Search headlines

A unique antibody system may help explain bats' unusual tolerance of viruses

Researchers found that vesper bats use two separate sets of genes to build antibodies ‪—‬ a rare evolutionary quirk that may give them different ways to fight infection.

Jul 30 • 12:53 PM EDT • Science • livescience.com

Safety a top priority as more heart procedures move to outpatient settings

The push to move certain procedures to ambulatory surgical centers is one of the biggest business trends in electrophysiology. Medical societies are watching this space closely to ensure high quality remains the goal.

Jul 30 • 12:41 PM EDT • Business • cardiovascularbusiness.com

This new Google Earth feature will change how you explore the world

Google Earth now uses Gemini's Nano Banana 2 to generate images and visual explainers from real-world locations on the web.

Jul 30 • 8:30 AM EDT • Technology • androidauthority.com

The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift

This edition of PN is made possible by paid subscribers. Become one ⬇️ 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps. Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) [ Harmeet Dhillon demonstrates danger of posting through it ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Liz Dye · Jul 29 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.” Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies. While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements. Science for dummies Part of how you can tell this isn’t a document about science is that you are immediately faced with an absolute wall of business-speak of the worst sort. Did you know we must “tightly couple our science and technology enterprises to ensure that groundbreaking ideas invented in the United States are rapidly prototyped, tested, manufactured, and scaled domestically”? You do now! That tone isn’t surprising, because Kratsios has no background in science or research. He has a bachelor’s in political science and spent most of his career working for Peter Thiel at Thiel Capital. After a stint in the first Trump administration as Chief Technology Officer, where he also did not do any science, Kratsios was tasked in 2020 with overseeing the Pentagon’s research budget for a brief time, a position that, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “carries a great deal of power in terms of dictating investment allocations.” He spent the Biden years at Scale AI as “head of strategy,” which you will also note is neither a science nor a research job. But Scale AI has contracts with the Department of Defense and, as the Washington Post wrote in 2023, “has been aggressively pitching itself as the company that will help the US military in its existential battle with China.” And now you have the necessary background for our new golden age, which is going to be a golden age of taking money away from scientists and universities and giving it to companies like Scale AI. A note from Aaron: Working with brilliant contributors like Lisa takes resources. If you aren’t already a paid subscriber, please become one to support our work. 👇 Subscribe In a genuinely galling move, Katsios spends a lot of time slamming universities because of “administrative burdens on researchers” and the “well-documented inefficiencies” in academia, the message being that those damn universities waste the time of amazing researchers with paperwork. Except it’s the administration that is attempting to impose inefficient, unnecessary burdens on those researchers with a proposed Office of Management and Budget rule that would require senior political appointees to approve every science grant and ensure it aligns with Trump’s personal priorities. Researchers would also have to seek prior government approval to attend conferences or publicize their research. And political appointees could terminate any grant at any time if they feel like it. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) [ The murder of expertise ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) Lisa Needham · Jun 11 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) But when it comes to AI, we’re going to “restore permissionless innovation.” The report proposes to give lucky ducky innovators a pile of cash up front for grants lasting five years or longer, saying “awards should be fully-funded in year one, with all resources earmarked upfront, to minimize administrative burdens and reduce pressure for researchers to generate intermediate results to secure continued funding.” Yeah, wouldn’t want to have to make the Very Special Tech Bros show results or get money parceled out year by year like the plebes at universities. The report also proposes that we should have “fast grants” with “simplified applications requiring just a few pages of writing” because that is definitely how science works, just writing a bit off the dome and getting some cash. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) [ Tech elites are turning AI into ChatGPTrump ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Paul Waldman · July 29, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Oh, and we should have prizes and challenges, where multiple teams compete. The proposed prizes include incentives like “advance procurement commitments,” which means the federal government agrees to buy whatever is being developed. There’s also “regulatory fast-tracking,” making sure all those great AI thingies don’t have to wait too long to be unleashed on a market. These aren’t incentives to do science. These are incentives to develop things with tax dollars that you can then sell to the government for more tax dollars. In the suggestion that might be the most unhinged, the most very opposite of how both government and research work, our new age will include “golden tickets.” That’s where an individual reviewer in an agency — yes, just one person — can “recommend unconventional proposals that may not pass consensus-driven review panels” because somehow this will “surface valuable ideas too divisive for committees and attract higher quality reviewers by empowering them to exercise independent scientific judgment.” Yes, that’s saying that a random person in an agency should be able to shovel money at some idea even if it can’t pass a review panel, and that the opportunity to do so will attract better employees because apparently all the best minds in science are chomping at the bit to be allowed to unilaterally fund AI research based on their personal vibes. But that isn’t at all how actual science works, and actual scientists aren’t unhappy about review panels. They work collaboratively, not siloed in some secret race to create the next AI chatbot. A 2020 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research examined whether peer review panels succeed in helping agencies predict which research ideas will best advance science. Peer review was better at finding “diamond in the rough” applicants than a single government program official. How about that. Trump always wants a taste It’s painfully clear that what Katsios is trying to do here is turn the whole of government science research and funding into the sort of “move fast and break things” paradigm that is the hallmark of big tech. That method works to line the pockets of tech executives, but it isn’t science. There’s a reason the government funds different kinds of research than private tech companies do. What Katsios either fails to understand or deliberately ignores is that the federal government is the main funder of basic research precisely because it can take a long time for it to bear fruit and is not intended to be profitable as such. “Basic” here does not mean rudimentary or simple, but rather research that is designed to advance scientific knowledge instead of achieving a specific outcome or product. Big tech companies don’t widely fund that sort of research, because it doesn’t make them money. Industry dollars account for only about 20 percent of basic research funding, while the government contributes around 60 percent. Big tech companies and startups do, however, rely on and benefit from that basic research. A 2019 study found that 35 percent of all patents obtained by venture-backed startups from 1976 to 2016 cited federally supported research. Basic research funded by the NIH contributed to every single drug the FDA approved from 2010 to 2016. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) [ The Saudi nuclear farce and governance by whim and meme ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Noah Berlatsky · Jul 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Unlike inventing the next ChatGPT, actual science is slow and iterative. Government funding of research that, on its face, would not appear to lead to any big new invention is actually what underpins those big new inventions. If the government hadn’t funded research into desert lizard venom, we wouldn’t know about semaglutide, and we wouldn’t have Ozempic. If research scientists hadn’t studied how bees optimize nectar foraging within a colony, we wouldn’t have the algorithm that assigns internet traffic across computer servers. The report assiduously ignores that a symbiotic, profitable relationship between the federal government, universities, and private companies already exists. Each federal research dollar generates about $1.50 to $3.00 in long-term economic benefits. The $36 billion the government awarded in NIH research funding in fiscal year 2025 generated $94 billion in new economic activity. Trump’s proposed new golden age is intended to strip those billions from universities, resulting in the dismantling of departments and the shuttering of labs. But Katsios has a plan for that: Universities should just become trade schools to churn out no-show STEM degrees! “Require universities and community colleges to embed practical technical training and externships into STEM curricula. Let hands-on experience and industry credentials count toward degrees.” It’s quite the feat to, on the one hand, strip schools of funding for scientific research while simultaneously demanding to control what is taught and, oh, also, colleges need to give degrees to employees at big tech companies just for being employees at big tech companies. The new golden age would also exacerbate the brain drain Trump’s policies have already caused. Nature found that in the first quarter of 2025, US scientists submitted 32 percent more job applications abroad than in 2024. A March 2025 poll by Nature of roughly 1,600 scientists found that over 1,200 said they were considering leaving the country. Europe is investing $565 million to make it a “magnet for researchers” and provide funding for scientists who relocate. The new golden age is also about embedding Trump’s xenophobia into the fabric of American science. The report complains of an “over-reliance on foreign students” that “creates a security challenge our institutions are ill-equipped to address” and that a “reliance on foreign talent sidelines American students.” This is, to put it mildly, nonsense. International students pay far higher tuition and often receive no financial aid. Their tuition dollars are what make it possible for American students to get financial aid. In the 2023-2024 school year alone, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported over 378,000 jobs. Those 1.1 million international students accounted for only six percent of the total number of students in higher education that year, but were such an economic engine that for every three international students, one job was created or supported. It’s impossible not to wonder whether part of Trump’s loathing for universities and their leading role in scientific research is that there is no way for him to corrupt the process and make money off it in the same way he can by giving millions and billions to Silicon Valley types who, in turn, give him millions in cash. There’s no way for his children to invest in universities that the government then gives no-bid contracts to, fattening the family’s bottom line, which is pretty much the Trump sons’ current venture capital practice. Trump and Katsios’s view of science is narrow, cramped, and wrong. We’re not in a crisis, we’re not a failed state. We’ve been a science superpower for decades, and the only thing that threatens that is Donald Trump. Tech bros are already living high off the hog in this administration. They don’t need any more of our tax dollars. Hopefully this new golden age never comes to pass. Thanks for reading Public Notice. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share We’ll be back with more tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s PN, please do your part to keep us free by signing up for a paid subscription. 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 Thanks for reading, and for your support.

Jul 30 • 8:12 AM EDT • Science • publicnotice.co

The US ‘golden age’ science strategy: what Europeans need to know

The US has unveiled what officials claim is the most radical overhaul of the public R&D system in a generation, which if implemented could have significant implications for transatlantic research collaboration. Science: A New Golden Age derides universities as “legacy institutions” and instead wants to prioritise funding on technological challenges, new research labs and funding that follows individual scientists, rather than being linked to their institutions. “Too much of our research enterprise has come to serve itself rather than the scientists within it,” writes Michael Kratsios, director of the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the only named author of the report. “Federal funding agencies should support a broader range of performers.” But some critics argue that the strategy is a smokescreen, using genuine problems in academia as an excuse to further weaken US universities, which US vice-president JD Vance has labelled “the enemy..”Even as it talks of a “golden age” for science, the White House has proposed halving the 2027 budget of the US National Science Foundation (NSF), and has put forward double-digit cuts for other funding bodies, such as the National Institutes for Health. It asked for similarly steep savings in 2026, but Congress stopped them going through. Science: A New Golden Age says success will be measured by the extent to which scientists are “free” to pursue the most “vital questions,,” painting academia as currently hidebound by bureaucracy, sluggishness and consensual conservatism. And yet the Trump administration is simultaneously planning new rules that will hand political appointees unprecedented powers to screen and cancel grants. The report has pretentions to be the successor to Science: The Endless Frontier, the seminal 1945 document in which presidential science advisor Vannevar Bush set out the case for post-war government funding of basic research, helping to spur the creation of funders such as the NSF. Even the title page font is the same. But it remains unclear if the latest report will leave anything like as lasting a legacy.Here, Science|Business explains some of the biggest proposed changes in Science: A New Golden Age, and how Europeans think it might change the landscape of their biggest science partner.Universities under fireA key target of the report are US universities, which it repeatedly suggests are outmoded as research institutions. It criticises the NSF for channelling resources “overwhelmingly to a single type of performer, the university-based, principal investigator-led research group..” Universities “extract” money from researchers’ grants to support “growing administrative bloat,” alongside legitimate uses. The Trump administration has been trying to cut the overhead costs in federal research grants that flow to universities. Instead, new institutions are being built. In May, the NSF announced it would spend $1.5 billion on two new so-called X-Labs, focused on scientific instrumentation and quantum systems. The idea is that they fill a niche in the landscape, tackling problems that are too big for a university lab, but too early stage for private start-up funding. Parallel with Europe?This shift to new research organisations parallels moves in Europe to set up new innovation agencies, such as Germany’s Sprind, the UK’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency, and the EU’s European Innovation Council. The Dutch and French governments are looking to set up their own entities too. There’s now an emerging consensus, evident in a number of new strategies, that public R&D needs to be shaken up, Charles McIvor, an economist at the OECD, has written in response to Kratsios’s plans. “What stands out for me across these strategies [in the US, Germany, South Korea and Japan] is that governments are realising that the old ways of delivering STI [science, technology and innovation] programming no longer works,” he said in a LinkedIn post. Metascience wins?The document is, at least on the face of it, also a big win for some policy thinkers in the US who want far more experimentation with new forms of research grant and institution.It name-checks a litany of new public R&D ideas, from focused research organisations and advance market commitments to “golden tickets,” which allow grant reviewers the power to hand applicants money without requiring the consensus of other review panellists.Related articlesEuropean researchers sound the alarm that Trump rule changes will hit cooperationFocused research organisations: what are they, and how do you set them up? NIH turmoil risks reciprocal EU-US access to health research funding In addition, every federal research funding agency should set up a metascience unit, the strategy says, “with authority to run controlled experiments on review and funding mechanisms.” The UK has already set one up, the strategy points out. This mirrors recommendations to the European Commission. In 2024, a report led by former Portuguese science minister Manuel Heitor also advised the EU to set up an “experimental unit” to test out new methods of funding research. So far, however, Brussels hasn’t put forward any plans to do so. Bypass universitiesBut there’s a worry that the Trump administration is using the metascience movement to justify an overhaul of public R&D that punishes universities, which it sees as centres of political resistance. Last year, it threatened to cut Harvard University’s federal funding unless it hired and admitted a “critical mass” of new faculty and students to create “viewpoint diversity” across campus. It’s also attempted to strip academics of funding for working on politically forbidden areas, like LGBTIQ people’s health.The new strategy appears to be a “move to bypass the power of universities full stop and allow funders and political bureaucracies to handpick the projects and people who will execute them,” said Jean-Claude Burgelman, a former senior official in the Commission’s research directorate, on LinkedIn.The EU’s science counsellor in Washington, Florent Bernard, wrote that the plans risk diverting public research funding so that it “solely serves private interests.” “Who, if not independent universities, will do research that demonstrates the impact of tobacco on lung cancer or the role of human activities in our current climate crisis?” he wrote.Should we take it seriously?“I would view the overall document as a bad faith argument,” said Cole Donovan, director of science policy at the campaigning group Stand Up for Science, and a former OSTP official. “I don’t see the project itself as something that can be isolated from the broader attack on the system.” He thinks the argument that academia has become dysfunctional and in need of radical reform is being deployed as part of a “PR argument” to legitimate moves against US scientists. The strategy presents ideas like metascience units as new, whereas there were moves to set them up at the NSF during the previous administration of Joe Biden, Donovan said. The other caveat here is that the OSTP has limited power to carry out any of these recommendations. While Kratsios has issued a memo to research agencies telling them to implement the recommendations in the report, he doesn’t have direct budgetary control. “As a former OSTPer myself, this does not seem like a document that is realistic,” said Donovan.

Jul 30 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • sciencebusiness.net

Inflammation may trigger persistent 'out-of-body' experiences, emerging research hints

Researchers are investigating whether immune dysfunction can help explain dissociative disorders.

Jul 30 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • livescience.com

Sheet metal, Plainview dentist, data leak make Lubbock business news

Business Reporter Alana Edgin reviews recent Lubbock area businesses news and hints at upcoming articles in the Around the Hub column.

Jul 30 • 5:30 AM EDT • Business • lubbockonline.com

Business journalism studies took her to the White House | UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media

The story by UNC Hussman alumni Brennan Doherty ’19 and video by John Roberts ’16 (M.A.) was originally published on unc.edu. This story is part of a four-part series on Carolina alumni working in Washington, D.C. Soon after her 2015 graduation from UNC-Chapel Hill, Megan Cassella was an intern for the Reuters news agency, eagerly awaiting and prepping for a special assignment. “Every now and then they needed an intern to run over to the White House last minute,” Cassella said. “You have to send your information the night before, so I started proactively sending my information to the White House every single night to be able to go the next day if they ever needed an intern.” Since then, she’s made many return trips to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in a career that’s included roles at Reuters, Politico, Barron’s and now CNBC, where she works as an on-air Washington correspondent. A longtime newswriter, Cassella made the move to TV in 2024, appearing on broadcasts multiple times daily to report on the biggest political and business stories. But the keys to doing a good job — knowing how to research, asking insightful questions, building relationships and explaining complex topics to a broad audience — remain the same. Did you know: Outside of the state of North Carolina, the Washington region is home to the largest concentration of Tar Heel alumni in the country. Cassella’s time as a Tar Heel was crucial in sharpening those skills, both in the UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media and through roles at student-run publications like The Daily Tar Heel. She excelled in Carolina’s business journalism program with former professor Chris Roush, which led to an internship at The Charlotte Observer and helped Cassella find her journalistic niche. A data journalism course with Associate Professor Ryan Thornburg taught her how to find stories in numbers, and former professor Paul O’Connor’s reporting class took Cassella to the North Carolina Capitol weekly, where she gained invaluable experience interviewing politicians. “Those hands-on experiences that Carolina gave me really kept my interest and have really benefited me since I’ve been up here in D.C.,” said Cassella. “I have UNC to thank for the fact that I even went into business journalism in the first place.” Megan Cassella ’15 “You’ve got to thrive on adrenaline in this job. You’ve got to do well with last-minute changes, with running by the seat of your pants.” Megan Cassella ’15 ‘There’s nothing else like it’ In recent months, Cassella has reported live from the G7 Summit in Geneva, covered the latest developments in the U.S.-Iran war and followed changes to trade policy, including tariffs. “Anything in this realm that influences Wall Street, I’ll be covering,” Cassella said. Her working hours are long and variable. After waking up, Cassella immediately checks her phone to see what news broke overnight. By 8:15 a.m., she usually learns which newscasts she’ll be on, and then she heads to the newsroom, White House or wherever her assignment is. “We want you in the 9 a.m. show and the 11, and then the 3 o’clock show wants you, too,” Cassella said, referring to a hypothetical day. If Cassella gets an exclusive or major news breaks, she might be told, “We want that on TV right now.” Within five minutes, she’d be expected to get to the camera, figure out what to say and deliver the news to a live audience. “It’s exciting. It’s nerve-wracking,” Cassella said. “But there’s nothing else like it.” A well-rounded education Cassella grew up in Maryland, the youngest of four kids. Her oldest brother, Brian Cassella ’05, attended Carolina, became a photojournalist and recently won a Pulitzer Prize. She remembers visiting campus as a young child and loving it. “I just always wanted to go,” she said, and that desire grew when she, like her brother, gravitated toward journalism. But it wasn’t just the journalism school that drew Cassella to Carolina. “It was also the whole liberal arts curriculum,” she said. “Even though I always wanted to be a journalist, I got to college, and I sort of felt I had to think about other things. I had to explore my options and see if that’s what I really wanted.” Did you know: In April UNC-Chapel Hill opened its Carolina in the Capital office in Washington. She combined her journalism schooling with a global studies major and a history minor. That broad range of academic experiences in Chapel Hill molded her, preparing Cassella for a career that’s taken her to the highest levels of political journalism and inside the Oval Office. “When you sit back and remember you’re actually sitting inside the White House and asking questions of the president, it’s a cool feeling,” Cassella said. “No matter who is in office, no matter what administration or party, it’s a privilege to be there.” Megan Cassella on… Being a Tar Heel in Washington: I run into Tar Heels all the time. My husband’s a Tar Heel. We actually met here in Washington, not at Carolina, even though we were the same class. Probably most of our friends are still Tar Heels. Even up here in D.C., we all get together for games and March Madness. And through work, there’s Tar Heels all over the place. It’s often used as a connection. Favorite Franklin Street spot: When we go back, our first stop is always IP3. That’s more my husband’s doing than mine. In college, I was a huge Spanky’s fan. Felt like it was a classic spot. May it rest in peace. Advice to journalism students: Reps, reps, reps! Nothing beats the experience you’ll gain by simply starting to do the work — asking the questions, reporting and writing the stories, doing the TV hits. When you can, go places in person. Talk to more people than you think you’ll need. Read as much as you can, from different sources and on different topics. If you’re not sure how to start your story, that usually means you need more reporting. When you’re not sure, ask.

Jul 29 • 10:39 AM EDT • Business • hussman.unc.edu

Seminar: Explainable AI - UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health

A common criticism of AI is that it operates as a black box, providing no insight into how results are generated. In this seminar, Josh Fuchs, PhD, will introduce Explainable... Read more »

Jul 29 • 10:17 AM EDT • Health • sph.unc.edu

BJP politician’s daughter explains why she supports India’s youth protests

Jul 29 • 8:50 AM EDT • Politics • aljazeera.com

What is a p‑value? Expert explains the most misunderstood number in science

If you've ever tried to read a scientific paper, you've almost certainly run into a p-value. And if you found it confusing, you're in good company: Plenty of working scientists misunderstand it too.

Jul 29 • 8:20 AM EDT • Science • phys.org

Doctor Reveals No. 1 Sign Your Stress Is Becoming a Chronic Condition

In TODAY.com’s Expert Tip of the Day, NBC News medical journalist Dr. Akshay Syal explains the main trait he looks for when diagnosing chronic stress in patients.

Jul 29 • 8:00 AM EDT • Health • today.com

BRC: Indoor entertainment park leases 29,000 sq. ft., expanding recreation lineup at Plainfield flex property

A new indoor family entertainment destination is coming to Plainfield, where it’s leasing more than 29,000 square feet at a revitalized industrial property.

Jul 29 • 6:54 AM EDT • Entertainment • re-nj.com

Xabi Alonso's Chelsea rebuild: How Bayer Leverkusen glory explains the plan to recruit role models at Stamford Bridge

Following the news that Chelsea are looking to sign Danny Welbeck and Jordan Henderson this summer, Adam Bate reflects on whether there are lessons from Xabi Alonsos spectacular success at Bayer Leverkusen that offer clues to explain his thinking...

Jul 29 • 5:30 AM EDT • Sports • skysports.com

The Business Of Grief: A Psychiatrist's Guide For Leaders

A psychiatrist explains what leaders get wrong about grief at work, why presence beats platitudes, and how to support grieving employees through loss and recovery

Jul 28 • 11:11 PM EDT • Business • forbes.com

Cubs Score Early and Often Humiliating St. Louis Cardinals Tuesday

Trying to describe what happened when the St. Louis Cardinals played a baseball game against the Chicago Cubs Tuesday night is like trying to explain what it looked like when you see a dumpster on fire. It wasn’t pretty, but it happened so let’s begin. The Chicago Cubs made St. Louis Cardinals starter Michael McGreevy […]

Jul 28 • 10:47 PM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

What is a p-value? An expert explains the most misunderstood number in science

Boiling scientific truth down to a single number has had bad consequences for our understanding of the world.

Jul 28 • 4:08 PM EDT • Science • theconversation.com

Shigeru Miyamoto Sums Up Everything Wrong With The Industry In One Sentence

And explains why Nintendo continues to succeed while its biggest competitors keep flailing

Jul 28 • 1:00 PM EDT • Technology • kotaku.com

Seattle educator used cosplay to help explain science. Then PBS called

Seattle educator Michelle Barboza-Ramirez is one of four hosts on PBS’ “Eons: Life and Death on Pangea,” streaming its first episode Wednesday.

Jul 28 • 1:00 PM EDT • Science • seattletimes.com

Report: College Sports Commission opens inquiry into UNC football

The College Sports Commission has approached North Carolina’s football program about a potential investigation, with GM Michael Lombardi placed on paid leave following an HR complaint, per sources cited by The Athletic.

Jul 28 • 11:46 AM EDT • Sports • sportsbusinessjournal.com

New STS guideline tackles the prevention of AFib after cardiac surgery

Among the guideline's most significant changes is a Class I recommendation for prophylactic amiodarone.

Jul 28 • 10:27 AM EDT • Business • cardiovascularbusiness.com

Did Griswold play politics on Marx complaint?

Victor Marx won the Republican gubernatorial nomination last month by fewer than 2,500 votes. Thirty-nine days earlier, Secretary of State Jena Griswold’s Elections Division found campaign finance complaints against Marx legally sufficient to pursue. Marx, it now alleges, accepted at least $78,000 above Colorado’s donation limits. But it didn’t investigate until weeks after he’d won. […]

Jul 28 • 6:57 AM EDT • Politics • denvergazette.com

How Trump’s ‘America first’ administration could shut US scientists out of the next Nobel-worthy discovery

A proposed White House rule would give political appointees unprecedented control over scientific funding. One physicist, who helped discover the Higgs boson, explains how the rule would’ve stifled that breakthrough.

Jul 28 • 6:00 AM EDT • Science • cnn.com

Public health survey documents the stench in Boyle Heights

Amid growing complaints from neighbors, the L.A. County Department of Public Health conducted a door-to-door outreach survey in the neighborhood surrounding the warehouse.

Jul 27 • 11:11 PM EDT • Health • latimes.com

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear’s message to Sen. Mitch McConnell: Disclose more about health or resign

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear has a message for Sen. Mitch McConnell, his state’s senior senator: Explain his long absence from the Senate and give details about his health, Beshear is insisting, or resign.

Jul 27 • 8:35 PM EDT • Politics • cnn.com

Ex-BioWare Dev Explains Why He Thinks Dragon Age Is Basically Dead

Hard to argue with that

Jul 27 • 7:00 PM EDT • Technology • kotaku.com

Merrimack business owners complain of ongoing road construction

Some business owners in Merrimack say a construction project is taking its toll on a small plaza along Milford Road.

Jul 27 • 5:28 PM EDT • Business • wmur.com

Brian Kelly CBS Sports job, explained: What former college football coach will be doing in new broadcast role

Brian Kelly will be behind the microphone in 2026 after last year's LSU firing.

Jul 27 • 3:46 PM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

How many cups of coffee should you be drinking each day?

How much coffee is too much? Northeastern experts explain why 3 to 5 cups a day may lower heart disease risk, but energy drinks don't count.

Jul 27 • 2:54 PM EDT • Science • news.northeastern.edu

UNC football NIL investigation, explained: Why College Sports Commission is looking into Tar Heels program

UNC's football program is facing more controversy as the College Sports Commission begins an investigation.

Jul 27 • 2:34 PM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

Carly Simon explains ‘difficult, frustrating’ diagnosis with Parkinson’s after skin cancer

Carly Simon revealed a major health update amid her ‘difficult, frustrating’ diagnosis with Parkinson’s disease, which followed surgery for skin cancer: ‘I am still very much here.’

Jul 27 • 9:17 AM EDT • Entertainment • ew.com

The State of Politics: What Explains Evers Endorsement of David Crowley for Governor?

He had expressly avoided endorsing anyone for governor, including 3 Democrats who worked for him.

Jul 27 • 8:27 AM EDT • Politics • urbanmilwaukee.com

You think U.S. politics have never been worse? It has, says this Utah professor and podcaster.

Rabic partisanship and fake news are not new ideas in America, a Utah Valley University professor argues. He explains why in his new book.

Jul 27 • 8:00 AM EDT • Politics • sltrib.com

Vinicius Jr transfer news: Arsenal interest explained as Real Madrid step up efforts to sign Yan Diomande from RB Leipzig

Jul 27 • 6:56 AM EDT • Sports • skysports.com

Can you really trust your smartwatch? A doctor explains

What a doctor wants you to know about sleep scores, heart rate data and wearable health tech.

Jul 27 • 5:23 AM EDT • Health • wjla.com

Swiss life science task force with wide-reaching measures to combat MFN policy

A proposal for government price surcharges shows just how far Switzerland is considering going to shield itself from MFN. It shifts the burden, but could preserve the country’s appeal to industry.

Jul 27 • 5:01 AM EDT • Science • medwatch.com

How Trump’s “America First” Administration Could Shut U.S. Scientists Out of the Next Nobel-Worthy Discovery

A proposed White House rule would give political appointees unprecedented control over scientific funding. One physicist, who helped discover the Higgs boson, explains how the rule would’ve stifled that breakthrough.

Jul 27 • 5:00 AM EDT • Science • propublica.org

‘Nefarious activity’ complaints lead to massage business rules change in Farmington

FARMINGTON -- The city has changed its rules for massage businesses in the wake of complaints made to the Police Department of inappropriate behavior taking place at such businesses.

Jul 27 • 4:57 AM EDT • Business • nwaonline.com

WATCH: Politics Today for the week of July 26, 2026

AMARILLO, Texas (KAMR/KCIT) — On July 26, the episode of Politics Today on KAMR Local 4 News, Jack Kessler reviews multiple recent political developments and topics of interest in the Amarillo area…

Jul 26 • 6:09 PM EDT • Politics • myhighplains.com

Collectable popcorn buckets are big business for movie theaters

Theaters that are always in search of revenue streams have clearly hit upon a winner in those very lucrative collectable popcorn buckets that seem to be ubiquitous with blockbuster movies. KTLA's David Lazarus explains.

Jul 26 • 11:02 AM EDT • Business • kget.com

New Giants DC Leans Into Abdul Carter-Micah Parsons Comparisons

Dennard Wilson can see why Abdul Carter is the New York Giants' most valuable player. Wilson explained the comparisons between Carter and Micah Parsons, even though the Giants' edge "wants to be his own person." Carter had a disappointing rookie season, stat wise, with only four sacks in 17 games.

Jul 26 • 10:30 AM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

Chris Evans explains how filming ‘Doomsday’ was like making the first ‘Avengers’ in 2011 (exclusive)

‘Avengers: Doomsday’ star Chris Evans sits down with EW for an exclusive Comic-Con interview, where he explains why making the movie gave him the same feels as filming ‘The Avengers’ in 2011.

Jul 26 • 9:00 AM EDT • Entertainment • ew.com

Political turmoil, lower pay yield small candidate pool for HTA’s top job

The Hawai‘i Tourism Authority has attracted about 60 applicants in its search for a new president and CEO, a significantly smaller candidate pool than past searches as the agency tries to recruit a leader after years of political turmoil and uncertainty about its future.

Jul 26 • 6:05 AM EDT • Politics • staradvertiser.com

Capcom explains why it's putting out so many Resident Evil remakes and why there aren't a lot of spin-offs

Capcom’s Masachika Kawata has commented on why we’ve been seeing a bunch of Resident Evil remakes over the past few years, but not so much in the way of spin-offs. You could easily make the case that we’re in a golden age with Resident Evil right now. New games have been a hit with fans and critics alike. In between...

Jul 25 • 6:00 PM EDT • Technology • nintendoeverything.com

Singer Zach Top slams modern country music, says it lacks 'soul'

Zach Top says modern country music sounds "perfect" and has lost its "soul," explaining why bluegrass and raw sounds are resonating with fans now.

Jul 25 • 5:14 PM EDT • Entertainment • foxnews.com

Superagers keep youthful memories but their DNA does not explain why

Scientists expected SuperAgers might simply inherit fewer Alzheimer’s-related risks, but their genes looked much like those of typical older adults. Their extraordinary memories may instead come from still-unknown protective forces involving the brain, body, lifestyle, and environment.

Jul 25 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • sciencedaily.com

Why Democrats Need to Think Smaller to Win Bigger

Democratic whisperer Ben Wikler explains why state races, not Washington, will determine his party’s future.

Jul 25 • 7:00 AM EDT • Politics • politico.com

Basic Business? Platinum Pro? Premium Plus? Airlines have a naming problem—here’s how to fix it

Naming experts explain why Delta’s new ‘Basic Business’ class doesn’t work, and what airlines can do to make flying at least sound fun again.

Jul 25 • 7:00 AM EDT • Business • fastcompany.com

Man City explain Abdukodir Khusanov’s bumper new five-year contract

The Uzbekistan defender is slated for a key role in the new City regime under Enzo Maresca

Jul 25 • 6:11 AM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

Her Customers Complained on TikTok. What Happened Next Changed the Business

Sprinkles founder Candace Nelson turned her social media platforms into a focus group, product lab, and customer research team all at once.

Jul 25 • 5:00 AM EDT • Business • inc.com

‘Ozempic face’ and hair loss: what evidence is there for weight-loss drug side-effects?

Research into GLP-1 medications is not always robust but complaints such as digestive problems are well known

Jul 25 • 3:00 AM EDT • Science • theguardian.com

John Cusack makes rare comment about why he pivoted away from film career

Actor John Cusack explains why he’s not working as much in Hollywood these days

Jul 24 • 8:42 PM EDT • Entertainment • ew.com

LG users complain about unwanted ads on TVs and gaming monitors

Even Microsoft is irked by LG's advertising.

Jul 24 • 4:00 PM EDT • Technology • mashable.com

Political attack bombshell rocks Tallahassee city commission races

A political sneak attack has led Jeremy Matlow's campaign manager to resign and has City Commission candidate Talethia Edwards explaining body camera video of her challenging police.

Jul 24 • 12:25 PM EDT • Politics • tallahassee.com

Carlton Cuse On Why Sports Rights Are Hurting Scripted & Residuals

'Lost's Carlton Cuse has explained how sports rights fights are hitting scripted TV production and updated on Netflix series 'The Secret of Secrets'.

Jul 24 • 11:23 AM EDT • Sports • deadline.com

High School Science That Teaches an ID Perspective? Yes, Please!

Kristin Marais and Summer Edwards explain why they’re so passionate about teaching their subject and how the courses are designed with maximum flexibility.

Jul 24 • 10:47 AM EDT • Science • scienceandculture.com

Bank of America Stadium renovation plans don’t include a dome. Here’s why

The newly unveiled, $1.3 billion Bank of America Stadium renovation plans didn’t include a dome. Tepper Sports’ CEO explains.

Jul 24 • 9:00 AM EDT • Sports • charlotteobserver.com

How do scientists know if climate change made a heat wave, extreme storm or wildfire worse?

A National Academy of Sciences report examined the latest advances in extreme event attribution science. As four of the authors explain, the type of disaster makes a difference.

Jul 24 • 8:43 AM EDT • Science • theconversation.com

The Benefits of Exercise for Mental Health

Exercise is just as good for your brain as it is for your body. A psychiatrist explains how getting physical can boost your mental health.

Jul 24 • 12:02 AM EDT • Health • health.clevelandclinic.org

Why creative leadership drives business growth

Ndidi Oteh explains why creativity isn’t just a cultural value—it’s a critical force behind innovation, transformation, and long-term business success.

Jul 23 • 4:39 PM EDT • Business • fastcompany.com

Ancient lore meets small-town politics: Why fans are flocking to 'Widow’s Bay'

UC Berkeley Professor Abigail De Kosnik explains why the new horror-comedy’s mix of genre play, dark humor and original storytelling has resonated so widely.

Jul 23 • 4:27 PM EDT • Politics • news.berkeley.edu

AUDIO: Small Business Rundown Highlights Why BOI Remains a Major Threat to Small Businesses

Podcast episode features NFIB Member Nancy Marr, U.S. Rep. Brad Finstad, and NFIB’s Josh McLeod explaining what to know about Beneficial Ownership reporting

Jul 23 • 3:22 PM EDT • Business • nfib.com

Former Parkview Health employee says company 'shortchanged' workers of pay

The complaint says Parkview Health failed to pay some employees the required overtime rate because of a time-rounding policy that shortened their hours.

Jul 23 • 2:07 PM EDT • Health • theindianalawyer.com

CCTA being used more and more to plan ahead before complex PCI

Interventional cardiologist Yader Sandoval, MD, discusses the growing trend of using CCTA imaging to plan ahead before complex PCI procedures.

Jul 23 • 12:01 PM EDT • Business • cardiovascularbusiness.com

SCCT highlights payment gains, policy challenges as coronary CT use surges

An increase of nearly 200% in the use of CCTA over the past year has driven policy changes.

Jul 23 • 11:41 AM EDT • Business • cardiovascularbusiness.com

Mosquito research draws KSU environmental science major to the woods for the summer

Kennesaw State University senior Brooklyn Galvan has found a happy place for the summer – in the mosquito-infested woods near Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The environmental science major is conducting research into mosquitoes as pollinators as part of the National Science Foundation’s Research Experiences for Undergraduates for Gulf Coastal Plains Ecology. The experience builds on Galvan’s experience researching the importance of mosquitoes to the ecosystem in the lab of KSU Assistant Professor of Microbiology Andrew Haddow.

Jul 23 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • kennesaw.edu

The Heart-Healthy ‘Superpower’ Nutrient That Doctors Love

In TODAY.com’s Expert Tip of the Day, a doctor explains why the nutrient helps lower harmful cholesterol and helps to stabilize blood sugar.

Jul 23 • 8:00 AM EDT • Health • today.com

Microsoft is cracking down on Windows 11 bloatware ads, forces LG to pull McAfee popup

LG has agreed to disable the McAfee popup in its Monitor App Installer, Microsoft's Pavan Davuluri confirms, after weeks of user complaints.

Jul 23 • 6:26 AM EDT • Technology • windowslatest.com

Plainfield Farmers’ Fair kicks off another year of summer tradition (PHOTOS)

Long-running Plainfield Farmers’ Fair returns with exhibits, livestock and entertainment.

Jul 23 • 5:30 AM EDT • Entertainment • lehighvalleylive.com

Seedy K’s Ville Report: La Familia III

For reasons soon to be explained, this can’t be called a GameCap. I had every intention of covering it normally. Running box score on the MacBook. Notepad in hand. Then, at 4:52, I got a call from my ex-, with whom I’m better friends than ever. Even when we were together. It was granddaughter — […]

Jul 22 • 8:53 PM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

Disgaea Creator Explains Why Physical Games Are So Important

The former NIS president had some harsh words for the decision

Jul 22 • 3:18 PM EDT • Technology • kotaku.com

Teen plaintiff suing Meta over mental health harms drops his claims against company days before trial

A Florida ​teen whose ‌lawsuit claimed Meta’s ​platforms were ​to blame for ⁠his ​depression and ​anxiety dropped his case ​against ​the company just ‌days ⁠before the trial in Los ​Angeles ​was ⁠set to ​start, ​the ⁠company said.

Jul 22 • 2:32 PM EDT • Health • reuters.com

Teen Plaintiff Suing Meta Over Mental Health Harms Drops His Claims Against Company Days Before Trial

By Diana Novak ⁠Jones July ⁠22 (Reuters) - A ⁠Florida teen whose lawsuit claimed Meta’s platforms were to blame ‌for his depression ‌and anxiety dropped ⁠his ⁠case against the company just days before the trial in Los Angeles was set to start, his attorneys said on Wednesday. The lawsuit, brought ...

Jul 22 • 2:32 PM EDT • Health • usnews.com

‘Marvel’s Wolverine’ star Liam McIntyre explains why he was ‘really scared to go all out’ (exclusive)

‘Marvel’s Wolverine’ star Liam McIntyre says he was ‘really scared to go all out’ with ‘feral Logan,’ but explains how he could ultimately ‘take some really huge swings.’

Jul 22 • 1:00 PM EDT • Entertainment • ew.com

'You sir, are the failure': Hegseth pressed by Democratic senator on Iran war plan

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced bipartisan scrutiny in the Senate on Tuesday as lawmakers pressed him to explain the rising costs of the war in Iran.

Jul 22 • 11:48 AM EDT • Politics • washingtonpost.com

Lilac Hills apartments inspected, no immediate health or safety hazards found

The City of Kalamazoo has completed an inspection of the Lilac Hills apartment complex following complaints from residents about living conditions.

Jul 22 • 11:35 AM EDT • Health • wwmt.com

Kyle Rudolph on Giving Back and the Business of Football

Kyle Rudolph on Altru's $20M raised, NFL's 18th game, private equity explained, and sports betting integrity.

Jul 22 • 10:21 AM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com

Kyle Rudolph on Giving Back and the Business of Football

Kyle Rudolph on Altru's $20M raised, NFL's 18th game, private equity explained, and sports betting integrity.

Jul 22 • 10:21 AM EDT • Business • sports.yahoo.com

Measles cases in the U.S. hit a new 34-year high

The U.S. hasn't seen measles numbers like this since 1992. An epidemiologist explains what's driving the surge.

Jul 22 • 10:19 AM EDT • Science • sciencenews.org

The iPhone 18 Pro's Rumored Camera Upgrade, Explained

Apple's upcoming iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are expected to feature a variable-aperture camera. The upgrade has been rumored repeatedly and would be a first for Apple's smartphone lineup, but what would it actually change for everyday users? An aperture is the opening inside a camera lens that lets in light. A natural comparison would be the pupils of your eyes, which open wider in the dark and become smaller in bright conditions.

Jul 22 • 5:15 AM EDT • Technology • macrumors.com

Nintendo explains why it's coming out with Splatoon Raiders instead of Splatoon 4

Rather than releasing Splatoon 4, the next entry in the series is Splatoon Raiders. Nintendo recently explained why it chose to release that title now. After more than a decade or core Splatoon gameplay, producer Seita Inoue explained in a new interview that the team “thought it might be interesting to create something with a slightly different approach to gameplay,...

Jul 21 • 9:17 AM EDT • Technology • nintendoeverything.com

5 lessons from 20 years of climate surveys: Political party matters, but it doesn’t explain everything

Why would a young Republican back solar but reject a carbon tax? Twenty years of survey data shows climate opinion is more complex than party labels suggest.

Jul 21 • 8:46 AM EDT • Politics • theconversation.com

Explained: Why India's medal-heavy sports like badminton, wrestling, hockey are missing from CWG 2026

The Glasgow CWG is going to be a severely truncated one with only ten sports on the roster.

Jul 21 • 2:28 AM EDT • Sports • espn.com

Nintendo says it has no legal duty to pass its U.S. tariff refunds on to consumers

Nintendo is asking a court to dismiss a proposed class action suit that was filed this past spring by gamers who say the Mario maker is breaking the law if it doesn’t pass on its U.S. tariff refunds to consumers. Those consumers “received exactly what they bargained and paid for” when buying price-hiked Nintendo goods last year, the company said in a filing on Monday in the case of Hoffert et al v. Nintendo. “Plaintiffs are not entitled to a rebate simply because of intervening legal developments related to tariffs.” Nintendo increased the price of Switch 2 controllers and the original Switch last year, following the imposition of globe-spanning U.S. tariffs (tariffs described by Nintendo’s lawyers on Monday as “sweeping” and “constantly changing”). This past February, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the tariffs were illegal. A month later, Nintendo sued the U.S. government to get a refund. And in April, gamers filed the class action claim against Nintendo in Washington, saying it would be illegally double-dipping if it made money from tariff-hiked sales and then from a refund. The gamers sought relief for anyone in the U.S. who bought price-hiked Nintendo items between February 2025 and February 2026. “The common thread among Plaintiffs’ claims is that it is somehow ‘unfair; that Nintendo has not retroactively adjusted its prices for completed sales in response to the outcome of the tariff litigation,” the company’s lawyers wrote in today’s motion to dismiss. “But that is now how commercial transactions work.

Jul 21 • 12:07 AM EDT • Technology • gamefile.news

UFC Freedom 250 Fails to Knock Out The Ratings

(Welcome to my weekly streaming ratings report, the single best guide to what’s popular in streaming TV and what isn’t. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. If you were forwarded this email, please subscribe to get these insights each week.) If UFC fans wanted one image to say, “Hey, Paramount+ is crushing it with their UFC rights deal,” I could provide that image. Here it is: (Reminder: this is my creation of the Nielsen Top 30, since Nielsen doesn’t combine the lists or include sports. I take all three lists and combine them. Some streaming TV shows probably have higher ratings than many of the films on this list.) Look at that! UFC Freedom 250 is number one! It topped the Nielsen “Top 30” list for shows and films that made the top ten the week of 15-June. So if you’re a UFC fan or supporter of Paramount+, that’s the good news for you this week. This program topped the ratings charts for one week. Everything else is bad news, or at least a huge caveat to that story, which I’ll explain today in the first part of this week’s Streaming Ratings Report—for the weeks of 8-June and 15-June—which is a double issue since I’ve been writing on a bunch of topics recently. UFC Freedom 250 is one of the biggest streaming events of the year, and super relevant to Paramount+’s strategy, so it merited its own article. Let’s dive in! (Reminder: The streaming ratings report focuses on the U.S. market and compiles data from Nielsen’s weekly top ten viewership ranks, Luminate’s Top Ten Data, JustWatch and Reelgood interest data, Samba TV household viewership, company datecdotes, Netflix hours viewed data, Google Trends, and IMDb to determine the most popular content. While most data points are current, Nielsen’s data covers the weeks of June 8th to June 21st 2026. You can find a link to my terminology here.) Subscribe Check Out My Interview on UFC 250 at MMA Draw After you read this article, if you want even more thoughts on UFC and Paramount-Skydance/Paramount+, I did a written interview with MMA Draw. They asked me to answer some questions about UFC Freedom 250, and I was happy to chat with them. Find it here: [ The MMA Draw Newsletter Did Paramount really overpay for the UFC? What the data tells us so far If you know the history of American television, you also know that combat sports is often a leading indicator of the future… Read more a day ago · 10 likes · 1 comment · Nate Wilcox and Zach Arnold ](https://www.themmadraw.com/p/did-paramount-really-overpay-for?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web) I never thought I’d need a combat sports newsletter in my life, but the good folks at MMA Draw publish an excellent one on UFC, MMA, pro wrestling, boxing and more, analyzing both the sports themselves and the politics, economics and antitrust issues that impact them. Check the article and their newsletter out! Paramount+ Has Its Best Sporting Event of All Time…But Was It Worth It? Before we look at the UFC Freedom 250 data in particular, let’s talk about what we can’t say. Namely, let’s start with the lack of comparisons. First off, I’d love to put a chart out comparing this fight to past UFC fights on Paramount+…but we don’t have the data. This is the first time we’ve gotten Nielsen data about a Paramount+ UFC fight. As far as I can tell, Paramount provided data for the first fight, but it was a proprietary datecdote (saying it had “an average minute audience” of 5 million “views”) and then, for two fights, we got the linear viewership numbers when they aired on CBS, but no streaming data. Everything else was crickets. We also can’t compare this fight to other fights/combat sports on streaming, in particular the MMA and boxing, because Netflix also didn’t use Nielsen to track those events, opting for TVision and VideoAmp, respectively. (This isn’t Paramount’s fault, but does still suck.) We also can’t compare to UFC’s fights that used to be on ESPN+, since we don’t have any data for that, plus Disney+ didn’t have marquee fights. The comparisons would not be apples-to-apples. Can we compare to past Pay-Per-View fights? Absolutely not. The comparisons would absolutely NOT be apples-to-apples. That didn’t stop Paramount+, though, who bragged that their UFC events have reached drastically more people than past PPV fights. Duh. Sorry, but I gotta make this point again. A basic tenet of economics is that the cheaper something becomes, the more people consume or buy it. That’s Econ 101. (Sometimes pundits call things “Econ 101” that are actually like Econ 210 or even PhD-level economics, but no, this is really like first or second class basic economics.) Yet I still see one analytics firm consistently say that more people watch films on streaming than PVOD proves streaming which means that the streaming window is more valuable than the PVOD window. No, it’s not! Same thing here. Pay-Per-View events back in the day could be really, really, really expensive! So whole groups of people pitched in to buy them. That increased the perceived value of, say, the Mike Tyson fight. Or a UFC numbered event. So yes, the fact that Paramount+ makes numbered UFC fights essentially “free” if you’re already a Paramount+ member means consumption will go up. Obviously. Same for Netflix and their boxing matches. They’re talking about fights that used to cost consumers, in some cases, $50 in 1996…which is over $100 in today’s dollars. Over 1.6 million people paid that to watch the Tyson-Holyfield fight! Again, streaming is essentially “free”. Or $10 to $20, depending on what streamer we’re talking about and what tier you’re on. No wonder more people are “watching”. (Plus, Nielsen’s out-of-home viewing also helps these numbers.) UFC Freedom 250 Did Well…But I Have A Lot of Worries So what can we compare the fights to? Well, the good news is Nielsen put out that the fight averaged 7.0 million viewers for UFC Freedom 250, which is a solid number for a fight. We also know the length, at roughly 4 and a half hours. (I saw different run times, but this seems to be the consensus considering it started at 8 pm, had a delay and then finished after midnight on the East Coast. If you assume a shorter run time, then yes, the total hours viewed would go down.) That means I have the two numbers needed to add this to my Nielsen database. And then…I can compare this viewership to the NFL: And, uh, not great. But also within striking distance, mainly because the runtime for this event was so long. I’d also add that this event had viewership equal to a regular season NFL game on streaming, but if anything, it was more comparable to an NFL playoff or Super Bowl-esque event. And you can compare viewership to the top football games on broadcast, cable and streaming, and it’s not impressive at all: We can also compare it to other sports that week, including the NBA Finals and start of the World Cup: Again, not great. The NBA generated roughly four times as many average viewers each game for its NBA Finals. The World Cup has similarly big numbers. Also, that’s just a tiny fraction of the 25 most watched sporting events each week. The NBA, NHL and FIFA World Cup had many, many more games racking up hours. We could also compare this to other streaming programs to get an idea of “is this a good investment?” and here is how it ranks compared to other top Paramount+ programs: The worry here? Well, unlike scripted programming, which has rewatchability, older fights/sporting events have very little library value. Very, very few people are rewatching these fights, especially years from now. Paramount has also released datecdotes bragging about their subscriber numbers. Earlier this year, they claimed that the first UFC fight on Paramount+ brought in 1 million subscribers. Then, in their quarterly earnings report, they only ended up with 700K subs. Not great! They claimed they dropped lower-value international subscribers, but that’s why I tend to discount subscriber additions when they’re leaked to the press.1 I expect we may see a bump again for UFC Freedom 250, but I’d caution using subscriber growth so soon after these events to judge the success, since new subs with high churn (see Peacock) aren’t great either. Also, analysts often want to attribute all subscriber growth to their favorite/pet show, and that just doesn’t make sense. The biggest caveat for UFC Freedom 250 and Paramount’s very first UFC marquee event is that these could be high watermarks for the sport. UFC Freedom 250 had an incredible amount of earned media coverage compared to most UFC fights. I mean, it had wall-to-wall national news coverage in the lead up to the event. (The first fight also had a lot of promotion from Paramount since it was first.) Other fights could reach this bar—say the Conor McGregor return to the Octagon—but they’ll be fewer and far between. Was This Deal Worth It? All to ask: is this Paramount deal worth it? In this case, I think the UFC Freedom 250 numbers are more distracting than helpful. This fight did well and compares well to other top sporting events. But we know that the first marquee event was at least a third smaller, if Paramount’s own data is to be believed. And it’s likely the other fights are much, much, much smaller. And then you get to the paycheck that Paramount-Skydance paid. FIFA’s World Cup cost about the same for Fox, but clearly generated multiples more total viewership. (Though it’s only every four years.) The NBA is much more expensive, but until the playoffs, they likely didn’t pay for itself. Even still, Disney, NBCUniversal and Amazon Prime Video likely overpaid. So, in that context, the NBA may be an overpay that makes the UFC look not so bad. But two overpays don’t make an underpay, to paraphrase the old cliché about wrongs and rights. And looking at UFC Freedom 250 as the likely ceiling of MMA on Paramount+, Paramount-Skydance likely paid too much. Share 1 I would love regular reports on subscriber additions by programs, but as is, it’s mostly leaked or rumored in haphazard ways.

Jul 20 • 6:48 PM EDT • Entertainment • entertainment.substack.com

Rethinking the campus mental health “crisis”

A developmental psychologist who studies college student mental health explains why it's time to retire the "kids these days" narrative.

Jul 20 • 1:20 PM EDT • Health • journalistsresource.org

Gut check: What the digestive system means for our overall health

In a Q&A, gastroenterologist Rosemarie Fisher explains common digestive health issues — and the best ways to improve gut health.

Jul 20 • 11:36 AM EDT • Health • news.yale.edu

Shaky political "science": breakdown of the peer review process

[This article is the latest in our “Shaky Political Science” series. In our 38 page report, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting,” released in December 2025, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting (RCV). Many of these studies suffered from puzzling research methodologies, poorly constructed surveys, unrealistic simulated elections, cherry picked data and faulty analyses that often were contradicted by results from real-world elections (a link to our full paper is here). Here are links to the first four articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report; the second one analyzed a study co-authored by University of Minnesota academic Larry Jacobs, which was one of the most error-prone of all the research we reviewed in our report; a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research; and a fourth article that analyzed seven studies sponsored by New America’s political reform program that deployed flawed methodology based on “simulated” elections instead of real-world elections, which when combined with some basic misunderstandings of RCV, produced odd and misleading results]. In this fifth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we examine two flawed studies on the impact of RCV on voter turnout authored by San Francisco State University professor Jason McDaniel. McDaniel’s research in these two papers stands out for its puzzling methodology, inadequate and cherry-picked data, and faulty analyses that not only misunderstands ranked choice voting but reflects a basic misunderstanding of politics in general. The first of the McDaniel studies actually passed through a peer review process and then was subsequently published by the Journal of Urban Affairs, despite its obvious errors. It is perplexing that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the errors and send it back to McDaniel for a rewrite or outright rejection. This calls into question the credibility of the peer review process itself. The peer review process is supposed to represent the intellectual pinnacle of the profession – a way for academics to certify the quality of each other’s work, and to act as a check against sloppy research. In the case of the McDaniel study, the peer review process failed. Yet his flawed study has been cited dozens of times by other political scientists in their own flawed works — an unvirtuous circle of academic research. Here is the first Jason McDaniel study that we analyzed: “Writing the Rules to Rank the Candidates: Examining the Impact of Instant-Runoff Voting on Racial Group Turnout in San Francisco Mayoral Elections,” by Jason McDaniel, 2016, Journal of Urban Affairs. This study covered San Francisco’s use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in mayoral elections, purporting to show that RCV reduces voter turnout overall, increases voter errors, and has a negative impact on “marginal populations,” i.e. racial minorities, mainly as the result of the alleged complexity of RCV asking voters to rank candidates and having to be familiar with multiple candidates and related dynamics. McDaniel reached these conclusions by examining five San Francisco mayoral elections taking place in odd years (i.e. where there are no federal or state races on the ballot) from 1995 to 2011, comparing three earlier non-RCV races (in 1995, 1999 and 2003) with the later two RCV races (in 2007 and 2011). Only two RCV races were studied, and as McDaniel acknowledged, only the contest in 2011 was “competitive” (that contest in 2007 was the first mayoral election using RCV, and incumbent mayor Gavin Newsom won easily in the first round of counting, earning 74% of first choices and far ahead of the second place candidate who had just 6.3% of first choices). Yet even the allegedly competitive contest in 2011was won by an incumbent with a landslide margin of nearly 20 points. No other elections were studied by McDaniel, even though San Francisco elects 17 other offices besides mayor with RCV, including the 11 seats on the Board of Supervisors (the name for the city council) in even years, and six other citywide offices in odd years. Previous academic research has found that competitive elections can stimulate greater voter involvement and higher turnout. For unexplained reasons, this study ignored at least 34 other RCV races between the years 2004 to 2011, many of which were very competitive and had high voter turnout. Instead, McDaniel’s analysis based its conclusions on data from only a single, marginally-competitive mayor’s race using RCV. These 2007 and 2011 mayoral elections were the only two RCV elections that McDaniel used as the sole basis for his small data set to determine the impact of RCV on voter turnout. Despite having no meaningful data to inform his study, McDaniel nonetheless concluded that RCV lowered turnout when compared to the previous three mayoral non-RCV elections using two-round runoffs. Then, using the same inadequate database of San Francisco elections, McDaniel also found that “Instant-runoff voting is associated with a significant decline in Black voter turnout and White voter turnout…On average, Black voter turnout decreases by 18 points and White voter turnout decreases by 16 points …” But how could he credibly arrive at that conclusion when his study was based on voter turnout in two RCV contests that were not even remotely competitive? Beyond that, McDaniel tacitly admits that the key determining factor driving Black voter turnout was not RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable Black candidate. McDaniel wrote, “Black voter turnout was about 17 percentage points higher for the two elections that featured an African American candidate compared to the three elections that did not” — but one of those three elections did not use RCV. The same dynamic was present for White voter turnout, in which higher turnout was not correlated with RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable White candidate. Beyond that, McDaniel’s voter turnout results, whether correlated with the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections, showed no clear patterns. In his Figure 1, he shows low Asian voter turnout in the non-RCV elections in 1999 and 2003 when there was no viable Asian candidate running, but in the 2007 mayoral election using RCV, there is still no viable Asian candidate, yet Asian turnout increases dramatically. For Latinos, voter turnout is virtually the same in 1999 (no viable Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2003 (leading Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2007 (no viable Latino candidate, RCV elections) and 2011 (leading Latino candidate, RCV elections). Meanwhile White voter turnout increased dramatically from a low in the 2007 mayoral election, in which the leading candidate was a white incumbent, to the 2011 election in which there were no leading white candidates that finished any higher than sixth place with 5.6% of the vote. Clearly other factors were determining voter turnout than either the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections. Despite these inconsistent findings, McDaniel boldly marches forth to render conclusions about the impact of RCV on different groups of racial voters, even though his conclusions are not remotely supported by his data. This looks like the worst kind of “data cherry picking” to cover up a puzzling conclusion based on a poor data set involving only two RCV elections, neither of which were remotely competitive. McDaniel’s cherry picking didn’t stop there. In calculating voter turnout for the three non-RCV mayoral elections in 1995, 1999 and 2003, he failed to mention that in each of these years there was a two-round runoff election, with a first round election in November in which no candidate garnered a winning majority of the vote, followed by the decisive runoff in December. So there were two non-RCV elections in each election year. But McDaniel only decided to include one of the two elections in his data set, apparently the December runoff in each year (which had higher turnout in two out of the three mayor’s races, and lower turnout in the third). So he ignored the November 1995 election, the November 1999 election when turnout was only 45 percent, and the November 2003 election when turnout was only 45.7 percent. This is flawed methodology based on blatant cherry picking, since McDaniel simply omitted three elections worth of data that did not fit within his frame. His study should never have made it through a peer review process, and it is an embarrassment to political science that not only was it approved for publication, but it has been uncritically cited by dozens of other political scientists. Share A “study” without wider context or credible data Lacking a data set that included even a single competitive RCV mayoral race, McDaniel declared that RCV lowered voter turnout in 2011, when turnout was 42.5 percent. But he also ignored -- or did not realize -- that voter turnout in mayoral elections during 2011 had sharply declined in all big cities, including far more steeply in nearby Los Angeles and other cities. In fact, San Francisco’s election in 2011 had the second highest turnout of any mayoral election in the nation’s 22 largest cities from 2008-2011. Was 2011 just a particularly low turnout year all across the country, perhaps because the country was still reeling from the aftermath of the housing market collapse in 2008-2010? McDaniel ignored this factor and did not search for alternative explanations beyond his flawed thesis. Furthermore, while McDaniel suggested that RCV leads to more “overvotes” – which is an invalidated ballot in which a voter, in either a non-RCV or RCV race, makes a mistake and selects two candidates for a single choice – he failed to address that in the June 2012 US Senate primary contest, which used the typical “one-choice” plurality method and did not use RCV, there was more than five times as many overvotes in San Francisco and Oakland than in the RCV mayoral elections in those cities. Additionally, turnout had been significantly higher and more representative in RCV elections for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors races -- that McDaniel didn’t even bother to study -- as compared to previous “delayed two-round runoffs” for those offices, often higher by as much as 40% in the RCV races. Perhaps the most surprising irony was that an earlier study co-authored by McDaniel (Overvoting and the Equality of Voice under Instant-Runoff Voting in San Francisco by Francis Neely and Jason McDaniel, 2015, California Journal of Politics and Policy) found that overvotes are often more common in lower-income precincts, but that the pattern of overvoting is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. Wrote Neely and McDaniel: “[Overvote] errors appear to be a function of complexity in general and not IRV per se…. the pattern of overvoting is similar in both IRV and non-IRV contests…Even among votes cast in a top-of-the-ticket race like U.S. Senate, overvoting occurs in an uneven fashion” (IRV, or ‘instant runoff voting,’ is another name for ranked choice voting in single-winner contests). So McDaniel not only contradicted his own conclusion in his earlier study with Neely, but the earlier study had been an important corrective for one of the most frequently made mistakes made by anti-RCV political scientists – a continual failure to provide crucial context by pairing a comparative analysis of real world RCV elections with an analysis of real world plurality or other electoral methods. Unfortunately McDaniel’s earlier study does not get cited much by other researchers, and McDaniel did not even cite it in his own flawed study analyzed above. Incredibly, McDaniel cherrypicked McDaniel, even as his flawed study has been cited dozens of times. Despite being a textbook example of poor political “science,” featuring both inadequate as well as cherrypicked data, the shelf life of McDaniel’s study has been extended endlessly by other political scientists and media outlets who have cited it uncritically. Equally troubling, the Journal of Urban Affairs put this paper through its peer review process and published it despite its numerous flaws. McDaniel gets it wrong, Part II Not content with producing one shoddy, confused paper, McDaniel produced another one a few years later, here is the link: Electoral Rules and Voter Turnout in Mayoral Elections: An Analysis of Ranked-Choice Voting by Jason McDaniel. San Francisco State Univ. (McDaniel, 2019). In this paper, McDaniel extended his previous flawed research focused on San Francisco, about voter turnout and voter impact, to multiple RCV cities through the 2018 elections. In his data set he included San Francisco, Minneapolis, St Paul, Oakland, Berkeley, San Leandro and Santa Fe. He then compared their turnout in mayoral elections to non-RCV cities, and to mayoral elections in those cities held before first RCV usage, and concluded “a significant decrease in voter turnout of approximately 3–5 percentage points in RCV cities after the implementation of RCV.” But he replicated many of the same mistakes as his first study presented above. While in this study McDaniel attempted to distinguish between various factors, such as odd year vs. even year elections, competitive races vs. noncompetitive, contests with open seats and other factors, the analysis is superficial and inadequate. He attempts to incorporate so many often-conflicting variables that his conclusions are once again unsupported by the actual data, and ultimately unconvincing (this second study never underwent a peer review process). For example, McDaniel declared that for RCV cities “in elections that are more competitive than average (margin of victory less than 20%), there is no significant RCV effect on voter turnout.” Yet McDaniel is a professor in a city, San Francisco, in which the 2018 special election using RCV to fill a mayoral vacancy was exceedingly close, decided by a margin of only one percentage point, and resulted in the second highest turnout in San Francisco history for a mayoral election. Illustrating the complexity involved in assessing the critical factors in turnout, that special election was held on the same election day as federal and state offices, which tends to boost turnout. Yet more voters participated in that RCV mayoral election than voted on the same day in the non-RCV primary for governor in which former San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom was running. Even more puzzling, in this study McDaniel inaccurately cited his own previous study from 2015 with Neely. McDaniel wrote, “Neely and McDaniel (2015) examine individual ballot image files within a natural experiment, and find higher rates of ballot errors in RCV elections compared to non-RCV elections” (emphasis added). However, we quoted from that 2015 study several paragraphs above, and in actual fact Neely and McDaniel actually concluded the opposite -- that the pattern of overvoting – which is the most common form of ballot error – is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. McDaniel also ignored the fact that in Bay Area RCV elections held in even years – at the same time as federal and state elections, when turnout is highest -- the “undervote” (that is, the dropoff in ballots cast for governor or mayor) has declined, which contradicts his thesis that the act of ranking ballots in RCV elections is too complex and presents a barrier for certain demographics of voters. To his credit, McDaniel actually acknowledged another contradiction in his own paper, which found a negative RCV turnout effect in some odd-year elections but not others, admitting that “may present a challenge to the theory that increased complexity [from RCV] will have a marginal negative effect on voter turnout.” But he tried to wallpaper over that contradiction by blaming it on an unlikely source -- bad election administration. McDaniels wrote, “This would suggest that the negative impact of RCV on voter participation may be alleviated by high quality election administration,” without presenting any data or even anecdotes to support such an unfounded theory. While competent election administration of any election, whether RCV or non-RCV, is crucially important, there is no credible research that supports the far-fetched notion that the quality of election administration has much of an impact on voter turnout in US elections, whether using RCV or otherwise. Upgrade to a $5 subscription The unvirtuous circle of academic research It is puzzling how McDaniel’s first study could have survived the peer review process for the Journal of Urban Affairs. The mistakes in McDaniel’s first study above should have been obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of ranked choice voting as well as elections in general, and elections in San Francisco specifically. It undermines faith in the credibility of the peer review process to think that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the egregious errors and reject McDaniel’s sloppy research and paper. And it remains a black mark on political science that this thoroughly discredited study has been cited dozens of times by other researchers. Indeed, in our research paper it became apparent that many political scientists cite each other’s flawed research to pad their list of citations and to legitimize their own flawed research, creating an unvirtuous circle of political science. More broadly, McDaniel’s voter turnout studies, like other studies evaluating RCV’s impact on turnout, lacked a recognition that no credible opinion or research can claim that RCV increases voter turnout merely because so many voters are excited to vote for their favorite candidates instead of “lesser evil” candidates without worrying about spoilers. Instead, with respect to turnout, the advantage of RCV has always been that, in most places where it has been used, it has eliminated a pre-November primary or post-November runoff, which usually saw about half the turnout of the November general election. This is especially true during even years when there are state and federal elections on the ballot which substantially drive turnout more than local contests. Any study that does not adequately account for this non-November primary/runoff vs November general election dynamic, or odd year vs even year election factors, is simply not credible. Both of McDaniel’s studies largely failed on those grounds. Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to a $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS…your digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe

Jul 20 • 9:29 AM EDT • Science • democracysos.substack.com