and a place to connect with other listeners.

In this in-depth podcast episode, investigative journalist Deepak Adhikari breaks down how election misinformation, AI-generated videos, and fake news are reshaping modern democracy. From the use of AI in election campaigns to the growing challenge of fact checking elections, this conversation explores how voters consume political content and how misinformation spreads rapidly through social media platforms. Deepak Adhikari shares insights into the state of Nepali media, discussing whether today's media landscape is ideology-driven or leadership-driven, and how media bias in elections impacts public trust. The episode also examines the misuse of information during election campaigns, the pressure on journalists to publish fast versus accurate news, and the ongoing media sustainability crisis. We also dive into political interviews during election periods, the illusion created by social media, and the debate around e-voting. With misinformation on social media at an all-time high, this episode highlights the importance of trusted news sources, ethical journalism, and responsible media consumption. If you're interested in investigative journalism, AI in politics, or understanding how misinformation influences voters, this episode is a must-watch. GET CONNECTED WITH Deepak Adhikari: LinkedIn - https://np.linkedin.com/in/deepakadhikari Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/deepak.adhikari1  

Simple questions can help you identify misleading claims before you spread them. Learn more at https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/ 

John Maytham is joined by Kelly Fincham, researcher in Journalism and Media at the University of Galway in Ireland, to unpack why misinformation remains so persuasive — and why factchecking on its own often falls short. Afternoon Drive with John Maytham is the late afternoon show on CapeTalk. Presenter John Maytham is an actor and author-turned-talk radio veteran and seasoned journalist. His show serves a round-up of local and international news coupled with the latest in business, sport, traffic and weather. The host’s eclectic interests mean the program often surprises the audience with intriguing book reviews and inspiring interviews profiling artists. A daily highlight is Rapid Fire, just after 5:30pm. CapeTalk fans call in, to stump the presenter with their general knowledge questions. Another firm favourite is the humorous Thursday crossing with award-winning journalist Rebecca Davis, called “Plan B”. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Afternoon Drive with John Maytham Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 15:00 and 18:00 (SA Time) to Afternoon Drive with John Maytham broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/BSFy4Cn or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/n8nWt4x Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rollie and Nicole take a break from poisoning their brains with climate disinformation by bringing you a climate-themed book club. It's the final episode of season 3, and you can get a HUGE jump on your new year's resolution of reading more by listening. How can that be? Well simply listening to this ONE podcast is the equivalent of reading FOUR entire books. It's a screaming deal!Stay tuned for updates about our upcoming season!BONUS EPISODES available on PatreonSOCIALS & MOREWANT TO ADVERTISE WITH US? Please contact sponsors@multitude.productions DISCLAIMER: Some media clips have been edited for length and clarity. CREDITS Created by: Rollie Williams, Nicole Conlan & Ben BoultHosts: Rollie Williams & Nicole ConlanExecutive Producer: Ben Boult Editor: Laura ConteProducers: Daniella PhilipsonAdditional Research and Fact Checking: Carly Rizzuto & Canute HaroldsonMusic: Tony Domenick Art: Jordan Doll Special Thanks: The Civil Liberties Defense CenterSOURCESSilent Spring by Rachel Carson Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disappearing Water by Marc ReisnerThe Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley RobinsonDoppelganger: A Trip into the Mirror World by Naomi KleinSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In today's episode, Brian and Zoë are joined by WIRED's Tim Marchman to discuss the news of the week — including how far-right influencers spread misinformation in Minneapolis, and why TikTok's US version is off to a rocky start. Plus, we dive into why some people are currently obsessed with the AI assistant Moltbot.  Articles mentioned in this episode:  ICE Is Using Palantir's AI Tools to Sort Through Tips | WIRED Google DeepMind Staffers Ask Leaders to Keep Them ‘Physically Safe' From ICE | WIRED TikTok Is Now Collecting Even More Data About Its Users. Here Are the 3 Biggest Changes | WIRED Moltbot Is Taking Over Silicon Valley | WIRED  Join WIRED's best and brightest on Uncanny Valley as they dissect the collision of tech, politics, finance, and business, from Alexis Ohanian's newest tech venture to the effects of inaccurate information from artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots on social protests.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Misinformation still finds its way into the conversation. Dorothy Gibbons and Dr. Raz dive into breast cancer myths, mammogram safety, risk factors, and common social media claims. They sort through concerns about bras, deodorants, cell phones, diet, and trauma. Evidence and screening guidelines guide the facts during this episode. Please consider sharing this episode, or making a donation at therose.org so more women receive breast cancer screening and care. Subscribe to Let’s Talk About Your Breasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart, and wherever you get your podcasts. Key Questions Answered 1. Does getting a mammogram increase your risk of developing breast cancer due to radiation exposure? 2. Why is there so much controversy and skepticism surrounding mammograms and breast cancer screening, especially compared to other screenings? 3. Is breast cancer only a concern for women with a family history of the disease? 4. Is breast cancer purely an older woman’s disease, or can younger women get it too? 5. Does wearing an underwire bra or any bra cause breast cancer? 6. Can deodorant use (especially with aluminum) lead to breast cancer? 7. Is carrying a cell phone in your bra (or close to your body) a cause of breast cancer? 8. Does hair dye or using plastic water bottles increase breast cancer risk? 9. Does hormone replacement therapy (HRT) increase breast cancer risk? 10. Can breast injury or trauma cause breast cancer? 11. Does obesity relate to breast cancer risk? 12. Can animals sense breast cancer in humans? 13. Are alternative treatments or internet trends (like ivermectin or bee venom) effective against breast cancer? 14. Is it important for patients to trust their doctor and treatment process? Timestamped Overview 00:00 Mammogram Radiation: Safe and Essential 04:22 Annual Screening Controversy Explained 08:28 Breast Cancer: Risks and Incidence 11:14 Impact of Treating Women's Diseases 13:52 Aluminum in Deodorant Safe 18:29 HRT Risks and Tapering Explained 25:52 Ivermectin Misuse and Clinical Trials 28:51 Health's Role in Cancer Prevention 29:47 Poison Necessary to Fight CancerSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Divya chats with Pallavi Sethi, a Policy Fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change & the Environment at the London School of Economics, where she works on climate misinformation and disinformation. Pallavi brings a unique perspective to this work, shaped by her background in advertising and media studies, as well as her experience in the fact-checking department for a large social media company. It was through these experiences that she began thinking more deeply about climate narratives and its influence on public perception. At the beginning of their conversation, they discuss some fundamental questions, such as what is climate misinformation and disinformation, what fact-checking is and how it intersects with debates around free speech, and, lastly, who bears responsibility for the information we see and share.  A central thread in Pallavi's work is her commitment to empowering the public — not just by calling for stronger platform governance, but by building media literacy and awareness so people can better recognize and challenge misleading climate narratives themselves. Pallavi has done extensive work in this area and brings sharp and thoughtful insights to an incredibly complex issue. But what is truly commendable about her work is that it does not stop at diagnosis; it also points to meaningful responses, such as the media literacy programs for kids in Finland and the efforts of a climate coalition called Climate Action Against Disinformation.  Pallavi discussed the role of Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD), a coalition of over 90 organizations working to make the information sphere safer regarding climate information. She explained that CAAD's collective efforts have been instrumental in putting climate disinformation on the global agenda, with information integrity appearing on the provisional agenda at COP30 for the first time. She highlighted that CAAD's strength lies in its ability to bring together diverse voices, making it harder for governments to ignore their demands.  Sources: Information on Pallavi's bio & background: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/profile/pallavi-sethi/ Sethi, P (2024). Kemi Badenoch's climate scepticism: a growing problem for the Conservative Party and its voters in LSE Blogs. Sethi, P., & Ward, B. (2024) Reform UK's climate denial undermines democracy in LSE Blogs. Sethi, P (2024). Why countering climate misinformation must be a priority in Global Government Forum. Sethi, P. (2025). The myth of Meta's free speech places democracy at risk in LSE Blogs. Sethi, P (2025). Strategic Obstruction: How Europe's Far-Right Parties Are Blocking Urgent Climate Action.  https://hopenothate.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/state-of-hate-2025.pdf Sethi, P (2025). Inside Trump's campaign to censor climate science. LSE Blogs  

Kicking off Season 4 of Masters of Risk, host Stewart Webster sits down with risk expert Michelle Sartain, President, Marsh US and Canada, for a deep dive into the volatile U.S. risk landscape They explore the top threats identified by business leaders, including economic uncertainty, declining workforce health, the rapid spread of misinformation, the dual-edged sword of Artificial Intelligence, and systemic supply chain fragility.  The conversation emphasizes the profound interconnectedness of these modern risks, where vulnerabilities in one area can trigger cascading consequences across social, operational, and political domains.  Stewart and Michelle discuss the critical need for organizations to build resilience and adopt cross-functional strategies to anticipate, manage, and mitigate shocks in an unpredictable world. Don't miss this essential guide to navigating the complex fragilities of today's business environment. Credits: Host: Stewart Webster Guest: Michelle Sartain Editor: Feranmi Adeoshun Published With Assistance From: Sophie Carr and Caitlin Bray www.spglobal.com/market-intelligence www.spglobal.com

One of the biggest risks people face when trying to understand the economy, investing, or personal finance isn't a lack of information. It's the illusion of being informed—while quietly limiting the sources that shape your thinking. We live in a world where information is everywhere. Podcasts, X threads, YouTube clips, newsletters, reels. But abundance doesn't equal diversity. In fact, the algorithms behind social media are designed to do the opposite: they show you more of what you already agree with. Over time, your worldview narrows—not because you chose it to, but because it was curated for you. I noticed this years ago when I started listening to alternative asset podcasts. At first, it felt refreshing—new ideas, new language, new opportunities outside the mainstream. But after a while, something became obvious. Many of these shows were operating inside an echo chamber. Different hosts. Same conclusions. Same narratives. Same villains. Same heroes. It was as if they were all listening to one another and simply regurgitating the same ideas, reinforcing them in a closed loop until they felt like truth. And to be fair—knowing many of these hosts personally—that's often the business model. Audience reinforcement is rewarded. Dissent is not. Ever since then, I've made a conscious effort to study people I don't naturally agree with. Not because I want to adopt their views—but because I want to stress-test my own. This matters more now than ever because social media accelerates groupthink at scale. When an idea gains traction online, disagreement quickly becomes social friction. It's easier to conform, retweet, and nod along than to pause and ask, “What if this is wrong?” I once had a conversation with Robert Kiyosaki where he told me he actually gets worried when everyone in the room agrees about the economy. When viewpoints converge too neatly, it's usually a sign that critical thinking has been replaced by consensus comfort—and that's exactly where blindsides are born. If your goal is to get closer to the truth, you must seek out opinions that challenge your own. That includes people you disagree with—especially people you disagree with. Truth doesn't emerge from unanimity. It emerges from tension. And that applies to me as well. Daon't let me—or anyone else—be your sole source of information. No matter how much you trust someone, outsourcing your thinking is always a risk. I can tell you from personal experience that in economics and personal finance, narrow perspectives lead to surprises you only recognize in hindsight. Those are the moments people regret most—not because they lacked intelligence, but because they lacked perspective. Financial education is critical. But a real curriculum doesn't just confirm what you already believe. It exposes you to competing frameworks, conflicting data, and uncomfortable questions—and forces you to think for yourself. That's how you build conviction that actually holds up when the world changes. This week's episode of Wealth Formula Podcast examines this groupthink problem on a broader scale throughout society with an author who wrote a bestseller on our inherent appetite for misinformation. It's a fascinating conversation that will surely get you thinking about the way you view the world. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  You can imagine people who are conflict avoidant, probably not so likely to post online, as opposed to people who are conflict approaching who love a fight, right? If that’s, if those are the folks who are more likely to post, that’s gonna shape our information space in really, really important ways. Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula Podcast. Coming to you from Montecito, California today. Uh, wanna remind you before we begin, there is a website associated with this podcast called wealthformula.com. That’s where you go if you wanna get more involved with, uh, the show, with the community, uh, specifically, um, if you are interested. There is a sign up there for something called investor club, which if you aren’t a credit investor, you sign up basically, uh, you, uh, get onboarded and then you can see potential deal flow that’s not available to the public. And, uh, lots of things going on in there. Real estate, we’ve had stuff in the aircraft spaced, um, interesting stuff. You should check it out for sure. If you are, uh, enter credit investor. And again, that is wealthformula.com. Just click on investor Club. Now today, let’s talk a little bit of, you know, just let’s talk a little bit about one of the biggest risks that people face when trying to understand the economy of investing personal finance. It’s not lack of information, right? These days, there’s an enormous amount of information. It’s just the illusion of being informed while quietly limiting the sources that shape your thinking in the first place. So we live in this world. I live in this world too, where information is everywhere. You got podcasts, you got X, you got YouTube newsletters, reels, random emails. Abundance of information doesn’t really equal diversity. In fact, the algorithms behind social media are designed to do the opposite. They just show you more of what you already agree with, and that is a little bit of a problem because over time your worldview really starts to narrow. And not because you chose to narrow it necessarily, but because it was curated for you. You know, I noticed this myself, uh, several years ago when I started listening to podcasts like my own. Even before I started my podcast. And what happens is that you get, initially you get kind of interested ’cause the stuff resonates with you. You get some ideas, you get new language, new opportunities outside the mainstream. But after a while you start to realize, or I start to realize that, you know, these shows were sort of operating inside of an echo chamber. They’re saying the same thing, different house, same conclusions, same narratives, villain. Same heroes, you know, it was as, again, it was as if they were all listening to one another and, and simply regurgitating the same ideas and reinforcing them, uh, in a, in a closed loop. Um, and when you do that, it starts to feel like truth. And to be fair, knowing many of these hosts personally, that is kind of the business model. You know, audience reinforcement is rewarded, descent is not so ever since then. You know, I’ve actually made a conscious effort to study people. I don’t, uh, naturally agree with. I actually don’t listen to any other personal finance podcasts, uh, that are sort of in this alternative space because I already know kind of what our narratives are. I wanna know what others think. I wanna, uh, I, it’s not necessarily that I’m looking to adopt their views, but because I wanna kind of, you know, challenge my own and this matters more now than ever. Again, because of social media. How that accelerates group think at scale. You know, when an idea gains traction online, um, you know, disagreement quickly becomes social friction. Now I think the thing to do is, you know, always be questioning yourself and asking the question really, what if I’m wrong? What if this narrative is wrong? And it reminds me actually once, uh, you know, I’ve had a chance to spend a little time with Robert Kiyosaki. Period, uh, different, different times, and I still. Kind of consider him a mentor. And I remember being at a table with him, a bunch of people talking about, you know, where the, where the economy was, what’s going on. And he looked at me and he says, this is what gets me nervous. I said, what, what gets you nervous? And he says, everyone here, everyone here, even people who normally disagree with one another, are agreeing with each other. Uh, the point is that when some of these, you know, viewpoints converge too neatly. Uh, it’s usually a sign, uh, that, you know, that critical thinking has kind of been replaced, and that’s exactly where you start to get blindside and where, you know, there’s a danger there that there’s something that no one’s, no one else has really even mentioning anymore. So if your goal is to get closer to the truth, you actually have to seek out opinions that challenge your own, and that includes. People you disagree with, especially people you disagree with. Because you know, truth doesn’t really emerge from unanimous thought. It emerges from sort of that tension and challenging, and that applies to me as well. You know, if I’m the only personal finance podcast you listen to, you probably shouldn’t be because I have, you know, made my own conclusions based on what I’m thinking and what I’m listening to. I try to get people. Um, you know, from different spaces talking about stuff, but the reality is that, you know, everyone’s biased. I’m biased too. So, um, you know, I can tell you from personal experience, uh, that in economics and in personal finance, the problem is that when you have these narrow perspectives, um, they often lead to. To prizes. Uh, you can’t, you know, they only recognize in hindsight, and those, uh, those are the moments that most people, I think, regret more than anything. Not because they lacked intelligence necessarily, but they lacked perspective, right? Listen, financial education is critical and we, we know that that’s the point of doing the show in the first place, but, you know, any real curriculum is, isn’t there, just to confirm what you already believe. I, I, if you, it should expose some competing frameworks. And, you know, different questions or different takes on things and, and that’s how you know, if you listen to those and you listen to those arguments, that’s how you can really build conviction that you can stand behind. And even if you’re wrong, you say, yeah, you know, I heard the other argument too. I didn’t buy it, but I guess I was wrong. Believe me, I’ve been wrong, uh, more than once myself. So the reason I bring that all up is because this week’s, uh, episode of Wealth Formula podcast really examines. Greater than just the idea of, you know, personal finance and macro economics and that type of thinking, but a greater problem, which is group think in general on a broader scale throughout society. And my, uh, my guest is a, a woman who wrote a best seller on this topic. It’s fascinating stuff. I think it’ll get you think. Make sure to listen in and we’ll have that interview right after these messages. Wealth Formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying you compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it. At result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique. It’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its backbone. Turbocharge your investments. Visit Wealth formula banking.com. Again, that’s wealthformulabanking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Uh, today my guest on Wealth Formula podcast is Professor Dana Young, who’s a professor of communication and political science at the University of Delaware, where her research explores how media psychology and identity shape belief systems she’s the author of Wrong, how media politics and Identity drive our appetite for misinformation and examines why people clinging to false narratives, and how understanding identity can improve persuasion. Our work helps decode the emotional and cognitive forces behind how we process risk, truth, and decision making. Welcome, professor Young. Great. Thanks so much for having me. Thanks for that intro. Someone has done their homework. I like that. Well, I try to, uh, well, let’s start with this. You know, one of the central arguments, uh, that you have is that people often believe things, not because they’re true, but because those beliefs serve as an identity function. Interesting concept, which I can kind of see in, uh, when you watch TV these days, can you, can you talk a little bit about that? Sure. And, and realize this is not happening at a conscious level. This isn’t something that we are thinking about. We’re not thinking, I wanna believe things that are untrue, but make me feel like I’m a part of my team. It doesn’t work that way. It is the, the truth, value of the things that we perceive is contingent on how those beliefs serve our team. Mm-hmm. So if there are things that our team believes. Those are the things that sort of historically, based on evolutionary psychology, those are the belief systems that would’ve made us probably really good members of our, of our tribe. Mm-hmm. That would’ve, um, if we had embraced those beliefs that would have. Give an indication to the shared members of our team that we are a good team member and therefore they should protect us. They should protect me, I will protect them. There’s a reciprocity there. So that belief sharing with our teammates is something that historically has served us well. And when it comes to survival, we really prioritize our social motivations above all else, because that is such a huge predictor of what allows us to survive and thrive. Is being a part of a community. And so, yeah. So the empirical validity of those claims is a little bit beside the point. The obvious, uh, the, the things that I think about there, I guess the, the sort of analogy there is like, you know, being a a, like I’m a big football fan, right? So I’ve been a big fan of the Minnesota Vikings for my entire life, although I’ve not lived there in from, you know, three quarters of my life. I grew up as a kid and that was my team. People come in, right? People go out. They’re people who, you know, were never there at the beginning, but I still root for them. Yeah. Yeah. And I still believe in them. And so, yeah, it, it reminds me of the sort of a, uh, you know, this tribal thing you’re talking about. The other place you see it, uh, is, is in politics. Uh, you know, when I, when I think about like, the way the parties have changed without getting political at all here. The, the, there’s some very, very significant changes that have happened in the ideologies, uh, or maybe not in the ideologies, but in the actuality of these parties and what they believe. They’ve changed so much in the last 30 or 40 years, yet the same people believed, uh, or identify as those party members. Is that kind of what you’re getting at? Yes, and, and because I’m a political scientist and political communication scholar, a lot of my interest in this area was born out of my concerns about our political, the political moment that we’re in, and how we really lack. A shared reality that’s necessary for democratic governance. Um, we, and we are seeing that literally there are dozens of examples every single day of different perceptions of reality across the left and the right. And so, so that was sort of why I tried to understand this, um, in the first place. But the. What you can glean from these theoretical dynamics, um, extend far beyond politics, right? To, as you were saying, and everything from economics to health, to the environment. Um, but because the shift that I think has been most impactful in this area regarding political identity is that in the United States, the. How the parties, what the parties are made up of, who the parties are made up of has changed dramatically over the last half century. And so rather than being these sort of loose coalitions of interest groups that would kind of come together and perhaps share a platform on specific policies, the way that the parties have shifted, especially sort of after the Civil Rights Movement made it that. Individuals began to identify with political parties based on like fundamental characteristics of who they are. Things like race, religion, geography, and, and fundamental aspects of culture. And so you have two political parties that actually look very different from one another in their racial and ethnic and religious and geographic sort of composition that is not good for democracy. Because we actually do not want our political parties to map onto such primal aspects of identity. ’cause it creates sectarianism and opens the door for dehumanization and violence, all kinds of bad stuff. But it also really tends to fuel some of these identity-based processes that we’re talking about because when you look around and everyone on your, in your political party. Lives like you do. They look like you do they worship like you do? They have the same hobbies as you. They drive the same kind of car. You know, those kinds of things. Like there’s a lot of that overlap that really makes your political identity take on a life of its own, and that life is increasingly. Um, unrelated to policy and more about kind of culture and aesthetics. So all of these caricatures that we think about of the left and the right, the, there’s. Stereotypes for a reason. They exist for a reason and they are so exaggerated through as a result of this political party shift over time. And, um, uh, as I talk about in the book, these differences are also exploited by our media environment. It’s really good for targeting and target marketing to have these kinds of divisions, uh, not great for democracy. Um, but they, these identities become further exacerbated. The more media we consume that tends to play into these identities. Yeah. It, it’s interesting to me, I think sometimes when you, when you think about what people believe mm-hmm. And then, you know, and then. Identifying those beliefs with like a, a political party or something like that. It’s interesting to think of the actual identification of the party coming first. Yeah. And then the beliefs following. Based on the identification. So that’s almost like religion, right? Exactly. Exactly. Right. And that’s a lot of the, the metaphors that we’ve been drawing from in political science. A lot of political scientists have been writing about this, really drawing upon the sociology of religiosity and how it operates because it, it, you’ll notice there’s another similarity too, that people will. Have this large identity as like a Catholic, right? Like I was raised Catholic. It’s, it’s part of who I am. Now. Do I believe everything that they say at church? No, but my identity as a Catholic is still very big. I, I, I will let it drive certain things, but I’m gonna write off other things as like. Not as important as my overarching identity. In the same way that we will find people who have a Democrat or Republican identity, and they live like a Democrat. They live like a Republican. However, when it comes to their actual policy positions. They don’t necessarily agree with their party platform. And that actually is where I get a little more optimistic because even though these caricatures seem so distinct when you drill down to actual policy positions, Americans have a lot in common. Those divides are not as giant as we think they are. I’m curious in terms of understanding the United States versus other countries, um, we, we seem to have a certain polarity which. It’s relatively new. I would say that, you know, even compared to, um, being a kid in, in the eighties, um, feeling like, you know, there was these two parties, but they seemed to get along pretty well. Mm-hmm. And for the most part, they were both kind of near the center. Yeah. And, um, but there’s this, there’s a much bigger division now. Um. What, I guess what drives the, the changes and when you look at different countries, like if you can compare and contrast like Sure. Are there certain specific variables Yes. That about our culture that that makes us who we are. Yes. Yeah. So that first question, um, I, I think that what’s really important is that when you think about how our political parties used to operate, um, in the aftermath of the Civil War, the two parties. We’re kind of in agreement when it came to racial issues in a way that was not good for African Americans in this country. Once the great migration happened and you had blacks from, from former slave states moving north and west, there was real pressure on leaders in those cities to advance or civil rights. Platforms, civil rights legislation, and to advance the rights of African Americans. That really put pressure on the parties in such a way that then it was the Democratic Party who became the party of championing civil rights. Then there was a response from the Republican party that was framed in terms, right, in terms of. State’s rights. That really drove the sorting of different kinds of people into the parties. It’s also fascinating to look at how religiosity and religion. Play a role here because during this very moment under the Nixon administration, there were efforts to revoke the tax exempt status of certain Christian schools that were sort of defacto segregated schools that were in violation of the policy at the time, which was to integrate those, the school system well. Those Christian parents were very unhappy with this, you know, revoking their tax exempt status. And there was a man named Paul Wyrick who came in and said, you know what, this is a moment to really bring together these two issues regarding race and religion. And he mobilized and created a grassroots movement out of this effort to sort of like protect our schools. And that actually became the conservative group, the Heritage Foundation. So that, that bringing together sort of the, the project of evangelical Christianity with this sort of move in opposition to integration that has a long history in our country. To your second piece though, about why the United States is, is. Special. Um, one, we have our, our history of slavery is not fundamentally unique, right? There are many countries that also practice slavery. I think the role that slavery already p played in the founding of our nation was important to keep in mind in terms of how the, the issue of race played into these shifts across political parties. And two, probably the biggest thing of all is that we have a. Two party system in countries that are dealing with some of these same pressures related to race and ethnicity, immigration, right? Where you see some of this polarization happening on ideology and a lot of those places they have multi-party systems. Which play a real amazing role at buffering some of these dynamics. So it’s not black or white, yes or no left, left or right. Uh, so we are uniquely positioned to have a hell of a time with polarization. When I, um, uh, I, you already sort of referenced, um, media. Mm-hmm. Um, you know, like when you think about polarization or you think about like. Re um, sort of constantly, um, emphasizing the things that you already suggest that you believe, uh, social media in particular is, I mean, is just pounding away at that, right? Yeah. I mean, sure. I just think about like my own feed, the things that I Yeah. You know, respond to or the things that I, you know, show affirmative, uh, reactions to the next thing. You know, like on x, you know, on Twitter, which I’ve been in. You know, doing more of, that’s all I get. Right? Sure. And it’s interesting because the next thing you know, you feel like. Everybody agrees with you. Sure, sure. And you’re like, oh, this is, this is amazing. I’m so Right. Right. No one has, right. No one believes the opposite of me. Right. Yeah. And it feels amazing. What role is that playing? Uh, I guess in, in your view? Social media dynamics are, are really fascinating because let’s, let’s realize, talk for a second about why it is that a lot of the content that we’re exposed to on social media is so divisive and identity evoking. Um. The reason that that happens is because the algorithms really just want us to be more and more engaged, obviously, because the only way that they’re able to, to micro target us with ads, et cetera, is by making use of the data points, the breadcrumbs that we have left behind. The only time that we leave those data points that we leave those breadcrumbs is when we do things. So if we’re just lurkers, we are not serving them at all. If we’re just hanging out looking at stuff, if we are actively liking or doing an angry thing, or writing or sharing, that’s what they need. So the algorithm is going to prioritize the content that is sort of outrage inducing, especially because negative emotions are exceptionally sticky. And there’s been some amazing work by um, uh, Jay Van Beil and his team who studied the sort of virality of different kinds of content online. And they found that the kind of content that is especially suited to virality is content that is both moral. Emotional that makes claims about what ought to be and what ought not to be, but is also like really emotionally and effectively evocative. And the kinds of content that tends to check those boxes is the content that is identity activated. Us versus them. They are doing this awful thing to us. Our way of life is under threat. Um, they are the bad guys. We are the good guys. So that’s how that happens, right? So that’s the kind of content that tends to be privileged across these platforms. That’s a piece of the puzzle. Another piece of the puzzle is that the kinds of people who tend to produce the most content online. Are weird, uh, as someone who posts online, uh, I, I just offended myself, but that’s fine. Um, the people who post a lot online tend to be more ideologically extreme. They also tend to have certain kinds of personality traits that maybe aren’t great is some of my work is looking at the, the trait of conflict orientation. You can imagine people who are conflict avoidant. Probably not so likely to post online as opposed to people who are conflict approaching who love a fight, right? If that’s, if those are the folks who are more likely to post, that’s gonna shape our information space in really, really important ways. Well then you get responses that are much more aggressive too, right? Like sure. In either direction. Sure. Something that’s kind of lukewarm. No one really cares to respond to it. Right. That’s exactly right. And then, and then those, those particular posts are rewarded by the media companies themselves because they’re getting all sorts of attention rising the top and those influencers who getting paid for that. So yeah, I mean, that’s the thing that really, that’s where I, I, I get to the point sometimes with this work where I, I’ve, I do feel a bit demoralized because I don’t necessarily see. Where there are really empowered agents to who can work within the system, we have to try to dismantle the incentive structure. So you know, if there are entrepreneurs out there who can think about ways to incentivize different kinds of content, I applaud that kind of development there. There are some, of course, who, who do the sort of, um. Positivity posts, you know, posts for good and viral videos about people help helping other people, and there is some indication that those also, they’re people love those. Those do go viral, but they don’t have the immediacy of the outrage, I guess, that when you think about, you know. The implications of this is really just, you know, I guess polarization, maybe some misinformation. Even misinformation is difficult because Sure. You don’t even actually know what is real information anymore. You don’t have like, sure. You know, when I was a, again, going back to being a kid in the eighties, it’s like you had one set of. Set of facts, you know? That’s right. But now that’s, there’s lots of different sets of facts, and in reality it’s hard to know what’s real. You just, you know, you just, you, you believe something and the next thing you know, something comes out and it, boy, that wasn’t real at all. Um, yeah. And, and let’s just, I’ll pause you for a second because, you know, as someone who studies misinformation, I, I have been through quite a journey with how I’ve thought about digital technologies, right? Yeah. Whereas. When I first started in this field 20, 25 years ago, I really lamented the fact that there were these voices on high at the news organizations who got to gatekeeper. They were the ones who decided what was true and what was not. And because of the way that they produced the news, that tended to reinforce certain kinds of official narratives. You know, there were times when conspiracies were exposed later on, when we learned that Wow. They did not tell us the truth, right? So early on I thought, oh wow, digital technologies are gonna be revolutionary, citizen journalists and iPhones. Mm-hmm. And in 2011, we saw the Arab Spring and we watched all these, these, you know, dictatorships. Topple. And then we saw the real tide shift with misinformation, with and disinformation deliberate efforts to exploit those. The lack of gatekeepers to exploit the, the lack of professional, quote unquote truth tellers, and really just make hay of our information space. And now sometimes it’s amazing, right? Because sometimes. The official account is not true, and other times the official account not only is true, but belief in the official account is necessary for us to sort of make progress as a society, right? So. The trouble is we don’t know which time is which. Well, well that, that’s, that’s what I was gonna say. I mean, I, I used to actually kind of in my own rein, have this narrative that, you know, certain sources were true and certain not, but even, yeah. You know, even after, you know, things that happened during COVID, for example. Yeah. Um, um, you know, the Wuhan Laboratories and, and things like that, that, you know, everybody looked at as a. A conspiracy theory and all this stuff, right? A tinfoil hat theory, a tinfoil hat, and you brought it up and you were crazy and everybody, you know, and, and the next thing you know, that’s the truth. That’s what happened. Yeah. So it, I think you’d even take people, um, it, it makes people who, uh, believe in the system, not believe in the system anymore. And, and I think that’s kind of where a lot of people are headed. That’s where the huge danger is. Yeah. And, and I think one area of research that is so. That is empowering and is hopeful. I have a, a doctoral student who is doing her dissertation on this. It’s a, it’s a concept called intellectual humility, which is just the extent to which we acknowledge that our beliefs and our perceptions of the world could be wrong. And what happens is when you operate in an intellectually humble way when you have beliefs, but you also are open to the fact that new information could come in at any moment, that could tell you that the things that you thought were true are not true. When you live that way, you tend to. Be closer to empirical truth than the people who are intellectually arrogant because the people who are intellectually arrogant, they’re so sure they’re right and they’re never looking to update their views. Yeah. You know, curiously on that too, like what, what does a research show about like highly educated or quote unquote intelligent people? Are they just as vulnerable? Are they more vulnerable? Because of this. And you know, in some ways I would think they’re almost more vulnerable. Yeah. And, and I think that it depends. So when we look at individual level factors and how they interact with susceptibility to MIS and disinformation, all of these different, so there’ll be psychological traits that interact with education level, that interact with what kinds of things you then are exposed to. So it is complicated. It’s complicated. So it tends to be the case that people who are. Perhaps more educated are more likely to seek out information from more like legacy journalistic sources. Yeah, yeah. Right. Yeah. Right. So, and on average, those sources tend to have more things that are empirically true than if you’re just sort of like looking on the internet for whatever you can find. Um, in fact, there’s also some research that shows that the people who report, um, quote unquote doing their own research. They are statistically more likely to believe misinformation, which actually makes sense because when you think you’re doing your own research, you’re actually doing what we call selecting on the dependent variable, which is you are looking for the information that confirms what you think is true. That is just what we tend to do. Unless you’re doing a controlled experiment. Yeah. You’re not actually looking for information that contradicts your beliefs. So, you know, we do this, this is, uh, a lot of times, um, you know, we talk about, uh, personal finance and mm-hmm. And macroeconomics and stuff. How does this translate over to like, beliefs about. Economy, the, you know, ’cause these are, these are important things that, again, there is incredibly different, uh, views on. Sure. You know, um, an example now, uh, an example is that everyone, you know, whether, whatever you believe the pol policy or not, that, that, that, that tariffs were going to drive inflation, a hundred percent inflation was gonna skyrocket. The last CPI number comes under like under three right? 2.7%. Yeah. Like what, what, tell me how this all applies to that kind of news, that information. Yeah, so, so I, I’m going to make a, a couple points that I think will, will get to your question. Yeah. Because, you know, a, a lot of what I have landed on is this role of social identity, right? In shaping belief systems and. One thing that I’m sure you’re familiar with is that when the party in the White House switches overnight from Democrat to Republican, people’s perception of how the economy is doing as a function of political party flips over. So when the White House went from Biden to Trump in January, 2025, overnight, Republicans went from thinking the economy was in the trash to thinking the economy was doing excellent, and Democrats did the opposite. So is that an actual empirical observation of the world, or is that an expression of their. Perception that their team is in charge. Therefore, things must be better. Or now my team is no longer in charge, so now things must be worse. Right. That’s the big one. We see that. You know, I’m. Every election back to who, however long this has been tracked, we see this. Um, another thing that I think is interesting is in terms of people’s perceptions of whether or not the economy is good or bad, that is very much shaped by who we’re talking to and what information we’re exposed to. So this, this in invites a whole host of questions about how should elites talk about. Economic health, right? You had under Biden, Biden trying to tell people, the economy is doing really well, the economy is doing great. Look at all these metrics. The economy is doing great. And so you have Democrats saying, oh yeah, the economy is doing well, and Republicans saying, I am looking at how much things cost. I am looking at, you know, various things in my bank account. I’m gonna say the economy is not doing well. I also think that Biden is not a great president, so I tend to think that things aren’t going well when the other party’s in charge. And then you look now under Trump. Trump is in a bit of a pickle, right? Because he is saying the economy is doing well. He’s saying, look at these metrics, look at these numbers, and you have this sort of. Viral perception among people that we are in a stagnant economy. I even heard my 15-year-old, we were at Costco and we got, you know, their pizza slices are like $2. We got pizza slices and she said, well. You can get a whole dinner for $8 in this economy, Rick. I was like, what? Economy? But, but those perceptions are so, and it, it’s also very, very difficult to figure out where did that perception come from? Yeah, yeah. How do we isolate the source of that perception that this economy is, is not good. Yeah. Well then certainly like behaviors follow, right. And yeah. So I guess, yeah. I guess that’s like, I mean, I’m sure that’s a completely different thing. Like, I mean, how do, how do these, you know, different perceptions. Party based perceptions Sure. Ultimately influence the economy because of the way people think of the economy. Exactly. Right. And how, how do mm-hmm. When it comes to what have tariffs done, right? Mm-hmm. Like I’m not an economist. I do not know what tariffs have done. My understanding from my media exposure is that there are, on some certain kinds of items, prices have gone up a bit, but that some of the other. Like at the grocery store, for example, some of the price increases that we see there are not the result of tariffs. So then what are they the result of when it comes to how we attribute responsibility and blame, that is also very much shaped by our social identity. So if it helps me to think my grapes are expensive because of Donald Trump, then that’s what I’m going to think. Give us your sort of final thought here. Mm-hmm. Just in terms of, you know, what’s, what’s the learning. Here and how can we apply this to our own thinking? So, so I, I like to leave things on, on a kind of positive note because there is a lot to be concerned about in such a fractured information space. Um. One of the things that has been bringing me some, some hope that I think we could carry with us into how we think about what it is that people yearn for, what it is that people want. Even in this, this very splintered environment, I am convinced that even though all of our technology is creating atomized spaces for us to become our most exaggerated version of our self. I think what we really crave as human beings are shared experiences, opportunities for us to share experiences together, whether that be media content that we then want to talk about, whether those be events. There is a reason why football is still such a successful, um. Kind of entertainment. Right? And there’s also a reason why when there are cultural stories that allow us to all talk about them, like the couple at the cold play concert that was outed or whatever, there are reasons why those moments just catch fire. And I think it is because despite the fact that our technology platforms are trying to give us. Atomized, individualized, discreet spaces. At the end of the day, we really do want to share things with one another. Good stuff. Uh, professor Young, uh, uh, Dana Young, it, the book again is Wrong. How Media, politics and Identity Drive Our Appetite for Misinformation. Thank you so much for being on Wealth Formula Podcast. Great. Thanks so much. It was fun. We’ll be right back. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens to you. The concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealthformulabanking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. Again, just make sure that you are getting multiple sources of information. Whether that comes to, you know, this show really is about personal finance and macroeconomics and only politics and all that is not what I’m into, but the point is. That, uh, when it comes to, uh, when it comes to anything including personal finance and microeconomics, make sure you have multiple sources of information. Listen to the arguments and, uh, you know, make a decision that you can live with, whether you’re right or wrong. That’s it for me this week on Wealth Formula Podcast. This is Buck Joffrey signing up. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

In this episode, Amanda Panda shares her journey from 7 years in Australian politics to building a personal branding empire, why your "flaws" are actually your brand, her controversial 60 Minutes appearance about not sending her daughter to school, and the three stories every founder needs to tell to build authority.Episode Timestamps0:00 Trailer0:55 Introduction1:07 Amanda's Career Start in Politics2:31 Helping Small Businesses on the Side3:06 The "Oh Shit Fund" and Going Solo3:26 Why She Left Politics ("Using My Craft for Evil")5:23 Politicians Losing Authenticity in the System6:04 PR, Propaganda, and Human Influence7:09 Misinformation and Fear Campaigns in Politics9:01 Trump vs Kamala: Attention vs Likability11:58 Overcoming Imposter Syndrome12:30 Your Uniqueness IS Your Brand14:05 Why You Need to Polarize (Pick a Side)15:34 How to Find Your Message17:18 Value-Driven Content vs Self-Absorbed Content19:06 Content Pillars: 3-6 Topics Max20:53 Being Authentic vs Being Strategic22:23 James Smith: Online Persona vs Real Person23:08 Psychology Behind Personal Branding23:48 Clifton StrengthsFinder and 16 Personalities25:13 40-Page Strategy Documents26:05 $500K from One Podcast Appearance26:37 Why PR Works (Emotional Connection)28:29 Propaganda Book by Edward Bernays30:12 Controlling the Narrative30:33 The 60 Minutes Story That Went Wrong34:17 Not Sending Her Daughter to School35:22 Her Daughter at 3: 8 Countries, 150+ Hours Flying36:31 AI Tutoring and Alternative Education37:44 How She Took Back the Narrative (Mamamia Op-Ed)38:37 Create Your Own Media (Podcast, YouTube, TikTok)39:26 The Three Stories Every Founder Needs40:28 Repeat Your Message 10 Times Before It Lands41:07 Daily Journaling for Content Ideas42:28 Sharing Struggles Without Being Cringe43:00 Mercury Retrograde and "Gatorade" Seasons45:17 Women's Hormonal Cycles and Productivity48:27 Building Empires by Elena Cardone49:11 Journaling Through Identity Shifts49:54 How to Rebrand Yourself51:00 "When a Woman Changes Her Hair, She's About to Change Her Life"52:31 Balancing Business, Marriage, and Motherhood54:46 Outsourcing Below Your Hourly Rate55:02 $11/Hour Nannies in Bali and Fiji55:46 70 Hour Weeks Across Mom and Business56:10 Quality Time in Bursts (Not Weekly Routines)57:19 Extraordinary Life Requires Extraordinary Sacrifice58:06 Checking Yourself: You're in the 0.0001%58:54 Where to Find Amanda59:12 Advice to 18-Year-Old Self: Peace Over People-PleasingAbout Amanda PandaPersonal branding strategist and PR expert who spent 7 years in Australian politics before building her own agency. Pioneer in personal branding space with 40-page strategy documents and $500K generated from a single podcast appearance. Now hosts a podcast for ambitious women navigating entrepreneurship and motherhood while raising her daughter Ariella with husband Jack.Connect with Amanda Pandahttps://www.instagram.com/amandapandadelosa/Connect with Mehttps://www.youtube.com/@morgantnelsonhttps://www.instagram.com/morgantnelson

In this episode, Ricardo analyzes the 21st edition of the World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2026, highlighting the end of predictability and the beginning of the so-called "era of competition." The report points to a more turbulent global scenario, with 50% of leaders predicting instability in the next two years, driven by geoeconomic confrontation that threatens global supply chains. Ricardo explains that in the economic field, high global debt and increased spending on defense, energy transition, and artificial intelligence make capital more expensive and scarcer, requiring extreme financial rigor in projects. Misinformation intensifies social polarization. As a strategic response, the report proposes a "coalition of the willing": moving forward with truly committed groups, without waiting for total consensus. Listen to the podcast to learn more!

In this week's episode, both of our storytellers confront the real-world consequences of misinformation—and how it can spread faster than the truth.Part 1: Growing up, Modesta Abugu knows firsthand the challenges rural African farmers face. But when she discovers that misinformation is making things worse, she sets out to change the narrative. Part 2: While living in South Africa, Fiona Tudor Price witnesses how AIDS misinformation devastates an entire nation. Modesta N. Abugu recently obtained her Ph.D. in the Department of Horticultural Science at North Carolina State University, where she conducted research to identify genetic tools that can be used to improve flavor in sweetpotato, guiding the development of high-quality varieties. As a National Science Foundation interdisciplinary research fellow at the Genetic Engineering and Society Center, NCSU, she examined the scientific, policy, and public-engagement dimensions of agricultural biotechnology within integrated food, energy, and water systems to help develop sustainable and responsive solutions that bridge innovation, policy, and societal needs. Modesta is also passionate about communicating science to the public, especially on the potential of agricultural biotechnology tools in promoting food security. She has been widely involved in grassroots campaigns geared towards creating an enabling policy environment for farmers to gain access to new agricultural innovations globally. Through her awareness and advocacy efforts, she contributed to the passage of Nigeria's biosafety bill into law, and the commercialization of Bt cowpea in Nigeria. Modesta obtained her Bachelor of Science degree in biochemistry from the University of Nigeria in Nsukka, Nigeria, and an MSc in horticultural science from the University of Florida. Outside of work, she loves to hike and visit new places.Fiona Tudor Price is a seasoned producer, director, and science communicator with a unique blend of expertise in biology, media and education. With a BSc. Hons. in Biology and Film & Television Studies, Fiona began her career at TVOntario and Corus Entertainment, contributing to award-winning environmental and science documentaries. In 1999, she moved to South Africa and founded Atomic Productions, where she directed and produced impactful natural-history content for global networks including National Geographic, Discovery Channel, Animal Planet and WWF. Transforming complex scientific concepts into compelling, human-centred narratives, Fiona earned a reputation for making science accessible to broader audiences. A passionate advocate for women in media, Fiona founded Women in Film and Television South Africa (WIFT SA), providing a platform for mentorship, networking, and empowerment within the industry. She is deeply committed to educational equity, particularly for learners with dyslexia. Fiona collaborated with Decoding Dyslexia, Ontario, to initiate the transformational Ontario Human Rights Commission's Right to Read inquiry, to address systemic issues in education for learners with dyslexia. Currently, Fiona is a Digital Media and Accessibility Specialist at Humber Polytechnic, focusing on the intersection of multimedia, AI, and accessibility in education, driving innovation at the crossroads of education and technology.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In the 6 AM hour, Larry O'Connor and Patrice Onwuka discussed: MEDIA CLAIMS DEBUNKED: Examining media claims that ICE detained a five-year-old in Minnesota, which DHS later clarified was a case of parental abandonment. VANCE IN MN: Vice President JD Vance visits Minneapolis to show support for federal agents following radical church protests. BETHESDA SQUATTER: Accused squatter Tamieka Goode is found guilty after taking over a $2.3 million home in an affluent Montgomery County neighborhood. STEM CELL BAN: The Trump administration halts the use of human fetal tissue in all NIH-funded research. Where to find more about WMAL's morning show: Follow Podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Audible and Spotify Follow WMAL's "O'Connor and Company" on X: @WMALDC, @LarryOConnor, @JGunlock, @PatricePinkfile, and @HeatherHunterDC Facebook: WMALDC and Larry O'Connor Instagram: WMALDC Website: WMAL.com/OConnor-Company Episode: Friday, January 23, 2026 / 6 AM HourSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

About this episode: It started as a time-limited series of interviews with public health experts at the start of a global pandemic. Over nearly six years, Public Health On Call expanded to a wide range of topics, including humanitarian health, aging, and vaccines, becoming a home for nuanced public health discussions and analysis. In this episode: Hosts Stephanie Desmon, Josh Sharfstein, and Lindsay Smith Rogers reflect on 1,000 episodes of the show, the challenges of covering complex health topics, and what issues they want to focus on next. Note: This episode is also available as a video on YouTube. Guests: Stephanie Desmon, MA, is a former journalist, author, and the director of public relations and communications for the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs. Dr. Josh Sharfstein is distinguished professor of the practice in Health Policy and Management, a pediatrician, and former secretary of Maryland's Health Department. Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the Public Health On Call podcast, an editor for Expert Insights, and the director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Episodes mentioned: 001 - Global Preparedness, Misinformation and Community Transmission—March 2020 060 - The Epidemic Within the Pandemic: Opioids and COVID-19—April 2020 064 - How COVID-19 Has Changed a Baltimore Public School—May 2020 132 - The Enemy of the People, by Henrik Ibsen and Parallels to the COVID-19 Pandemic—August 2020 169 - Online Learning with Baltimore Public School Principal Matt Hornbeck—September 2020 285 - COVID-19 and the Arts Part 2: Performing Arts and the Pandemic with Marin Alsop—March 2021 311 - A Baltimore Public School Reopens—May 2021 401 - School in the Time of COVID: A Tour Of Hampstead Hill Academy—November 2021 465- A Special Mother's Day Episode—May 2022 653 - Back to School: How One K-8 School Is Getting Ready for the Fall—August 2023 751 - The New Federal Regulations Aimed Making Methadone More Accessible—And Less Stigmatizing—April 2024 823 - Special Episode—The Fight For A Swimmable Harbor in Baltimore—November 2024 862 - The Misinformation Around Seed Oils—March 2025 891 - B'More For Healthy Babies: A Look Back at 15 Years of Infant Mortality Reduction in Baltimore—May 2025 953 - Interpreting the Data on Tylenol, Pregnancy, and Autism—September 2025 967 - An Update on Baltimore's Swimmable Harbor and the Pistachio Tide—October 2025 973 - Baltimore's Record Low in Homicides—November 2025 979 - Why Are More People Choosing Not to Vaccinate Their Pets?—November 2025 Transcript information: Looking for episode transcripts? Open our podcast on the Apple Podcasts app (desktop or mobile) or the Spotify mobile app to access an auto-generated transcript of any episode. Closed captioning is also available for every episode on our YouTube channel. Contact us: Have a question about something you heard? Looking for a transcript? Want to suggest a topic or guest? Contact us via email or visit our website. Follow us: @‌PublicHealthPod on Bluesky @‌PublicHealthPod on Instagram @‌JohnsHopkinsSPH on Facebook @‌PublicHealthOnCall on YouTube Here's our RSS feed Note: These podcasts are a conversation between the participants, and do not represent the position of Johns Hopkins University.

In this episode of That's So Hindu, Mat McDermott, Pawan Deshpande, and Devala Rees discuss the intersection of AI and Hinduism, exploring how AI can be integrated into devotional practices, the biases present in AI systems, and the implications of misinformation in educational contexts. They delve into the philosophical questions surrounding consciousness and AI, and the potential future of AI in relation to Hindu traditions. The discussion emphasizes the importance of accurate representation and the opportunities AI presents for spreading knowledge about Hinduism.TakeawaysAI images can be used in Hindu practices but with caution.Hinduism encompasses over 300 distinct traditions.Misinformation in educational materials about Hinduism is prevalent.Caste is often misrepresented in AI outputs.AI can mimic human-like features but lacks true consciousness.The optimization function in AI influences its responses.AI performs better when users interact positively with it.Hindus are significant users of AI technologies like ChatGPT.AI presents opportunities for accurate representation of Hinduism.The future of AI in Hinduism raises important philosophical questions.Chapters00:00Introduction to the Guests and Their Backgrounds02:54AI in Hindu Devotional Practices05:49Understanding AI: Definitions and Implications11:59Bias and Misinformation in AI17:52Educational Challenges and Misrepresentation of Hinduism23:44The Role of AI in Cultural Representation29:45Consciousness and AI: A Philosophical Exploration35:57The Future of AI and Hinduism41:45Conclusion and Final ThoughtsKeywordsAI, Hinduism, Devotional Practices, Misinformation, Bias, Education, Cultural Representation, Consciousness, Philosophy, Technology Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For this episode, Moira walks Adrian through the conservative attack on birth control, and in particular the influencer-led, MAHA-adjacent surge of misinformation about menstruation and birth control. At issue is ultimately a deeply reactionary, and deeply troubling picture of the gendered body and women's autonomy. Topics covered include: cycle synching, the politics of "naturalness" and the weaponization of legitimate grievances with the medical establishment for ideological purposes.Here is the list of books/articles we refer to in this episode:-- Dorothy Roberts, Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction and the Meaning of Liberty (1998)-- Mikaeli Anne Carmichael, Rebecca Louise Thomson, Lisa Jane Moran, Thomas Philip Wycherley, "The Impact of Menstrual Cycle Phase on Athletes' Performance: A Narrative Review"

This is the All Local 4pm update for January 21, 2025

Online scams. Influence campaigns. AI: How to be skeptical, but not cynical, about the information you consume. Plus, advice for teachers. Get news and guest insights by subscribing to the Inspire Podcast Newsletter. See the transcript. Read educators' tips on teaching students to verify truth.

An Associated Press investigation found that more than 420 “anti-science” bills were introduced in statehouses last year, targeting protections around public health issues like vaccines, milk safety, and fluoride. As state legislatures come back into session, what can we expect for 2026? Joining Ira Flatow is Laura Ungar, science and medical reporter for the Associated Press.Plus, reporter Elise Plunk joins Host Flora Lichtman to discuss the complex case of a citizen-led pollution monitoring program in Louisiana that persists despite a law banning the use of its data.Guests: Laura Ungar is a science and medical reporter for the Associated Press.Elise Plunk is an environmental reporter and Report for America corps member at the Louisiana Illuminator.The transcript for this episode is available at sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden joins the show to talk about treating thousands of Covid patients, the battles over ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies, Houston Methodist’s attacks, and how speaking out turned her life upside down. She breaks down spike proteins, vaccine failures, and why early treatment mattered.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

View the Show Notes Page for This Episode Become a Member to Receive Exclusive Content Sign Up to Receive Peter's Weekly Newsletter Abbie Smith-Ryan is a leading researcher in exercise physiology whose work focuses on how training and nutrition influence body composition, metabolism, cardiovascular health, and women's health across the lifespan, with particular attention on perimenopause and post-menopause. In this episode, Abbie explains how early exercise and play help build the foundation for bone health, muscle development, and cardiorespiratory fitness in girls, as well as how puberty and menstruation shape athletic performance, motivation, and recovery. She also explores how women can tailor training and nutrition across the menstrual cycle through smart fueling, hydration, and inflammation management; examines the evidence behind supplements such as creatine, omega-3s, and magnesium; and unpacks the metabolic and body composition changes that accompany the transition into perimenopause and menopause. Finally, she covers practical exercise programming for busy women, training and nutrition considerations during pregnancy and postpartum, and the evolving role of hormone therapy alongside lifestyle-based, evidence-driven approaches that help women better advocate for their health. We discuss: Abbie's background in distance running and her interest in studying women's health around exercise [3:00]; The role of early-life exercise in building lifelong bone, muscle, and cardiovascular health in girls [4:00]; Training principles for premenstrual girls, the risks of early specialization and delayed puberty from intense training, and how youth sport participation can shape bone and spinal health [7:15]; Nutrition as fuel in young female athletes: supporting training, growth, and performance [11:00]; Training and recovery across the menstrual cycle: recovery, nutrition, supplements, and practical strategies for performance support [16:00]; The benefits of creatine supplementation and importance of protein intake across the menstrual cycle [27:15]; How women should approach training intensity and volume across the menstrual cycle [33:00]; How to identify and monitor the perimenopausal transition and why this phase represents a critical window for exercise and nutrition interventions [37:15]; Case study: time-efficient exercise program for a busy, perimenopausal woman [42:00]; Why improving body composition is a better goal than weight loss, and how to set realistic fat-loss targets in midlife women [53:30]; How to preserve muscle and bone while using GLP-1 medications: resistance training, protein intake, and more [58:15]; Designing a three-hour-per-week training plan for sustainable body recomposition [1:03:30]; Abbie's insights from her 20+ years of self-tracking: nutrient timing, injury prevention, excessive training, bone health, and more [1:07:15]; How pregnancy and the postpartum period affect body composition, and how consistent exercise and intentional nutrition can prevent a permanent shift in body fat or muscle mass [1:13:30]; Changes in muscle quality and metabolic flexibility during perimenopause and menopause, and how exercise may counteract hormonally driven sarcopenia [1:21:45]; The biggest open questions about women's health: combining menopause hormone therapy with exercise, GLP-1 drugs, minimizing injury risk, and more [1:32:00]; How the training response differs between men and women, and the importance of type IIa muscle fibers [1:39:15]; Training advice for the hypothetical 70-year-old woman who has never exercised deliberately [1:47:00]; Misinformation about exercise and nutrition for women, injury risk, supplement hype, and the need for more nuanced messaging around hormones, recovery, and midlife training [1:53:30]; Benefits of hormone therapy in midlife women and its interaction with exercise and lifestyle interventions [2:00:15]; Peter's overall take on how women should approach exercise volume and intensity at various life phases and time constraints [2:03:00]; and More. Connect With Peter on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube