Podcasts about Pew Research Center

This series is all about pushing past the dichotomies of American politics to better understand why voters prefer X to Y, Yea to Nay, or Red to Blue. Our friends at the Pew Research Center are of a like mind, so we asked Director of Politics Jocelyn Kiley to join Henry to discuss the center's […]

O Império da IA, com Karen HaoEm 2019 — tempos mais simples! — a jornalista Karen Hao foi fazer o primeiro “perfil” jornalístico da sua carreira, aquelas reportagens em que um jornalista passa dias acompanhando uma pessoa ou empresa, uma coisa meio biografia, meio retrato congelado no tempo.A tal empresa era uma startup do Vale do Silício, ainda pequena e desconhecida dos meros mortais como eu e você, mas que hoje é a mais valiosa da história: a OpenAI, também conhecida como “a criadora do ChatGPT”.A Karen Hao vendeu o projeto do perfil para o MIT Technology Review porque a OpenAI parecia, naquela época, uma startup diferente. O “open” no nome nasceu da visão de que inteligência artificial é um assunto tão importante para o futuro da humanidade que precisava ser explorado de um jeito aberto, compartilhando conhecimento com todo mundo, e mais preocupado em proteger esse tal futuro do que em só gerar lucro.Hoje, aqui direto de 2026, a gente já sabe que não foi exatamente isso que aconteceu. Com o tempo, a OpenAI se transformou numa empresa oficialmente voltada para o lucro como qualquer outra e chegou a ser processada por Elon Musk — um dos apoiadores iniciais do projeto — por quebrar essa promessa de ser ‘open'. Em maio, o Elno perdeu a causa, e a OpenAI agora se prepara para lançar as ações na bolsa e, pelos números atuais, já largar valendo mais de 1 trilhão de dólares.Mesmo em 2019, a Karen Hao sentiu que todo esse papo de “open” não era bem assim: segredos e competitividade em todas as conversas que ela ouvia na empresa. Publicou o tal perfil contando isso e o pessoal da OpenAI… não gostou muito. Achou que ela ia só falar bem deles, e a empresa cortou contato com ela por três anos.O Boa Noite Internet é uma publicação apoiada por pessoas como você, nosso público. Para receber novos posts e apoiar meu trabalho, considere tornar-se um assinante gratuito ou pago.Até que, em maio do ano passado, ela lançou nos EUA o livro O império da IA: Por dentro da corrida irresponsável pela dominação total, que segue contando a história da OpenAI — e abre com a bizarra saída do Sam Altman, demitido do cargo de CEO por “nem sempre falar a verdade” ao conselho da empresa, para voltar quatro dias depois nos braços dos funcionários.Mas esse livro não é exatamente uma biografia da OpenAI. Para mim, é mais um retrato de todo o sistema empresarial em que vivemos hoje — inteligência artificial ou não. O importante é que ele acabou de sair no Brasil pela Editora Rocco, que me procurou para saber se eu queria entrevistá-la aqui no programa, aproveitando que ela veio participar do Esquenta do Congresso Internacional de Jornalismo Investigativo da Associação Brasileira de Jornalismo Investigativo. O congresso, aliás, acontece dia 30 de julho — vai lá no site da Abraji saber mais, quem sabe comprar seu ingresso.Mas enfim, claro que eu queria conversar com ela. Obrigado, Abraji, obrigado, pessoal da Rocco, pelo presente. Quem me conhece sabe que IA agora é um assunto muuuito importante no meu trabalho. Eu fico aqui tentando navegar o meio do caminho entre o fim do mundo exterminador do futuro e a utopia vendida por muita gente. Não acredito em nenhum dos dois cenários, falei disso com a Karen antes e durante a conversa. Mas no final da entrevista a gente volta para falar não só disso, como também de como o IA em Curso, minha comunidade de letramento contínuo em IA, se conecta com tudo. Com promoção? Pode ser. Quem ficar até o fim, verá.A entrevista foi gravada em inglês — a Karen também fala mandarim, mas não fala brazilian —, então vai funcionar assim. Se ouvir no áudio, vai ser a versão original, do mesmo jeito que foi com o Ted Chiang ano passado, para você botar o seu cursinho para trabalhar. Aqui no site boanoiteinternet.com.br você está acompanhando a transcrição completa traduzida, se quiser ler enquanto ouve. E no YouTube tem uma versão legendada. Assim, você entra na conversa do jeito que preferir.Combinado? Então, bora lá entender O Império da IA com Karen Hao, no Boa Noite Internet.Cris: Karen Hao, bem-vinda ao Boa Noite Internet.Karen Hao: Obrigada pelo convite.Cris: Que bom ter você aqui. Espero que o Brasil esteja te tratando bem durante a Copa do Mundo — a gente veio falar sobre isso. Hoje é dia de falar de futebol, de Copa do Mundo, quais são as chances de cada país. Mas a primeira coisa que você precisa saber sobre essa conversa é que eu não sou jornalista. Não sei fazer isso. Peço desculpas antecipadas à sua profissão e ao seu ofício.Além disso, você foi enganada. Eu não estou aqui pra te entrevistar. Isso aqui é uma sessão de terapia. Você vai me ajudar a superar meus traumas.Porque eu sou da… do que eu chamo de “geração esquecida” — sou geração X, nasci nos anos 70. Esquecida porque, nessa guerra de gerações, as pessoas esquecem que a gente existe, e isso é incrível, porque a gente causou muito estrago no planeta. O Elon Musk é geração X, então é só isso que você precisa saber sobre a minha turma. Gente como ele, ou como Marc Andreessen… eu cresci lendo e assistindo à ficção científica que dizia que tecnologia é a melhor coisa do mundo, que ciência e engenheiros são incríveis e vão nos levar pra um lugar incrível.Sou uma daquelas pessoas que, quando a internet surgiu, falou: a paz mundial está logo ali. O conhecimento a um clique de distância, o futuro vai ser incrível. E aqui estamos nós. Então, quando usei o GPT pela primeira vez, e depois o ChatGPT, fiquei super empolgado. Foi a primeira vez, desde a internet, que eu fiquei realmente empolgado.Tenho até uma certa fama de ser mal-humorado com tecnologia: Bitcoin é lavagem de dinheiro, Clubhouse não presta — e as pessoas, ah, Clubhouse é a próxima grande coisa. Mas quando a IA chegou, eu falei: isso é importante. Só que eu já não era mais aquela criança dos anos 70. Tinha crescido, tinha visto o que aconteceu com a internet, tinha trabalhado numa big tech. E estava em desespero com o sistema em que a IA estava sendo construída.Dito tudo isso, o seu livro, aqui, já nas livrarias, recebe provavelmente o melhor elogio que eu posso dar: é otimista. Não é uma lista de reclamações e gente má fazendo coisas más. Claro, você fala muito sobre a OpenAI — ela é o fio condutor da história, especialmente aqueles quatro dias em que o Sam Altman saiu e voltou. E é muito divertido de ler. Mas você toma o cuidado de ser otimista.E uma das coisas que você menciona é como as pessoas na OpenAI, e em todas essas empresas, dizem: “isso é inevitável, a gente tem que fazer”. Quero falar sobre isso. Mas a gente tem que começar pela pergunta que você provavelmente ouve em todo podcast, a do título — Império da IA. Por que império?E acho que essa pergunta é ainda mais relevante no Brasil, país do sul global, colonizado. Por que império da IA?Karen Hao: Antes de mais nada, obrigada por dizer que o livro é otimista. Muita gente não reconhece isso, mas é verdade. Eu escrevo com um profundo otimismo de que os danos que a gente vê podem mudar. Não faria o trabalho que faço se não achasse que as coisas vão mudar.Sobre por que eu uso a expressão império, ou império da IA: a forma como empresas como a OpenAI operam é impressionantemente parecida com a dos impérios antigos. Eu traço quatro paralelos no livro. O primeiro é que elas reivindicam recursos que não são delas — os dados das pessoas, a propriedade intelectual de artistas, criadores como você, jornalistas.Segundo, elas exploram uma quantidade extraordinária de mão de obra. Isso vale tanto para os trabalhadores da cadeia de produção de IA, mal pagos e maltratados, que ainda assim geram uma riqueza extraordinária para essas empresas, quanto para os trabalhadores cujos empregos são automatizados e cujos direitos são corroídos pela implantação dessas tecnologias em diferentes setores.A terceira característica é que impérios controlam os fluxos de informação na sociedade. Essas empresas censuram a pesquisa fundamental sobre essas tecnologias, o que limita nossa capacidade de entender as verdadeiras limitações e capacidades dos modelos que desenvolvem. E estão criando uma tecnologia de informação que tentam transformar no portal único pelo qual qualquer pessoa se relaciona com o mundo.Esse portal impregna as ideologias do Vale do Silício, seus sistemas de valores, sua língua, e projeta a hegemonia do inglês. Isso influencia boa parte do conhecimento que a gente vai produzir daqui pra frente, porque cientistas e educadores usam essas plataformas e acabam perpetuando essas mesmas ideologias e valores.E o quarto e último paralelo é que impérios sempre se agarram a uma narrativa existencial ou moral sobre por que precisam existir. Essas empresas fazem a mesma coisa. Dizem que são o “império do bem”, numa missão civilizatória de trazer progresso e modernidade pra toda a humanidade, competindo contra um “império do mal” que ameaça mandar a humanidade pro inferno.Quando você conversa com algumas pessoas dentro dessas empresas, ou que as lideram, elas dizem: se você nos deixar construir uma inteligência artificial geral, que elas de alguma forma moldam como um deus, a gente vai acabar numa espécie de utopia, um paraíso onde a mudança climática é resolvida, o câncer é curado, a pobreza é aliviada.Mas, se os caras maus conseguirem isso antes, a gente pode acabar com todos os humanos mortos — um risco de extinção pra todos nós.Cris: E eles vêm dizendo isso há quase dez anos, e ainda usam como ferramenta. A gente está num país que foi influenciado por três impérios ao longo da história: Portugal, Inglaterra e agora os Estados Unidos. Então a gente olha pra essas empresas de um jeito meio cínico: sim, sim, já conhecemos essa história.Mas, ao mesmo tempo, ano passado, o Pew Research Center fez uma pesquisa sobre como o mundo enxerga a IA, e o sul global é bem mais otimista do que o norte. Uma das razões é a ideia de democratizar — não só informação, mas: ah, finalmente eu posso montar uma startup, sair desse lugar de exploração e criar o unicórnio de um bilhão de dólares. Os números são grandes na China. Países em desenvolvimento veem muito mais benefício do que risco na IA.China, 83%. Tailândia, 77%. Holanda, 36%. Canadá, 40%. Será que a gente está deixando passar alguma coisa? A gente está certo? Isso está democratizando mesmo? Até que ponto?Karen Hao: Provavelmente tem duas razões. Uma é que muitos dos danos que a indústria de IA causa à maioria global são bem escondidos. Ela se esforça muito pra esconder como polui o ambiente dessas comunidades, como explora e devasta a mão de obra, deixando traumas psicológicos — como documento no livro.E, recentemente, li um artigo de opinião no New York Times que trazia um bom ponto: muitas economias desenvolvidas estão especialmente atentas ao potencial da IA de desmontar oportunidades de emprego de tempo integral. A gente começa a ver isso cada vez mais. Já na maioria global, muito mais gente vive em economias informais, e aí a ideia de que a IA vai tomar um emprego de tempo integral não pesa tanto.Então os danos mais visíveis — a erosão do emprego formal de tempo integral — pesam mais no norte global, ou pelo menos é lá que as pessoas se sentem mais ansiosas. E os danos invisíveis, que atingem o sul global, ninguém percebe tanto, justamente porque são invisíveis. É meio por isso que tanta gente sente essa divisão que aparece na pesquisa do Pew.Cris: Eu tenho acompanhado as notícias sobre IA no Brasil, e toda semana tem um novo data center sendo construído em alguma cidade. Isso é vendido como uma coisa boa: que ótimo investimento, gera emprego. E me fez pensar de novo — a gente passou por três impérios, mas algumas famílias no Brasil, e aposto que em outros lugares também, estão no poder há 500 anos ao longo da história do país.Então, ao mesmo tempo, a gente pensa: é, estamos sendo explorados, é a mesma coisa. Eu já não tenho emprego, então deixa eu usar essa tecnologia pra melhorar minha vida. Mas as pessoas que realmente tomam as decisões, de novo, nos últimos 500 anos, se perguntaram: como a gente ajuda esse pessoal a explorar nosso país de um jeito que nos mantenha no poder e nos dê muito dinheiro?Mas também foi verdade que, sei lá, a Volkswagen abre uma fábrica no Brasil e aquilo gera emprego, contrata gente pro chão de fábrica e pros escritórios. Como é que isso é diferente com a IA?Karen Hao: De certa forma, não é diferente. Existe um fenômeno parecido: a indústria de IA terceiriza muitos dos trabalhos que ela não quer dentro dos centros de poder, e joga isso pra comunidades empobrecidas, do mesmo jeito que outras multinacionais fizeram por décadas.Mas também é diferente, porque a escala dos impactos trabalhistas e ambientais da IA é completamente outra, muito maior que a da indústria automobilística ou da moda. E a velocidade é outra, porque são tecnologias digitais que atravessam fronteiras muito rápido.E é diferente porque a maioria das pessoas não percebe que a IA, mesmo sendo tecnologia digital, tem uma cadeia de suprimentos muito física e intensiva em mão de obra manual.Quando você compra roupa, café, um carro, é mais óbvio que existem materiais que precisam ser extraídos e depois manuseados por pessoas pra criar aquele produto. Já com a IA, a maioria aceita a narrativa que o Vale do Silício projeta: a de que isso vem da “nuvem”, desses espaços etéreos que parecem nem existir no planeta. E a verdade é exatamente o oposto.Ela depende de uma quantidade extraordinária de extração mineral. Depende da construção de infraestruturas enormes — data centers, instalações de supercomputação espalhadas pelo mundo. E depende de muita, muita mão de obra manual: trabalhadores de dados que limpam, preparam e moderam o conteúdo dos sistemas de IA que chegam até você quando usa o ChatGPT.É isso que a torna tão diferente. E há também uma ideologia completamente diferente sustentando a expansão da IA. Quando você conversa com executivos da moda, eles não vão dizer: se você não comprar nossa roupa, vai pro inferno.Já a indústria de IA diz: se você não nos deixar capturar cada vez mais terra, mais recursos e mais mão de obra pra produzir essas tecnologias, vamos ter uma destruição civilizacional. Isso é, ao mesmo tempo, retórica política usada como arma pra moldar o debate público e a cabeça de quem formula políticas, e também está enraizado num sistema de crenças — algumas pessoas dentro dessas empresas realmente acreditam que, se uma AGI fosse construída, e construída nas mãos erradas, isso levaria mesmo a esse tipo de destruição.E é isso que move a sede cada vez maior da indústria por mais capital, mais recursos e mais terra.Cris: Eu quero falar sobre AGI, mas antes: ano passado, a OpenAI estava sendo processada no Reino Unido por violação de direitos autorais, basicamente todos os livros do mundo digitalizados e usados pra treinar modelos. E um dos executivos disse ao júri: bem, se a gente não puder fazer isso, fecha as portas. Me chocou que muita gente reagiu com um “ah, tá, o que a gente pode fazer? Eles vão fechar as portas”.Em parte porque a gente já está acostumado com essa narrativa. Outro dia, numa conferência, um ex-CEO dizia: a gente teve que usar embalagem de plástico porque é mais barata que papel, senão prejudicaria nosso resultado. E a plateia reagia: ah, então é só fechar as portas — a sociedade não pode arcar com isso.Mas isso também, como você disse, se conecta à ideia de uma grande missão, uma missão de salvar o mundo, que a gente precisa cumprir antes que seja tarde, senão estamos condenados. OpenAI está literalmente no nome — só que em português não é tão direto: é “inteligência artificial aberta”.Foi criada a partir de um sonho, um projeto que era pra ser uma coisa pro bem comum. Em 2019, num tempo bem distante, antes da pandemia, você cobriu a OpenAI, foi até o escritório deles, ficou lá dentro. O que você viu? E, mais importante, como essa missão mudou? O Elon Musk os processou outro dia justamente por mudarem a missão. Isso alguma vez foi verdade? Em algum momento eles pensaram mesmo “ah, a gente vai salvar o mundo”?Como essa narrativa de ser aberta funciona com a OpenAI?Karen Hao: Quando comecei a cobrir a OpenAI, levei a sério o que eles diziam — que tinham sido recrutados com a missão de beneficiar toda a humanidade. E aí, quando me infiltrei na empresa, fui ficando bem mais cética, porque via como eles operavam de um jeito completamente diferente, portas adentro, do que diziam em público.Diziam que iam publicar todas as pesquisas e abrir o código de tudo, e na prática eram uma das organizações mais secretas que já cobri. Eram muitas discrepâncias, e, na época, presumi que tinha havido algum tipo de corrupção que os levou a abandonar a missão original. Depois de cobrir a empresa por mais alguns anos e de trabalhar neste livro, mudei de ideia até sobre a missão original.Não acho mais que ela era um esforço sincero e generoso de beneficiar a humanidade. A missão foi criada pra dar à empresa — na época, uma organização sem fins lucrativos — uma margem de manobra extraordinária pra depois levantar muito capital, acumular muito talento e perseguir a força motriz de verdade por trás de tudo aquilo: se tornar a força dominante no desenvolvimento de IA.E penso assim agora porque, quando você olha pras narrativas de cada nova empresa de IA no começo — a Anthropic, a xAI, a Safe Superintelligence do Ilya Sutskever, a Thinking Machines Lab da Mira Murati —, todas usam a mesma narrativa da OpenAI: nós somos os mocinhos, eles são os bandidos.É por isso que precisamos criar uma nova empresa que avance a IA do nosso jeito, não do deles. E você começa a perceber, por esse padrão, que eles repetem a mesma coisa em parte porque acreditam nela até certo ponto, mas também porque ela funciona muito bem com a imprensa, com o público, com quem formula políticas.No livro, eu reproduzo os e-mails internos que Elon Musk, Sam Altman e Greg Brockman trocavam nos primeiros dias da OpenAI. Eles tinham plena consciência de que estavam criando uma missão que soasse bem para o público. E o propósito de verdade, que também deixaram registrado nesses e-mails, era vencer o Google. Viam o Google como a força dominante em IA e queriam ser eles essa força.Não gostavam de ver o Google na frente, então inventaram justificativas: o Google é uma empresa com fins lucrativos, então nós vamos ser sem fins lucrativos. Mas, no fundo, acho que era puro ego: tem que ser a gente, não eles, a gente quer ser quem lidera isso.E aí passaram um tempão moldando essa missão pública, que acabou sendo super útil pra recrutar o primeiro grupo de pesquisadores e turbinar o avanço deles.Cris: Então agora é um bom momento pra falar de AGI, a inteligência artificial geral. Muita gente pergunta: o que é AGI? O que “geral” quer dizer? E a impressão que peguei lendo seu livro é que, por design, isso nunca fica claro de verdade, porque é um alvo móvel. Essas empresas um dia vão dizer “chegamos, alcançamos a AGI”? Ou o plano é sempre “não, não, ainda não chegamos, me dá mais dinheiro, me dá mais poder”?Qual é o papel da AGI na narrativa dessas empresas?Karen Hao: Já que a gente está falando de ficção científica, eu costumo usar a analogia de que o mundo da IA é meio como Duna. Em Duna, o personagem principal, Paul Atreides, entende, ao chegar no planeta Arrakis, que o povo de lá foi semeado com um mito: o de que um dia viria um Messias pra libertá-los. Ele sabe que é um mito, mas decide entrar nele e agir como se fosse o Messias pra controlar melhor aquele povo.E, vivendo, respirando e encarnando esse mito dia após dia, ele começa a perder a noção de que é um mito. Passa a se perguntar se o mito era mesmo verdadeiro ou se foi ele quem o tornou verdadeiro. É essa confusão entre mito e realidade — ele vive num espaço intermediário, sem ter mais certeza do que é verdade e do que é ficção.E trago isso pra responder sobre a AGI porque a AGI é, ao mesmo tempo, um mito e algo que os líderes e os trabalhadores dessas empresas vivem, respiram e encarnam dia após dia, a ponto de perderem a noção do que é mito e do que é realidade. É a ideia de um sistema de IA teórico que um dia igualaria as capacidades humanas. Só que a gente nem tem consenso científico sobre o que é inteligência humana.Por isso, de certa forma, por design, é um termo bem maleável, que deixa essas empresas fazerem o que quiserem. Elas definem e redefinem a AGI conforme a necessidade, movem a trave pra onde quiserem. E, ao mesmo tempo, isso é sustentado por uma crença genuína de certas pessoas lá dentro, por causa dessa confusão entre mito e realidade. Pelas minhas contas, a OpenAI já usou pelo menos quatro definições diferentes de AGI.A primeira está no site deles: “sistemas altamente autônomos que superam humanos na maioria dos trabalhos economicamente valiosos”. É uma definição de automação do trabalho — eles dizem, de forma explícita, que estão atrás dos empregos mais bem pagos. A segunda apareceu no contrato com a Microsoft, por um tempo a maior investidora deles: ali, a AGI virou um sistema que geraria 100 bilhões de dólares em receita.Ou seja, uma definição feita pra incentivar a Microsoft a investir. Já o Sam Altman disse ao Congresso que AGI é um sistema que cura o câncer e resolve a mudança climática — uma definição de benefício social, muito útil quando você quer que os reguladores não te regulem.E, por fim, quando falam com o consumidor, dizem que vai ser o melhor assistente digital que você já teve — porque, claro, estão tentando vender o produto.E aí você percebe duas coisas. Primeiro, que é um conjunto de definições completamente incoerente. Segundo, que eles trocam de definição conforme o público que querem convencer. Mas também tem gente nessas empresas que acredita de verdade que está construindo uma tecnologia capaz de dar conta das quatro coisas.Então é uma realidade bem confusa e complicada: o que a AGI de fato é, e pra que ela serve, para essas empresas, para a agenda delas e também para as crenças delas.Cris: Como ex-funcionário da Meta — entrei em 2013 —, a missão era unir o mundo e torná-lo mais aberto e conectado. É uma missão incrível. E tem uma coisa que eu sempre digo, porque muito amigo meu vem falar comigo, “ah, esse cara da OpenAI, ou a própria Meta, são maus”. Eu conheci muita gente na empresa. Nunca conheci uma pessoa mal-intencionada.Todo mundo, independente da missão, era gente boa tentando entregar o melhor produto possível, pra dar poder a quem tem um pequeno negócio, por exemplo. Tenho amigos pessoais que construíram a empresa deles em cima da publicidade do Facebook e do Instagram. E esse é justamente o problema, porque ainda assim é uma corporação muito má, pelo que ela causa ao mundo pra bater as metas de negócio.Ou seja, você não precisa de um vilão tipo Lex Luthor pra causar um estrago desse tamanho no mundo. E adorei a referência a Duna. Duna é engraçado: é o livro que eu mais reli na vida que não foi escrito pelo Tolkien. Li o primeiro Duna umas três vezes, e toda vez é como se fosse um livro diferente. Na primeira, eu era adolescente, e era só o Paul Atreides, o cara durão.Na segunda, eu morava no Canadá e li com olhos de estrangeiro, pensando em colonização. E na terceira vez foi quando os filmes do Denis Villeneuve saíram, e aí era: ah, o Bene Gesserit criou esse mito, isso é meio pós-moderno. Narrativamente, fico me perguntando o que vai significar pra mim se eu ler uma quarta vez.Karen Hao: Eu ia te perguntar isso. Quando você disse que cresceu numa época cheia de ficção científica falando das maravilhas da tecnologia, fiquei curiosa: que histórias você estava lendo? Porque muita coisa que saiu nos anos 70 e 80 dizia exatamente o oposto. E muita gente já apontou que os executivos de tecnologia de hoje, que vivem citando essas histórias, interpretam elas justamente ao contrário da intenção original.Cris: Concordo plenamente. Mas, respondendo: foi basicamente Isaac Asimov e Arthur C. Clarke. E é por isso mesmo — os executivos de tecnologia, e o Elon Musk mais que todos, leem esses livros como receita, não como aviso. O livro de que eu mais me lembro, nem lembro o título, era um do Asimov em que ele descreve o elevador espacial que aparece na série da Apple TV, Fundação.E o enredo é: eu sou esse engenheiro brilhante, quero construir essa coisa no Sri Lanka, mas o governo trava tudo com regulação — eu sou um gênio e a regulação é a vilã. Hoje eu leio e penso: ah, sei. Mas, quando garoto, era só “olha, um elevador espacial, que genial, a gente nem precisa de foguete”. E aí você começa a entender. E aí eu parei de ler esses caras.E passei a ler gente com uma visão completamente diferente: o Ted Chiang, que entrevistei ano passado, a N.K. Jemisin, o Cory Doctorow, de quem sou muito fã. E talvez eles sejam mais explícitos, pra gente burra como eu entender: “não, bobo, a analogia é essa”. Mas Duna era incrível — vermes gigantes de areia, o tal garoto durão, e aquela coisa do “eu não aceito o meu destino”.Tenho esse grande destino, mas não quero ele. Do resto da série eu já não gosto tanto. Mas o mais importante de tudo: Duna gerou o melhor GIF de filme de todos os tempos, o “Lisan al Gaib” do Javier Bardem — que eu devia ter colocado durante a sua explicação, aquele “uau, ele está cumprindo a profecia, agindo como o profeta”.Mas, de novo, falando de vilões: você mencionou que essas empresas se colocam como o bem contra o mal, feito impérios antigos. Só que elas também jogam a carta da China, né? “Se a gente não fizer, a Rússia faz primeiro.” Só que a Rússia começou uma guerra e está ocupada demais. “Mas a China chega lá, e é por isso que a gente tem que ser fechado.” É por isso que Mythos e Fable e agora o GPT-5.6 foram proibidos pelo governo. Isso tem fundamento?Quero saber se é possível a China competir — quero mesmo essa resposta — mas também porque, desde toda essa conversa do Fable-Mythos, países como Índia e Brasil vêm dizendo que precisam de um modelo soberano. Dá pra fazer, ou a OpenAI, a Anthropic e o Google estão tão à frente que já não dá?Karen Hao: Sobre a China: você está certíssimo, o Vale do Silício usou por anos a carta do “e a China?” pra escapar de qualquer responsabilização de verdade. Fizeram muito isso na era das redes sociais.A Meta fez muito isso, com o Mark Zuckerberg dizendo ao governo dos EUA: vocês não podem nos regular, senão a gente perde. Mas, se a gente ganhar, vai ter um efeito liberalizante no mundo e nas democracias em todo lugar. E, infelizmente, o que a gente viu foi que jogar essa carta repetidamente produziu exatamente o efeito contrário do que o Vale do Silício prometeu.Uma das empresas de rede social dominantes dessa era é a ByteDance. Ou seja, mesmo sem regulação das redes sociais nos EUA, existe uma empresa chinesa de rede social bem dominante. E as redes sociais estadunidenses acabaram tendo um efeito antiliberal no mundo — é bastante consensual que enfraqueceram democracias em todo lugar. E aí, na era da IA, elas seguiram jogando a mesma carta.Mas o que eu sempre aponto é que a gente definitivamente não devia acreditar nelas. Já existe evidência significativa de que tudo o que elas dizem está, de novo, se provando o oposto. Elas disseram: não regulem a gente como empresas de IA, regulem a China, via controles de exportação — um mecanismo do governo dos EUA com alcance extraterritorial.Só que as empresas chinesas agora estão produzindo modelos de IA de código aberto extremamente eficientes, que viraram super populares no próprio Vale do Silício. Existe um monte de startup de lá que prefere usar modelo chinês a OpenAI, Anthropic ou Google.Então, nesse sentido, é um conjunto de evidências bem decisivo, acho, pra mostrar que a gente devia simplesmente responsabilizar essas empresas, não importa o que digam sobre “ah, vamos perder pra China”. No fim das contas, é só retórica política. Não é um argumento real que elas consigam sustentar pra escapar da responsabilização.Responsabilizá-las vai fortalecer a democracia pelo mundo, vai trazer mais direitos humanos, trabalhistas e de privacidade de dados pras pessoas — é sempre o contrário do que elas dizem que aconteceria. E, sobre a sua pergunta em torno da IA soberana: acho a ideia realmente importante, mas acho também que muitos países estão meio confusos sobre o que querem dizer com isso.Muitos governos, hoje, pensam a IA soberana pela pergunta: a gente consegue construir o nosso próprio ChatGPT? O nosso próprio grande modelo de linguagem, o nosso sistema de IA generativa? Estão olhando só pro modelo que o Vale do Silício já definiu e tentando descobrir como recriar aquilo.E o que eu digo pra quem formula políticas é: defina pra que a IA serve no seu país, no seu contexto. Quais são, no fim das contas, os objetivos do seu país? Os objetivos do seu povo? E também os nossos objetivos coletivos, entre países?Porque a gente tem, por exemplo, os Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável da ONU. Já definimos coletivamente que há coisas que precisamos resolver juntos: superar a crise climática, reduzir a pobreza, melhorar a educação.E, enquanto o Vale do Silício adora dizer que está fazendo tudo isso, na prática não está. Mas a gente poderia — poderia desenvolver, de forma colaborativa, sistemas de IA que realmente avançassem em cada um desses objetivos coletivos que já acordamos.E cada país também devia fazer o exercício: quais objetivos você quer alcançar, e que tipos de sistema de IA você poderia desenhar pra chegar lá — sistemas que talvez não se pareçam em nada com um grande modelo de linguagem. Se os países fizessem isso, acho que descobririam que a maioria dos sistemas de que precisam exigiria muito menos recursos.Ou seja, contextos como o Brasil, a Índia e outros, quando não precisam competir construindo essas infraestruturas de computação gigantescas e gastando centenas de bilhões de dólares, na verdade já têm, localmente, todos os recursos necessários pra desenvolver um sistema de IA soberano.Cris: Quando ouvi falar do seu livro pela primeira vez, uma amiga me disse que você não poupa ninguém — fala mal do Sam Altman, mas também do Dario Amodei. E as pessoas costumam escolher um lado. Eu sou time Claude, odeio o ChatGPT, essas coisas. Então cheguei no livro pensando: ah, é mais um livro dizendo que a IA é terrível, que a gente não devia usar IA.Mas, conforme fui lendo, e ouvindo outras entrevistas suas, me pareceu que o seu problema é justamente o que você acabou de descrever: a forma como essa tecnologia é feita. E, em especial, a palavra escala — a ideia de que a solução é a escala. O que você quer dizer com isso?Karen Hao: Eu costumo usar a analogia de que “IA” é como a palavra “transporte”: na verdade se refere a uma coleção de tecnologias que vão da bicicleta ao foguete. São tipos bem, bem diferentes de tecnologia, que exigem insumos diferentes pra se desenvolver e depois têm impactos diferentes na sociedade.E você está certo: sou especificamente crítica ao que chamo de “foguetes da IA”, os sistemas que os impérios da IA estão desenvolvendo, aqueles que exigem uma quantidade enorme de exploração de mão de obra e extração ambiental.E sou bem otimista com o que chamo de “bicicletas da IA”: sistemas especializados, eficientes, com bom custo-benefício, governáveis pelas pessoas, cujo desenvolvimento pode ser participativo. Países como o Brasil, o Chile, a Índia, qualquer contexto, têm recursos pra desenvolver e se autodefinir, em vez de simplesmente herdar um sistema criado pelos dois únicos centros do mundo capazes de gastar uma quantidade extraordinária de capital: o Vale do Silício e o ecossistema tecnológico chinês.E o motivo pelo qual eu acho tão corrosivo o que os impérios da IA estão desenvolvendo é exatamente o que você disse: a forma como eles fazem isso, por um mecanismo de força bruta pra avançar as capacidades da IA em escala. Eles vão simplesmente empurrando cada vez mais dados de treinamento nesses modelos, e isso exige corroer a privacidade das pessoas, tomar a propriedade intelectual delas e, ainda por cima, baixa a qualidade dos dados que entram nos modelos — o que leva aos danos de exploração de mão de obra, porque aí você tem que dar conta da moderação de conteúdo.E aí você tem pessoas psicologicamente traumatizadas por serem expostas a todo aquele conteúdo horrível que se tenta “lavar” através desses modelos.E aí vem o problema dessas infraestruturas de computação enormes, com impactos ambientais que aumentam a conta de luz das comunidades que as hospedam e agravam a crise de custo de vida. Elas precisam ser alimentadas por fontes fósseis, que jogam mais carbono na atmosfera e mais poluição no ar dessas comunidades.Então todos os problemas que eu identifico, no que têm de corrosivo, derivam inteiramente da abordagem deles pro desenvolvimento de IA. Por que não descartar a abordagem, em vez de descartar a tecnologia? Redefinir e redesenhar de que tipos de sistema de IA a gente precisa de verdade, com uma cadeia de suprimentos fundamentalmente diferente. E isso não é exclusivo da IA.A gente já viu muitas outras indústrias que começaram com uma cadeia de suprimentos bem ruim. A moda, por exemplo: muita degradação ambiental, muita exploração de mão de obra.Com muita organização, protesto, ação de consumidores, regulação governamental e cooperação entre governos, a gente conseguiu criar mercados novos pra moda sustentável e ética, cadeias de suprimentos novas e inovações pra fazer roupa mais saudável pras pessoas e pro planeta.E é basicamente isso que eu defendo: transformar a indústria de IA do mesmo jeito que transformamos a moda, e as cadeias de suprimento de alimentos. Assim a gente fica com os benefícios da tecnologia, ajuda ela a avançar os objetivos que importam pra gente, sem jogar uma fração enorme da população mundial numa condição atrasada e numa qualidade de vida pior.Cris: O Brasil está agora, no Congresso, discutindo a escala de seis dias por semana. A regra atual é: você trabalha seis dias e descansa um. E muitas empresas, o comércio principalmente, dizem “vamos fechar as portas”, e os trabalhadores respondem “isso é problema seu, não meu”. É mais ou menos a mesma narrativa dessas empresas de IA: se eu não usar a sua água, a Idade das Trevas está chegando.Falando em Idade das Trevas, e falando em bicicleta: a sua analogia me lembrou uma coisa. Eu gosto de jogo de zumbi, de mundo aberto, e em nenhum deles tem bicicleta. Num desses jogos, instalei um plugin que deixava andar de bicicleta — você acha uma e sai pedalando. E aí entendi por que não tem bicicleta: desbalanceia tudo. Parte da graça do jogo é você precisar achar um carro, e daí pneu, gasolina, comida pra carregar. De bicicleta, você vai a qualquer lugar.E eu pensei: ah, é. Meio que estraguei o jogo pra mim, porque agora tenho uma bicicleta, é incrível. Enfim, em termos práticos: no fim do ano passado, uns meses atrás, a revista Wired publicou um artigo pedindo pra jornalistas de tecnologia contarem como usam IA no trabalho. E cada um usava de um jeito. Você usa IA no seu trabalho? Como?Karen Hao: Eu não uso nenhum sistema de IA generativa no trabalho — nem ChatGPT, nem Gemini, nem Claude. Por três motivos. O primeiro é uma postura ética, depois de tanto investigar essas empresas. O segundo é privacidade de dados: eu investigo essas empresas.Não quero que elas conheçam todo o meu raciocínio enquanto eu apuro o livro, literalmente investigando elas. E o terceiro é que, no meu caso específico, a força do meu trabalho está na capacidade de construir relações fortes com as fontes, pela empatia, e de contar histórias envolventes, pela narrativa. E os grandes modelos de linguagem simplesmente não são a ferramenta certa pra nenhuma das duas coisas.Não vão melhorar a minha empatia nem a minha escrita. Então eu não perco nada com essa postura ética: simplesmente corto essas ferramentas e sigo fazendo o meu trabalho muito bem. Pra outros jornalistas pode ser diferente, e pra quem está em outras áreas o cálculo pode ser outro.Mas eu incentivo as pessoas a pensarem primeiro: quais são as suas forças no trabalho? Quais são os seus objetivos? E aí ir de trás pra frente pra descobrir se a IA é a ferramenta certa, qual tipo de IA é a ferramenta certa, e qual fornecedor você quer de fato usar, apoiar, votar com os pés. Agora, eu uso, sim, IA preditiva.Aquelas ferramentas de IA especializadas, as “bicicletas da IA”, digamos. No livro, tinha um detalhe que eu queria muito ilustrar: como a OpenAI deu um salto quando passou de organização sem fins lucrativos a um empreendimento bancado pela Microsoft. Percebi que as cadeiras do escritório ficaram bem mais caras. Então fotografei as cadeiras de um escritório e as do outro.E joguei tudo na busca reversa de imagens do Google, que é um sistema de IA especializado — não é baseado em grandes modelos de linguagem, não é IA generativa. Assim descobri quanto essas cadeiras costumam custar. No primeiro escritório, cerca de 2 mil dólares por cadeira. No segundo, eram cadeiras de um designer brasileiro famoso, uns 10 mil dólares cada.Coloquei esse detalhe no livro pra ilustrar o tipo de riqueza e de concentração de recursos de que a gente está falando. Esses são alguns dos jeitos como eu uso IA, ainda que de forma bem limitada, sempre pontual, quando acho que vai ajudar. E, claro, uso ferramentas de transcrição por IA — outra IA especializada — em todas as minhas entrevistas.Cris: Essa foi uma das partes em que a minha cabeça explodiu, eu nunca tinha percebido: a OpenAI criou o Whisper. Deixa eu dizer de outro jeito, do meu ponto de vista. A OpenAI liberou abertamente essa ferramenta incrível de transcrição, o Whisper, em que eu jogo o áudio e ela me devolve as palavras que as pessoas disseram. E eu pensei: ah, que generoso da parte deles.Mas o motivo real de terem criado a ferramenta foi pegar todos os vídeos do YouTube, transcrever e alimentar a máquina. E aí é: ah, claro. Enfim, falando de ferramentas e de otimismo — a gente está chegando ao fim da conversa. Eu tenho uma regra desde o episódio dois deste programa, há oito anos: de novo, como eu disse do seu livro, não pode ser só uma lista de reclamações e coisa ruim. E a gente tem se saído bem até aqui.Você falou de caminhos e de bicicletas, mas eu quero ser mais específico. Se isso aqui fosse uma reunião de negócios: qual é o plano de ação, quais são os próximos passos? Só que uma das coisas que eu repito bastante, na vida e neste programa, é que problema sistêmico não se resolve com ação individual. Se eu tomar banhos mais curtos, isso nunca vai salvar o planeta do aquecimento global.E muitos amigos meus simplesmente: não quero falar de IA, não quero usar IA. Voltando aos videogames: leram que tal jogo usa IA e pronto, não vão jogar. E a minha primeira pergunta pra você é: como a gente ocupa esses espaços da IA generativa — ChatGPT, Gemini e por aí vai? Porque o que a gente viu com as redes sociais foi: ah, o Facebook é do mal, vou sair do Facebook. Ah, vou sair do Twitter.E, na esperança de quê, sei lá, talvez alguém diga: ah, sinto falta do Cris, cadê ele? Ah, está no Bluesky. Mas isso deixa o espaço aberto pra os radicais entrarem e postarem o que quiserem, sem ninguém contrapor ou tornar aquilo um lugar melhor. Então como a gente ocupa o espaço da IA — seja qual for a definição de “espaço da IA” que você preferir — com todos esses problemas que a gente vem discutindo?Karen Hao: Acho que tem duas categorias de ação pra gente pensar. Uma é desmantelar o império. A outra é investir e construir novos tipos de sistema de IA, que se tornem alternativas às tecnologias do império. Quando eu digo desmantelar o império, não estou dizendo que quero que a OpenAI, o Google, a Anthropic, seja quem for, simplesmente deixem de existir.É que eu não quero que elas sejam imperiais. Não quero que fiquem extraindo uma quantidade extraordinária de valor sem redistribuir nada em troca. Se elas voltassem a ser negócios que praticam uma troca justa de valor com o mundo, eu ficaria perfeitamente feliz com qualquer tecnologia que estivessem desenvolvendo.E a forma de desmantelar o império, acho, se resume a muita organização de base, que vai pressionar os governos a regular e responsabilizar essa indústria. No último ano, a gente viu uma quantidade incrível dessa organização de base florescendo pelo mundo.Recentemente, lancei com um grupo de jornalistas, pesquisadores de IA e acadêmicos críticos um projeto chamado AI Resist List, que busca documentar parte dessa organização de base pelo mundo. A gente encontrou cerca de 30 exemplos, de todas as regiões, de ações individuais, institucionais e movidas pela comunidade.Tinha ação artística, ação política. E isso mostra bem o seu ponto: não dá pra contar só com a ação individual, mas o indivíduo pode, sim, ter impacto. Até uma ação pequena pode gerar um grande efeito cascata. Claro que se juntar com os vizinhos pra protestar contra o data center é ainda mais eficaz. Se juntar dentro da sua escola ou universidade pra protestar contra a parceria dela com uma empresa de IA também é mais eficaz.Se juntar com os colegas de trabalho de um setor pra barrar a adoção de uma IA que corrói os direitos trabalhistas é mais um jeito eficaz. A gente tem um monte desses exemplos. Um dos meus favoritos é o de uma comunidade sobre a qual escrevi no livro, Quilicura, no Chile, na periferia de Santiago. É uma comunidade da classe trabalhadora, bem pobre, que vem sendo alvo incessante da expansão de data centers.E por isso protestaram de forma bem aguerrida contra essa expansão, porque não acharam bom negócio hospedar essas instalações sem tirar nenhum benefício, enquanto elas consomem uma parte significativa dos recursos naturais da região.E, logo depois que escrevi sobre eles, foram além na resistência e criaram uma plataforma chamada Quili.ai. É um site em que você entra e que parece um chatbot, parece o ChatGPT: tem uma interface de chat pra você digitar. Só que, quando você faz uma pergunta, em vez de um modelo de IA responder, a mensagem é encaminhada pra alguém que mora em Quilicura, no Chile. Aí, se você pede “quero a imagem de um cachorro”, aquilo vai pro artista local deles, o Benji. Ele pega um pedaço de papel, desenha um cachorro, tira uma foto e te manda de volta.Eles fizeram isso essencialmente como um projeto de arte performática, pra fazer as pessoas pensarem duas vezes antes de usar IA generativa pra bobagem. A mensagem era: ei, quando você fica brincando com essas ferramentas em pedido besta, isso afeta comunidades como a nossa, drena os recursos de que a gente precisa pra viver bem.E também queriam levar as pessoas a pensar: por que não perguntar pra alguém da sua própria comunidade aquela receita que você procurava, ou pedir aquela imagem? Porque aí você reconstrói as conexões que estão tão em falta na sociedade — a falta delas é o que nos deixa mais vulneráveis a esse tipo de colonização do império.Eles deixaram o projeto aberto por 24 horas, e qualquer pessoa no mundo podia mandar um pedido. Receberam uma quantidade extraordinária deles. Viralizou de vez. E essa cidadezinha conseguiu uma virada enorme de narrativa sobre a suposta inevitabilidade e necessidade dessa tecnologia, sobre tudo o que o Vale do Silício diz — que, se você não usar, vai ficar pra trás de quem usa.E esse é só um exemplo, entre muitos, de como pessoas comuns, não importa a sua posição na sociedade, podem ter impacto real no debate, na consciência pública e até na regulação. A gente está vendo isso agora com os protestos contra data centers. Nos EUA, em 2025, cerca de 150 bilhões de dólares em projetos de data center foram travados.Isso virou uma das questões políticas mais quentes nos EUA para as próximas eleições de meio de mandato. Tem gente eleita sendo literalmente tirada do cargo por ter aprovado data centers, contrariando a vontade do povo. E isso já está tendo efeito real sobre as empresas e sobre a trajetória do desenvolvimento de IA.A OpenAI teve que encerrar recentemente a sua ferramenta de geração de vídeo, o Sora. Quando lançaram, apresentaram como o segundo produto mais importante desde o ChatGPT. O que aconteceu entre o lançamento e o fim? Uma reportagem do Wall Street Journal apontou três motivos, todos moldados por ação de base. Um: um gargalo enorme de capacidade de computação.Muitos dos data centers travados ou parados eram da OpenAI. Dois: um cenário financeiro bem mais incerto. A OpenAI está se preparando pro IPO, o que significa ficar mais exposta a Wall Street — e Wall Street está cada vez mais nervoso com a capacidade dessas empresas de cumprir o que prometem.E aí a OpenAI teve que reforçar alguns projetos paralelos pra fazer o balanço parecer um pouco melhor aos olhos de Wall Street. E, terceiro: os consumidores simplesmente não estavam usando o produto — o que também é ação coletiva de consumidores. Então, por todo esse tipo de resistência, de várias formas, de baixo pra cima, as pessoas estão de fato tendo impacto real na indústria e responsabilizando ela.Essa é a primeira categoria de ação. A segunda é: ok, que tecnologias de IA a gente usaria como alternativa? E aí a gente precisa investir mais nelas. Muitas vezes, quando converso sobre o livro, a pessoa diz: ok, me convenci de que não quero usar ChatGPT, não quero usar Claude — mas então uso o quê no lugar?E o problema é que eu não tenho muitas respostas pra essa lista de alternativas. Tem umas poucas aqui e ali, uma plataforma, uma empresa.Cris: Dá pra rodar o modelo no seu próprio computador, como o Cory Doctorow faz, mas aí é limitado e…Karen Hao: Exatamente, exige mais habilidade técnica. Mas, pra quem consegue instalar modelos de código aberto no próprio computador, eu incentivo 100%. Só que a gente também precisa de mais gente desenvolvendo interfaces bem fáceis pra esses modelos de código aberto, pra que qualquer pessoa consiga usar.A gente também precisa de mais gente desenvolvendo “bicicletas da IA”, de investidores e governos investindo mais nesse tipo de solução, e de talento — pesquisadores de IA, desenvolvedores e outras pessoas dispostas a sacrificar um pouco e abrir mão dos pacotes de remuneração enormes.Cris: Eu estava começando a achar que agora as empresas precisam ter menos lucro — e isso nunca vai acontecer.Karen Hao: Não, não é a empresa ter menos lucro. É o trabalhador topar abrir mão do pacote de milhões de dólares pra levar o talento dele pra outro lugar. Mais fácil, bem mais fácil. Eu converso com muito pesquisador de IA cansado da abordagem da indústria, porque ela é completamente sem criatividade intelectual.Eu conversei com pesquisadores que não passaram seis anos num doutorado em IA só pra ficar empurrando mais dados na máquina — pra eles, é o trabalho mais chato do mundo. E depois automatizar a programação, que era justamente o que eles gostavam de fazer. Converso com tanta gente que já não acha graça nenhuma nisso. Estão meio presos por “algemas de ouro”.E estão tentando descobrir, dentro de si, que carreira alternativa poderiam ter. Eu costumo incentivar esses pesquisadores a gastar o talento deles construindo um tipo diferente de empresa, que trabalhe com “bicicletas da IA”. E a gente já começa a ver cada vez mais desse talento indo por aí.E a gente precisa que todas as facetas da sociedade invistam num ecossistema muito mais robusto e rico de tecnologias de IA, capaz de substituir as que hoje dominam. Eu ainda tenho as cicatrizes das minhas próprias “algemas de ouro”, mas concordo plenamente.Cris: E as redes sociais são o exemplo — veja o que aconteceu com elas. Tem aquela frase famosa: as mentes mais brilhantes da minha geração passam o tempo fazendo as pessoas clicarem em anúncios. E ainda dizem: ah, isso pode ser o futuro. Pois é.Você contou a história do Quili.ai e isso me lembrou um dos primeiros criadores de conteúdo do Brasil, o Cid Não Salvo. Uns 10, 15 anos atrás, ele tuitou o seguinte: “Gente, eu disse pro meu pai que, sempre que ele precisar pesquisar alguma coisa na internet, é pra ir no Twitter.com e digitar a pergunta na caixa”. E olha que ele tinha milhões de seguidores.E, por uns bons dias, quase um mês, você entrava no Twitter do pai dele e via perguntas tipo “onde eu compro pizza?”. Era engraçadíssimo. No fim, ele contou pro pai — ou talvez não. Mas eu adoro essa ideia. Antes de a gente terminar: você já deve ter respondido isso mil vezes, mas vai continuar cobrindo IA? O que está na sua cabeça, o que vem por aí? Turnê mundial? O que vem pela frente?Karen Hao: Com certeza estou pensando em como continuar responsabilizando essas empresas. Estou envolvida em várias colaborações, com gente incrível, em diferentes projetos ligados a isso. O AI Resist List foi um deles. Também co-criei um programa chamado AI Spotlight Series, com o Pulitzer Center, uma organização jornalística sem fins lucrativos que financia jornalismo investigativo pelo mundo.É um programa que treina jornalistas do mundo inteiro a cobrir IA por uma lente de responsabilização. Até agora, já treinamos mais de 3 mil. E eu sigo pensando em como construir mais capacidade dentro do jornalismo, da sociedade civil, de outros contextos, pra mobilizar ainda mais essa organização de base — pra conter de verdade os impérios da IA e ajudar a desmantelá-los.Cris: Adorei o seu exemplo da moda. É possível, já foi feito. Ou até a indústria automotiva. Ou o grande exemplo que a gente não mencionou, e que o pessoal da OpenAI vive citando: o Projeto Manhattan, a energia nuclear.O mundo não acabou. Quando eu era criança lendo Asimov, achava que ia tudo acabar num fogo nuclear. Enfim — alguma última palavra, alguma mensagem, algum palpite pros jogos do Brasil na Copa, alguma coisa que você queira dizer antes da gente encerrar?Karen Hao: No fim das contas, o que eu espero que fique desta conversa e do livro é o seguinte: neste momento, o Vale do Silício está concebendo a IA como um projeto político. E a característica central desse projeto é tirar a autonomia de todo mundo — a autonomia de moldar de verdade o próprio futuro e o nosso futuro coletivo. Mas, no instante em que você reconhece que já tem uma autonomia significativa pra resistir, o império começa a desmoronar.Então espero que as pessoas encontrem a própria voz, a afirmem, conquistem o seu lugar à mesa e se conectem com os vizinhos, com a comunidade, com os colegas de trabalho, pra criar mais movimentos juntos.Cris: Que ótimo. Karen Hao, o seu livro é O Império da IA: Por dentro da corrida irresponsável pela dominação total. Obrigado por vir ao Brasil conversar com a gente. Foi um prazer.Karen Hao: Muito obrigada.Uma das primeiras perguntas que anotei quando comecei a pensar nessa conversa foi justamente a do final, a da ocupação de espaços. Porque, como eu disse, quando as redes sociais chegaram para ficar, muita gente falou “ah, não vou usar, é do mal” — e aí as pessoas ruins, vamos chamar assim, acabam ocupando esse espaço e falando o que bem entendem. A gente precisa aprender essa lição agora, no mundo da IA.Fora que vejo muita gente falando de IA sem nunca ter usado — ou que usou, sei lá, dois anos atrás, acha que continua tudo igual e já diz que não quer chegar perto.E por quê? Porque essa abordagem de ocupar espaços é o que eu e a Ana Freitas buscamos fazer no IA em Curso, nossa comunidade de letramento contínuo em IA. Foi, aliás, uma conversa que tive com a Karen antes da entrevista: ao mesmo tempo que a gente fala do impacto da IA no mundo, também precisa focar no que é prático, no que dá para fazer hoje com IA, sem vender sonho nem desastre. A analogia que usei foi a de que é que nem quando a gente fazia curso de Word e Excel — é o que eu faço agora que vai facilitar minha vida, me fazer ganhar tempo, botar a IA para me ajudar. Quem viu minha conversa com a Ana aqui no Boa Noite Internet, no fim de 2025, sabe do que estou falando. Se não viu, volta lá e confere.Desde que a gente lançou este episódio, o IA em Curso já passou de 400 pessoas. Tem muita gente colocando projetos pessoais incríveis na rua, tirando do papel aquela ideia que rondava a cabeça há um tempão. E a comunidade tem mentoria ao vivo, aula gravada, newsletter, banco de agentes, grupo de Telegram… que mais? O que não falta é jeito de passar para você o conhecimento sobre IA de que você precisa hoje, agora. Quero te dar a bússola para navegar nesse universo.Se esse é o tipo de abordagem que você quer ter com a IA, passa lá no iaemcurso.com.br e usa o cupom BNI2026 para ganhar 20% de desconto no plano anual. Mas corre, porque daqui a duas semanas vou apagar esse cupom — não é todo dia que a gente dá um desconto desses.É isso. Boa Noite Internet, temporada 2026 começando — como todo ano, com mudança, ideia, projeto. Ou, como diz minha citação preferida de todos os tempos: “vivemos uma fase de transição, como sempre”. Espero ver você por aqui e lá no IA em Curso.Obrigado pelo seu tempo e pela sua atenção. Até o próximo episódio. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit boanoiteinternet.com.br/subscribe

You may have heard about South Africa's viral Netflix show, The Polygamist. The series has been trending across the continent, sparking conversations about relationships, marriage and fidelity. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, a US-based think tank, only around 2% of the world's population lives in polygamous households. However, the practice is most common in sub-Saharan Africa, where an estimated 11% of people are part of polygamous families.So, what is it really like to be in a polygamous marriage, and why do some people choose this way of life? We hear from Takid Master, his first wife, Cecilia, and his second wife, Mariam, about how their relationship works.Presenter: Nkechi Ogbonna Producers: Fana Negash, Carolyne Kiambo and Bella Twine Senior Producers: Priya Sippy and Charles Gitonga Technical Producer: David Nzau Editors: Rhoda Odhiambo and Maryam Abdalla

Kurt Schlichter, retired Army Colonel, trial attorney, senior columnist at Townhall.com, and author of the upcoming America Warlord, available for pre-order now, discusses a variety of topics with Seth including the House’s recently-passed bill to make daylight savings time permanent and the Pew Research Center poll showing that 44% of American Muslims support the terror group Hamas. They also reiterate the importance of taking a strong stance against terrorism and the need for our government to take more serious action against it. Additionally, they touch on the topic of critical mass and how it relates to the growing influence of socialism in many of the Democratic Party's recent nominees in midterm election contests, and the untimely death of South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham (R).See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We unpack a new survey from PEW Research Center which shows that China is now viewed more positively than the US. Plus: Greener, Cooler, Healthier is a new platform providing nature-based solutions to urban heat. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A Pew Research Center study finds China's global favorability has improved, while views of the United States have declined, including in traditional US allies such as Canada, Australia and Germany.

Read more from VPM News:  Virginia Democrats question DOJ's plan to monitor primaries in two counties  MASS Design Group chosen as winner of Swords into Plowshares project  Virginia Holocaust Museum launching portrait series  On the agenda: Richmond City Council retreat, budget talks    Other links:  Preventable Missed Court Hearings Cost Virginia More Than $3 Million Per Year (Pew Research Center)  State may have inadvertently created a 1-year gap with no cannabis laws, but language was fixed after concerns arose (Cardinal News)  Richmond police accessed public housing surveillance cameras 827 times in 11 months (Richmond Times-Dispatch)*   *This outlet uses a paywall.  Our award-winning work is made possible with your donations. Visit vpm.org/donate to support local journalism.

God already gave you the land. The catch? You still have to walk on it. Joshua 1 on comfort, courage, and the cost of staying put. Click here to read the sermon A New Dawn, A New Day Joshua 1:1–9 Heavenly Father, Jesus, we come before you this Sunday morning, and we lift up your holy name. Jesus, we invite your presence, your Holy Spirit power, into this moment and into this place and into our lives and our hearts and our minds. Jesus, we pray prayers of gratitude for our children who came back from camp this week. We pray prayers of protection and grace over our youth who are headed off this week. We pray a prayer of clarity for Yates Baptist Church. Jesus, we ask in your holy name that you would give us clarity over confusion, that you would cast vision for the future of your church, and that that vision would lead us where division stirs. And finally, Jesus, we declare boldly this morning that whatever you may have in store for the future of Yates Baptist Church, we know that the very best days of the kingdom of Jesus Christ are still to come. The best is yet to come. And so, Jesus, we come before you this morning, and we give you the honor and the glory and the praise that is rightly due to your name. Jesus, we pray. Amen. Well, it is such a treat to be with you today, Yates Baptist Church. I want you to know the last time I was in this building was a few years ago, when I had the opportunity, as the head of the communications team for the Tri-West Baptist Network, to come in here. You hosted our annual meeting, and I got to give a report. So it is a very different experience being here preaching rather than giving a business meeting report. This is far more enjoyable, and I'm so glad to be with you today. Knowing that I'm going to be with you for the next three weeks helps me, because it allows me to preach a sermon series rather than try to squeeze everything together into one message. So we're going to get you to that meeting and that lunch earlier than you had hoped. That's the plan. So we're starting a series today called Onward. Onward. This series is going to be all about — and you can go ahead and throw that up on the screen, there we go — moving toward the uncharted. Moving toward the uncharted. We're going to be looking at the book of Joshua, and Joshua felt like an important book for where you are right now in the life of Yates Baptist Church. So before we jump into the first chapter of Joshua today, I wanted to start by looking back at the end of the Mosaic books. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy — those are the five books we call the Law, or the Pentateuch. These are the first five books of the Bible, and they are written by Moses. When we get to the end of Deuteronomy, Moses, after forty years leading the people through the wilderness, has died — before he was ever able to cross the Jordan River into the promised land. There's something powerful about that, because Moses was a good and faithful leader for the people of Israel, but Moses was not able to experience where the people of Israel were headed. Moses died before the people had stepped into all that God had for them. One of the things that is true in the life of every church is that there are changes, there are shifts that happen in churches. Any church older than seven years has probably had more than one pastor — it's just the nature of how that works. A church has a vision that is bigger than any one person. The church has a vision that is bigger than any one generation, because the church of Jesus Christ is multigenerational. It continues, and you and I are standing on the shoulders of the giants who have come before us, generations and generations and generations, and we get the opportunity to be the people the next generation stands on the shoulders of, to go even further. I'm so grateful for that. I'm so grateful that the kingdom of God never stops with a person or with a generation. For the people of Israel, they had been in the wilderness for forty years, and Moses had been leading them faithfully. When Moses dies, there is a moment of utter chaos and confusion for the people of Israel. Suddenly they find themselves in a spot where they don't know what to do, they don't know what's next, they don't know who to listen to, they don't know who to follow. And that's where we find ourselves at the beginning of Joshua chapter one. Today we're going to read Joshua chapter one, verses one through nine. If you have your Bibles with you, I want to encourage you to pull them out. If someone wants to give one to Keith, I know he didn't have his up here, but I want to make sure everyone has their Bible. I do want to say what a treat it is to be here with Keith. When I first moved to Durham, I moved here to pastor Durham Memorial Baptist Church on the east side of town, and for the three years I was there, I had the wonderful privilege of spending every Sunday with Keith's lovely wife, Kathy. That was an incredible joy to me, and I love, Keith, that you're still here — it's so, so meaningful to me. So let's go ahead and open up your Bibles. Joshua chapter one, verses one through nine — I'm going to be reading out of the Holman Christian Standard Bible, but whatever translation you're reading out of is just fine. After the death of Moses the Lord's servant, the Lord spoke to Joshua son of Nun, who had served Moses: "Moses My servant is dead. Now you and all the people prepare to cross over the Jordan to the land I am giving the Israelites. I have given you every place where the sole of your foot treads, just as I promised Moses. Your territory will be from the wilderness and Lebanon to the great Euphrates River — all the land of the Hittites — and west to the Mediterranean Sea. No one will be able to stand against you as long as you live. I will be with you, just as I was with Moses. I will not leave you or forsake you. "Be strong and courageous, for you will distribute the land I swore to their fathers to give them as an inheritance. Above all, be strong and very courageous to carefully observe the whole instruction My servant Moses commanded you. Do not turn from it to the right or the left, so that you will have success wherever you go. This book of instruction must not depart from your mouth; you are to recite it day and night so that you may carefully observe everything written in it. For then you will prosper and succeed in whatever you do. Haven't I commanded you: be strong and courageous? Do not be afraid or discouraged, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go." (Josh 1:1–9, HCSB) That's nine verses to start off the book of Joshua, and three times in nine verses we get the instruction from the Lord to be strong and courageous. [Addressing the person running the slides.] We're not ready for that yet, but you can come on back — thank you. Be strong and courageous. Hey, I do want to take a second — can we give it up for the AV volunteers in the back, for how they've had to handle everything today? Thank you so much. Yeah, we're not ready for that slide yet, but I appreciate it. So, Joshua chapter one, we get this important message: be strong, be courageous. Be strong, be courageous. Be strong, be courageous. And I'm wondering why it is that God would have to tell Joshua, this leader who's about to take over for Moses — why he would have to be told to be strong and courageous, be strong and courageous, be strong and courageous. And I want to just say, I think it is because to lead is hard. To lead into uncharted territory is impossible without God. And I wonder today — I wonder today, as you are preparing for an important meeting today and an important business meeting next week, as you prepare for today — are we a people who are afraid? Are we fearful? Are we full of doubt about what could be, about what might happen? Or are we a people who are strong and courageous? Are we a people who are ready to say there is more to do, there is more to come? The battle is not over yet, and it is time to be strong and courageous, because as long as the Lord has given breath in your lungs, you and I have work to do. The story's not over, and it's going to require that we are strong and courageous. Now, that is what I have always taken out of Joshua 1:1–9. If you've ever been involved in a church youth group, or you've ever been to a Bible study, or — strangely enough — if you've ever been a member of a sports team, Joshua 1:1–9 is not an unfamiliar passage of Scripture. And one of the things that can happen as we spend time with Scripture we're familiar with is that our familiarity can sometimes lead us to miss something that's right there on the page. Maybe this has been your experience — you've read over a passage of Scripture time and time again in your life, and something happens, whether you were at the right moment or it spoke into the right instance in your life, but something happens. You go back to that Scripture you maybe even know by heart, and suddenly something jumps out at you that never has before. And so, in this sermon that I have titled "A New Dawn, A New Day," I want to talk about what we see by looking at a principle and a promise. What we see by looking at a principle and a promise. Now see, there is a promise from God in Joshua chapter 1. In fact, there are a few promises. God is reasserting the promises he made to Moses, and he is letting Joshua know: the promises I made to Moses, those promises are true for you too, Joshua. These promises are not just for Moses. These promises are for you. But they're not just a promise — there's also a principle at play, and a principle is a foundational truth. A principle is a foundational truth. Maybe to put it a different way: a principle is a promise that is dependent on the user. A principle is a promise that is dependent on the user, meaning a principle is a truth that requires your obedience. And because of that, a principle can be a blessing or a curse. If you receive the promise, and the promise leads you to step out in obedience, then that promise has been a blessing. But if you receive the promise and do nothing with it, then the principle there is — man, that's kind of become a curse to you. So here's what I want to do this morning. I need three volunteers, and I'm going to go ahead and say this now, please take it in the loving way it's meant: I need three spry volunteers. I need three spry people. Come on up — who's ready? I need three people. If you make me start pointing at people, it's not going to go well. So, my friend right here in gray and black, I'm going to have you come on up. My friend over here in the blue shirt with the white stripe, come on up — I've got to have you come on up. And then, hey, my friend Matt Griffin is here — I'm going to have Matt come up. Come on, y'all. Oh, sir, I apologize, I'm sorry — all right, I'm going to have you stay there. I need one more volunteer who's ready to raise a hand. There we go, thank you, my friend, you can come on. Actually, you guys come on up on stage. Hey, I'm Rob. What's your name? Jeff — so good to have you come on up. And you are? Watson. Love that. And Matt, it's so good to see you — as I knock over this microphone stand. I'm going to have all three of you guys come over here. So — Matt, Jeff, Watson — Matt, Jeff, and Watson. Now, I want to take you back to the Scripture — in reading this passage recently, this is what jumped off the page to me. This is verse three: "I have given you every place where the sole of your foot treads, just as I promised Moses" (Josh 1:3, HCSB). I have given you every place where the sole of your foot treads, just as I promised Moses. So, Watson, you get to go first. I've given you — I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads. What's your first response? I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads. Okay, wonderful — are you staying right there? Okay, well, let's see it, come on. You've been given — Jeff, what about you? I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads. You're going to get moving. Matt, I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads. Where are you going? Come on. Now, thank you, thank you. By the way, give these guys a round of applause. [Congregation applauds.] Thank you so much. Okay, let's be honest here for a minute — can we be honest? How many of us have received this promise from the Lord, and we are the blessed, frozen, chosen? I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads. "God, thank you for this, that's so awesome. I'm so grateful, God, thank you that you've given me every —" but, man, I'm comfortable right here. Oh, man, I'm comfortable. I mean, there's air — come on, y'all, there's air conditioning. There's air conditioning, and it is too hot. Oh, man, and you know, I've got this thing in my back. Oh, all right. I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads, and we are good right here. So let me tell you the principle. Let me tell you the principle here: "I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads, just as I promised Moses" (Josh 1:3, HCSB). It's a promise, but it's not just a promise — it's a principle. Because if we are the frozen chosen, that's it. This is what we get. God's made a promise. God said, come on, I've given it to you, let's go. Thanks, God, doing great right here. And we get to the end of our lives, and despite the faithful promise of our God, we look around at what we've done for the kingdom, and we go, yep, I had it — God gave me all of this right here. It was a promise, but the promise turned into a curse, because we didn't do anything with it. Watson, I loved your reaction: "I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads" — well, let's dance in time then, come on, let's go. "I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads" — well, then there is no way you are stopping me from taking ground. "I've given you every place where the sole of your foot treads" — so get moving. Because I don't want us to come to the end of our lives and go, I could have gone so much further, I could have gone so much further, but the more comfortable I got, the easier it was to go, man, I'm going to take those steps tomorrow. I'm going to take that ground tomorrow. I'm going to have that conversation tomorrow. I'm going to invite that friend to church tomorrow. And tomorrow turns into tomorrow turns into tomorrow. I know I'm not the only procrastinator in the room, right? Come on, someone else there with me — you know what it's like to see your days turn into tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow. And you get to the end of a week, or a month, or a year, or a life, and this is all we've got. And the truth is: if God has promised Joshua to give him every place where the sole of his foot treads, just as he promised Moses (cf. Josh 1:3, HCSB), and Joshua were to stay still on the east side of the river, it's not just Joshua missing the opportunity. It's Joshua looking back at Moses's faithfulness and saying it didn't matter — because for all the steps you took, I'm not taking any. And that's the reality of the church. And by the way, this isn't unique to us. This has been the reality of every single generation of the church. Every single generation in the history of the church is constantly fighting against our human nature for safety and security and comfort. But God hasn't called you to that. He hasn't called us to that. God has called us out into the great wide open. God has called you to go further and do more and reach more people. Generation after generation of faithful believers who have gone before us have taken steps so that we could be right here in church. I say to you today, let's not come all this way just to stop. Let's not have come all this way just to make it this far. God has more for us. God has more for you. God has a bright future ahead — but the bright future ahead will not be easy, and it will not be safe, and it will not be comfortable. It will involve taking steps. And here's the truth — I did not do this for the sake of today's message. I went with a men's group Friday and Saturday up to Galax, Virginia, for a little two-day camping trip with some guys I know from another church. And yesterday morning, we decided, hey, let's go for a hike. I don't know if you can tell by looking at me, but I don't go on a lot of hikes. It's five and a half miles, and there's a significant amount of elevation change, but we're not running, right? It's not a race. So I'm like, yeah, we'll just take the whole morning and we'll do it. But every step was harder, and then it got to the point where all the muscles in the backs of my legs started clenching up. And the muscles are like, no, we're done. And you're like, well, we're not back to the car yet — so you're kind of grabbing your legs along the way, you're like, come on, we've got to go. And I wonder today how many of us, in our faith, need to just grab our legs — even though it's hard, even though it's not comfortable, even though it's pushing us further than we thought we could go — and just say, nope, God has given me every step, so I'm not stopping. Because here's the principle for Joshua: Joshua will only inherit what he inhabits. Joshua will only inherit what he inhabits. Let me put it to you another way — Joshua will only receive what he steps into. Right now, Durham, North Carolina, and the greater Triangle remains one of the fastest-growing areas in the country — second in the Southeast in growth behind the suburbs of Atlanta.1 But what makes this place unique, among all the other places you could be living, is a set of universities — regardless of which color blue you may wear — a collection of research and tech companies based here that is pulling in people from all around the world. Right now, there are more people coming from places in the world where Christianity is illegal, and those young adults are coming here to attend school or to work jobs. You are right now living in one of the few places on earth where, without leaving your zip code, you can impact the whole world. There's a student right now at Duke University who doesn't know Jesus, comes from a family that doesn't know Jesus, and comes from a country where people don't talk about Jesus — and God brought them to your doorstep. He brought them to you. Right now, there are teenagers in the vicinity of this church who are part of not just the least Christian, but the least faith-based generation in American history. In the history of the United States, "no religious affiliation" — the "nones," as we call them — has never been the predominant group within a generation, until my kids' generation. The largest and most rapidly growing religious affiliation in the United States among my children's generation is "none."2 And they're right here. They're right here. They live next door and across the street, and some of them are children in the developmental center. And they're part of families that don't know Jesus, that haven't heard the engaging and compelling story of what Christ has come to do for you and for me. You are right now in one of the most unique positions that any group of Christians has ever been in, in human history. The question is: are we going to stand right here and be comfortable, and watch the opportunity pass by? Are we going to find ourselves at the end of our lives with the Savior saying, "I brought them to you," and we say, "Yeah, but we were really comfortable"? God has given you a promise. I have already given it to you. I've already given you the land. I've already given you every step that you will take. Over the next two weeks, we're going to be hearing more about Joshua leading the people of Israel across the Jordan River and into the promised land. But for right now, at the end of Joshua chapter one, the people have not yet made that step. They have not yet stepped across the river. They have not yet crossed their lines of comfort and safety in order to follow God's vision and mission for their lives. What better place to end today's message than to leave us with this question? Just like Joshua and the people of Israel, we are standing on the shore of a river. We are standing on the border of where we have been and where we are going. Church — has God brought you this far just to come this far? Or is there a step to take? Is there a step to take that is worthy of the sacrifice of the generations behind us? Is there a step for us to take that says, it's not going to end here, but we are moving forward — even when it's not comfortable, even when there's no safety and security in it? Are we willing to be the kind of people who have enough faith to say, just like Joshua, we will only inherit what we inhabit? We will only receive what we live into. Church, how is God calling you to be obedient today? And are we taking those steps of obedience? Are we taking those steps like our lives depend on it? Are we taking those steps like our legacies depend on it? Are we taking those steps like the kingdom of heaven is in the balance? Because everything that we're about to read in the rest of the book of Joshua is incredible — beautiful stories of God's faithfulness. But here's what was true for Joshua, and here's what's true for you today: if Joshua didn't cross the river, he never would have seen any of it. We woke up this morning with breath in our lungs, which means God has purpose and mission for us. And I don't want you to miss it. I don't want you to miss it, because the best is yet to come. Let me pray for us. Heavenly Father, Jesus, we are so grateful for the power of your gospel. We are compelled by your Holy Spirit to take faithful steps of obedience, even when it's hard, even when it makes us uncomfortable, God. We are willing to take steps of obedience. So, God, when everything in us wants to pursue comfort, safety, security, God, will you give us the boldness to believe that the best is yet to come? Would we not make choices from a scarcity mindset, God? Would you give us an abundance mindset? Would we be a people who believe that you have placed us here and now to make a difference in the whole world? God, what could be more deserving of the name Yates than that we would go — that we would cross borders and lines of comfort and safety and security, that we might see those who are far from Christ become sons and daughters of the King? Jesus, we pray this in your name. Amen. Endnotes 1 The greater Research Triangle region (Raleigh–Durham–Chapel Hill) is widely recognized as one of the nation's fastest-growing metropolitan economies. The UNC Kenan Institute's "American Growth Project" ranks the Triangle's economy third-fastest-growing among the fifty largest U.S. metros and fourth-fastest among 150 extended metropolitan areas, while also noting that the Triangle is North Carolina's second-largest regional economy by GDP, behind Charlotte. Census-based analyses of metro population growth similarly place Raleigh–Cary in the national top tier — roughly tenth-fastest in recent rankings — and highlight that many of the country's fastest-growing metros are in the Southeast. These data support the general description of the Triangle as a leading growth center in the Southeast, though the sermon's specific claim that it is "second in the Southeast behind the suburbs of Atlanta" generalizes across the precision of the available rankings. 2 Recent survey data show that today's youngest adult cohort is the most religiously unaffiliated in recorded U.S. polling. The 2024 PRRI Census of American Religion reports that about 38–39 percent of Americans ages 18–29 identify as religiously unaffiliated ("nones"), a substantially higher share than among older generations. PRRI's breakdowns by age and gender likewise show that young adults — especially young women — have become significantly more likely to claim no religious affiliation over the past decade, rising from 32 percent in 2013 to 38 percent in 2024. The Pew Research Center's Religious Landscape Study finds that roughly 44 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds now identify as religiously unaffiliated, making the "nones" the single largest religious category in that age group and larger than any individual Christian tradition — a pattern not seen in older cohorts in prior survey waves. Works Cited Baptist News Global. "PRRI: Growth of the Religiously Unaffiliated Is Slowing." May 15, 2025. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://baptistnews.com/article/prri-growth-of-the-religiously-unaffiliated-is-slowing/. The Holy Bible, Holman Christian Standard Bible. 2004. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers. "Markets with the Most Population Growth in 2025." RealPage Analytics, April 1, 2026. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://www.realpage.com/analytics/population-growth-markets-2025/. Pew Research Center. "Religious 'Nones' in America: Who They Are and What They Believe." January 23, 2024. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/01/24/religious-nones-in-america-who-they-are-and-what-they-believe/. Public Religion Research Institute. "2024 PRRI Census of American Religion." PRRI, April 14, 2026. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://www.prri.org/spotlight/2024-prri-census-of-american-religion/. Public Religion Research Institute. "Gen Z, Gender, and Religion." PRRI, March 4, 2025. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://www.prri.org/spotlight/gen-z-gender-and-religion/. "Southeast Metros Lead US Population Growth as National Gains Slow." Becker's Hospital Review, March 26, 2026. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/strategy/southeast-metros-lead-us-population-growth-as-national-gains-slow/. UNC Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise. "From Tobacco to High Tech: Manufacturing in the Piedmont Triad and the Research Triangle." March 18, 2025. Accessed July 12, 2026. https://kenaninstitute.unc.edu/commentary/from-tobacco-to-high-tech-manufacturing-in-the-piedmont-triad-and-the-research-triangle/. © 2026 Rob Stone. All rights reserved.

Unleashed! The Political News Hour with Mayor Deb – According to a Pew Research Center report, only 17% of Americans trust the government to do the right thing “just about always” or “most of the time”. Other surveys indicate that two-thirds or 66.67% of the public believe the government is untruthful or actively manipulating information. A pretty high percentage...

One of the hallmarks of an authoritarian regime is severe restrictions on religious practice.But there's also been a marked increase in religious repression by individuals, sometimes in defiance of more liberal government policies. The Pew Research Center in Washington has been monitoring this situation. GUEST:Samirah Majumder is the lead author of Pews recent report. 

It's a funeral taking place over six days, five cities and two countries. Crowds have overwhelmed the streets of Iran to mourn or just watch the funeral procession for the late Ayatollah Khamenei. He and other family members died in February in attacks by the US and Israel. Khamenei ran a brutal regime that killed an estimated 40,000 demonstrators earlier this year, but his funeral has become a rallying point for the nation. The man set to become the next prime minister of Britain, Andy Burnham, is best known as the popular and successful mayor of Greater Manchester in northern England. But long before that, he was a pious altar boy in his local Catholic church in Liverpool. Burnham has referred frequently to his Catholic background and values, even if he observes only some of the church's teaching. How much will faith shape his prime ministership? One of the hallmarks of an authoritarian regime is severe restrictions on religious practice. But there's also been a marked increase in religious repression by individuals, sometimes in defiance of more liberal government policies. The Pew Research Center in Washington has been monitoring this situation.GUESTS:Dr Ali Mamouri  is a Middle East specialist at Deakin University and a former adviser to an earlier reform government in neighbouring Iraq.Hannah Rich is a senior researcher at the London-based think tank Theos.Samirah Majumdar is the lead author of Pew Research's recent report.This program is made on the lands of the Gadigal People of the Eora Nation

Pew Research Center president Michael Dimock has spent years listening to what Americans think — and what they're telling him right now is pretty dark. But buried in the data is something revealing: people are ready for bold democratic reform that the country hasn't seen in decades. He explores how America's founders didn't create a finished system of government but rather launched an ongoing project that requires each generation to renew, adapt and reimagine democracy. The survey says Americans are ready to do the work. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

East Fishkill approves moratorium When Debra Pagano heard that a developer was proposing a 1-gigawatt AI data center in East Fishkill, she asked her son in Texas what he thought of the controversial facilities. With 466 currently operating or planned data centers, Texas has more than any other state except Virginia, according to the Pew Research Center. "I asked his opinion — if it was to their advantage or not," said Pagano. "He said, 'If you can put the brakes [on] in any way to stop it from coming, especially to this area, do it.'" East Fishkill's Town Board applied those brakes on June 25. After a nearly two-hour public hearing during which Pagano and other residents aired emotions ranging from concern to fear, the board approved a three-year moratorium on data centers, which are facing a nationwide backlash as their construction accelerates to meet the large energy demands of AI. New York's Legislature approved a one-year moratorium that needs Gov. Kathy Hochul's signature to take effect. Several upstate towns have also hit pause on any new projects, and Orangetown officials in Rockland County are weighing a moratorium for their town, which has several existing centers. East Fishkill's moratorium, lasting until July 1, 2029, prohibits permitting or consideration of any data center "until the completion of federal and state studies" of their power and water usage, noise and heat emissions. The town allows an exception for projects "ancillary to an existing or permitted use" and less than 20 megawatts, or ones eligible for an economic-development special permit. It passed amid protests from residents who learned that Treetop Companies had asked the New York Independent System Operator, which operates the state's electric grid, to study the impact of an AI-processing and cloud-computing center at its property off of Donovan Drive. While the center would connect to ConEd's grid, the study will also look at its effect on Central Hudson and NYSEG's systems. Nick D'Alessandro, East Fishkill's supervisor, has emphasized that Treetop does not have a formal application with the town, but he said before the public hearing that "the people speak, the government listens and the government acts responsibly." He also said a "significant use" like a data center requires "impactful thought" by professionals and the public. "A moratorium gives us time," said D'Alessandro. "Time to study the infrastructure impacts and the environmental impacts. Time to hear from the experts." With its timeout, East Fishkill joins a movement that has led to more than 100 active moratoriums nationwide and permanent bans by eight municipalities and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians in North Carolina, according to the U.S. Data Center Moratorium Tracker. The warehouse-sized centers house rows of servers that are the repositories and waystations for the documents, images and video stored and shared by Americans through their smartphones and computers. Their construction has accelerated in recent years, driven first by cloud computing and cryptocurrency mining, and now by the processing needs of AI. Behind the backlash are economic and environmental concerns: the effect of the power-hungry facilities on household electricity rates; their thirst for large amounts of water to cool equipment and the impact on wells; and other issues such as noise and traffic. A proposal to build a 200-megawatt data facility at Indian Point is also being studied by NYISO. Tanya Radford, an East Fishkill resident, who gets her electricity through Central Hudson, said any project should be subject to a "robust environmental review" that assesses "air, water, noise and light pollution." She also said that developers should pay for any new energy infrastructure they need. "Ratepayers and communities should not have to pay for new infrastructure that supports new industry," said Radford. "Large commercial industrial users should pay premium prices rather than get sweetheart deals at...

According to the Pew Research Center, approximately 30% of U.S. veterans believe the government provides them with too little help, while only 46% say the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is doing an excellent or good job of meeting veterans' needs. Those numbers highlight a troubling reality: too many veterans are struggling to access the benefits and support they have earned through their service. Every veteran has earned the right to the care and benefits they deserve—but far too many never receive them because they simply don't know where to begin. This week on Let's Have This Conversation, I sit down with Army veteran Cory Gold, whose life changed forever after a parachute failure left him with a broken back and a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Despite qualifying for VA disability benefits, Cory spent four years unaware those benefits even existed. Rather than allowing that experience to define him, he turned it into a mission by founding Worth Their Weight, a nonprofit dedicated to finding the veterans the system has overlooked and connecting them with the benefits they've earned—completely free of charge. During our conversation, Cory explains why VA disability benefits are not charity but compensation earned through service and sacrifice. We discuss the barriers that prevent so many veterans from accessing those benefits, the frustrations of navigating the VA claims process, and why no veteran should have to face that journey alone. Cory also shares how Worth Their Weight is creating meaningful change through its Search & Rescue program, where Field Scouts build trust within local communities, identify veterans who have fallen through the cracks, address immediate needs such as transportation, shelter, or communication, and connect them with VA-accredited Veteran Service Organization (VSO) partners who guide them through the claims process. We also explore the organization's upcoming Vet Connect initiative, which aims to bridge the digital divide by providing veterans with tablets and hands-on training so they can access the benefits, services, and resources available to them. This is more than a conversation about veteran benefits. It's a discussion about leadership, resilience, advocacy, and restoring dignity to the men and women who have sacrificed so much in service to our country. Whether you're a veteran, have a loved one who served, or simply want to better understand the challenges facing those who wore the uniform, this episode offers valuable insight and hope.  Tune in to hear how one veteran transformed his own struggle into a nationwide mission to ensure no veteran is left behind.     Call (833) WTWVets For more information: https://worththeirweight.org/ Follow: @WorthTheirWeight Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Recent polls indicate that feelings of patriotism are at an all-time low in the United States. This is especially the case for younger Americans, who are less likely than their older counterparts to describe themselves as patriotic, and less inclined to participate in displays of patriotism. On one hand this is nothing new: According to a Pew Research Center study, the generational divide has played a role in whether a person identifies as patriotic since at least 2003. And, as Sara Pequeño pointed out in an article for USA Today, boomers who call themselves patriots today were once "protesting the Vietnam War by marching in the streets and burning American flags."   This also comes at a time when religious affiliation is on the wane. And the discussion around patriotism in the United States is tangled up in ideas about faith, God, and divine will. For instance, one PRRI poll found that 44% of people surveyed think God has granted the United States a special role in human history.    But is this what patriotism means? How should people of faith think about their obligations to their country?    On this episode of Glad You Asked, the hosts talk to religion scholar and public intellectual Dr. Lewis Brogdon, who was recently appointed executive director of JustFaith Ministries. Brogdon has also served in leadership and teaching roles in various academic institutions, and is a regular contributor to a number of publications and the author of several books, most recently The Gospel Beyond the Grave: Toward a Black Theology of Hope (Wipf and Stock Publishers).   You can learn more about this topic, and read some of Brogdon's work, in these links.   "True patriotism is about building bridges, not walls," by Mark Shea   "Teach kids the complicated truth about American heroes," by Kathleen Bonnette   "Any religion allied with nationalism is dangerous," by Stephen Schneck   "Christians Can Be Bad Neighbors? Reflections on Luke 10:25-37 and My Visit to the United Nations," by Lewis Brogdon   "Can justice movements lose their soul?" by Lewis Brogdon   "Why most bow," by Lewis Brogdon  

Description In this episode of The Christopher Perrin Show, Christopher Perrin welcomes Keith McCurdy and Davies Owens for a conversation about Raising Sturdy Kids, Keith's new book on forming strong families and capable children. McCurdy argues that children today are not naturally sturdier than previous generations, but are often more fragile—marked by rising anxiety, depression, diagnoses, medication, and difficulty coping with discomfort. Using the image of trees that need wind and weather to grow “stress wood,” he explains why children also need healthy, productive struggle in order to become flexible, durable, and mature. Davies Owens connects this need to the larger challenge facing parents today: many families are disconnected from extended-family wisdom, surrounded by competing voices, and unsure how to parent with clarity and courage. The conversation assesses the self-esteem movement, gentle parenting extremes, fear-based parenting, and the cultural lie that feelings are the most important part of who we are. Together, they call parents, schools, and churches back to a shared vision of maturity: the ability to choose what is right even when it is difficult, uncomfortable, or unwanted. The episode closes by highlighting practical resources for parents and schools, including Raising Sturdy Kids, Basecamp Live's “Live Sturdy” conversations, and future ClassicalU resources.Episode OutlineIntroducing Raising Sturdy Kids and the need for strong families and capable childrenKeith McCurdy's background in mental health, counseling, and work with familiesWhy children today are often more fragile than sturdyThe tree analogy: stress wood, wind, weather, and healthy struggleDavies Owens on parents, extended family, and the loss of generational wisdomBasecamp Live, Zipcast, and the “Live Sturdy” conversations with Keith McCurdyThe self-esteem movement and the story of the broken baseball trophyThe cultural lie that feelings are the most important part of who we areHelping students understand that emotions cannot reliably discern truthParenting by consensus and the dangers of following the crowdThe “three Ps”: problem, principles, and practical applicationMaturity as doing what is right when it is difficult, uncomfortable, or unwantedCourage as every virtue at its testingFamily, school, and church as a threefold partnership in forming sturdy childrenWhere to find Raising Sturdy Kids and related resourcesKey Topics & TakeawaysSturdiness Through Struggle: Children do not become strong by being protected from every hardship. Like trees exposed to wind and weather, they need appropriate stress in order to grow durable, flexible, and mature.Truthful Encouragement: The self-esteem movement often replaces real formation with artificial praise. Children need adults who speak truthfully about failure, growth, effort, and responsibility.Feelings and Reality: Emotions have value, but they cannot reliably distinguish fantasy from reality or truth from distortion. Children must learn to understand feelings without being ruled by them.Courage and Virtue: Virtues become real when they are tested. Courage gives virtue flesh by enabling students to practice what is right under pressure.Shared Formation: Families, schools, and churches need common language and shared principles if they are going to form children in wisdom, virtue, and maturity.Benevolent Authority: Loving discipline is not harsh authoritarianism. Parents are called to lead clearly, calmly, and lovingly, without allowing raw emotion to govern correction.Questions & DiscussionWhere are children in your community most protected from healthy struggle?Consider areas such as schoolwork, chores, athletics, friendship conflict, disappointment, consequences, and technology. What would a healthy, age-appropriate version of productive struggle look like?What is the difference between encouragement and false praise?Discuss the baseball trophy story. Why did the child instinctively reject praise that did not match reality, and how can adults be both truthful and encouraging?How should we teach children to understand their emotions without being ruled by them?Consider McCurdy's examples of fear in an alley, fear in a dream, and fear while watching a movie. What do these examples reveal about feelings and truth?What does maturity look like in a child, teenager, or adult?Discuss McCurdy's definition of maturity as doing what is right when it is difficult, uncomfortable, or unwanted. Where do you personally need courage to do what is right despite discomfort?How can parents, schools, and churches become a stronger threefold partnership?Consider what your school or church reinforces well and where families may be receiving mixed messages. What shared language would help create a thicker culture of formation?Suggested Reading & ResourcesRaising Sturdy Kids: Simple Truths for Building Strong Families and Capable Kids by Keith McCurdyThe Abolition of Man by C. S. LewisSticky Faith: Everyday Ideas to Build Lasting Faith in Your Kids by Dr. Kara E. Powell and Dr. Chap Clark Basecamp Live Podcast: Live Sturdy SeriesZipcast.mediaLive SturdyClassical Academic PressSociety for Classical LearningClassicalU Course: ParentU: Is Classical Education Right for Your Children?ClassicalU Course: Growing Classroom Culture through Parent Partnerships“More than half of Americans live within an hour of extended family” By Kiley Hurst, Pew Research Center

In this episode of the Celebrate Kids podcast, we delve into the significant concerns parents have regarding their children's mental health in today's digitally connected world. Host discusses a recent Pew Research Center report revealing that 40% of U.S. parents are extremely worried about their children struggling with anxiety or depression, surpassing fears related to physical dangers such as kidnapping or substance abuse. Dr. Kathy explores the impact of these worries on parental behavior and the importance of focusing on the light amidst the darkness. Join us as we unpack the balance between natural parental fears and the hope found in a supportive, faith-based perspective.

The episode reveals a structural shift where “AI powered” has moved from a selling point to a source of liability and customer distrust. Surveys from WordPress VIP, the Pew Research Center, and Carnegie Mellon University indicate that both consumers and professionals increasingly see visible AI in products and services as a negative attribute, eroding trust rather than adding perceived value. This trend impacts MSPs directly, as their role in advising clients on technology adoption now brings increased accountability for customer experience outcomes tied to AI-driven automation. According to a WordPress VIP survey, 60% of US consumers are deterred by the term “AI” in brand marketing, and 86% do not fully trust AI-delivered information, preferring original sources. The Pew Research Center found that, while 49% of US adults now use AI chatbots, 40% believe AI will worsen society and 67% distrust regulatory oversight. A Carnegie Mellon study of working visual artists reported 99% disapproving of generative AI and 85% refusing to use it. These quantified findings underscore a broad disconnect between AI adoption and public trust. Additional research reinforces this skepticism and clarifies operational risks. AnswerConnect's survey of 6,000 consumers across the US, UK, and Canada found that 85% prefer human service over bot interactions, 57% lose trust in brands using AI for support, and 73% exhibit greater loyalty to businesses maintaining human involvement. Data from Fractal and Search Engine Land shows that the share of consumers who say heavy AI use would decrease their trust in a brand nearly doubled in a year, rising from 20% to 39%. Furthermore, 84% desire businesses to disclose AI use, yet only 20% of businesses consistently do so. These patterns suggest tangible declines in customer loyalty and increased expectation for transparency surrounding AI deployment. For MSPs and IT service providers, visible AI in customer-facing areas introduces pricing risk and trust liabilities. Delegating key customer interactions to AI without clear disclosure can erode brand equity and disrupt client retention metrics. The operational recommendation is to segment human-in-the-loop service as the standard premium offering, with fully automated AI positioned as a disclosed, lower-tier alternative. Writing these distinctions explicitly into contracts and statements of work—pairing them with actual client retention data—enables more defensible pricing and clarifies accountability, helping avoid unintended consequences tied to silent automation. 00:00 The Turn-Off  03:39 Reading the Motive 05:25 The Loyalty Account 08:35 Why Do We Care?    Supported by:  Pax8  ScalePad    Sign up for the SMB Online Conference: www.smbonlineconference.com

As Americans age, they have a few options for care in their later years, like moving in with a family member or into an assisted-living facility. Or aging in place.... Increasingly, with the assistance of AI. Steven Blum is a writer from Seattle now based in Austria. He published a piece about his aging father, who lives alone in Seattle and is being monitored through Sensi. It’s an AI device that’s constantly listening for signs of distress. It’s supposed to detect if Blum’s dad has fallen. It was an option that made sense, because his father doesn’t want to move out of his home. He isn’t alone. Last year, the Pew Research Center asked older Americans what they would do if they couldn’t live by themselves anymore. Around 60% said that they’d rather stay in their homes and have someone care for them, instead of moving into an assisted living facility or a nursing home. As Americans enter their later years, AI could be part of their care. Guest: Steven Blum, a writer based in Austria Related links: My Father Wants to Age in Place. AI Will Be Watching | WIRED Assistive tech for older adults is becoming increasingly automated. What are the privacy risks? | KUOW Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Paul Taylor — former executive vice president of the Pew Research Center and author of This Is Getting Old — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a sweeping, data-rich conversation about the generation that has dominated American political life longer than any other: the Baby Boomers. Taylor's framing is striking — voters keep electing presidents born in 1946, and no generation in American history has enjoyed the kind of political hegemony Boomers have held since becoming the largest voting bloc in the 1980s. He argues this dominance has had real consequences as America approaches its 250th birthday in a genuinely dark place: CEO pay has ballooned from a 20-to-1 ratio to 300-to-1 on the Boomers' watch, their decisions have fueled the very populist backlash now reshaping both parties, and — in a deep irony — they spent decades undermining public confidence in the very institutions that benefited them most, helping imprint Trump's "everything is rigged" worldview onto the broader public. Taylor offers a wealth of arresting data points: Jimmy Carter is the only Democrat to win a majority of the Boomer vote in the last 14 elections, and the United States is the only country on earth where a majority of citizens believe their fellow citizens are morally bad — a stunning measure of how thoroughly Americans have turned on one another. The conversation broadens into questions of national identity, demographics, and where the country goes from here. Taylor argues that America is fundamentally a creedal nation rather than a "blood and soil" one, that it has accepted far more immigrants than any other country (though he's candid that too much immigration too fast tends to produce political and cultural backlash, and that the shift toward majority non-white immigration over the past 60 years has been a profound change), and that today's young generation celebrates difference — but a mosaic, he cautions, still needs glue to hold it together. Boomers, he notes, are the last living generation to experience America as something close to a monoculture, and the last to remember segregated America firsthand, which shapes their politics in ways younger generations struggle to understand. Taylor doesn't shy away from the harder verdicts: the generalization that Boomers are a narcissistic generation, he says, is fair. He and Todd explore the demographic time bomb of declining birth rates and an inverting age pyramid (and whether AI and robotics might paradoxically reduce the need for a baby boom), and trace a fascinating through-line from Gary Hart to Graham Platner on how the television era forced politicians to perform their character for the public — and how both Platner and Trump ultimately channel the same anger at a broken system. Taylor closes on a cautiously hopeful note that the next wave of American politics could be a backlash against the current divisiveness, even as he braces for the possibility that his fellow Boomers may not love what they read in his book. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Refresh your wardrobe with Quince. Go to https://Quince.com/chuck for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Paul Taylor (This Is Getting Old) joins the Chuck ToddCast 01:00 Voters keep electing presidents born in 1946 01:45 No generation has had political hegemony like the Boomers 02:45 Since the 80s, boomers have been biggest voting bloc 03:30 America in a dark place as it prepares to celebrate 250 05:00 Disneyland opened in the 50s but has lost its egalitarian culture 05:45 CEO pay has gone from 20-1 to 300-1, boomers facilitated that 06:30 Boomers’ decisions have led to a major populist backlash 08:00 Boomers came of age during a period of deep division in America 10:00 During the 60s, people believed the system was built to do good 10:30 Trump’s “rigged” worldview has been imprinted on the public 11:45 Boomers undermined confidence in institutions that benefitted them 13:30 There’s always been a class distinction in the boomer generation 14:30 Carter is the only Democrat to win majority of boomer vote in past 14 elections 16:00 U.S. is the only country where majority thinks fellow citizens are morally bad 17:30 Boomers grew up with a sense of triumphalism after World War 2 18:30 American exceptionalism didn’t start with the boomers 19:30 America has accepted far more immigrants than any other country 20:30 Too much immigration leads to political and cultural backlash 21:30 In the last 60 years, most immigrants have been non-white, a big change 22:30 Today’s young generation celebrates differences, but a mosaic needs glue 24:00 Boomers are the last generation to experience America as a monoculture 26:15 American is a creedal nation, not a “blood and soil” nation 28:45 Americans are misinformed, but generally pragmatic and collaborative 30:00 Hopefully the next wave of politics is a backlash to our current, divisive politics 30:45 Boomers are the last living generation to experience segregated America 32:45 Despite current tensions, progress for women and minorities has happened 34:00 Expanding minority rights is a hard thing to pull off 34:45 Why has it taken so long to push boomers out of leadership? 36:00 Women’s liberation has led to declining birth rates 37:30 Inverted demographic chart is going to create problems 38:30 Will we need a baby boom if AI & robotics will perform many of the jobs? 40:30 The generalization that boomers are a narcissistic generation is fair 41:15 Is there a thru line between Gary Hart and Graham Platner’s character issues? 44:15 The television era forced politicians to present themselves to the public 45:45 Mainers will have to decide about Platner’s shortcomings 47:00 Platner & Trump channel anger at the system 50:30 Will your fellow boomers hate what they read in this book?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chuck Todd focuses this episode around a single, almost too-perfect metaphor: the reflecting pool Trump remade, where the paint is now visibly peeling off the concrete and the president is blaming vandals rather than his own shoddy work — a fitting symbol, Chuck argues, for a presidency defined by grandiose self-promotion and an inability to take responsibility for anything. He opens on the Iran fallout, where JD Vance is attending the latest round of negotiations while Marco Rubio is conspicuously MIA, MAGA is openly fracturing over the war and over support for Israel, and Trump's defenders are stuck trying to explain away an obvious capitulation.He warns that the Iranians have now learned to manipulate the markets the same way Trump does — opening and closing the Strait of Hormuz whenever they need cash — and that there will be no positives to come out of this war. From there Chuck pivots into one of his sharpest character indictments yet, arguing Trump is the worst role-model president in American history — a man who behaves like an elementary-school playground bully, and who constantly tries to steal other people's achievements.The contrast crystallized, Chuck says, in the split-screen of Obama's library dedication against Trump's UFC spectacle — the Obamas embodying the story of American meritocracy while Trump embodies inherited advantage squandered. That comparison leads Chuck into a genuinely nuanced reassessment of Obama's legacy: a successful president by traditional measures whose party nonetheless weakened badly on his watch, in part because there was no accountability for the financial crisis, no real effort to set up an heir apparent, and because Obama built a movement around himself rather than the party.He closes on Tuesday's pivotal New York primaries, where he argues the Democratic Socialists of America — led by Zohran Mamdani and AOC — are attempting a genuine takeover of New York Democratic politics, where the long-convenient "progressive" label is about to be torn apart to reveal the socialist faction underneath, and where the central question facing the entire party will be forced into the open: the socialist brand isn't automatically fatal, but it terrifies suburban voters, and a committed faction of supporters is all it takes to hijack a political party. Then, Paul Taylor — former executive vice president of the Pew Research Center and author of This Is Getting Old — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a sweeping, data-rich conversation about the generation that has dominated American political life longer than any other: the Baby Boomers. Taylor's framing is striking — voters keep electing presidents born in 1946, and no generation in American history has enjoyed the kind of political hegemony Boomers have held since becoming the largest voting bloc in the 1980s. He argues this dominance has had real consequences as America approaches its 250th birthday in a genuinely dark place: CEO pay has ballooned from a 20-to-1 ratio to 300-to-1 on the Boomers' watch, their decisions have fueled the very populist backlash now reshaping both parties, and — in a deep irony — they spent decades undermining public confidence in the very institutions that benefited them most, helping imprint Trump's "everything is rigged" worldview onto the broader public. Taylor offers a wealth of arresting data points: Jimmy Carter is the only Democrat to win a majority of the Boomer vote in the last 14 elections, and the United States is the only country on earth where a majority of citizens believe their fellow citizens are morally bad — a stunning measure of how thoroughly Americans have turned on one another. The conversation broadens into questions of national identity, demographics, and where the country goes from here. Taylor argues that America is fundamentally a creedal nation rather than a "blood and soil" one, that it has accepted far more immigrants than any other country (though he's candid that too much immigration too fast tends to produce political and cultural backlash, and that the shift toward majority non-white immigration over the past 60 years has been a profound change), and that today's young generation celebrates difference — but a mosaic, he cautions, still needs glue to hold it together. Boomers, he notes, are the last living generation to experience America as something close to a monoculture, and the last to remember segregated America firsthand, which shapes their politics in ways younger generations struggle to understand. Taylor doesn't shy away from the harder verdicts: the generalization that Boomers are a narcissistic generation, he says, is fair. He and Todd explore the demographic time bomb of declining birth rates and an inverting age pyramid (and whether AI and robotics might paradoxically reduce the need for a baby boom), and trace a fascinating through-line from Gary Hart to Graham Platner on how the television era forced politicians to perform their character for the public — and how both Platner and Trump ultimately channel the same anger at a broken system. Taylor closes on a cautiously hopeful note that the next wave of American politics could be a backlash against the current divisiveness, even as he braces for the possibility that his fellow Boomers may not love what they read in his book. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit the Korean War and its lasting legacy on both American culture and geopolitics. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Refresh your wardrobe with Quince. Go to https://Quince.com/chuck for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code CHUCKTODDCAST at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/chucktoddcast Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 01:30 The reflecting pool has become a metaphor for Trump’s presidency 05:30 JD Vance attending latest round of Iran negotiations, Rubio MIA 07:30 MAGA is divided over the Iran war and support for Israel 08:45 Trump’s defenders stuck trying to explain away capitulation to Iran 09:30 Administration threatening to purge any critics of the Iran deal 10:30 Much of the administration is more populist, less pro-Israel 13:00 Growing movement of isolationism in both parties 14:30 Iranians have learned from Trump how to manipulate the markets 15:15 Iran will open and close the Strait whenever they need money 16:00 There will be no positives coming out of the Iran war 17:15 Will Republicans pretend Trump won, or will they start to speak out? 18:30 Trump has been a terrible role model for young American boys/men 19:30 Trump is the worst role model president we’ve ever had 20:15 Trump’s behavior is like an elementary school bully 21:15 Crypto.com bribed Trump to get out of legal trouble 21:45 UAE bribed Trump get export controls for chips dropped 22:45 Trump pardoned J6 rioters, then tried to reward them with slush fund 24:00 At least 40 pardoned J6ers have reoffended & been arrested again 25:00 Trump sent troops into cities to intimidate them like a playground bully 26:00 Trump, like a kid, tries to steal other people’s achievements 27:00 Trump’s remake of the reflecting pool has been a disaster 27:45 Paint is peeling off the concrete from the pool, Trump blames vandals 29:00 It’s clear Trump wasn’t parented at all, not given character tests 29:45 Trump gets a pass for behavior we wouldn’t tolerate from a child 30:30 How do we assess Obama’s legacy when Trump was elected after him? 31:15 Obama library ceremony reminded us about what he did best 31:45 Obama library vs Trump’s UFC showed sharp contrast between the two 32:45 The Obamas embodied the story of American meritocracy 33:15 Trump was born on 3rd base, and always trying to steal home 33:45 Both Obama and Trump’s stories are American stories 35:00 As time passes it becomes harder to separate Obama from Trump 35:45 By traditional measures, Obama was a successful president 36:30 The Democratic party weakened during Obama’s presidency 37:00 Three things Obama could have done to strengthen his party 37:30 Public was upset there was no accountability for financial crisis 38:00 Obama didn’t help identify and set up an heir apparent for success 39:00 22nd amendment a mistake? Would the country be better with 3 Obama terms? 39:30 Obama built a movement around himself, leaving party weaker 40:30 New York holds its primary on Tuesday with major implications 41:30 The Democratic Socialists of America trying to shift the party left 42:00 The Democratic party is splitting into 3 camps 42:45 “Progressive” used to cover both progressives and socialists 43:15 Tuesday’s primaries will tear the cover off the socialism facade 44:15 Mamdani believes he’s leading a movement, challenging establishment 44:45 Mamdani and AOC trying to lead DSA takeover of NY Democratic politics 45:45 Mamdani trying to remake the Democratic party in his image 46:30 Can the DSA brand work in the suburbs and outside the 5 boroughs? 47:15 Dem leadership treated Mamdani like a liability, socialism only sells in cities 48:15 The socialist label isn’t automatically fatal, but it scares suburban voters 49:00 Tuesday will force Democratic candidates to fit into one of the boxes 49:45 A faction of supporters is enough to hijack a political party 58:45 Paul Taylor (This Is Getting Old) joins the Chuck ToddCast 59:45 Voters keep electing presidents born in 1946 01:00:30 No generation has had political hegemony like the Boomers 01:01:30 Since the 80s, boomers have been biggest voting bloc 01:02:15 America in a dark place as it prepares to celebrate 250 01:03:45 Disneyland opened in the 50s but has lost its egalitarian culture 01:04:30 CEO pay has gone from 20-1 to 300-1, boomers facilitated that 01:05:15 Boomers’ decisions have led to a major populist backlash 01:06:45 Boomers came of age during a period of deep division in America 01:08:45 During the 60s, people believed the system was built to do good 01:09:15 Trump’s “rigged” worldview has been imprinted on the public 01:10:30 Boomers undermined confidence in institutions that benefitted them 01:12:15 There’s always been a class distinction in the boomer generation 01:13:15 Carter is the only Democrat to win majority of boomer vote in past 14 elections 01:14:45 U.S. is the only country where majority thinks fellow citizens are morally bad 01:16:15 Boomers grew up with a sense of triumphalism after World War 2 01:17:15 American exceptionalism didn’t start with the boomers 01:18:15 America has accepted far more immigrants than any other country 01:19:15 Too much immigration leads to political and cultural backlash 01:20:15 In the last 60 years, most immigrants have been non-white, a big change 01:21:15 Today’s young generation celebrates differences, but a mosaic needs glue 01:22:45 Boomers are the last generation to experience America as a monoculture 01:25:00 American is a creedal nation, not a “blood and soil” nation 01:27:30 Americans are misinformed, but generally pragmatic and collaborative 01:28:45 Hopefully the next wave of politics is a backlash to our current, divisive politics 01:29:30 Boomers are the last living generation to experience segregated America 01:31:30 Despite current tensions, progress for women and minorities has happened 01:32:45 Expanding minority rights is a hard thing to pull off 01:33:30 Why has it taken so long to push boomers out of leadership? 01:34:45 Women’s liberation has led to declining birth rates 01:36:15 Inverted demographic chart is going to create problems 01:37:15 Will we need a baby boom if AI & robotics will perform many of the jobs? 01:39:15 The generalization that boomers are a narcissistic generation is fair 01:40:00 Is there a thru line between Gary Hart and Graham Platner’s character issues? 01:43:00 The television era forced politicians to present themselves to the public 01:44:30 Mainers will have to decide about Platner’s shortcomings 01:45:45 Platner & Trump channel anger at the system 01:49:15 Will your fellow boomers hate what they read in this book? 01:51:45 Chuck’s thoughts on interview with Paul Taylor 01:52:00 ToddCast Time Machine - June 25th, 1950 01:52:15 The Korean War never ended 01:53:00 The Korean War has a strange place in American history 01:53:30 The Korean War memorial in DC is haunting 01:54:45 The Korean War produced a world we’re still living in 01:55:15 America’s approach to foreign intervention began in Korea 01:56:00 Before the war, South Korea was third world and impoverished 01:57:00 North Korea has become a repressive military regime, more dangerous 01:58:00 The fighting ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty 01:58:30 The DNZ is one of the most heavily fortified borders on earth 01:59:00 The first fighting between US and China was in Korea 01:59:30 Truman didn’t rely on congress for a formal declaration of war 02:00:30 Korea was really America’s first true “forever war” 02:01:30 Korea taught America to live with a problem rather than fix it 02:02:15 Korea was not a clear victory or a clear defeat 02:03:15 Ask Chuck 02:03:30 Where’s the best place to go for civics education for kids? 02:06:30 Have you thought about creating an “election manifesto”? 02:10:30 Are there guardrails around presidential interference in elections? 02:14:45 If you could warn the founders about one blind spot, what would it be? 02:18:00 What happens behind the scenes during a TV news anchor walk-off? 02:21:15 What has actually changed on the ground in Venezuela post-Maduro?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How some local religious groups welcome LGBTQ+ members June is Pride Month, an annual celebration honoring LGBTQ+ people, their history and an ongoing movement toward equality. Most celebrations are secular in nature - but there are some religious organizations in Northeast Ohio hosting Pride events this year. For many, religion is a source of belonging and spiritual guidance. But for others, experiences with faith communities have led to rejection, exclusion or religious trauma. Studies from Pew Research Center shows that 80% of LGBTQ adults in the U.S. believe in spirituality and nearly half identify with a religion. Thursday on the "Sound of Ideas," we're bringing together faith leaders to discuss how their congregations engage with LGBTQ people, how they interpret their faith traditions' teachings on sexuality and identity, and what that relationship looks like not just in June, but throughout the year. Guests: - Rev. Dr. George Graham, Pastor, Pilgrim Congregational United Church of Christ - Shoshana Nyer, Rabbi, Suburban Temple Kol Ami - Fr. Damian Ference, Vicar for Evangelization, The Cathedral Saint John the Evangelist - Rev. Derek Terry, Executive Director, Open and Affirming Coalition and Part-time Pastor, St. Peter's United Church of Christ "Easy Day Away": Chautauqua and Jamestown in New York As the summer gets underway, you might be feeling the urge to travel. But the cost of getting away has gotten more expensive lately, as the U.S. war on Iran continues to squeeze access to oil, driving up the cost of both airfare and gas to fill up our cars. As a result of increasing prices, a survey from US News and World Report released in April showed that 65% of Americans have changed their summer travel plans. For those of you who are being budget-conscious but are still feeling that wanderlust, we're launching a new summer series on Thursday's edition of the "Sound of Ideas" called "Easy Day Away." We'll bring you ideas for simple trips you can take that are within a short drive of Northeast Ohio, and don't require an overnight stay. For our first feature, we're highlighting Jamestown and Chautauqua in New York's Chautauqua County. These two cities are on either side of Chautauqua Lake, both about a two hours' drive east of Cleveland. Jamestown is home to both the Lucille Ball Desi Arnaz Museum and the National Comedy Center, and Chautauqua is known for its Chautauqua Institution, a historic, 750-acre lakeside educational and cultural center. Guests: - Journey Gunderson, Executive Director, National Comedy Center - Gary Hahn, Board Member and Secretary, Chautauqua County Visitors Bureau - Deborah Sunya Moore, Senior Vice President and Chief Program Officer, Chautauqua Institution

Michael Smerconish sits down with Pew Research Center's Jocelyn Kiley to discuss the organization's newly released political typology, which divides Americans into nine distinct political groups. With nearly half of Americans now identifying as independents, what does the data reveal about the country's evolving political identity? Kiley explains how Pew's research goes beyond traditional Democrat-versus-Republican labels, why polarization continues to grow, and what these new political tribes tell us about the future of American politics. Plus, Michael shares his own surprising results from Pew's political quiz. Original air date 16 June 2026. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

According to Pew Research Center, 83 percent of Americans support requiring government-issued photo identification to vote. Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.

Is the world becoming more religious or less religious? Gina Zurlo, Lecturer on World Christianity at Harvard Divinity School, talks about the demographic, cultural, and social forces reshaping religion around the globe. Drawing on a recent Pew Research Center report on religious diversity, Zurlo explores Christianity's shift toward the Global South, the impact of migration and demographics, and what researchers are learning about faith and spirituality among younger generations. Produced and hosted by Jonathan Beasley Edited by Tyler Sprouse Logo art direction by Kristie Welsh Pew Research Report on religious diversity around the world: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2026/02/12/religious-diversity-around-the-world/ Harvard Divinity Bulletin article: "Is the World Becoming More or Less Religious? Depends on China." https://bulletin.hds.harvard.edu/is-the-world-becoming-more-or-less-religious-depends-on-china/ Intro/Outro music: "Shape Of Hope"; Publishers: Abbey Road Masters; Universal Production Music Ad break music: "Atmospheres"; Publishers: Aurora; Universal Production Music Sign up for the HDS Current newsletter: www.hds.harvard.edu/news/connect Follow HDS on social media: IG, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn (@HarvardDivinity)

In 1985, 67% of Americans rated pastors high in honesty and ethics. Today? Just 27% - and only 17% among those under 35. It's one of the steepest trust declines of any profession. The question isn't if this affects your church - it does. The question is what you do about it.   ============================= Table of Contents: ============================= 0:00 - Intro 1:15 - The Numbers Are Worse Than You Think 3:38 - Why This Happened 13:18 - How to Rebuild Trust Through Communications   THE 167 NEWSLETTER

In democracies, we typically assume that public opinion on issues like jobs, the economy, and inflation matter for shaping policy and politics. But opinions on foreign policy are often treated as the preserve of elites, especially in a country like India. Yet, it turns out that we know surprisingly little about what ordinary Indians think about foreign policy, how stable those views are, and whether they influence the choices that governments make. A new short book, Indian Public Opinion toward the Major Powers, tackles these questions by examining more than six decades of Indian attitudes toward the United States, China, and Russia. The book draws on a wide range of survey data to ask how Indians view the major powers, how those views have shifted over time, and what they reveal about democracy, accountability, and foreign policy in India. To discuss the book, co-authors Aidan Milliff and Paul Staniland join Milan on the podcast this week. Aidan is an assistant professor of political science at Florida State University. Many moons ago, he was a James C. Gaither Junior Fellow with the Carnegie South Asia Program. Paul is professor of political science at the University of Chicago and a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The trio discuss the treasure trove of data on Indian public opinion the authors stumbled upon, the characteristics of India's “foreign policy public,” and the variation in Indian attitudes toward the United States, China, and Russia/the Soviet Union. Plus, the discuss why a respondent's region emerges as a strong predictor of one's foreign policy views. Episode notes: Aidan Milliff and Paul Staniland, “Replication Archive: India Public Opinion Toward the Major Powers,” May 2026. Paul Staniland, “The Indian ‘foreign policy public,'” paulstaniland.com (Blog), May 6, 2026. Christine Huang, “Americans see India in positive light, but few have confidence in Modi,” Pew Research Center, June 21, 2023.  Paul Staniland and Vipin Narang, “Democratic Accountability and Foreign Security Policy: Theory and Evidence from India,” Security Studies 27, no. 3 (2018): 410-447. Aidan Milliff and Paul Staniland, "Indian Public Opinion toward the Major Powers," in Elements in Indo-Pacific Security, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2026). (The piece is publicly available until June 15, 2026)

Chris Boyer and Reed Smith run a forensic walk through five dated, citable moments where the future of healthcare consumerism was sitting in published research before the industry moved. The Pew health-seeker data in 2000. ePatient Dave's "Gimme My Damn Data" keynote in 2009, which took twelve years to reach the Information Blocking Rule. Mobile crossing into everyday health behavior by 2012. Apple, Amazon and Haven all declaring healthcare a priority inside twelve months in 2018 and 2019. Peer-reviewed AI matching dermatologists in 2017, three years before most people had heard of ChatGPT. The signals were never really about the technology. Each one was a permission a consumer gave themselves. Permission to research without asking. Permission to demand their data. Permission to expect everywhere and anytime. Permission to compare a hospital to Apple. Permission to skip the front door. Name the permission and you have found the signal. Five artifacts, each with a date and a source, and the same defensive industry response to all of them A six-marker test that tells you whether you are inside a signal while it is still a signal, not after Why the permission shift is the marker most teams miss, and the permission patients are taking right now The scoreboard for today: agentic AI as the new front door, the death of click-through, the restructuring of primary care, and voice The one current signal that breaks the pattern, and why ambient documentation moved fast when nothing else did The honest finding is uncomfortable. Three of today's four signals score 5 or 6 out of 6 on the same markers that flagged every past miss. The fourth, voice, scores about 3, and it shows what breaks the pattern. Ambient documentation moved quickly because it helps clinicians and patients in the same motion, so the internal politics line up instead of fighting. If you can name the permission your patients are taking right now, you have found the signal. The only question left is whether you act inside the window or wait for the deadline. Mentions from the Show: Pew Research Center, The Online Health Care Revolution, Rainie and Fox, November 2000: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2000/11/26/the-online-health-care-revolution/ Pew Research Center, Health Online 2013, Fox and Duggan, January 2013: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2013/01/15/health-online-2013-2/ deBronkart and Eysenbach, Gimme My Damn Data (and Let Patients Help!): The #GimmeMyDamnData Manifesto, JMIR, November 2019: https://www.jmir.org/2019/11/e17045/ Esteva et al., Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks, Nature, January 2017: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21056 Tom Ferguson and the e-Patient Scholars Working Group, e-Patients: How They Can Help Us Heal Healthcare, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2007: https://participatorymedicine.org/e-Patient_White_Paper_with_Afterword.pdf Tim Cook on CNBC's Mad Money, full transcript, January 8 2019: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/08/apple-ceo-tim-cook-interview-cnbc-jim-cramer-transcript.html Kyndryl, Healthcare Readiness Report, March 2026 (76% report more AI pilots than they can scale): https://www.kyndryl.com/in/en/about-us/news/2026/03/healthcare-readiness-report-findings Dave deBronkart, Meet e-Patient Dave, TED: https://www.ted.com/talks/dave_debronkart_meet_e_patient_dave Eric Topol, Deep Medicine, Basic Books, 2019: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/eric-topol/deep-medicine/9781541644649/ Eric Topol, The Patient Will See You Now, Basic Books, 2015 Clayton Christensen, Jerome Grossman, Jason Hwang, The Innovator's Prescription, McGraw-Hill, 2009 Dave deBronkart, Let Patients Help!, 2013 Society for Participatory Medicine: https://participatorymedicine.org/ TP483, The Market That Competition Forgot: https://touchpoint.health/podcast/tp483-the-market-that-competition-forgot/ TP478, The Journey Nobody Told Operations About: https://touchpoint.health/podcast/tp478-the-journey-nobody-told-operations-about/ TP457, The Patient Maze: Smarter Tools, Same Old Problems: https://touchpoint.health/podcast/tp457-the-patient-maze-smarter-tools-same-old-problems/ Reed Smith on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/reedtsmith/ Chris Boyer on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisboyer/ Chris Boyer website: http://www.christopherboyer.com/ Chris Boyer on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/chrisboyer.bsky.social Reed Smith on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/reedsmith.bsky.social Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

According to Pew Research Center, nearly 75% of Black Americans identify as Christian.It's well known that many of the first African American Christians were first exposed to Christianity in the midst of enslavement. This exposure could have been used as a tactic for control by enslavers or as a genuine attempt to lead individuals to salvation by missionaries. But, whether conversion happened out of fear or joy, the African religious practices that the enslaved people would have practiced back home, all but disappeared during American enslavement.But, when emancipation occurred in the 1860's, the newfound freedoms of the formerly enslaved included not only an autonomy of body and identity, but an autonomy, at least in theory, of what they believed, and how they worshipped. For many, this materialized in a continued commitment to Christianity. But for many others, there was now the freedom to begin engaging with their traditional African beliefs, which often looked very different than Christianity. And even formerly enslaved Christians may have begun practicing a form of Christianity that, while still committed to the gospel, had visible distinctions and different emphases from the white men who first evangelized to them. But, while African Americans technically had the right to religious freedom, practitioners of African religion still faced persecution, especially during the era of Jim Crow, where legally free black Americans were still oppressed by their white governments for nearly a century. Even today stigma around Voodoo and similar practices has made African religion a taboo in many communities.Harvard Professor Ahmad Greene-Hayes recently wrote a book called “Underworld Work,” which explores the nuances of African American religious practice in the era between emancipation and the Civil Rights Movement. I spoke with Greene-Hayes about the complexities of Black religion during Jim Crow and the ways many Americans misunderstand African Spiritualism.

It's Monday, June 8th, A.D. 2026. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Russian pastor labeled “terrorist” for speaking against Ukraine war On May 28th, Russian authorities labeled 74-year-old Baptist pastor Yuri Sipko to be a terrorist, reports International Christian Concern. As the former head of the Union of Evangelical Baptist Christians in Russia, he has spoken out against the war in Ukraine on social media. As a result, Russia launched a criminal case against him in August 2023, claiming he was spreading false information about military actions. At the time, Sipko said,  “They are looking for me to put me in prison because I've spoken the truth that Russia waged war on Ukraine,  People are dying, and everything is being destroyed. It's criminal, and they should not be doing this.” During the investigation, Sipko's home was raided, but he managed to escape. In Matthew 5:10, Jesus said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven.” Iran's missiles failed to hit Saudi Arabia or Bahrain On June 2nd, U.S. forces successfully defeated multiple Iranian ballistic missiles and drones, and conducted self-defense strikes on Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz in response to attempted attacks by Iran across the Middle East, reported the United States Central Command on X. Iran launched several ballistic missiles toward regional neighbors. However, all failed to hit their intended targets. Two Iranian missiles fired at Kuwait fell short or broke apart enroute, and three missiles launched at Bahrain were immediately intercepted by U.S. and Bahrain air defense forces. House resolution constrains Trump from military action against Iran In a vote of 215-208 on June 3rd, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure seeking to stop President Trump from taking further military action in Iran amid growing opposition to the war, reports the Associated Press. President Trump called the 215 representatives who passed the resolution "unpatriotic.” In a post on Truth Social, the president wrote: "In a meaningless vote, the House voted, 4 bad Republicans and all of the Dumocrats, to limit my War Powers, right in the middle of my final negotiations to end the War with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Who would do such an unpatriotic thing?" It is unclear how much legal force the House's measure will have. The White House described the move as an unconstitutional attempt to restrict presidential power. Four GOP Senators opposed Safeguard Voter Eligibility Act On June 4th, the U.S. Senate failed to pass the Safeguard Voter Eligibility Act which would require people to show documented proof of citizenship, reports Fox News. Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky voted against the motion, signaling that the SAVE America Act does not have the votes to pass. Appearing on Fox News, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah said this. LEE: “Americans overwhelmingly support the need for voter I.D. They overwhelmingly support the need to verify citizenship from those registered to vote in this country. That's why the overwhelming majority, a super majority, of Republican voters, of Democrat voters nationwide want the S.A.V.E America Act passed. And even want it passed before the midterm elections. “That cuts across the board in people of both political parties. The only place where this is even remotely controversial is in the halls of Congress with Democrats. We've got to get this done to make our elections safe and secure again.” Indeed, according to Pew Research Center, 83% of Americans favor requiring all voters to show government-issued photo ID to vote, including 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats. Trump beautifies Washington, D.C. Ahead of America's 250th birthday, President Donald Trump made a promise. TRUMP: “We're going to get all the graffiti off the marble. We're going to fix the roads and the medians, which are falling down all over the street. Washington, D.C. will become a symbol of beauty, security, freedom, and strength.” Specifically speaking, for nearly two decades, the Columbus Fountain in front of Washington's Union Station was nonfunctional. Now, water is flowing again after 19 years. Plus, all of the obscene graffiti that President Joe Biden had tolerated was power washed away. The work was completed thanks to President Donald Trump's executive order on "Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful." Appearing on CNN's State of the Union, Interior Secretary Doug Bergum said this. BERGUM: “The real scandal is not that we're fixing up monuments or making this capital beautiful again. The scandal should be, how in the world did we let our capital fall into such a disrepair? How did we fall into such a spot where celebrating American patriotism became partisan?” At a cabinet meeting, President Trump weighed in. TRUMP: “D.C. is looking beautiful, and the fountains are almost all open.” Most notably, the reflecting pool between the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial was in terrible disrepair.  After draining the pool and removing 12 truckloads of trash, they repaired the leaks in the pool's concrete slab and joints by applying a waterproof coating, and painted it “American flag” blue to improve the reflection.  After starting the filling process on June 4th, it was completely filled yesterday, June 7th. YouTuber announced abortion of Down syndrome baby And finally, YouTube influencer Jesse Ridgway, who has 4 million followers, is facing a massive backlash after he announced on X that he and his wife decided to abort their baby after the child was diagnosed with Down syndrome, reports LifeSiteNews.com. Horrifically, Ridgway stated that he and his wife researched Down syndrome and decided that it would be best for both the child and for his family if the baby was killed in the womb—and noted that over 90 percent of children diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted. He said, “50% of babies with Down syndrome have heart defects. 75% will have hearing challenges. Over 50% will have vision problems. … Sadly, the list is long. … As for us, we made a difficult decision that we believe, in the long-run, will be beneficial for our family. Thankfully, we had a choice.” Incidentally, despite frequent health difficulties, nearly 99 percent of people with Down syndrome report being happy with their lives; 96 percent like how they look; and 97 percent like who they are.  Dr. Calum Miller, a United Kingdom doctor and ethicist, said, “I'm sorry you murdered your child because he/she didn't pass quality control.” He pointed out that Ridgway had previously celebrated the fact that his dog had managed to survive a complicated surgery and was now living without kidneys. Columnist Mollie Hemingway wrote, “Killing your baby because he wasn't perfect in your eyes is so sad and dark and, yes, evil. Even if we didn't know how wonderful people with Down syndrome are. I pray you find Jesus. Life is beautiful.” And podcaster Brittany Hughes bluntly put it: “There is no way of framing this that will gain my sympathy. No poetic waxing, no begging for understanding, no tearful excuses. My heart breaks for this precious baby who was killed for the crime of having an extra chromosome by the two people who should have protected him or her with their own lives.” Proverbs 31:8 says, “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Monday, June 8th, in the year of our Lord 2026. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com.  Plus, you can get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

This week, we're looking at a sorely undercovered national story: the murder rate is declining at an incredible rate. At the same time, the suicide rate is headed the other way. To explore why that divergence has happened, we've got Pew Research Center's John Gramlich on the show to discuss the details. He wrote a piece looking at the most recent FBI and CDC data on gun murder and suicide. He said the results are remarkable. The murder rate is plummeting. It's back to pre-pandemic levels and shows no sign of leveling off. Gramlich said the decline is incredible and rare. He also described how the role of guns in murder has changed over time as well. The post-pandemic data shows that the portion of guns used in murders has shifted significantly. The same is true for the portion of gun deaths that are due to suicides rather than murders. Largely, Gramlich noted, because murders have fallen substantially while suicides have gone up a bit. Even though the gun suicide rate didn't climb dramatically, as the gun murder rate did in 2020, it has slowly climbed to near-record rates. Meanwhile, Gramlich said crime data from sources beyond the FBI and CDC indicate the gun murder rate is nearing record lows. Here's a link to John's piece: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/04/28/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-us/Special Guest: John Gramlich.

In this episode, we tackle a moment that is quietlyreshaping American households: the college graduate who walks across that stage in May and is back in their childhood bedroom by June. We will explore what this transition really looks like for both the graduate and the parents, why it is happening at historic rates, what the research tells us about the emotional and psychological weight of coming home, and what fathers can do to make this season one of the most powerful investments they will ever make in their adult child.This is not a conversation about failure. This is aconversation about fatherhood at a new level.REFERENCES & SOURCE NOTES1.      Weiner, S. (2024).Adjusting to Life After College: A Therapist's Guide to Moving Back Home. Apple Psychological. https://applepsychological.com/adjusting-to-life-after-college-a-therapists-guide-to-moving-back-home/2.     SAGE Scholars TuitionRewards. (2023). Returning Home after College: A Growing Trend or a NecessaryMove? https://www.tuitionrewards.com/newsroom/articles/386/returning-home-after-college-a-growing-trend-or-a-necessary-move3.     US News & WorldReport. (June 2025). How to Get Along When College Grads Move Back Home WithParents. https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2025-06-12/how-to-get-along-when-college-grads-move-back-home-with-parents4.     National Associationof Home Builders. (November 2025). Young Adults Are Once Again Moving BackHome. https://www.nahb.org/blog/2025/11/young-adults-are-once-again-moving-back-home5.     Pew Research Center.(2023). About a third of young adults ages 18–34 live with their parents. 6.     Federal Reserve Bankof Atlanta. (2024). Housing Affordability Index.

According to a 2020 Pew Research Center survey, more American Jews cite having a sense of humor as important to their Jewish identity than things like keeping kosher and studying Torah. Humor has long been associated with Jewish identity—from Jerry Seinfeld to Mel Brooks, Adam Sandler to Joan Rivers.On this episode of How God Works, we'll talk with the latest member of the long tradition of highly successful Jewish comedians, Emmy award-winning actor, writer and comedian, Robby Hoffman, about how Jewish people have shaped comedy, how comedy has shaped the Jewish people, and the role humor plays in her life and approach to faith. We'll also ask if humor itself can be a spiritual practice—a way to cope with life's difficulties and maybe even touch the transcendent. Robby Hoffman is a writer, actor and comedian. Her Netflix stand-up special Robby Hoffman: Wake Up debuted in December 2025. She recently appeared on the HBO series Rooster. She was also nominated for an Emmy in 2025 for her guest role on HBO's Hacks. She is the host of the Too Far podcast on Patreon. Learn more about her work on her website where you can also find tickets to her tour.Also mentioned on this episode:Jennifer Caplan, learn more about her work and find links to her books on her website.

Learn whether manufactured homes could be your path to homeownership and how to get ahead of a tax bill from your investments. Could a decades-old federal rule be standing between you and an affordable home? Hosts Sean Pyles, CFP®, and Elizabeth Ayoola are joined by senior news editor Rick VanderKnyff, along with mortgage writers Abby Badach Doyle and Kate Wood, to explore whether manufactured homes could offer a real path to homeownership for buyers priced out of the traditional market. They dig into how modern manufactured homes have changed, why the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act is drawing renewed attention to an obscure chassis rule from 1976, and what you need to know about financing, appreciation, and whether these homes are finally having their rebrand moment. Then, investing and taxes editor Bella Avila helps answer a listener's question about how to handle a growing tax bill from investment income. They discuss how taxable accounts can trigger unexpected tax bills, how to decide between adjusting your W-4 and making estimated tax payments, and why strategies like stashing money in a HYSA or CD might not work out the way you'd hope. During this episode, data cited about manufactured home relocation rates was attributed to the Pew Research Center. The correct attribution is The Pew Charitable Trusts.  Locked Out: 3 Outdated Myths About Manufactured Homes https://www.nerdwallet.com/mortgages/news/locked-out-manufactured-homes-affordable-housing-crisis  Subscribe to MoneyNerd, our podcast's weekly email newsletter, at https://moneynerd-nerdwallet.beehiiv.com/  Want us to review your budget? Fill out this form — completely anonymously if you want — and we might feature your budget in a future segment! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScK53yAufsc4v5UpghhVfxtk2MoyooHzlSIRBnRxUPl3hKBig/viewform?usp=header To send the Nerds your money questions, call or text the Nerd hotline at 901-730-6373 or email podcast@nerdwallet.com. Like what you hear? Please leave us a review and tell a friend. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Pew Research Center is out with a new report exploring which topics American churchgoers say they hear about from their clergy. KMOX Religion Editor Fred Bodimer found about more about the survey when he talked with Pew Senior Researcher Becka Alper.

In 2024, just 18% of Americans said religion is gaining influence. Then came the double-digit jump. Pew Research's Chip Rotolo has the numbers — and they're striking. Two minutes. Real impact. Leave a review: lovethepodcast.com/politicsandreligion Chip Rotolo is a research associate at Pew Research Center studying religion's role in public life. His team's latest report finds a sharp reversal in how Americans view religion's influence — and raises harder questions about Christian nationalism, what "Christian values" actually means to different people, and why the data looks so different depending on which party you ask. Calls to Action ✅ If this episode resonates, consider sharing it with someone who might need a reminder that disagreement doesn't have to mean dehumanization. ✅ Check out our Substack: coreysnathan.substack.com ✅ Leave a review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen: lovethepodcast.com/politicsandreligion ✅ Subscribe to Talkin' Politics & Religion Without Killin' Each Other on your favorite podcast platform. ✅ Watch the full conversation and subscribe on YouTube: youtube.com/@politicsandreligion Key Takeaways A genuine vibe shift. After hitting an all-time low in 2024, the share of Americans who say religion is gaining influence has jumped sharply — now matching levels last seen in 2002. Christian nationalism is contested territory. Pew doesn't label anyone a Christian nationalist, but the questions associated with those views consistently land around 15% of Americans — while a much larger share wants Christian values to play some role in public life. Party drives everything. On nearly every question in this survey, the most striking splits are by political affiliation, not religion. How you ask matters as much as what you ask. Question wording, sequence, and consistency over time are what make trend data trustworthy — and Chip pulls back the curtain on how Pew gets that right. About Chip Rotolo Chip Rotolo is a research associate at Pew Research Center, where he studies religion's role in public life, religious engagement over time, and the intersection of religion and politics. He holds a PhD in sociology from Notre Dame, an MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary, and a BA from UNC Chapel Hill. Links and Resources Pew Research Center: pewresearch.org Chip on Instagram: @chip.rotolo Leave a review: lovethepodcast.com/politicsandreligion Connect on Social Media Corey is @coreysnathan on all the socials... Substack LinkedIn Facebook Instagram Twitter Threads Bluesky TikTok The data has opinions. So does God. Turns out, so do we.

Inflation continues to strain household budgets, but a new Pew Research Center report found that paychecks generally kept pace with rising prices over the long term. The analysis showed inflation-adjusted buying power increased between 11% and 22% between 1999 and 2025. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed with the latest news from a leading Black-owned & controlled media company: https://aurn.com/newsletter Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Two minutes. Real impact. Leave a review: lovethepodcast.com/politicsandreligion What if the outrage itself is the addiction? In this solo episode, Corey Nathan draws on scripture, neuroscience, Dr. Seuss, and two very personal stories to ask a harder question than who's right: are we more hooked on the fight than committed to what the fight is supposed to be about? From a son's vaccine hesitancy to a buddy who loves Pete Hegseth, Corey makes the case that the heavy lift of staying in the room with people we deeply disagree with isn't just good manners. It's the whole ballgame. Calls to Action ✅ If this conversation resonates, consider sharing it with someone who believes connection across difference still matters. ✅ Subscribe to Corey's Substack: coreysnathan.substack.com ✅ Leave a review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen: lovethepodcast.com/politicsandreligion ✅ Subscribe to Talkin' Politics & Religion Without Killin' Each Other on your favorite podcast platform. ✅ Watch the full conversation and subscribe on YouTube: youtube.com/@politicsandreligion Connect on Social Media Corey is @coreysnathan on all the socials… Substack LinkedIn Facebook Instagram Twitter Threads Bluesky TikTok Thanks to our Sponsors and Partners Thanks to Pew Research Center (pewresearch.org) for making today's conversation possible. Proud members of The Democracy Group Hard conversations, conducted with honesty and care. That's the whole project.

Why does it seem so much easier for men to claim large blocks of leisure time for themselves than it is for women? This week, based on a listener question, we are asking: What is the mom equivalent of golf? We unpack the “leisure time gender gap,” why women's downtime is often treated as optional, and how motherhood changes the way we think about rest, hobbies, and friendship. We discuss: Why golf has become a uniquely protected, and male-coded, form of leisure How parenting young children turns leisure into a zero-sum game Practical ideas from listeners for creating more intentional leisure time which includes connection with friends Here are links to some of the resources mentioned in the episode: Katie Garrity for Scary Mommy: ⁠⁠Is There A Women's Hobby Equivalent To Men's Golfing Habits?⁠⁠ Bruce Drake for Pew Research Center: ⁠⁠Another Gender Gap: Men Spend More Time in Leisure Activities⁠⁠ Carolina Aragão for Pew Research Center: ⁠⁠Working husbands in U.S. have more leisure time than working wives do, especially among those with children⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Check out the whole thread of excellent ideas in our Facebook group! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode, Lauren & Matt gleefully share data from a recent Pew Research Center report confirming what we already knew: print books are alive and well. We unpack the survey results and what they mean for us, indie authors, and the publishing industry as a whole.Listen wherever you get your podcasts, or watch the video episode on YouTube!Dive Deeper

What happens when the stress of parenting slowly replaces the friendship, intimacy, and teamwork that once held a marriage together? For many couples, the transition into parenthood introduces emotional exhaustion, communication breakdowns, and daily tension that quietly reshapes the atmosphere of the home. Research consistently shows that marital satisfaction often declines after children enter the picture, leaving many families struggling to maintain emotional connection while navigating the demands of everyday life. According to research from the Gottman Institute, approximately 66% to 70% of married couples experience a significant decline in marital satisfaction within the first three years after having children. Additional findings suggest that nearly 47% of parents admit they remain together primarily for the sake of their children despite feeling emotionally disconnected from one another. These realities highlight how unresolved conflict, chronic stress, and ineffective communication can quietly transform the emotional climate of a household. At the same time, families overwhelmingly recognize the importance of emotional connection and partnership inside the home. Research from the Pew Research Center found that nearly 70% of American parents consider open communication and emotional connection “very important” to a successful marriage. Additionally, 62% of married adults identified sharing household responsibilities as a major contributor to marital satisfaction and long-term relationship stability. In this insightful and deeply practical episode, relational counselor and licensed marriage and family therapist Jan Talen shares how families can move from emotional chaos to emotional calm through intentional communication, relational awareness, and practical behavioral tools. Drawing from more than 35 years of counseling experience, Jan introduces listeners to the “DNA Way to Communicate,” a framework designed to help couples rebuild unity, reduce conflict, and create a calmer emotional environment for both marriage and parenting. Through her “Family Crazy to Family Calm” approach, Jan explains how couples can begin by clearly defining the desires and dreams they have for their marriage and family, learning the necessary relational skills required to strengthen connection, and intentionally applying those skills in everyday life. Her work focuses on helping couples become a steady, united parenting team while creating space for wisdom, emotional safety, and long-term relational health inside the home. This conversation explores the realities many couples quietly face after children enter the picture, the emotional cost of unresolved tension within a household, and why calm communication is often one of the greatest gifts parents can offer both their marriage and their children. Jan also discusses the importance of practical emotional skills, integrating spiritual principles when desired, and helping families create sustainable habits that foster emotional resilience and lasting connection. Whether your household feels overwhelmed by stress, strained by communication challenges, or simply disconnected from the peace you once envisioned for your family, this episode offers practical guidance, hope, and actionable tools for creating healthier relationships and a calmer home environment.     For more information: https://www.usandkids.com/ Take the Quiz: https://info.focusonthefamily.ca/marriage-assessment Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 3562: Dr. Jack Stoltzfus explores the difficult balance between supporting young adults financially and encouraging long-term independence. He offers practical guidance on when financial help can strengthen self-sufficiency, when it can create dependency, and how parents can provide support without undermining responsibility or healthy boundaries. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://parentslettinggo.com/to-fund-or-not-to-fund-your-young-adult/ Quotes to ponder: "It's okay to say “no.”" "Just because you can fund doesn't mean you should." "Most parents have had to struggle at times to make ends meet, and as a result, they are stronger and more confident about their ability to face financial crises." Episode references: Pew Research Center: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/09/04/a-majority-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-live-with-their-parents-for-the-first-time-since-the-great-depression/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Young people are walking away from church at higher rates than ever, but as research from Pew Research Center shows, that doesn't necessarily mean they're rejecting God. In this episode, guest host Elijah Fernandez is joined by co-hosts Allyson Williams and Caleb Davilmar to share their perspectives on this shift. Together, they explore the rise of “deconstruction” culture, the relevance of church for this new generation, and what it all means for the future of faith. This is a real conversation about faith, culture, and the future of the church. FREE EBook: https://online.flippingbook.com/shelf/66917R.O.C Merch: https://henryfernandez.org/?s=podcast&post_type=productE-Mail Correspondence:Subject:  Did You Catch Last Night's Premiere Episode?Young people are walking away from church at higher rates than ever before, but according to research from the Pew Research Center, that doesn't necessarily mean they're rejecting God.In their very first episode as hosts, guest host Elijah Fernandez is joined by co-hosts Allison Wilson and Caleb Davilmar for an honest and eye-opening conversation about faith, church culture, and the growing disconnect many young people feel toward organized religion today.Together, they share their generation's perspective on deconstruction, relevance, purpose, and what the future of faith could look like for Gen Z and young millennials.This powerful conversation is real, relatable, and designed to help you become the best version of yourself.Watch or listen now and join the conversation.Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@HenryFernandezministriesSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5TKoCOjx1k67ANL4oy4lvJApple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/henry-fernandez-podcast/id1510552618 

Does your teen shut down, give one-word answers, snap back, or avoid hard conversations altogether?If so, the issue may not be that your teen does not care. They may not yet have the skills to communicate when they feel overwhelmed, judged, anxious, embarrassed, or defensive.In this episode, Tess Connolly, LCSW, explores teen communication coaching and why communication is one of the most important life skills tweens and teens can build.Communication is the foundation of every relationship your teen has — with you, friends, teachers, coaches, siblings, future partners, and eventually coworkers and college roommates.CDC data shows that many teens are carrying significant emotional stress, with 39.7% of high school students reporting persistent sadness or hopelessness in 2023. Pew Research Center also reports that 96% of teens use the internet daily, and 46% are online almost constantly, which means teens are communicating all the time — but not always in ways that build real-life relationship skills.In this episode, you'll learn:Why teens often shut down during parent conversationsWhat teen communication coaching looks like in real lifeHow to help your teen speak up without forcing them to talkWhy tone, timing, and body language matter before the words even beginSimple scripts parents can use when teens are defensive, rude, or quietHow single parents can lower communication pressure while still holding boundariesThe “Notice, Name, Need” framework for calmer conversationsIf communication with your tween or teen has become tense, distant, or reactive, book a 45-minute Parent Reset Call with Tess. Together, you can look at the patterns happening in your home and identify practical ways to rebuild trust, reduce conflict, and help your teen open up.⭐Got screen time problems at home? Get the Tech Reset Agreement here

Public trust in the Supreme Court is at a 30-year low, according to Pew Research Center. For some, this month marked a turning point in perceptions of its legitimacy.The court recently ruled in Louisiana v. Callais. Its decision undermined a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that protected minority voters and sought to prevent racial discrimination in elections.Following the court's ruling, Tennessee's GOP-controlled legislature passed a new congressional map, dismantling the state's majority-Black district. The map gives Republicans a competitive advantage in all nine districts ahead of the state's midterms. Other red states are now scrambling to redraw their congressional maps as well.Justice Samuel Alito justified the court's ruling by claiming that Black voter turnout, both nationwide and in Louisiana, exceeded white voter turnout in two of the five recent presidential elections, writing that the kind of discrimination the Voting Rights Act was designed to prevent no longer exists.However, reporting from The Guardian found that Alito's claim was based on misleading data from the Justice Department.As trust in the Supreme Court continues to remain low, calls for reform grow. In this installment of our weekly politics series, “If You Can Keep It,” we unpack what that reform might actually look like and what's at stake for our democracy if it doesn't happen.Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

On Monday, May 4, the Supreme Court issued a temporary stay on a lower court's order that mifepristone, a drug commonly used in early-term abortions, can only be prescribed and dispensed in person. The order pauses the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals's decision to prevent the drug from being accessed by mail. In a brief order, Justice Samuel Alito, who oversees appeals from the 5th Circuit, paused that court's order until May 11, restoring telehealth access to the drug and giving challengers until May 7 to respond.Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!Do Americans see each other as immoral?Back in March, the headline was everywhere: “Americans Especially Likely To View Fellow Citizens as Morally Bad,” the title of a 25-country study from the Pew Research Center. Associate Editor Lindsey Knuth interviewed one of the study's coauthors, Jonathan Evans, and Pew's associate director of global attitudes research, Laura Silver, to talk about Americans' national pride, partisan differences, and the state of professional polling. You can listen to the interview here.You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠ todays “Under the radar” story ⁠here⁠ and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: How do you think the Supreme Court should rule on the challenge to remote mifepristone prescriptions? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Audrey Moorehead and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Associate Editor Lindsey Knuth came across some very interesting and concerning headlines that she decided to investigate further. Both studies of the concerning stories Lindsey found came out of the Pew Research Center and were authored by Jonathan Evans, senior researcher at Pew, and Laura Silver, associate director of Pew's global attitude research. They dive into the differences between Democrat and Republican responses to these findings, how much partisanship plays a role in US finding and which American qualities US citizens are most proud of. Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was hosted by Lindsey Knuth and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Six years removed from COVID, the data tells a more nuanced story than most headlines. In this episode of The Mobilized Church Podcast, we look at insights from Pew Research Center, Gallup, Barna Group, and Lifeway Research to understand where the Church and mission field really stand today.Yes, decline may be slowing, but stabilization is not transformation. Spiritual openness is still there, especially among younger generations, but it's often unformed and fragmented. At the same time, rising anxiety and renewed interest in faith point to a deep hunger that has yet to become real discipleship.This episode challenges the Church to look beyond attendance and ask the deeper question: are we actually forming disciple-makers?

A recent public opinion study by Pew Research Center shows what Americans think about the morality of abortion…and many other topics. There's good news, bad news, and weird news. We break it all down on this episode of The 40 Days for Life Podcast.