Podcasts about moderated

The Positive Aging Community recently hosted a dynamic discussion on one of the most pressing questions facing older adults and their families: should you age in place or consider making a move? Moderated by Steve Gurney, the session drew on recent survey data, expert insights, and robust audience participation to explore the nuanced factors that shape this deeply personal decision.Desire to Stay vs. Need to MoveA central theme emerged from the discussion: most older adults want to remain in their homes as they age. Citing the December 2024 AARP “Aging in Place in Community” study, Gurney noted that 75% of adults age 50 and older wish to stay in their current homes, while 73% hope to remain in their communities, even if that means moving to a different type of residence within the same area1. This distinction—between “aging in place” and “aging in community”—reflects a growing recognition that while the desire for continuity is strong, practical needs may prompt changes in living arrangements.Key Factors Driving DecisionsThe conversation highlighted several major considerations:Cost of Living: The primary driver for those contemplating a move is affordability. Sixty-five percent of adults aged 50+ would relocate for a lower cost of living, and 71% of those anticipating a move cite rent or mortgage expenses as a key factor1.Social Connections: The importance of social opportunities and avoiding isolation is on the rise. Loneliness and lack of engagement are now widely recognized as significant health risks, prompting many to seek out communities with more robust social infrastructures1.Home Maintenance and Accessibility: The cost and effort of maintaining a home, as well as the need for modifications to address mobility or safety, are major concerns. Forty-three percent of older adults expect they'll need to make their homes more accessible as they age1.Attitudes Toward Age-Restricted Communities: While age-segregated communities offer services and amenities, they are less appealing to many older adults, who prefer to remain integrated within broader, intergenerational neighborhoods1.A Four-Legged Stool: Planning for Meaning and PurposeGurney introduced a helpful metaphor for decision-making: the “four-legged stool.” The seat represents living with meaning and purpose, supported by four legs:Mobility: What if you can't drive or don't want to drive?Home Accessibility: What if you can't easily move around your home?Social Connections: What if you're not connected to neighbors or your community?Cognitive Health: What if you experience cognitive decline, such as dementia?Participants were encouraged to reflect on these questions as a framework for planning, emphasizing that having a plan—rather than simply hoping to age in place—is crucial for positive outcomes.Financial Stability and Community OptionsThe discussion also addressed concerns about the financial stability of senior living communities, particularly in light of recent bankruptcies among life plan communities. Gurney advised potential residents to be cautious consumers: ask about entry fee refunds, review financial health documents, and consult with professionals before making a decision.Watch the recording and review chat, etc. https://www.retirementlivingsourcebook.com/videos/aging-in-place-or-making-a-move-open-forum-and-q-aFor more information, resources, and the latest research, visit the AARP Aging in Place Study and the Positive Aging Community.

Q&A on the series Poker Face with actor Simon Helberg. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Charlie has an extraordinary ability to determine when someone is lying. She hits the road with her Plymouth Barracuda and with every stop encounters a new cast of characters and strange crimes she can't help but investigate and solve.

At Aerial Cities 2024, this panel offered a clear-eyed view of where the #eVTOL and #AAM industries truly stand. Key takeaways from the session: ➡️ Passenger trust is the real design challenge. From “a product my mother wants to fly in” (CRISALION) to full-scale test demonstrators (Supernal), the focus is shifting from prototypes to public-ready aircraft. ➡️ Infrastructure may be the biggest bottleneck. “You're talking $25 million to build a vertiport,” (Bristow Group) — and there are no zoning codes in place yet. ➡️ #Regulation is moving fast — but not evenly. The UK, EU, and US are aligning slowly, while China is already certifying autonomous vehicles. That divergence could reshape the global market. ➡️ #Airspace strategies vary dramatically. The UK is going fully integrated, while Spain is testing U-space corridors. Harmonisation is still a work in progress. ➡️ Coexistence, not disruption, will define the 2030s. Future skies will blend eVTOLs, #drones, and traditional #aviation — and success will depend on collaboration, not competition. Moderated by Darryl Abelscroft (Future of Flight, ‪UKCAA‬ ), this panel featured expert insights from David Stepanek, FRAeS (Executive Vice President & Chief Transformation Officer, Bristow Group), Mark Watson (Head of UTM Service Integration, NATS), Manuel Heredia Ortiz (Former CEO, CRISALION), Diana Marina Cooper (Chief Partnerships & Policy Officer, Supernal), and Daniel García-Monteavaro (Head of Drone Business Development Department, ENAIRE) — in one of the most grounded, real-world conversations of the event. Read the full session recap now:

Difficult conversations should take place in all regions of a diverse state like Texas, especially after 30-plus years of one party rule. Beyond placing blame on rural regions or certain sects of historically Democratic voters, we should first take a deep look inwards and be ready to listen to those different from ourselves. Last month, over a hundred Democratic county party chairs, rural organizers, and freshly announced candidates held a conference in Bastrop, Texas. The 134 PAC invited both Progress Texas Podcasting Director Chris Mosser and Advocacy Manager and former small-town City Councilor Reagan Stone to take part - an honor and lots of fun. For the closing panel of the event, Reagan joined San Angelo attorney and Co-Founder of the 134 PAC Jon Mark Hogg, and seasoned rural political consultant and proud Missouri farmer Will Westmoreland to start the hunt for answering questions on turning Texas blue. Moderated by University of Houston at Victoria Political Science Professor Woodrow Wilson Wagner, this episode is an off-prompt attempt at defining why our conservative neighbors don't always vote for what may serve their best interests, and how progressive Texans might go about starting difficult, but very important, conversational exchanges with their more conservative counterparts.Learn more about the 134 PAC at https://www.the134pac.org/.Thanks for listening! Learn more about Progress Texas and how you can help support our ongoing work at https://progresstexas.org/.

Q&A on the film Nuked with actor & executive producer Justin Barth and actor Anna Camp. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. A group of friends gets together for a cannabis-infused, technology free, dinner party only to learn a bomb is headed right for them.

On Thursday, June 5th, we hosted CMO Series Live 2025 in New York. Throughout the day, we witnessed sessions led by senior marketing leaders and managing partners. Today, we are revisiting one of the standout sessions of the day, which explored the way AI is reshaping the landscape for legal marketing and business development.  Moderated by Sam Page, we heard from: Jen Leonard, Founder & Principal at Creative Lawyers,  Darth Vaughn, Associate General Counsel & Managing Director, Policy and Legal Operations at Ford Motor Company Bridget Mary McCormack, President and CEO at American Arbitration Association Jim Metzger, Chief Financial Officer at Reed Smith Jen, Darth, Bridget, and Jim addressed how CMOs can adapt to recognize and meet their clients' needs and expectations, and how to make internal strategic investments in having AI-driven legal services. This special episode covers:  How AI is changing the conversations that they are having in their organizations The strategic steps CMOs should be taking to revolutionize business development and marketing models as AI comes into play Examples of specific AI deployments  The current positioning of the wider market for adopting and using AI, especially for clients of law firms   The methods to train and develop associates on the use of AI, whilst focusing on critical thinking The approaches that CMOs can take to having conversations with their CFOs on rationalizing the cost of implementing AI

In American Jewish life, few questions are as fraught — or as revealing — as this one: Is Donald Trump good for the Jews? For some, the answer lies in his record. As president, Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, brokered normalization deals between Israel and Arab states, and cast himself as an unflinching ally of the Jewish state. In recent months, he has demanded action on campus antisemitism and positioned himself as a defender of Jewish students. But others see a more cynical calculus: a president who invokes Jewish loyalty tests, traffics in antisemitic tropes, and redefines criticism of Israel as bigotry — thereby narrowing the space for dissent and civil discourse. They worry that his brand of politics is less about safeguarding Jewish life than about instrumentalizing it, often at the expense of liberal values many American Jews hold dear. In this launch of the SAPIR Debates, two prominent Jewish voices take opposing sides of this urgent and emotionally charged question: Jason Greenblatt, who served as Trump's Special Envoy to the Middle East and worked for him for 20 years, and Rahm Emanuel, former chief of staff to President Obama, Mayor of Chicago, and US Ambassador to Japan. Moderated by SAPIR Editor-in-Chief Bret Stephens, this is a timely, unsparing exchange on identity, power, politics — and what it means to stand with the Jews in America today.

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

Farm owner Diane Gooding, Liz Bauer of Garston Hops and Alex Nowell, Mellotone Beer Project brewer and CLS Farms consultant, discuss how the partnership between brewers and growers has evolved in the past 20 years. Learn about the role terroir and farm practices play in hop aroma and flavor, and how the industry is adjusting to a slowdown in hop sales. Moderated by Stan Hieronymus.For more Drink Beer, Think Beer check out All About Beer.SponsorsDogfish Head Craft BreweryCalling all hop heads! Dogfish Head's 60 Minute IPA is a fantastically hoppy India Pale Ale that's beautifully balanced thanks to their unique continual hopping method. Delivering a pungent hop flavor that isn't crushingly bitter, 60 Minute is continually hopped throughout the boil for a full 60 minutes … starting to see where the name comes from?! Check out dogfish.com to learn more and to find some 60 Minute near you! Dogfish Head Craft Brewery, Milton, DE. Please drink responsibly.Stomp StickersStomp Stickers is a proud member of the Brewers Association that produces a wide variety of printed brewery products such as beerlabels, keg collars, coasters, beer boxes and much more. Stomp's website features an easy-to-use design tool, low quantity orders, fast turn times, and free domestic shipping. Visit StompStickers.com and use code THINKBEER for 15% off your first order.The 5th IngredientIf you're running a brewery owner or operator, Beer30 by The 5th Ingredient is the ultimate command center. The most powerful brewery management software on the market, Beer30 handles the entire brewing workflow, from recipe development to production. Once your beer is brewed and ready, it seamlessly manages your inventory and streamlines your brewery's sales and distribution--all in the same easy-to-use platform. Beer30 lets you get back to the beer and the people that made you fall in love with this industry in the first place. And no other brewery management software gives you the ability to truly master your business and get the insights that you need to thrive in an increasingly competitive industry. Visit the5thingredient.com/AllAboutBeer today to learn more and receive 3 free months of Beer30.Host: Stan HieronymusGuests:  Diane Gooding, Liz Bauer, and Alex NowellSponsors: All About Beer, Stomp Stickers, The 5th Ingredient, Tags: Hops, IPA, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, New Zealand, Farming, Flavor, AromaPhoto: John Holl

These are some of the biggest trends – and challenges – facing the news ecosystem today, impacting India in new and unique ways. And this was the focus of a discussion organised around the launch of the Reuters Institute Digital News Report for 2025, a comprehensive study of news consumption worldwide. Moderated by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism's director Mitali Mukherjee, the panel comprised Nic Newman, senior research associate at the institute; Sannuta Raghu, journalism fellow at the institute and head of the AI Lab at Scroll; Ritvvij Parrikh, head of AI product at Times Internet; and Akash Banerjee, founder and host of The Deshbhakt. According to the report, 55 percent of Indian users now consume news on YouTube, and 44 percent share news via social, messaging or email often via WhatsApp. Akash says there's a clear indication towards television “taking a bit of a beating” while social media sees a “steady uptick”. “You've got to be real and raw,” he says, and explains how consumption patterns are moving towards “snackable, biteable content”, where a shorter format is “much, much more prevalent than the longer format”. Ritvvij talks about the challenges in using large language models that can sometimes “miss the news peg” of a story and therefore the need to deal with “detecting hallucinations”. He adds, “Trust in news is eroding and not just because of bad actors, but also because of opaque algorithms.”Sannuta breaks down how AI can help news organisations “stay relevant” in some ways, converting text articles into videos that can be shared on Instagram. “The idea was…there are over 600 million smartphone users in India with access to cheap internet,” she says. She also explains the logistics of dealing with producing news in different languages in a country as diverse as India. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

But is it worse than that? Not simply a wealth transfer but a lever of control, wielded by the U.S. government to make weaker nations fall in line. Soft power as they call it. Few understand it better than Mike Benz, formerly the “Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Communications and Information Policy” at the State Department. Benz believes soft power and foreign aid, managed effectively, have their place in the U.S. empire. Tonight we are bringing the reformist Benz together with foreign aid proponent Cenk Uygur and abolitionist Keith Knight (editor of Scott Horton's Libertarian Institute) to answer the question: “should we abolish foreign aid?” Hosted by Josie.

This session was recorded 11th June in Zanzibar.  This engaging session features real-life examples from Namibia, Madagascar, and Zambia. Moderated by Francis Doku, the discussion dives into how airlines, airports, and tourism boards can work together to overcome barriers such as high costs, regulatory challenges, and the lack of data-driven strategies. The panelists, representing different sectors, emphasize the need for shared data, trust, government support, and innovative marketing to create successful partnerships. They also highlight the significant impact of external support in orchestrating and sustaining these collaborative efforts. Your moderator is Francis Doku, CEO, Maestro Africa Group Panellists: Keira Langford-Johnson, Business Development Director, Proflight Zambia Charmaine Matheus, Namibia Tourism Board Minosoa Tatamo Rakotozafy, Head of Aeronautical Activities, Ravinala Airports 

Q&A on the Netflix series The Waterfront with actor Jake Weary. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. As their storied North Carolina fishing empire decays, the damaged Buckleys grapple to revive their imperiled maritime heritage.

Q&A on the film Ponyboi with writer/producer/actor River Gallo. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Unfolding over the course of Valentine's Day in New Jersey, a young intersex sex worker must run from the mob after a drug deal goes sideways, forcing him to confront his past.

What's the difference between religious privilege and religious freedom? How does Christian nationalism spread? Why do so many ideas that start in Texas expand to other parts of the country? On this podcast, we bring you a special panel discussion on Christian nationalism in the Texas public sphere, recorded live on April 8. It features BJC Executive Director (and Respecting Religion co-host) Amanda Tyler, scholar David Brockman, professor Mark Chancey, and journalist Robert Downen. Moderated by Jack Jenkins, it was part of an all-day event focused on telling the story of religion in Texas through journalism, hosted by the Texas Tribune in partnership with Religion News Service, the Institute for Diversity and Civic Life, and Southern Methodist University's Religious Studies department.   SHOW NOTES Segment 1 (starting at 00:33): Introducing today's show and the panelists Learn more about the Texas Tribune's April 8 event titled “Telling the story of religion in Texas through journalism” on the website of the Texas Tribune. The website page dedicated to the event includes YouTube videos of each speaker and panel presentation.  The day-long event was held in partnership with the Texas Tribune, Religion News Service, the Institute for Diversity and Civic Life, and Southern Methodist University's Religious Studies department.   Segment 2 (starting at 02:51): Panel presentation You can watch a video of this presentation on YouTube, including a Q&A following the conversation. The panelists are: Amanda Tyler, executive director of BJC (Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty), lead organizer of Christians Against Christian Nationalism, and co-host of this podcast Dr. David Brockman, a non-resident scholar in religion and public policy at Rice University's Baker Institute who also serves as an adjunct professor at Texas Christian University Dr. Mark Chancey, professor of religious studies at SMU Robert Downen, senior writer at “Texas Monthly”  The moderator is Jack Jenkins, national reporter at Religion News Service. NOTE: After this panel was recorded, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott did sign legislation requiring every Texas public school classroom to display the Ten Commandments. Read more in this piece by Sameea Kamal for the Texas Tribune: Texas will require public school classrooms to display Ten Commandments under bill signed by governor Amanda and Holly talked about the Texas Bible curriculum in episode 2 of this season: Oklahoma and Texas try to force Bible teaching in public schools Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. Your gift to BJC is tax-deductible, and you can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

What's really causing America's obesity epidemic? In this special debate episode of The Metabolic Link, two leading voices in metabolic health square off: Dr. Richard Johnson, renowned for his research on fructose metabolism, and Dr. Layne Norton, a PhD in nutritional sciences and expert on the energy balance model. Moderated by host Dr. Dominic D'Agostino, the discussion dives deep into the biological roots of obesity, the relevance of sugar-sweetened beverages, the role of leptin and uric acid, and whether it's fructose or calories that are driving the crisis. Despite their differing perspectives, both experts agree on one critical point—our modern food environment is fueling metabolic dysfunction on a massive scale. This is one of the most nuanced and constructive conversations you'll hear on the topic of obesity science.References submitted by both guests can be found here!For more exclusive interviews and presentations with Dr. Johnson and Dr. Norton along with 100s of other videos on metabolic health and therapy, ad-free private episodes of The Metabolic Link, and to earn CMEs visit our member medical education platform: https://membership.metabolicinitiative.comSpecial thanks to the sponsors of this episode:✅ Genova Connect – Get 15% off any test kit with code METABOLICLINK here✅ iRestore – Get a huge discount when you use the code METABOLICLINK here✅ Fatty15 – Get 15% off a 90-day Starter Kit with code METABOLICLINK hereLearn more about Dr. Layne NortonLearn more about Dr. Richard JohnsonIn every episode of The Metabolic Link, we'll uncover the very latest research on metabolic health and therapy. If you like this episode, please share it, subscribe, follow, and leave us a comment or review on whichever platform you use to tune in!You can find us on all your major podcast players here and full episodes are also up on our Metabolic Health Summit YouTube channel!Find us on social: Instagram Facebook YouTube LinkedIn Please keep in mind: The Metabolic Link does not provide medical or health advice, but rather general information that does not serve as a substitute for a licensed healthcare professional. Never delay in seeking medical advice from an appropriately licensed medical provider for any health condition that you may have.

On this special SITREP episode of the FDD Morning Brief, Executive Director Jonathan Schanzer is joined by FDD Senior Fellow Lt. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Conricus and FDD CMPP Senior Director Bradley Bowman to assess the fallout from Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iran with a ceasefire now in effect — and evaluate the current status of Tehran's nuclear ambitions.Learn more at: https://www.fdd.org/fddmorningbrief

Q&A on the NBC series Grosse Pointe Garden Society with showrunners Jenna Bans and Bill Krebs. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Follows four members of a suburban garden club, as they get caught up in murder and mischief, as they strive to flourish. All episodes of Grosse Pointe Garden Society are now steaming on Peacock!

Join pioneering LGBTQ+ activist Daniel C. Tsang for a special conversation reflecting on his 50 years of activism, including his groundbreaking 1975 article Gay Awareness in Bridge Magazine, one of the first to address LGBTQ+ issues in the Asian American community. Tsang will discuss the evolution of LGBTQ+ rights, his personal journey, and the ongoing challenges facing the community. Moderated by the Museum of Chinese in America's Chief Curator Herb Tam, the event will conclude with a Q and A session for audience engagement.

Dustin Nemos Curtis Griffin Merciful God vs Vengeful God Biblical Debate Moderated By Victor HugoSource: Victor Hugo Maverick Artisthttps://rumble.com/c/c-5462997If you appreciate the work we do and wish to support us, you can donate here >>https://www.nemosnewsnetwork.com/donateOn Sale Now - CarbonShield60 Oil Infusions 15% OFFGo to >> https://www.redpillliving.com/NEMOSCoupon Code: NEMOS(Coupon code good for one time use)Sleepy Joe Sleep Aidhttps://redpillliving.com/sleepIf you wish to support our work by donating - Bitcoin Accepted.✅ https://NemosNewsNetwork.com/Donate———————————————————————FALL ASLEEP FAST - Stay Asleep Longer... Without Negative Side Effects.✅ https://redpillliving.com/sleep———————————————————————For breaking news from one of the most over the target and censored names in the world join our 100% Free newsletter at www.NemosNewsNetwork.com/news———————————————————————Follow on Truth Socialhttps://truthsocial.com/@REALDUSTINNEMOSAlso follow us at Gabhttps://gab.com/nemosnewsnetworkJoin our Telegram chat: https://NemosNewsNetwork.com/chat———————————————————————

In this episode of Medicine Grand Rounders, Dr. Sanjeeb Bhattacharya - Director of the HFpEF clinic and Associate Program Director of the HVTI heart failure fellowship - goes over various clinical presentations of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Moderated by: Yasmine K. Elghoul, MD

Join the University of Notre Dame's Alumni Association for our virtual series: Game Changers: Unlock Your Career Playbook, powered by IrishCompass and co-sponsored by Notre Dame Athletics. We invite you – regardless of career stage, industry, or profession – to learn from inspiring leaders. Join us for an engaging talk with successful Notre Dame coaches: Volleyball's Head Coach Salima Rockwell, Fencing's Head Coach Gia Kvaratskhelia, and the Catalino Family Head Hockey Coach Brock Sheahan '08. Discover how their approach to building winning athletic programs – from recruiting talent to fostering teamwork, building high-performing cultures, and achieving excellence – offers valuable lessons to elevate your own career! Moderated by Ron Powlus '97, Deputy Athletics Director – Football.Thanks for listening! The ThinkND Podcast is brought to you by ThinkND, the University of Notre Dame's online learning community. We connect you with videos, podcasts, articles, courses, and other resources to inspire minds and spark conversations on topics that matter to you — everything from faith and politics, to science, technology, and your career. Learn more about ThinkND and register for upcoming live events at think.nd.edu. Join our LinkedIn community for updates, episode clips, and more.

Zak Stein moderates an intense and wide-ranging conversation between Dr. Iain McGilchrist. and Dr. Marc Gafni and The dialogue spans the sacred nature of story, the loss of value and eros, the nature of evil, and the deep structures shaping culture today.Iain McGilchrist is a British psychiatrist, literary scholar, and one of the most important philosophical voices of our time. He is best known for The Master and His Emissary and The Matter With Things, where he argues that the left and right hemispheres of the brain attend to the world in fundamentally different ways, with massive consequences for civilization. His work bridges neuroscience, philosophy, art, and depth psychology, offering a vision of human consciousness grounded in attention, embodiment, and reverence.Dr. Marc Gafni is a visionary philosopher, spiritual teacher, and social theorist. A former Orthodox rabbi with a doctorate from Oxford University, he is the co-founder of the Center for World Philosophy and Religion and a leading voice in the articulation of “cosmo-erotic humanism.” His books include Your Unique Self, A Return to Eros, and Radical Kabbalah. Gafni's work fuses Jewish mysticism, integral theory, and Western philosophy to explore the nature of self, eros, and value at the evolutionary edge of human identity and spirituality.Zak Stein is a Harvard-trained education and transformation philosopher known for his work on developmental ethics, meta-crisis, and the future of human learning.#IainMcGilchrist #MarcGafni #ZakStein #Eros #Story #MeaningCrisis #IntegralPhilosophy #TheMasterAndHisEmissary #CosmoEroticHumanism

Q&A on the CBS series Tracker with actor & executive producer Justin Hartley and showrunner & executive producer Elwood Reid. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Colter Shaw travels the country in his old-school RV, helping police and private citizens solve crimes and locate missing persons--until his latest case changes everything.

Q&A on A Man on the Inside with Production Designer Ian Phillips. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Charles, a retired man, gets a new lease on life when he answers an ad from a private investigator and becomes a mole in a secret investigation in a nursing home.

Q&A with the Late Night with Seth Meyers writing team including host & writer Seth Meyers, head writer Alex Baze, “A Closer Look” writing supervisor Sal Gentile, writer Jenny Hagel, and writing supervisors Seth Reiss and Mike Scollins. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. With his signature monologue and sharp newsy segments like "A Closer Look," Seth Meyers hilariously breaks down the day's biggest stories and takes the current political circus head-on. He then welcomes Hollywood's most beloved A-list guests, as well as people not seen anywhere else in late night, like political figures and other interesting newsmakers. With fan-favorite comedy segments that become viral sensations, and the talented 8G band at his side, Seth consistently brings home the last laugh.

In this special Pride episode, Mark-Eugene and Dylan team up with DPS/Broadway Licensing for an author roundtable celebrating queer voices in the theatre. Moderated by Emmy-winning journalist Patrick Pacheco, the conversation features an all-star panel: Charles Busch (The Tale of the Allergist's Wife, Vampire Lesbians of Sodom), C.A. Johnson (All the Natalie Portmans), Michael Korie (Grey Gardens, Flying Over Sunset), and Lisa Kron (Fun Home, 2.5 Minute Ride). Together, they reflect on the power of queer storytelling, the evolution of representation onstage, and what it means to write with pride. It's a dynamic, heartfelt discussion with some of the most influential and exciting voices in American theatre today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Q&A on the Prime Video series Overcompensating with creator/writer/actor Benito Skinner, showrunner Scott King, and music supervisors Jen Malone and Nicole Weisberg. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Follows Benny, a football player, as he struggles to accept his sexuality in college, finding himself overcompensating as he tries to appear as something he's not.

How is AI impacting the economy today? What might this mean for tomorrow? This episode brings you inside a discussion hosted at BFI in April. Moderated by Caroline Grossman, Executive Director of the Rustandy Center for Social Sector Innovation, the conversation features: Anders Humlum, Assistant Professor of Economics, Chicago Booth; Sanjog Misra, Professor of Marketing, Chicago Booth & Faculty Director of the Center for Applied AI; Samir Mayekar, Associate VP and Managing Director, Polsky Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation; and Alex Tamkin, Research Scientist at Anthropic and lead researcher on the new Anthropic Economic Index.

Q&A on the series Elsbeth with actor Carrie Preston. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Astute but unconventional attorney Elsbeth Tascioni utilizes her singular point of view to make unique observations and corner brilliant criminals alongside the NYPD.

IFPRI Policy Seminar Fertilizer, soil health, and economic shocks: Policy lessons learned from recent events Organized by IFPRI, Food Policy, and the CGIAR Science Program on Policy Innovations June 11, 2025 Join us for a discussion of key findings from a recent special issue of Food Policy exploring the complex interactions between fertilizer use, soil health management, and economic shocks in various agricultural systems. Governments around the world have long implemented policies to enhance agricultural productivity through inorganic fertilizer application and soil management, yet recent global disruptions, from the 2020–2022 food, fuel, and fertilizer price crisis to ongoing climatic uncertainties, have challenged the effectiveness of these interventions. Authors and editors of the special issue will present evidence on the medium-term effects of rising fertilizer prices and their implications for global demand, highlighting the disproportionate effects on smallholder farmers in low- and middle-income countries. The discussion will also cover issues related to the role of targeted subsidy programs, integrated soil fertility management, and site-specific nutrient approaches. A panel of fertilizer experts will discuss how these insights can support policymakers seeking to mitigate price volatility, strengthen soil health, and ensure resilience in agricultural production, particularly during adverse weather events and economic shocks. This seminar offers critical perspectives for researchers, policymakers, and agribusiness leaders working to build more sustainable and equitable food systems in an increasingly uncertain world. Introduction and Opening Remarks Ruth Hill, Director, Markets, Trade, and Institutions, IFPRI Christopher Barrett, Stephen B. and Janice G. Ashley Professor of Applied Economics and Management, Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY A synthesis of recent evidence on the policy dimensions of fertilizer, soil health, and economic shocks Kibrom Abay, Senior Research Fellow, IFPRI Country and cross-country policy experience: A conversation with the authors Moderated by David J. Spielman, Director, Innovation Policy and Scaling, IFPRI Akuffo Amankwah, Senior Economist, World Bank Catherine Ragasa, Senior Research Fellow, IFPRI Jaweriah Hazrana, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Arizona State University Pauline Chivenge, Senior Scientist, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) Panel Discussion: How do we build resilience to future shocks in international and domestic fertilizer markets? Moderated by Charlotte Hebebrand, Director, Communications and Public Affairs, IFPRI Peter Odhiambo Owoko, Head, Policy Coordination, Directorate of Agricultural Policy Research and Regulations, State Department for Crop Development & Agricultural Research, Kenya Latha Nagarajan, Director, Sustainable Opportunities for Improving Livelihoods with Soils (SOILS) Consortium, International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC) Shamie Zingore, Director of Research and Development, African Plant Nutrition Institute (APNI) Avinash Kishore, Senior Research Fellow, IFPRI Closing Remarks Ruth Hill, Director, Markets, Trade, and Institutions, IFPRI Links: More about this Event: https://www.ifpri.org/event/fertilizer-soil-health-and-economic-shocks-policy-lessons-learned-from-recent-events/ Subscribe IFPRI Insights newsletter and event announcements at www.ifpri.org/content/newsletter-subscription

June 10, 2025 | This episode of The Chain features a panel discussion from May's PEGS Boston. Moderated by Peter Tessier, Albert M. Mattocks professor of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Chemical Engineering at the University of Michigan, the panelists include Sarel Fleishman, professor of Biomolecular Sciences at the Weizmann Institute of Science; Kadina Johnston, senior specialist of Discovery Biologics at Merck & Co.; Vincent Ling, chief business officer of Morphocell Technologies; Arvind Rajpal, SVP of Xaira; and Max Vasquez, chief computing officer of Adimab. Together they discuss benchmarking AI/ML methods compared to traditional approaches, development of human-relevant training data, identifying and addressing core challenges in de novo designs, and more. Links from this episode:  PEGS Boston Conference & Expo Engineering Bispecific Antibodies University of Michigan University of Michigan Chemical Engineering Weizmann Institute of Science Scala Biodesign Merck & Co., Inc. Morphocell Technologies Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Xaira Adimab LLC 

Can Sales Managers Be Friends with Their Reps? The Ultimate Sales Leadership DebateShould leaders be friendly or firm? In this epic live debate from CoachEm's inaugural Closing Arguments series, two powerhouse sales veterans, Mark Kosoglow (Co-founder & CEO at Operator, former Outreach leader) and Kevin "KG" Gaither (CEO of InsideSalesExpert.com, former ZipRecruiter exec), go head-to-head on one of the most controversial questions in sales leadership:“Can, should, or would you be friends with your sales reps?”Moderated by Matt Benelli, host of the Coach to Scale podcast, this unscripted, no-holds-barred session dives into real stories, polarizing philosophies, and battle-tested experiences on the fine line between empathy and authority.What you'll learn:When friendship enhances performance, and when it kills accountabilityWhy sales managers struggle with tough conversationsThe hidden career risks of blurred boundariesHow modern leaders navigate connection, trust, and coaching cultureGet actionable takeaways for building high-performing sales teams while balancing trust, professionalism, and results.This is not your average webinar. It's honest. It's engaging. It's real sales talk for real sales leaders. Sponsored by CoachEm: The world's first AI coaching execution platform, built to scale sales success through data, coaching, and culture.COMMENT below: Can you be friends with your reps? Where do YOU draw the line?

Q&A on the series St. Denis Medical with actor Wendi McLendon-Covey. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. It follows an underfunded, understaffed hospital where the doctors and nurses try their best to treat patients while maintaining their own sanity.

Q&A on the Apple TV+ series Dope Thief with actor & executive producer Brian Tyree Henry. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Follows long-time friends and delinquents who pose as DEA agents to rob a house in the countryside, but end up unintentionally revealing and unraveling the biggest hidden narcotics corridor on the Eastern seaboard.

Food safety is a public health and development priority. This year's theme “Food Safety: Science in Action” highlights the urgent need to strengthen food systems through research, innovation, and science-based regulation. On this episode, we speak with Nicholas Alifa, PhD Researcher in Food Science at the University of Reading, on the role of science in building safer, more resilient food systems. Moderated by Stephen Daniel, Senior Associate, Think Tank Operations, NESG

From WEDI's 2025 Spring Conference, a panel featuring health care cybersecurity subject matter experts Erik Decker, VP, CISO, Intermountain Health, and Scott Ruthe, VP, Waystar. Moderated by WEDI's Privacy & Security Workgroup Co-Chair Lesley Berkeyheiser (DirectTrust), the panel discusses cyber resilience business processes, strategies, collaboration, and resources for both public and private health care entities

Q&A on the ABC series Abbott Elementary with actor Chris Perfetti. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. A group of dedicated, passionate teachers -- and a slightly tone-deaf principal -- find themselves thrown together in a Philadelphia public school where, despite the odds stacked against them, they are determined to help their students succeed in life. Though these incredible public servants may be outnumbered and underfunded, they love what they do -- even if they don't love the school district's less-than-stellar attitude toward educating children.

Q&A on the series Ginny & Georgia with actor Brianne Howey. Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company. Teenage Ginny and her family yearn to put down roots in a picturesque New England town after years on the run.

Two visions for the future of AI clash in this debate between Daniel Kokotajlo and Arvind Narayanan. Is AI a revolutionary new species destined for runaway superintelligence, or just another step in humanity's technological evolution—like electricity or the internet? Daniel, a former OpenAI researcher and author of AI 2027, argues for a fast-approaching intelligence explosion. Arvind, a Princeton professor and co-author of AI Snake Oil, contends that AI is powerful but ultimately controllable and slow to reshape society. Moderated by Ryan and David, this conversation dives into the crux of capability vs. power, economic transformation, and the future of democratic agency in an AI-driven world. ------

For the last two weeks, our on-the-Croisette crew of Film Comment contributors has been reporting from the 2025 Cannes Film Festival with a series of thoughtful dispatches, interviews, and Podcasts. Before the festival wrapped on May 24, Film Comment partnered with Cannes Docs, the nonfiction-focused section of the Marché du film, on a panel titled “The Voice of Documentary.” Moderated by FC Editor Devika Girish, the panel convened three practitioners of radical nonfiction—Eduardo Williams (The Human Surge 3), Brett Story (Union), and Zoya Laktionova (Ashes Settling in Layers on the Surface)—to unpack the ethical and practical ways in which documentaries use sound, voice, and audio to speak to us and shape us as listeners. 528861

Panel discussion with casting directors Shaheen Baig (Adolescence), Julie Schubert (The Diplomat) and Brett Greenstein & Collin Daniel (Nobody Wants This). Moderated by Mara Webster, In Creative Company

In this special episode of All Quiet on the Second Front, we're bringing you a live recording from Offset 2025. Moderated by Danielle Metz, 2F Chief Policy Officer, this panel tackles a question that's easy to say but hard to operationalize: how do we actually build trust between government and industry to deliver secure, mission-ready technology? Danielle is joined by Rob Nolen, Chief Technologist for DoD at AWS, Dan Garcia, Chief Information Security Officer at EnterpriseDB, and Eric Sanders, Chief Information Security Officer at DHS (I&A) and, together, they unpack the cultural and structural baggage that slows innovation—and explore what it'll take to shift hearts, minds, and bureaucracies toward impact.What's Happening on the Second Front: Building security into systems from the start (not bolting it on later)Measuring impact through velocity, not vanity metricsRisk tolerance vs. risk avoidance in government techThe role of policy and regulation in accelerating trustWhy a shared language between builders, buyers, and approvers is mission-critical

In this special episode, Peter and Eddie are joined with comic book royalty Larry Lieber, co-creator of iconic Marvel heroes like Iron Man, Thor, and Ant-Man, and former Marvel Spider-Man group editor Danny Fingeroth. The duo dives into Lieber's illustrious 75-year career, from his early days at Timely Comics to his long tenure illustrating The Amazing Spider-Man newspaper strip and his groundbreaking work at Marvel. They also explore Lieber's bold new venture, his debut prose novel Chirps, a departure from comics that showcases his storytelling versatility. Moderated by Fingeroth, who shares insights from his own Marvel journey and his work as a comics historian, this episode is packed with behind-the-scenes anecdotes, reflections on the Silver Age of comics, and a celebration of Lieber's enduring legacy. Tune in for an unforgettable conversation with two titans of the industry!

In this episode of Medicine Grand Rounders, we're join by hematologist extrodinaire Dr. Dana Angelini, who goes over the do's and don'ts of anticoagulation for the Internal Medicine Physician. Moderated by: Seysha Mehta, MS3

In American Jewish life, few questions are as fraught — or as revealing — as this one: Is Donald Trump good for the Jews? In this launch of the SAPIR Debates, two prominent Jewish voices take opposing sides of this urgent and emotionally charged question: Jason Greenblatt, who served as Trump's Special Envoy to the Middle East and worked for him for 20 years, and Rahm Emanuel, former chief of staff to President Obama, Mayor of Chicago, and US Ambassador to Japan. Moderated by SAPIR Editor-in-Chief Bret Stephens, this is a timely, unsparing exchange on identity, power, politics — and what it means to stand with the Jews in America today. Recorded May 15, 2025, at The 92nd Street Y, New York.

Eli Williams of Day One Agency joins the conversation to unpack findings from the agency's latest report, Gen Z: Life, Actually. The study challenges common assumptions about Gen Z and reveals a generation that's more multifaceted—and in some ways, more traditional—than many marketers assume.Through the lens of public relations and cultural insight, this episode explores how Gen Z is reshaping expectations around work, money, identity, and influence. Williams outlines three distinct cohorts within the generation and explains how their diverse values are already influencing the future of brand communication.Moderated by Fred Cook, the conversation addresses key questions, including:In what ways is Gen Z more similar to their parents than expected?How do their views on stability, risk, and tradition split across subgroups?Why does financial anxiety shape so many of their decisions?What should communicators understand about Gen Z's internal diversity?How can media literacy become a strategic asset in engaging Gen Z?Key Discussion HighlightsThe report identifies three mindsets within Gen Z:Neo-Traditionalists value stability and lean toward conservative idealsFluid Pragmatists take a cautious, balanced approach to major life decisionsInternet Age Explorers reject conventional paths in favor of experimentation and experienceMoney as a Central ConcernAcross all groups, financial uncertainty plays a central role in shaping priorities, spending, and life planning.A New Life TimelineUnlike previous generations, Gen Z is not in a hurry to pursue traditional milestones like marriage, homeownership, or long-term careers. Their timelines are fluid, self-defined, and experience-driven.The Implications for PRGen Z's complexity demands a more nuanced, culturally aware approach to communication. Understanding their values—and the differences within the generation—is key to long-term engagement.Media Literacy as a Core CompetencyGrowing up in the digital age, Gen Z is becoming increasingly adept at filtering content and questioning sources. Communicators must recognize that this generation does not take information at face value.Time markers00:00 — Understanding Gen Z: A New Perspective06:41 — The Three Cohorts of Gen Z12:09 — Fluid Pragmatists: The Middle Path17:37 — Internet Age Explorers: The Experimental Group25:18 — Navigating the Future of PR with Gen Z31:21 — Media Literacy and the Information Diet of Gen ZFind the report here:Gen Z: Life, Actually – Day One Agencyhttps://d1a.com/perspective/genz-life-actually A production of the USC Annenberg Center for Public Relations at the University of Southern California.

Recorded live at the 40th Space Symposium event in Colorado Springs, CO, this week's bonus crossover episode features a powerful conversation from HawkEye 360's Salon Breakfast Panel, Illuminating Chinese Military Activity in the Indo-Pacific Region.Moderated by Kari Bingen, the panel brings together expert perspectives from co-host Ray Powell, Kimberly Lehn, Corey Johnston, and Mike Studeman to explore the shifting dynamics of the Indo-Pacific, including maritime domain awareness, grey zone operations, and the critical role of commercial space-based RF data in enhancing strategic visibility.Tune in for sharp insights into one of today's most pressing geopolitical challenges—and how space-based capabilities are reshaping our understanding of activity in the region.For those interested in following HawkEye 360, visit www.he360.com or follow @hawkeye360 on X, LinkedIn, and YouTube.Follow our podcast on X, @IndoPacPodcast; or on LinkedIn or BlueSky at our show title, Why Should We Care About the Indo-Pacific?Follow Ray Powell on X (@GordianKnotRay) or on LinkedIn.

Worlds colliding ... dogs and cats living together ... mass hysteria Pete Rose Batting Avg Starting Pitching The experience database Becoming a man

In this special episode of our podcast, recorded live at HemOnc Pulse Live in Austin, Texas on May 2–3, 2025, leading experts tackle some of the most pressing controversies in the management of myelodysplastic syndromes. Moderated by Naval Daver, MD, this dynamic panel discussion brings together top thought leaders in hematologic malignancies to debate evolving treatment standards, diagnostic challenges, and the integration of emerging therapies in clinical practice.