SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " Wrong " 872 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Sports media host Stephen A Smith: ‘The audience gravitated to me’
ESPN’s highest-paid star on his plans to be the next Joe Rogan, what the Democrats get wrong — and his thoughts on a possible White House run
Azmoun: Iran's absent talisman unafraid of controversy
Sardar Azmoun is Iran's third top scorer in history with a successful club career behind him but is set to miss out on the 2026 World Cup in an exclusion shadowed by political controversy."At a historical turning point, Sardar Azmoun stood on the wrong side," said the pro-government Fars news agency, accusing the player, a racehorse breeder in his spare time, of "betting on the losing horse" in a "gamble that meant missing the World Cup".
I’m a Business Consultant Who's Seen the Best Advice Fail Companies — Here’s What Goes Wrong
After consulting with small businesses for years, I realized the biggest reason companies fail isn’t bad advice — it’s that most owners never fully commit to executing the changes needed to grow.
New Info On ‘Destiny 2’ Alarm Bells, Marathon’s Role And ‘Destiny Infinity’ Pitch
Destiny 2's autopsy is in motion, and there's new information on what went wrong, what part Marathon has played and what could have been.
Wrongful death lawsuit filed against Miami plastic surgery business for the deaths of two patients
Are We Still Taking The Wrong Supplements For Our Gut-Health?
Experts question modern gut health and supplement culture, as Professor Paul Clayton of LYMA warns many probiotics and wellness formulas may be fundamentally incomplete.
Science Says You're Probably Making Smoothies Wrong, and I've Never Felt More Validated
A new study suggests adding a banana to berry smoothies may significantly reduce flavanol absorption, a victory for one banana skeptic.
Yerba mate has lots of health benefits but Chinese may be drinking it wrong
Ancient South American fusion may reduce risks of Parkinson’s and is enjoyed by top footballers, but the indigenous drink should be shared.
Analysis: Gibbs-White omission could still haunt Tuchel
Only time will tell if Thomas Tuchel's decision to leave Morgan Gibbs-White at home for the World Cup is the right one. The Nottingham Forest playmaker and the City Ground clearly think it was the wrong one after the best and most consistent season of the 26-year-old's career. Gibbs-White's 15 Premier League goals this season leaves him as the second top English scorer in the top flight, only beaten by Ollie Watkins following the Aston Villa striker's double at Manchester City on the final day.
N.J. needs a forensic science commission. Here’s why.
Advances in technology are transforming criminal justice, but without safeguards, they can also lead to wrongful convictions
Wisconsin reaches new low in CBS Sports' post-spring power rankings
Nothing went wrong in Wisconsin's spring practices, but CBS Sports' Cody Nagel is not ready to buy into this team.
Letter to the Editor: The human cost of science getting it wrong
Patrick Newman cites one scientist calling RCP 8.5 ‘not implausible,’ yet the IPCC has now officially removed it as implausible. Notably, that same scientist said RCP 8.5 should be clearly labeled a high-end scenario. It…
5 common walking mistakes that could hurt your progress, according to an expert
Walking has many proven health benefits, but common mistakes like scrolling and wearing the wrong shoes could cause more harm than good, expert says.
Trump’s ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ hit with another legal challenge
The Trump administration’s newly created nearly $1.8 billion fund for allies of President Donald Trump who say they were wrongly targeted by the government was hit with a second lawsuit on Friday, adding to the growing legal and political backlash facing the White House.
Hybrid AI: Combining Deterministic Analytics with LLM Reasoning
How AI architecture prevents plausible but wrong analytics
Pushed to the limit, Republicans show rare defiance to Trump's demands
President Donald Trump’s political revenge tour met its potential match this week as angry, upset Republican senators, pushed to a breaking point by his seemingly insatiable and outlandish demands — particularly a $1.776 billion fund for Jan. 6 rioters and others he believes were wrongly prosecuted — did the unthinkable.
Thursday’s Chaos Shows How Trump and Congress Have Cracked Apart | WSJ Politics Newsletter for May 22
Plus, Kevin Warsh will be sworn in as the next Fed chair and the Democrats published their ‘autopsy’ into what went wrong in 2024
Guzman Y Gomez Gives Up on Failing US Business; Shares Soar
(Bloomberg) -- Australian burrito chain Guzman y Gomez Ltd. said it’s closing its Chicago restaurants and exiting the US after failing to generate adequate sales. The company’s shares soared.Most Read from BloombergSpot the Difference: Putin Gets Trump Treatment From Xi in ChinaIran Says the US’s Latest Proposal Has ‘Narrowed the Gaps’Modi’s Toffee Gift to Meloni Ignites Rally in Wrong Indian StockIran in Talks With Oman Over Permanent Hormuz Toll SystemDow Average Climbs to Record on US-Iran De
DNC Report Live Updates: Democrats' Autopsy Report on 2024 Election Faults Biden, Harris and Others
An incomplete report on what went wrong in 2024 was released after it had become an embarrassment for the Democratic National Committee.
Takeaways from the DNC autopsy
Ever since the 2024 election, Democrats have been searching for answers as to what went so wrong to possibly have re-installed Donald Trump as president.
Bonus 228: The $1.776B Political Question
Every so often a story comes along that is so brazen, so cleanly emblematic of the moment we are living through, that staying quiet about it feels like a kind of complicity unto itself. Monday’s announcement by the Department of Justice that the Acting Attorney General has unilaterally created a $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” to compensate so-called “victims of lawfare” is one of those stories. And the reason I want to write about it here, in a newsletter ostensibly devoted to the Supreme Court and the law and politics surrounding it, is that I’m increasingly worried that we’re asking the wrong institution to save us from one of the most offensive, alarming, and anti-constitutional things we’ve seen from any president in American history. As I explain below the fold, the Anti-Weaponization Fund is not principally a legal problem awaiting a judicial fix. It is a shockingly egregious political abuse—the President suing his own government, purporting to settle with himself, and routing nearly $2 billion from the Treasury to his own supporters as a not-so-subtle (and not-so-formal) reward, if not an incentive, for political violence. And the Constitution’s answer to political abuses of this kind and magnitude is a political remedy, not a legal one. In his majority opinion in NFIB v. Sebelius (the Affordable Care Act case from 2012), Chief Justice Roberts defended the Court’s endorsement of Congress’s power to adopt the individual mandate by noting that it is “not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” As much of a judicial supremacist as I am, that sentiment is, for better or worse, an entirely correct (and, in the long term, normatively desirable) institutional assessment. One can believe in substantial judicial power without believing that literally every political dispute in our country can and should be resolved by unelected judges. The real upshot of this latest headline (among so, so many other similar headlines) is that it is past time to reinvigorate impeachment—not because conviction is realistic in this Senate, or even because impeachment itself is feasible in this House, but because forcing every member of Congress to vote on the record whether this brazen, corrosive, and affirmatively dangerous corruption is impeachable is itself a point worth fighting for (and fighting with our friends over). Assuming the courts will save us absolves our political leaders of both responsibility and accountability for allowing this kind of mischief to continue, and it absolves all of us of our responsibility to refuse to tolerate those who would just as quickly shrug their shoulders and move on. For those who aren’t paid subscribers, we’ll be back (no later than) Monday with our continuing coverage of the Supreme Court. For those who are, please read on.
Dodgers’ Mookie Betts Sends Shohei Ohtani Message As Concerns Mount
The Los Angeles Dodgers shortstop offered his take on “what’s wrong with Shohei” as the Japanese superstar struggles.
Money Is Ruining Youth Sports
For-profit companies are buying up the rituals of American childhood and selling them back to parents.
Tina Peters pardon by Jared Polis wrongly subverts process
Tina Peters deserved to go to jail but not for nine years, a panel of judges decreed, ordering her resentencing. Jared Polis then stepped in and substituted his own judgment. It was the height of arrogance.
May 20, 2026: The political unknown shaking up the GOP primary for governor; climate-proofing Denver's urban trees; what's wrong with the 'tree of heaven'
Victor Marx has millions of followers online but is a new face in Colorado politics
Scientists were wrong about this “rule-breaking” particle
Scientists spent decades chasing signs of a mysterious new force hidden inside the muon, one of nature’s strangest particles. But after years of supercomputer calculations, researchers discovered the apparent anomaly was likely a calculation error — and the Standard Model still reigns supreme.
It’s the Most Hotly Contested Primary in America. Liberals Are Excited. They’re Getting It All Wrong.
The Epstein files, a MAGA civil war, and an alleged sex scandaled have turbocharged a House race.
Vaginal Health Products Are Booming. Do You Really Need Them?
Gaps in women’s health knowledge and care have created a business opportunity. What could go wrong?
Sorry, Governor — you are wrong on this one
If you have read even a handful of my several hundred columns during the past few years, you likely ran across me saying nice things about Gov. Jared Polis. I genuinely like the guy, whom I met during our mutual first runs for Congress back in 2008. He was very nice to me, even though, […]
Scientists Tweaked the Global Warming Outlook. So Trump Weighed In.
Renewable energy has helped make the worst-case scenario a bit less bad. The president said, falsely, it shows that climate scientists were wrong all along.
Ask Pinstripe Alley: Yankees mailbag questions request
A lot went wrong for New York in a week’s span. What can they do about it?
Whoa! Netflix is Sending Narnia Heading to Theaters...What This Means for the Future of Film
(Welcome to the “Most Important Story of the Week”, my bi-weekly strategy column analyzing the most important (but often not buzziest) news story of the last two weeks. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. Please subscribe.) Here’s a funny thing about the debate over whether streamers should release their movies in theaters first: Both sides think the other side represents the “conventional wisdom”. If you’ve been reading me for any amount of time, or even just scanned my front page, you know I think movies make more money by having a robust theatrical window compared to going straight-to-streaming. I’ve published thousands of words on this topic. And for years, I felt like I was standing up to a wave of opposition. See, while the “put your films in theaters to make money” take was obvious at any point before 2019, post-streaming revolution, most of the trendy thinkers took the opposite point of view. Big names argued that Netflix putting their film straight-to-streaming (“S-to-S” from here on out) actually made more money. Netflix was “disrupting” theaters, just as they disrupted Blockbuster Video, and since innovation is always good, this too was a great idea. This thinking then leaked into the mainstream business outlets like the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg. I read many articles whose take boiled down to “Netflix makes tons of money from S-to-S releases” and “theaters were in structural decline” anyways. Covid-19 shutting down theaters and the 2023 strikes shutting down film production seemingly justified this point of view, as the box office struggled to return to 2017-2019 heights. Yet I’ve also read folks arguing the opposite point: the conventional wisdom says to put films in theaters! From some writers’ points of view, “everyone” actually agrees/agreed with my “send your films to theaters” take—especially the stodgy traditional studios—and folks still didn’t understand Netflix’s genius. I feel like, for the last two years, many people have argued this point as if it’s conventional wisdom. You know what? I may have been wrong. At this point, the “S-to-S strategy makes money” might be the minority viewpoint. Especially with the news this month that Netflix will put at least one film—Greta Gerwig’s Narnia film The Magician’s Nephew—in theaters in 2027 for a full 49-day run is big news. So that’s the story of the week, but I’ll also explain why they’re making this move now and why Netflix may not completely embrace theaters, along with other topics, like how I don’t buy Disney’s “super app” strategy, the latest good news out of the unions, my take on the latest attacks against free speech, and a whole lot more. Let’s get started. Subscribe Most Important Story of the Week - Netflix Goes to Theaters! Listen, I promise not to victory lap too hard today. As I just wrote, I’ve argued against sending films straight-to-streaming for—checks calendar—eight years now. Since 2018. Yikes. That’s a long time. And for years, others painted my thinking as “conventional” in that I was standing up for the status quo against trendy, cool disruption. And that’s not cool! But math is math, and I never could make the S-to-S numbers work. The only thing that ever enabled that model was Wall Street’s brief exuberance for it. It seems like the heads of Netflix now agree with me. (There were always rumors that former head of film for Netflix Scott Stuber argued internally for theatrical releases as well.) As they announced: “The Magician’s Nephew_—the first film in a Narnia series of films—will open on 12-Feb-2027, with a 49 day theatrical exclusive run.”_ I’m a little surprised at how little coverage this big change actually got. Credit to Bloomberg for leading with it and Matt Belloni’s The Town for highlighting it with the provocatively titled podcast “Hell Hath Frozen Over”. But after that? Instead of getting as much coverage as, say, the FCC’s latest egregious crackdown on free speech, this news story got crickets. But it’s massively more important for the future business of entertainment. So let’s start with the obvious question… Why Put Your Movies in Theaters? So…why should Netflix put (some!) of their movies in theaters? Well, I’ve already written that in a very, very, very long article from 2022: [ ](https://entertainment.substack.com/p/the-data-is-in-theatrical-films-massively) [ The Data Is In: Theatrical Films Massively Outperform Straight-To-Streaming Films ](https://entertainment.substack.com/p/the-data-is-in-theatrical-films-massively) Entertainment Strategy Guy · April 5, 2023 [ Read full story ](https://entertainment.substack.com/p/the-data-is-in-theatrical-films-massively) To summarize, theatrical runs make much more money, especially blockbusters, because they earn more money per viewing,1 and that helps boost home entertainment sales. Theatrical films also perform as well or better than the streaming-only films. Now, partially this is driven by increased marketing for said films, but said marketing ultimately boosts the awareness of the movies and drives improved streaming and library performance as well. Again, I’ve made this case after reviewing the economic models and streaming data for years. Just last week, Emily Horgan also made the case for kids films! Yes, it is probably conventional wisdom, but that’s also because it’s true! I’d also argue we’ve seen a lot of data in the various studios’ behavior. As I’ve noted before, the more a studio needs to make money, the likelier they are to put films in theaters. As such, Disney, Universal, Warner Bros., Paramount and Sony all send their major films to theaters. Even if they once made a big S-to-S push (*cough* Disney *cough*), they’ve since relented and returned to theaters. The tech companies don’t need to make money, per se, so it took them years to embrace theaters. Apple doesn’t need to make money because it doesn’t disclose their (likely) Quibi-sized losses each year. (They fear bad press more than losing money.) Amazon announced two years ago that they planned to make Amazon-MGM Studios/Prime Video profitable on its own, and guess what? Now they’re putting films in theaters. That leaves Netflix. They’re in between the “no need to make money at all” and the “desperately need to make money to offset linear TV declines”, so they had less pressure to put some films in theaters. Plus, for years, they were the sexy disruptor, and Wall Street rewarded them for that. (Honestly, they still do.) Yet, even Netflix likely saw the money they were leaving on the table (I’ve estimated it at an easy billion dollars before) so they changed their course. I heard one pundit argue that, because Netflix already makes so much money, they don’t need to make more money, which sort of goes against everything I’ve ever learned about business and economics. Again, to be super-nuanced, sending “films to theaters” does not mean EVERY film. TV movies have been a thing for decades. Lifetime films, Hallmark holiday films, Disney Channel Original Movies, and so on, don’t need theatrical runs. But films above a certain budget level (say $25 to 50 million) almost certainly need theaters to maximize their revenue. The Scenarios (with a Dose of Skepticism) Now time for some skepticism: it won’t surprise me at all if Netflix re-changes course. Specifically, Netflix announced that their Narnia film will go to theaters. And I’d bet anything we see KPop Demon Hunters 2: The Huntering2 also goes to theaters, cause it’s the surest hit outside of a Disney animated sequel right now. But how much does Netflix truly commit to theaters? They’ve already tried to emphasize that this is a one-off move. I see three broad scenarios:
What is Trump’s $1.776 Billion ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund?
The Trump administration is creating a $1.8 billion fund to compensate people it says were wronged by the federal government, a group that could be largely made up of the president’s allies.
Trump moves to dismiss $10 billion suit over leak of tax returns after reports of a resolution
The creation of a fund to pay allies of the president who believe they were wrongly investigated and prosecuted reflects Trump's long-running claims that the Biden administration Justice Department was weaponized against him.
Pop star Shakira is acquitted in a Spanish tax fraud case
A Spanish court acquitted Shakira in a tax fraud case, ordering the government to return more than $64 million in wrongly imposed fines.
'Slot is dreaming' - fans on boss' comments
Melinda: Yes, I believe we have to give Slot chance to right his wrongs in the window and I believe he will do better. Nothing against Arne Slot, I just think he isn't the man for the job. Segie: Slot is dreaming if he thinks the new transfer window is going to change things for Liverpool.
Too many mistakes cost Yankees in loss to Mets
At least one thing went wrong in every aspect of the game as the Yankees took a loss on Saturday.
Now What? With Carbon Pricing Eroded and Pipeline Politics Advancing, Here Are the Pathways for Climate Success
At the end of a whirlwind week of news on carbon pricing and electricity strategy, capping a madcap year of pretty much non-stop, dramatic change, the word across much of Canada’s climate and energy transition community is that climate policy in this country has been shredded. Eviscerated. Hit with a sledgehammer by policy rollbacks that have pushed the country’s 2050 net zero target “well out of reach”. That means it’s never been more important to look for the rays of hope and glimmers of possibility. To glimpse the seeds of the next set of strategies to get Canada’s climate pollution under control and the country into the accelerating global dash away from fossil fuels. And then, once we’ve spotted those possibilities, get on with the hard, day-to-day slog of trying to make them a reality. Nothing takes away from the frustration and the deep disappointment so many climate and energy hawks are expressing, the sense of betrayal by the author of Value(s) and the former UN special envoy for climate action and finance. But we knew two things as the week drew to a close. We’re looking at the world as it most definitely is. And we don’t get to give up finding the pathways to confront climate change and deliver faster, deeper carbon cuts that leave no one else behind. So really, the first question we all have to ask ourselves is: What’s next? Subscribe All the Oxygen in the Room The outpouring of anger and grief over the carbon pricing deal between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has been absolutely understandable. So much of the climate community poured years, more than a decade, into dragging the current federal pricing regime across the finish line, then defending it from a deluge of three-syllable rhymes after the Trudeau government proved utterly incapable of delivering its own message. The policy foisted on us by neo-classical economists took up all the oxygen in the room, burned through years of climate response time that we won’t get back, while cornering climate hawks into the position that the best response to the crisis of our lifetimes is a new tax…in an era of historic anti-tax sentiment. I mean, really—what could possibly have gone wrong? Against that history, let’s appreciate columnist Max Fawcett’s point that even a modest carbon pricing agreement with a government as off-the-wall libertarian/conspiracist as Danielle Smith’s—those adjectives are mine, not Max’s—is a win worth savouring (as long as Smith keeps her promises for a change). But part of living in the world as it is (no, I’m not letting that go) is to be clear-headed about what we can and can’t control. And one thing we get to decide, after seeing this week’s carbon price festivities take up all the oxygen yet again, is whether we want to keep letting that happen. Particularly when success down that road depends on a factor that no one with a climate agenda can control or influence—a provincial carbon pricing mechanism that has been manipulated and eroded beyond its lowest possible denominator. Thankfully, that’s not the way it has to go. Not when we have so many other powerful, practical tools at our disposal, including the ones still available to us through this abominable Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Canada and Alberta. Tools In Our Toolbox When I started roughing out this list, I didn’t expect it to grow to nearly a dozen bullet points. It’s probably still incomplete. Some of the greatest hits in today’s climate solutions toolbox include: • No Carbon Capture, No Pipeline: On Friday, Prime Minister Mark Carney explicitly stated that there’s been no change to the MOU provision that there will be no West Coast pipeline without an industry commitment to build its massive, $16.5-billion carbon capture and storage (CCUS) hub in Northern Alberta, and vice versa. The two megaprojects were joined at the hip when the MOU was signed Nov. 27, and the implementation agreement this week affirmed that they still are. A parade of independent analysts have spent years pointing to the economic and technical flaws in CCUS, while the industry kept postponing its investment decision until it could arm-twist the government for more “clarity” (by which it meant even more lavish taxpayer subsidies) on the project. Now the industry itself is running away from the CCUS hub and insisting the pipeline should proceed without it, but Carney doesn’t seem to be budging from a central tenet of the MOU to which Smith has signed on. • No Subsidies, No Investors: Climate analysts and advocates have quite rightly been hammering away at Carney and his team, insisting that any new capacity the industry wants to build must proceed without new subsidies. The government has responded with a growing collection of funding and financing mechanisms for the very wide menu of industrial development and nation-building projects they say they want to take on, and that menu always includes fossil fuel infrastructure. But it’s hard to see how even the combined fiscal clout of the federal and supportive provincial governments will deliver the financial backing private investors would need when the business case for new fossil fuel development is evaporating before their eyes. Particularly when… • No Market, No Demand, No Investors: As our friend Markham Hislop at Energi Media (our apparently sleepless friend, given the massive volume of great material he’s been churning out) points out this morning, the biggest vulnerability in any pipeline deal is the assumption that Asian buyers will want the oil or liquefied natural ga that our fossil industry is so keen to send them. Hislop writes in part: Ottawa and Alberta are effectively betting that countries like China and India will continue increasing oil imports for decades as their economies grow and energy consumption rises. That assumption underpins the entire economic rationale for expanding oil sands production and building billions of dollars in new export infrastructure. But Asian energy systems are changing rapidly… China, India, South Korea, and other major hydrocarbon importers are now investing hundreds of billions of dollars into electricity systems built around wind, solar, batteries, nuclear, hydro, and expanded transmission infrastructure. Domestic “energy sovereignty” is increasingly replacing the old energy-security model based on stable oil and gas imports. Those investments are expected to sharply slow oil demand growth and eventually reverse it, even as overall energy consumption continues rising. There are also refining constraints. Many Asian refineries and petrochemical complexes are already optimized to process discounted heavy crude from the Middle East and Latin America. That raises serious questions about how much additional Canadian bitumen Asian markets can absorb at profitable prices. Small wonder that there’s still no private sector investor for the project, despite Smith’s government desperately beating the bushes to put together a deal. For now, Alberta is acting as proponent and covering early start-up costs for a pitch to the federal Major Projects Office, which could actually turn into the next tough hurdle for Smith and her pipeline to jump. • Canada Day Looms: How ironic that Canada’s birthday this year could become a major chokepoint for the provincial premier who’s been working so diligently to tear the country apart! The July 1 target date for Alberta’s pipeline proposal is baked into the MOU, was reaffirmed by the implementation plan, but it hadn’t dawned on me that it cuts both ways. As one very smart colleague wrote in an email yesterday, “they’ve thrown the ball into Alberta’s court to get the project proposal on the table really quickly and to have to do a whole pile of work to put together a massive, complicated project that would typically take years to assemble, and they’ve given them weeks to do it.” That makes July 1 a looming deadline that Smith won’t be able to run away from politically, especially with the separatists in her party and her caucus breathing down her neck. (See previous ref to off-the-wall.) But if Alberta comes in with a sloppy, incomplete submission, even after Carney bent over backwards to simplify the application process and the rules that govern it, it may be harder for the province or the industry to blame Ottawa and insist on the faster process they claim their investors are demanding. (Oh, wait—which investors would those be??) • We’ll See You In Court (Then We’ll See You Again): If Carney did cave, that would be just one more reason for Indigenous and other affected communities to take the government and the process to court—Just as Alberta First Nations did, successfully, in response to Smith’s half-baked separation referendum. Veterans of the Harper era have been warning that a shoddy process around fossil fuel infrastructure or other major projects will be a recipe for the very delays that process seeks to avoid. And now more than ever, with renewable energy and energy storage eating fossil fuels’ lunch in import markets around the world, a delayed pipeline or LNG terminal may be as good as a cancelled one. • Charged Up, Ready to Go: With its goal of doubling Canada’s electricity supply to meet a doubling of demand by 2050, the national electricity strategy that Carney unveiled Thursday has a lot to like. With its explicit language about speeding the shift from fuels to more efficient and affordable electricity, global investment and deployment patterns that already favour that shift, an emerging bidirectional power grid, the role of front-line options like rooftop solar and heat pumps, the emergence of electric vehicles as behind-the-meter energy storage, and the domestic jobs and manufacturing to make it all happen, the document doubles down on the essential cornerstone of a faster shift off fossil fuels. The strategy envisions a more prominent role for gas and nuclear power. But some of those provisions were already in the Clean Electricity Regulations that climate hawks are now fighting so hard to defend, inserted as a compromise in a futile attempt to mollify the industry and its political representatives in Alberta and Saskatchewan. But once again, gas will be a tougher sell when it’s more expensive and now so much more unpredictable than the clean alternatives. The new nuclear technologies are still speculative and deeply vulnerable to cost overruns. Increasingly, utilities, developers, and investors know it. Carney declared Thursday that “it doesn’t do us good to be sitting in court all the time with provinces. It doesn’t do us good to be talking past each other. What does do us good is to come together with specific projects.” There are no guarantees, but so much of the language and narrative-building in the electricity strategy suggests the lion’s share of those projects will be renewable. • The Party Has Already Started: The electricity strategy only rarely digs down to specific projects, but provinces representing three-quarters of Canada’s population are already embracing a faster transition. Hydro-Québec is working on a 10-year, $185-billion renewable energy and grid buildout by 2035. Ontario recently brought 10 provinces and territories together in a National Energy Corridor Agreement to boost interprovincial and -territorial transmission infrastructure. And the MOU implementation agreement commits Alberta to facilitate investment in renewable energy projects, a big step back from its continuing, punitive restrictions on renewables development. The electricity strategy envisions much of the financing and infrastructure that will be needed to pull those advances together into an integrated whole. • Delivering on Affordability: The MOU implementation plan has little or nothing to say about affordability (are you surprised?), but the electricity strategy does, with a top-line pledge to reduce home energy costs for seven out of 10 Canadian households by 2050, a total saving of $15 billion across the board. It’s just a start, but it puts affordability on the government’s narrative map. If they’re serious and deliberate about patching together a least-cost energy strategy, it’ll have little if any room for oil, gas, or nuclear—not with powerful evidence, for example, that electricity prices are higher when those prices are set by gas. • Smith Proves that Canada Works: By signing a deal that makes it harder to claim the federal government is blocking a new pipeline, Smith has helped prove Carney’s constant anti-separatist refrain that “Canada works”—incurring the rage, no doubt, of her own political base. Canada also needs to work for anyone who depends on a clean environment, healthy and thriving ecosystems, and safe, stable climate. But with Smith and her separatist constituents setting up as a fifth column for annexation by Donald Trump’s United States, let’s set aside any notion that 51st state status for Canada is a recipe for anything other than climate disaster (and so much else). Resisting and withstanding Trump (just 170 more sleeps until mid-term elections, which is a damn sight better than the 730 we started with) doesn’t mean a free pass for a pipeline, but we can still appreciate it that keeping Canada whole and sovereign is still Carney’s Job One. • The Words Not Spoken: Apart from a commitment to export a million barrels of “low-emission” Alberta bitumen per day (memo to Smith and Carney: You realize that that’s less than the industry is already exporting??), the MOU implementation plan says nothing about the international trade and economic sovereignty deals that Carney has been travelling the world to negotiate. It didn’t have to. Carney doesn’t need permission from Danielle Smith, her American enablers, or her separatist allies to continue building the alliances that will ratchet down our economic dependency on our unstable, unreliable neighbour to the south. But every connection he builds with countries outside North America helps align our economy and our future with a faster shift off fossil fuels. Little if any of this was on our bingo cards a year or two ago. But it’s the pathway that has opened up to us. And if it gives Canada any climate or energy gains at all in an era still dominated by Trump and his increasingly ridiculous tariffs, his loutish trade negotiations and his continuing annexation threats, we have to take the wins. Not least because they’ll be the point of departure for what we can achieve in 2027, 2029, and beyond, as Trump’s grip and this era begin to loosen and then fade. What is Carney Doing? If this line of thought is right—and it’s a possibility, not a prediction—it means that Carney’s actions and decisions are largely about buying time. Time for Trump’s power to wane. Time for Alberta’s separatist/conspiracist virus to spread, mutate, die out, or at least die back, with help from a vaccine of federal steadiness and calm (appropriate enough, for a movement populated largely by vaccine deniers) that no conspiracy theory can dismiss. And time for the government’s trade and investment agenda to deliver results—even knowing that some of those results will bring impacts that front-line communities will not and should not accept. In the immediate moment, none of this changes the way the wider climate community has to respond, from campaigners to investors to front-line practitioners. All of our voices are still essential. But those voices will be stronger and more confident if we have a clearer sense of the brutal game we’ve been pulled into, and a plausible path (or two it three) for playing it to the win we need. This conversation also underscores our biggest task for the remaining years of what was supposed to be the “decisive” decade for climate response: if we can shift the energy narrative in Canada, make it a mainstream view that the country’s preoccupation with oil and gas has us falling farther behind a changing world, we’ll see far better results in the 2030s and beyond. For many veteran climate advocates, taking on that part of the fight will begin with recognizing that most of our friends and family, neighbours and colleagues already understand that climate change is real and right in front of us: they’re looking away and staying silent because they don’t have what climate communicator Katharine Hayhoe calls “efficacy”. As Hayhoe recently pointed out in a feature interview with The Energy Mix, it amounts to science denial to keep hammering away at the dire news about global warming without also helping audiences understand what they can do about it, with multiple studies telling us why that won’t work. Far better to open those conversations with the dominant crises like energy security, food security, emergency preparedness and business continuity, affordability, and financial security that have knocked climate change far lower on the list of public priorities, and will likely keep it there. We Knew This Would Happen Climate hawks have always known this day would come. For decades, we warned that everyone had to pay attention to climate change right now, because it would be much tougher to respond once the crisis itself started affecting our daily lives. We were right, and here we are. But now, thanks to decades of hard work, communities and countries have an alternative to doubling down on fossil fuels. “In 10 years everyone will have ‘always known’ that solar and batteries were going to win,” Morgan Solar Executive Chair Mike Andrade writes on LinkedIn. With the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz roiling energy priorities around the world, Canada and the United States are among the shrinking number of countries that are still very keen on fossil fuel development. Understanding that gap is a first, essential step in spotting the opportunities ahead, and averting the deep economic as well as environmental and social risk we face if we don’t seize them. Thanks for reading The Energy Mix Weekender! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe Mitchell Beer traces his background in renewable energy and energy efficiency back to 1977, in climate change to 1997. Now he and the rest of the Energy Mix team scan 1,200 news headlines a week to pull together The Energy Mix and The Energy Mix Weekender. Chart of the Week BYD Eyes 20 Dealership Locations After Canada Greenlights Chinese EV Imports ‘Sledgehammer’ Carbon Price Deal Boosts Emissions by 230Mt, Aims for Fall 2027 Pipeline Approval ‘Worse Than Harper’: Regulatory Rollback Would Stop Canada from Assessing Project Impacts, Critics Warn Electricity Strategy Aims for Doubling by 2050, Allows ‘Flexibility’ for Gas Power Plants Opposition Mounts as O’Leary’s Data Centre Approved in Drought-Stricken Utah Diluted Carbon Price Misses ‘Reality of the World We’re In’, Could Impede Diversified Trade: Climate Institute $200B in Clean Energy Investment Will Need On-Time Delivery, Reliable Policies, Trade Association Says ‘Sovereign Pipeline’: CEO Pitches to Keep Trans Mountain in Government Hands What a Supercharged El Niño Could Mean for Canada Canada’s future is electric, and here’s how a power grid superhighway would get us there (Toronto Star) The Perilous Waters of Hecate Strait (Globe and Mail) Saudi Aramco profits jump despite conflict in Middle East (The Guardian) Farmers confront rising cost of fertilizer and fuel as spring seeding under way (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) Clarkson forecasts 24% decline in offshore oil, gas capital expenditures (Oil & Gas Journal) Pipe Dreams: How Oil and Gas Fail to Deliver Economic Development in Africa (Oil Change International) Developing countries must hold the pen to script the fossil fuel transition (Climate Home News) Iran war threatens the dream of a post-oil economy in the Gulf (Washington Post) U.S. Oil, Gas Work Force Hits Lowest Level Since 2022 (Rigzone) Why Polestar Is Doubling Down on Net Zero as Rivals Pull Back on EVs (Bloomberg) Why this Michigan utility plans to sell its hydro dams for $13 (E&E News/Politico) Levees can no longer save New Orleans (Vox)
I used Gemini to restart a hobby I abandoned 20 years ago — and I found something unsettling
AI is very helpful, so why does it feel so wrong?
Scientists Say a 40-Year-Old Childhood Obesity Warning May Be Completely Wrong
A long-accepted explanation of childhood growth patterns is now being challenged by new research that questions whether BMI changes in early life reflect fat accumulation at all.
Aronimink is Proving All of Us Wrong
Most of us thought Aronimink would get picked apart by the world's best. We couldn't be happier to be wrong.
Andrew Abbott leaned into some science to get his season back on track
Andrew Abbott locked in on the stick-figure graphic of himself. The world of biomechanics is very advanced. But with Abbott going through the worst rut of his big league career, he opened up to some new ideas to get himself back on track. He asked for some help, and he leaned into some sports science. He said the stick figures made it clear, and he credits biomechanics for helping him get his season back on track. Over his last three starts, he has allowed two total runs in 17 ⅔ innings. “There’s a photo of (me) last year and the year before on a graph, and this year is in a different color,” Abbott said. “You see where you are in comparison to that. Where the hands are at this moment, where your feet are, where the knee is, where your head is at, where your shoulders are at, it breaks it all down if you want it.” When Abbott saw his mechanics in this objective way, he recognized exactly what had been going wrong. “When my tempo, my feet and my hands are aligned, then normally my mechanics are sound,” Abbott said. “And when my mechanics are sound, my stuff behaves normally. The fastball is jumpy. I’m up in velo. My extension is better.” Abbott said that he started diving more into his biomechanics in the middle of April. The Reds have a biomechanics team, which works closely with pitching coach Derek Johnson and hitting coach Chris Valaika. Leading the group is biomecahnics manager Franky Mulloy. “I laugh every day,” Francona said. “When Franky starts talking, I start laughing. I remind him to know his audience.” Francona isn’t a scientist. The Reds’ manager jokes about his own comprehension of the data. But it’s easy for him to recognize the value that the biomechanics team is providing. “That’s why we got them,” Francona said. Abbott said that he had his first big biomechanics-oriented meeting in the middle of April. Behind the scenes, there was already a lot of communication going on within the Reds’ staff. “Franky calculates all the things, builds it into these graphs, and DJ gets them,” Abbott said. “They have their internal communication. Then, we go to them and ask what about this or that. The main thing for me is arm angle.” The data shows Abbott how his arm angle evolves from start to start. He hasn’t meant to change it. But just like all of us, our posture might be different from one day to the next. Pitchers’ arm angles can make minor shifts without the pitcher or even coaches noticing. But the data can’t miss a change like that. Abbott recognized that his arm angle had been moving around without him noticing. Now, he checks in with the data to make sure that his mechanics are in sync. “They get into these cool looking graphs,” Abbott said. “I can’t really describe them. I don’t know what they are. But for me, it’s a photo of a stick figure of myself.” The stick figure of his current positioning is superimposed over previous versions of himself. With that format, Abbott can compare his mechanics on any given day to what they were when he was pitching at his very best. “It was very noticeable from the moment I saw this year as black compared to two years ago and last year, it was very, very different,” Abbott said. “I could see with my eyes without having to ask any questions about the difference in the photos.” For any pitcher, there are a lot of moving pieces in your delivery. For Abbott to be the best version of himself, he needs his head, his arm, his hand, his knee and his feet to be on the right “tempo.” “Tempo is a word I’ve used a lot,” Abbott said. “Getting everything in certain areas working together.” He has been much better at that recently. The data backs that up, and so does Abbott’s ERA. The biomechanics data has also given the Reds’ staff and Abbott some better ideas for some training that he can do between starts. He has added drills to shore up areas of his body that Abbott needed to make stronger. “They make a plan based off what they see,” Abbott said. “If things start changing, we know what to revert back to.” Overall, Abbott says that he’s not a very analytical guy. There’s so much information out there, and he says that it’s important for him to not get too analytical when he breaks down his specific pitches. He has learned the value of being “analytical about mechanics.” And the way that the Reds presented that information to him made it easier for him to make the right adjustments without being overloaded by information. “It was a very simple fix,” Abbott said. “It took a long time to finally get there, feel the results and see it. But for the most part, it was very simple to apply it.”
Chartbook 449: Voldemort on Threadneedle street. The Bank of England and the "haunted house" of English politics.
Imagine the scene: In some Harry Potter version of 21st-century London, a group of deathless UK Treasury officials gathered from across the last century huddle over warm pints and glasses of Chardonnay. Around the table there are officials from the 1920s, the 1930s, the 1970s, 2022 and today. Inevitably, in May 2026, the subject of conversation is the disintegration of the current Labour government. Despite its huge majority in parliament, it has been reduced to tatters by catastrophic local election result. These exposed the fact that rather than having a government with a clear popular majority, the UK is like most other modern societies divided into 5 segments each of which commands between 26 and 16 percent of the vote. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the leadership at Nos 10 and 11 Downing Street - where the Prime Minister and the Chancellor (Treasury Secretary) work - seem paralyzed. They are caught between mounting discontent over unfairness and the cost of living, and tough fiscal strictures that push them into making unpopular spending decisions. In the London pub, the Treasury officials from across the ages, can barely hide their satisfaction at the latest display of democratic politics caught in the vice-grip of financial logic. “Remember the mur d’argent and the banker’s ramp?” “Just like yesterday!” There are smirks around the table. Then the representative of 2026 pipes up: “One thing you have to say about the current lot (referring to the latest hapless Labour government), you don’t have to teach them about the bond market!” There is a murmur of ascent from the Treasury Mandarins. The trauma of the fiscal crisis of September-October 2022 sits deep. Back then, in the final stages of Tory decay, a ‘mini budget’ that challenged fiscal orthodoxy led to a brief but fierce panic in one of the oldest government bond markets in the world (aka gilt market). Now all you have to do is to mention the “bond market” to hush debate. [ Paul Mason@paulmasonnews In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. 1/ 3:57 PM · May 12, 2026 · 466K Views 224 Replies · 674 Reposts · 3.93K Likes ](https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082?s=20) “And the funny thing is”, the young man in the huddle continues, “they don’t even want to talk about … ”. There is a sudden hush. Significant looks are exchanged around the table. About? One of the senior figures puts down his glass with a decisive “clink”. He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named has entered their thoughts. Meanwhile, a few miles away in a grubby pub in Bloomsbury, two conspirators from the camp of Critical Macrofinance huddle over cans of low-alcohol IPA. They look at each other and blurt out loud: “The Bank!” “Everyone in the bloody Labour party is talking about the bond market. But why aren’t they even mentioning … the Bank of England!?” “Why is no one talking about Voldemort?” In Paul Mason’s blogpost, after much chest-thumping about basic fiscal logic, the basic point about the Bank of England is buried in the fine print at #3 in his list of suggestions as to what a radical Labour government might actually be able to do! [ Conflict & Democracy Down with the bond market! Down with gravity! It may seem unfair to focus on Labour MP Paula Barker for her off-the-cuff assertion that the bond market would have to “fall in line” with Andy Burnham, should he replace Keir Starmer as prime minister. But Burnham himself told the New Statesman that Labour had to “get beyond this thing of being in hock to the bond markets… Read more 2 days ago · 100 likes · 3 comments · Paul Mason ](https://htsf.substack.com/p/down-with-the-bond-market-down-with?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web) Back in Bloomsbury they shake their heads and ask: “Didn’t we learn anything from the Eurozone crisis?” Meanwhile, as if summoned to the conversation by some higher force, the “pink pages” announce: “The days of ultra-cheap government borrowing have come to an end” and Martin “Whizzard” Wolf publishes the graph of the season Look at the UK in 2026, perilously positioned on the upper edge of the pack. No wonder no one in London needs any lessons about the “bond market”. But, look again. Imagine how they feel in Rome. What is London’s nightmare in 2026? The nightmare is that you end up like Italy in the early 2010s during the Eurozone crisis. Once comfortably situated in the middle of the pack, watching with horror as your ten-year yields explode to 7 percent and “spreads” become a national nightmare. One of the largest economies in Europe, a founding member of the euro, stigmatized. But the message of the Italian experience is ambiguous. After all, the stigma didn’t last. In 2026, Italy borrows at rates lower not only than the UK but the US. The US, which, as everyone knows, enjoys the “exorbitant privilege” of being the issuer of reserve, safe asets. What kind of magic is this? How did Italy, in the space of fifteen years, go from being good, to bad and back again? Which brings us back to our dissident friends in their Bloombury boozer and their memories of the Eurozone crisis. Italy never was Britain - with its ongoing fiscal deficits. Without interest payments, on primary balance, from 2000 to 2020 Italy ran a tight fiscal ship. Even in 2008 it barely went into deficit and when it was being put on the rack in the early 20210s its primary surplus matched that of austere Germany. So, what happened? How did it end up stigmatized? Of course Italian politics didn’t help. Berlusconi was at the helm and he had legal issues. But amongst friends in the Bloomsbury pub, Berlusconi is a sideshow, the name we whisper to each other is “Trichet”. From 2004 to 2011 the ECB was headed by Jean-Claude Trichet, ex of the French Treasury, more German than the Germans. After 2009 as the news of the Greek fiscal disaster broke, the European bond markets wento into panic mode and Trichet began a brutal game of cat and mouse. Between 2009 and 2011, Trichet intervened in the bond market to help, only when he thought he had compliance with austerity. When he thought they were uncooperative, he withdrew. In the summer of 2011, he even made direct suggestions to his Italian counterparts in Rome, as to how Italy should be governed. It was this cat and mouse game that drove the bond markets crazy and exposed Italy to a violent squeeze. When Mario Draghi took over the ECB at the end of 2011 and declared “whatever it takes”, the pressure on Italy, gradually eased. It is that starring role that has made Draghi into the towering figure in European politics that he remains today. So now you see why voices in London hush when it comes to the Bank of England. “The bond market” isn’t an irresistible objective force like the weather or an avalanche. It can appear like that. But that depends on the way it is being handled, or not handled by the central bank. Which is why the silence about the Bank of England in London right now is so significant. If you think this all sounds a bit fishy, coming from a left-liberal Keynesian like myself, well, let me introduce you to Robin Brooks, who, to put it mildly, plays on a different quidditch team to me. Here, from the position of a fiscal hawk is Robin’s celebratory account of the Bank of England’s role since 2022; In October 2022, at the height of the bond market blow-up in the UK, something incredible happened. Governor Andrew Bailey told British pension funds the Bank of England would end its support program for the country’s fragile gilt market, drawing a line under how much help the central bank was willing to give to exposed pension funds and - implicitly - the government. By the end of that week, Kwasi Kwarteng - the finance minister - had resigned. Prime Minister Liz Truss would soon follow. This episode is so incredible because it contrasts with what happened in the Euro zone earlier that year. Bond markets in Spain and Italy were under pressure amid high inflation and rising interest rates. In the middle of this, Mario Draghi - Italy’s Prime Minister - resigned, compounding pressure on bond markets of high-debt countries on the Euro periphery. Unlike the Bank of England, the ECB caved. It bought Italian and Spanish government bonds in an effort to cap yields and introduced a new tool that signaled to markets it might do such caps more frequently going forward. Faced with pressure on bond markets, the ECB capitulated to political pressure from high-debt countries like Italy and Spain. The Bank of England stood its ground and toppled the Truss government. This kind of thing has long-lasting consequences. It means markets price a higher probability of yield caps in the Euro zone, which keeps Italian and Spanish yields artificially low, while markets feel free to push up UK yields without fear of central bank intervention. As I flagged in yesterday’s post, this means you really can’t compare UK yields to those of other high-debt countries. The UK looks worse, but only because its central bank isn’t interfering with markets. There’s more to this than just that 2022 episode. The Bank of England has also been much more aggressive in its quantitative tightening (QT) than other central banks. If one motivation for quantitative easing (QE) is to lower bond yields - especially longer-dated ones - then it stands to reason QT pushes yields up. The left chart above shows a four-quarter moving average of UK government debt issuance (black line) in percent of GDP and which sectors absorb this issuance, including the Bank of England (blue bars). The right chart above compares the Bank of England’s accumulation or run-off of government bonds (blue line) with that of other central banks, where this blue line is the same as the blue bars in the left chart. The Bank of England was quicker and more aggressive than other central banks in downsizing its bond holdings, so UK yields will have risen more than elsewhere also for this reason, not just because of Governor Andrew Bailey’s remarks in October 2022. Back in October 2025, after a conversation in New York with friends in British politics, my sense of dysphoria was such that I raised the issue of the Bank of England openly in the FT Since 2008, the UK has slid into a deep economic and political predicament. Growth has stagnated to a degree far worse even than in the 1970s. The Tory leadership’s wager on the Brexit referendum spectacularly backfired, leaving the UK isolated from Europe and at the mercy of its special relationship with the US, many of whose political class regard the UK as a basket case. After years of austerity, the Labour party lurched to the left and then back to the centre. The Tory party has been eclipsed by the populist nationalism of Reform. Any British government should be worrying first and foremost about how to restart growth. Instead, Keir Starmer is beset by shades of the gilt market panic triggered by the Liz Truss government in 2022. The debt level is higher than in recent years, but there is no cause for panic. UK debt is at far from critical levels and of long duration. Whether you want to “take back control” or launch progressive economic policy, a democracy dogged by fear of bond market vigilantes is unhealthy. In a country that is a monetary sovereign, this climate points to one thing: a disconnect between the government and the central bank. Since 1997, the independence of the Bank of England has become a sacred cow. But independence is what you make of it. And in the wake of the gilt market crisis of September 2022, relations between the Bank of England and the UK government need a reset. In normal times, there is no doubt that an inflation-targeting independent central bank can serve a country well. But since 2008, the UK and other advanced economies have not had the luxury of such simple problems. To their credit, central bankers around the world have not stood on orthodoxy. After 2008, the US Federal Reserve rescued the global banking system and, through quantitative easing, it stabilised the Treasury market in the face of huge deficits. In Europe, things were trickier. Both the Bank of England under Mervyn King and Jean-Claude Trichet’s European Central Bank played cat and mouse with national governments. This was a high stakes wager that between 2010 and 2012 escalated bond market tension and triggered a disastrous turn to austerity. Shaken by the impact of those shocks, their successors, Mark Carney and Mario Draghi adopted a more protective stance (assuming you were not the government of Greece). Recall that Draghi’s legendary slogan, “Whatever it takes”, was uttered to face down the City of London’s bond vigilantes. In 2015, Draghi launched QE — financial repression by another name. In 2016, Carney used the authority of the Bank of England to stabilise markets following the vote for Brexit, an exemplary demonstration of how central banks can underpin democratic choice, even when those choices are wrong headed. All these were independent central bankers steeped in the best practice of the 1990s, who recognised that historic crises demanded radical action. It was the price surge of 2021-2023 that poisoned the atmosphere. Though the shock came mainly from the supply side, central banks ended up in the dock. Nowhere more so than in the UK. The Bank of England reacted with aggressive normalisation. Faced with a cost of living crisis, the governor called for workers to accept real wage cuts. In early 2022, as gas prices were at record levels and Russia’s army was poised to invade Ukraine, the Bank adopted a stringent programme of quantitative tightening, elevating interest rates. When the Truss government got itself in trouble, the Bank took almost a week to come to the rescue. Rather than enacting a charade of normality, it is time to recognise that in 2025 the UK faces a period of historic transition. To meet this challenge, what is needed is a new concordat with the Bank. This should not ignore inflationary pressures or the long-run trajectory of debt, but should affirm the priority of reviving investment-led growth. One could follow Donald Trump in demanding interest rate cuts. The Bank could shadow the ECB in its commitment to capping Eurozone yields. But the top priority should be to lay the ghost of September 2022. The Bank’s slowing of QT last month was a concession. An immediate and complete end would send the right signal. Such a concordat will not by itself restore sanity to politics, solve the housing problem or rebuild the NHS. But it would help to lift the fear of bond market crisis, which is paralysing the effort by democratic politicians to answer the fundamental questions facing the nation. Now, that call for a new concordat between government and Bank of Englands seems more urgent than ever. The problem is that in October 2025, Starmer still had some authority. Today the government is in tatters. And when you are the “under the harrow” - to echo a phrase of Montagu Norman’s from the 1920s - it is the worst possible time to consider institutional change. To make general arguments at a time of crisis can only seem like special pleading rather than a general argument for long-term change. The same, unfortunately, is also true for the other basic institutional reform that Britain urgently needs i.e. the abolition of the out-dated first past the post electoral system and its replacement by a moderated form of proportional representation. And thirdly - whilst we are saying the quiet parts out loud - Britain needs to reopen the question of EU membership. What the local election results of 2026 show is that this remains a key issue. And what they also show is that there is a clear majority that would favor a return. Until these basic features of Britain’s political economy are addressed the country will carry on its politics as though in a haunted house, governed by governments that lack actual majorities, conjuring up false constraints whilst ignoring the real ones. This one is for DG and MI. I love writing the newsletter. If you enjoy it too and fancy buying me a coffee once a month, you know what to do. Click below! Subscribe
PGA Championship: Rory McIlroy uses a single four-letter word to describe his first round
McIlroy fired a 4-over 74 and is already on the wrong side of the cutline.
We need to practice talking to people we disagree with. Here’s how
"I’ve spent my career as a mediator sitting across from people who are convinced the other side will never understand them," writes Seth Izen. "What I’ve learned, again and again, is that they’re usually wrong."
Confusing THC Vape laws don’t change the health risks for teens, experts warn
THC vape pens are becoming harder for parents and teachers to recognize. Some devices are designed to look like USB drives, highlighters, or other everyday electronics — making them easy for teens to hide. Now, with changing policies surrounding THC products in Texas, experts worry some teenagers may wrongly assume vaping THC is harmless.
WhatsApp launches AI private chat feature
A cyber security expert says deleting chat history could lead to a lack of accountability if things go wrong.
Vance to States: Address Fraud or Lose Federal Medicaid Funding
The Trump administration is set to launch audits of state watchdogs responsible for ferreting out wrongdoing.
Halley’s comet may be named after the wrong person
A medieval monk may have beaten Edmond Halley to one of astronomy’s greatest discoveries by nearly 700 years. Researchers say Eilmer of Malmesbury recognized that the blazing comet seen in 1066 was the same one he had witnessed in 989. At the time, comets were viewed as terrifying omens tied to war and royal deaths, adding even more drama to the famous celestial event shown in the Bayeux Tapestry. The discovery is sparking debate over whether Halley’s Comet deserves a different name.
Newly-independent lawmaker Kevin Kiley calls gerrymandering ‘everything that is wrong with our politics’
Extreme heat is worsening faster for Black Americans
Bill Cassidy's can't-win conundrum, what RFK Jr. gets right and wrong about antidepressants, and more health news
GOP Rep. Chuck Edwards, amid House Ethics inquiry, denies having inappropriate relationship with staff
Republican Rep. Chuck Edwards denied having any inappropriate relationship with staff and told CNN in an interview Tuesday that an investigation by the House Ethics Committee will eventually clear him of any wrongdoing.
Dems’ latest Virginia redistricting scheme draws mockery amid major court filing blunder
Democrats are facing Republican ridicule from a former prosecutor after reportedly filing their Virginia redistricting appeal to the wrong Supreme Court
Good Intentions, No Easy Solution: Why Income Diversification Needs a Gender Reckoning
When commodity prices drop, the path forward is rarely straightforward, and our recent field research in Côte d’Ivoire’s cocoa communities shows that the costs of getting diversification wrong fall hardest on women and girls.
Five moments it all went wrong for Starmer
Winter fuel and welfare U-turns, national insurance hikes, Peter Mandelson’s appointment and disastrous local elections have brought PM to the brink
Trump is normalizing things that would have been scandals in his first term
President Donald Trump is once again looking for loyalty in all the wrong places. But he’s now spent a decade gradually upping the provocations and wearing down his critics’ willingness to raise a fuss.
Scientists Thought Ravens Followed Wolves for Food. They Were Wrong. Ravens Predict Them
New GPS tracking suggests ravens navigate Yellowstone using a mental map of wolf kills.
What Happens When a Sports Columnist Is Very, Very Wrong?
Usually, nothing. Our honorable scribe faces the music about a boneheaded Sixers prediction.
Opinion | We’re Thinking About Mental Health Diagnoses All Wrong
Neither genetics nor brain scans can distinguish a person with depression, A.D.H.D. or autism from one without.
Comedic text-based adventure game There’s Something Wrong with the Hero’s Choices announced for PC
Publisher PLAYISM and developer minatonezumi have announced comedic text-based adventure game There’s Something Wrong with the Hero’s Choices. It will launch for PC via Steam in 2026 wi…
This day in Penguin history: Francis steps up
(Wrote this for tomorrow, and then realized the date was wrong. So pull up a chair for some bonus history content..) 1992: Ronnie tips the balance of the series, and playoffs Pittsburgh’s hopes to defend their 1991 Stanley Cup championship were in deep trouble on May 9th, ahead of Game 4 of the Patrick Division […]
Discord down today: What is wrong with servers? Company addresses API errors - how to fix
Users across multiple regions reported issues accessing Discord today, with many complaining about API errors
Fact check: Trump posts wildly deceptive chart on oil prices
Oil prices are higher now than they were when President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025. But Trump posted a wildly deceptive chart on Friday that wrongly suggests oil prices are lower than they were upon predecessor Joe Biden’s departure.
The Science of Workplace Behavior
When performance issues look like people problems, they’re often really system problems—and this post shows how to spot the difference before you try to fix the wrong thing.
Turning A Big Dial Taht Says "Civilization" On It And Constantly Looking Back At The Audience For Approval Like A Contestant On The Price Is Right
Firaxis has spent too long listening to the wrong fans, and Civilization is paying the price
Here’s what’s wrong with Chief Justice Roberts saying the Supreme Court isn’t political
Duncan Levin: The problem is not that Americans misunderstand what the court is doing but, rather, that Americans can plainly see the pattern in the court's decisions.
Civ 7 'Got It Wrong' As It Ditches Its Most Controversial Mechanic
The 4X strategy game is still recovering from a rough launch
Civilization VII Update Will Finally Let Players Stay as One Civ Through All Ages, as Take-Two Boss Admits: 'We Got It Wrong'
Civilization VII is set for a major update that finally let players stay as one civ through all Ages, as the boss of parent company Take-Two has admitted: “we got it wrong.”
‘We got it wrong’ with Civilization VII, says boss, as major update announced
“What we tried to do was a bridge too far” with Civ 7, says Take-Two CEO…
Opinion: Speaking the truth about the Pope and politics
In 1938, Monsignor Fulton Sheen wrote, “There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the […]
Dolly Parton cancels Vegas residency due to health issues. What is wrong
The iconic Dolly Parton recently canceled a planned a series of appearances in Las Vegas. Here's why.
Dodgers subtle move signals something is wrong with Shohei Ohtani
This can't be a good sign.
Education Is a Fault Line In U.S. Politics. Democrats Are on the Wrong Side
Elorza & Austin: The party has been protecting schools rather than questioning whether they are working. 4 ways to get back on track for families.
Microsoft Defender wrongly flags DigiCert certs as Trojan:Win32/Cerdigent.A!dha
Microsoft Defender is detecting legitimate DigiCert root certificates as Trojan:Win32/Cerdigent.A!dha, resulting in widespread false-positive alerts, and in some cases, removing certificates from Windows.
A California Dream? Some Democrats Fear Harris Picked the Wrong Race.
Some wish Kamala Harris had decided to run for governor in California, where Democrats are struggling to break through, rather than weigh another White House run.
A California Dream? Some Democrats Fear Harris Picked the Wrong Race.
Some wish Kamala Harris had decided to run for governor in California, where Democrats are struggling to break through, rather than weigh another White House run.
There’s a Right and Wrong Way to Use Urgent Care
We asked experts when you should use one, and when you’re better off visiting an ER or primary care doctor instead.
Jays Score 8 In The 8th, Beat Twins
Blue Jays 11 Twins 4 Jays did everything they needed to do in the top of the eighth: But there was also bad news, George Springer took a pitch off the, already broken, toe and had to come out of the game. I’d imagine he’ll be back on the IL. I was wrong the Jays […]
What's wrong with buying Chicago concert and sports tickets? Here's what you told us
Added fees and secondary market prices are keeping many people away from pricey events. For some of them, that's the only solution.
Florida Yacht Charter Business Fights $1.5 Million Tax Bill
A Florida yachting venture that participated in high-stakes offshore fishing tournaments before unforeseen setbacks forced a pivot to luxury charters told the US Tax Court the IRS wrongly defined its business as a hobby and assessed more than $1.5 million in tax liabilities.
Why Your Brain Can Read Scrambled Words, According to Science
The viral claim gets it wrong – and the truth is weirder.
Nico Iamaleava will silence critics, contend for Heisman Trophy
Nico Iamaleava was dubbed the poster child for what's wrong with college football. It turns out, he's everything right for UCLA.
Former employee sues Dartmouth Health for wrongful termination and retaliation
Former chief quality and value officer Carol Barsky alleged that the hospital retaliated against her after she reported medical equipment safety concerns.
The firing of Rob Thomson feels messy
Dave Dombrowski’s handling of the Rob Thomson firing is rubbing some people the wrong way.
Saints’ Jordyn Tyson already being questioned for one important reason
What's wrong with Tyson?
Takeaways from the latest California governor’s debate
Eight candidates seeking to become California’s next governor met for an unwieldy debate Tuesday, where the candidates discussed their plans to make the state more affordable and sought to gain ground in an unsettled field. Xavier Becerra emphasized his past jobs as HHS secretary and California attorney general. But he also put aside a nice guy reputation with a few shots at his opponents. San Joe Mayor Matt Mahan pushed back on California’s gas tax, calling it regressive and arguing that rural and working-class Californians pay more to protect the roads than “wealthy EV owners.” And he said everyone else on stage had healthcare wrong.
Democratic Governor Candidates Break with Mills on Data Centers
Four out of five candidates running to replace Janet Mills said she was wrong to veto a temporary moratorium.
Miraculous comeback falls just short, Mammoth drop Game 4
Here’s what went wrong for the Mammoth in Game 4.
Student hospitalized after suffering burns during science project at MAST Academy in Key Biscayne - WSVN 7News | Miami News, Weather, Sports
KEY BISCAYNE, FLA. (WSVN) - A science experiment gone wrong sent one student to the hospital.According to school officials, a female MAST Academy student sufferedRead More
This Is the Wrong Time for the Predictable Democrat Response to the Correspondents’ Dinner Shooting
A strong midterms push is the only way to start fixing the problems at the heart of this terrible act of gun violence.
‘The Voice’: The 5 Most Impactful Changes Since Season 1
Some of these changes were knockouts. Others hit all the wrong notes.
‘The Voice’: The 5 Most Impactful Changes Since Season 1
Some of these changes were knockouts. Others hit all the wrong notes.
‘The Voice’: The 5 Most Impactful Changes Since Season 1
Some of these changes were knockouts. Others hit all the wrong notes.
‘The Voice’: The 5 Most Impactful Changes Since Season 1
Some of these changes were knockouts. Others hit all the wrong notes.
‘The Voice’: The 5 Most Impactful Changes Since Season 1
Some of these changes were knockouts. Others hit all the wrong notes.
The science of hosting the perfect dinner party
You may be using the wrong plates.
A Whopping 99.86 Percent Of The Solar System’s Mass Is Crammed Into The Sun
All those pictures of the Solar family are giving a lot of people the wrong idea.