Category: Test

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Paul M. Collins Jr., Professor of Legal Studies and Political Science, UMass Amherst

President Donald Trump’s nomination of his former criminal defense attorney, Emil Bove, to be a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, has been mired in controversy.

On June 24, 2025, Erez Reuveni, a former Department of Justice attorney who worked with Bove, released an extensive, 27-page whistleblower report. Reuveni claimed that Bove, as the Trump administration’s acting deputy attorney general, said “that it might become necessary to tell a court ‘fuck you’” and ignore court orders related to the administration’s immigration policies. Bove’s acting role ended on March 6 when he resumed his current position of principal associate deputy attorney general.

When asked about this statement at his June 25 Senate confirmation hearing, Bove said, “I don’t recall.”

And on July 15, 80 former federal and state judges signed a letter opposing Bove’s nomination. The letter argued that “Mr. Bove’s egregious record of mistreating law enforcement officers, abusing power, and disregarding the law itself disqualifies him for this position.”

A day later, more than 900 former Department of Justice attorneys submitted their own letter opposing Bove’s confirmation. The attorneys argued that “Few actions could undermine the rule of law more than a senior executive branch official flouting another branch’s authority. But that is exactly what Mr. Bove allegedly did through his involvement in DOJ’s defiance of court orders.”

On July 17, Democrats walked out of the Senate Judiciary Committee vote, in protest of the refusal by Chairman Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, to allow further investigation and debate on the nomination. Republicans on the committee then unanimously voted to move the nomination forward for a full Senate vote.

As a scholar of the courts, I know that most federal court appointments are not as controversial as Bove’s nomination. But highly contentious nominations do arise from time to time.

Here’s how three controversial nominations turned out – and how Bove’s nomination is different in a crucial way.

Robert Bork

Bork is the only federal court nominee whose name became a verb.

“Borking” is “to attack or defeat (a nominee or candidate for public office) unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism or vilification,” according to Merriam-Webster.

This refers to Republican President Ronald Reagan’s 1987 appointment of Bork to the Supreme Court.

Reagan called Bork “one of the finest judges in America’s history.” Democrats viewed Bork, a federal appeals court judge, as an ideologically extreme conservative, with their opposition based largely on his extensive scholarly work and opinions on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

In opposing the Bork nomination, Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts took the Senate floor and gave a fiery speech: “Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy.”

Ultimately, Bork’s nomination failed by a 58-42 vote in the Senate, with 52 Democrats and six Republicans rejecting the nomination.

Ronnie White

In 1997, Democratic President Bill Clinton nominated White to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. White was the first Black judge on the Missouri Supreme Court.

Republican Sen. John Ashcroft, from White’s home state of Missouri, led the fight against the nomination. Ashcroft alleged that White’s confirmation would “push the law in a pro-criminal direction.” Ashcroft based this claim on White’s comparatively liberal record in death penalty cases as a judge on the Missouri Supreme Court.

However, there was limited evidence to support this assertion. This led some to believe that Ashcroft’s attack on the nomination was motivated by stereotypes that African Americans, like White, are soft on crime.

Even Clinton implied that race may be a factor in the attacks on White: “By voting down the first African-American judge to serve on the Missouri Supreme Court, the Republicans have deprived both the judiciary and the people of Missouri of an excellent, fair, and impartial Federal judge.”

White’s nomination was defeated in the Senate by a 54-45 party-line vote. In 2014, White was renominated to the same judgeship by President Barack Obama and confirmed by largely party-line 53-44 vote, garnering the support of a single Republican, Susan Collins of Maine.

Miguel Estrada

Republican President George W. Bush nominated Estrada to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2001.

Estrada, who had earned a unanimous “well-qualified” rating from the American Bar Association, faced deep opposition from Senate Democrats, who believed he was a conservative ideologue. They also worried that, if confirmed, he would later be appointed to the Supreme Court.

However, unlike Bork – who had an extensive paper trail as an academic and judge – Estrada’s written record was very thin.

Democrats sought to use his confirmation hearing to probe his beliefs. But they didn’t get very far, as Estrada dodged many of the senators’ questions, including ones about Supreme Court cases he disagreed with and judges he admired.

Democrats were particularly troubled by allegations that Estrada, when he was screening candidates for Justice Anthony Kennedy, disqualified applicants for Supreme Court clerkships based on their ideology.

According to one attorney: “Miguel told me his job was to prevent liberal clerks from being hired. He told me he was screening out liberals because a liberal clerk had influenced Justice Kennedy to side with the majority and write a pro-gay-rights decision in a case known as Romer v. Evans, which struck down a Colorado statute that discriminated against gays and lesbians.”

When asked about this at his confirmation hearing, Estrada initially denied it but later backpedaled. Estrada said, “There is a set of circumstances in which I would consider ideology if I think that the person has some extreme view that he would not be willing to set aside in service to Justice Kennedy.”

Unlike the Bork nomination, Democrats didn’t have the numbers to vote Estrada’s nomination down. Instead, they successfully filibustered the nomination, knowing that Republicans couldn’t muster the required 60 votes to end the filibuster. This marked the first time in Senate history that a court of appeals nomination was filibustered. Estrada would never serve as a judge.

Bove stands out

As the examples of Bork, Estrada and White make clear, contentious nominations to the federal courts often involve ideological concerns.

This is also true for Bove, who is opposed in part because of the perception that he is a conservative ideologue.

But the main concerns about Bove are related to a belief that he is a Trump loyalist who shows little respect for the rule of law or the judicial branch.

This makes Bove stand out among contentious federal court nominations.

Paul M. Collins Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Emil Bove’s appeals court nomination echoes earlier controversies, but with a key difference – https://theconversation.com/emil-boves-appeals-court-nomination-echoes-earlier-controversies-but-with-a-key-difference-261347

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, Frank and Bethine Church Endowed Chair of Public Affairs, Boise State University

Champions of the almost entirely party-line vote in the U.S. Senate to erase US$1.1 billion in already approved funds for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting called their action a refusal to subsidize liberal media.

“Public broadcasting has long been overtaken by partisan activists,” said U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, insisting there is no need for government to fund what he regards as biased media. “If you want to watch the left-wing propaganda, turn on MSNBC,” Cruz said.

Accusing the media of liberal bias has been a consistent conservative complaint since the civil rights era, when white Southerners insisted news outlets were slanting their stories against segregation. During his presidential campaign in 1964, U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater of Arizona complained that the media was against him, an accusation that has been repeated by every Republican presidential candidate since.

But those charges of bias rarely survive empirical scrutiny.

As chair of a public policy institute devoted to strengthening deliberative democracy, I have written two books about the media and the presidency, and another about media ethics. My research traces how news institutions shape civic life and why healthy democracies rely on journalism that is independent of both market pressure and partisan talking points.

That independence in the United States – enshrined in the press freedom clause of the First Amendment – gives journalists the ability to hold government accountable, expose abuses of power and thereby support democracy.

Trusting independence

Ad Fontes Media, a self-described “public benefit company” whose mission is to rate media for credibility and bias, have placed the reporting of “PBS NewsHour” under 10 points left of the ideological center. They label it as both “reliable” and based in “analysis/fact.” “Fox and Friends,” by contrast, the popular morning show on Fox News, is nearly 20 points to the right. The scale starts at zero and runs 42 points to the left to measure progressive bias and 42 points to the right to measure conservative bias. Ratings are provided by three-person panels comprising left-, right- and center-leaning reviewers.

A 2020 peer-reviewed study in Science Advances that tracked more than 6,000 political reporters likewise found “no evidence of liberal media bias” in the stories they chose to cover, even though most journalists are more left-leaning than the rest of the population.

A similar 2016 study published in Public Opinion Quarterly said that media are more similar than dissimilar and, excepting political scandals, “major
news organizations present topics in a largely nonpartisan manner,
casting neither Democrats nor Republicans in a particularly favorable
or unfavorable light.”

Surveys show public media’s audiences do not see it as biased. A national poll of likely voters released July 14, 2025, found that 53% of respondents trust public media to report news “fully, accurately and fairly,” while only 35% extend that trust to “the media in general.” A majority also opposed eliminating federal support.

Contrast these numbers with attitudes about public broadcasters such as MTVA in Hungary or the TVP in Poland, where the state controls most content. Protests in Budapest October 2024 drew thousands demanding an end to “propaganda.” Oxford’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism reports that TVP is the least trusted news outlet in the country.

While critics sometimes conflate American public broadcasting with state-run outlets, the structures are very different.

Safeguards for editorial freedom

In state-run media systems, a government agency hires editors, dictates coverage and provides full funding from the treasury. Public officials determine – or make up – what is newsworthy. Individual media operations survive only so long as the party in power is happy.

Public broadcasting in the U.S. works in almost exactly the opposite way: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private nonprofit with a statutory “firewall” that forbids political interference.

More than 70% of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s federal appropriation for 2025 of US$1.1 billion flows through to roughly 1,500 independently governed local stations, most of which are NPR or PBS affiliates but some of which are unaffiliated community broadcasters. CPB headquarters retains only about 5% of that federal funding.

Stations survive by combining this modest federal grant money with listener donations, underwriting and foundation support. That creates a diversified revenue mix that further safeguards their editorial freedom.

And while stations share content, each also has latitude when it comes to programming and news coverage, especially at the local level.

As a public-private partnership, individual communities mostly own the public broadcasting system and its affiliate stations. Congress allocates funds, while community nonprofits, university boards, state authorities or other local license holders actually own and run the stations. Individual monthly donors are often called “members” and sometimes have voting rights in station-governance matters. Membership contributions make up the largest share of revenue for most stations, providing another safeguard for editorial independence.

Broadly shared civic commons

And then there are public media’s critical benefits to democracy itself.

A 2021 report from the European Broadcasting Union links public broadcasting with higher voter turnout, better factual knowledge and lower susceptibility to extremist rhetoric.

Experts warn that even small cuts will exacerbate an already pernicious problem with political disinformation in the U.S., as citizens lose access to free information that fosters media literacy and encourages trust across demographics.

In many ways, public media remains the last broadly shared civic commons. It is both commercial-free and independently edited.

Another study, by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School in 2022, affirmed that “countries with independent and well-funded public broadcasting systems also consistently have stronger democracies.”

The study highlighted how public media works to bridge divides and foster understanding across polarized groups. Unlike commercial media, where the profit motive often creates incentives to emphasize conflict and sensationalism, public media generally seeks to provide balanced perspectives that encourage dialogue and mutual respect. Reports are often longer and more in-depth than those by other news outlets.

Such attention to nuance provides a critical counterweight to the fragmented, often hyperpartisan news bubbles that pervade cable news and social media. And this skillful, more balanced treatment helps to ameliorate political polarization and misinformation.

In all, public media’s unique structure and mission make democracy healthier in the U.S. and across the world. Public media prioritizes education and civic enlightenment. It gives citizens important tools for navigating complex issues to make informed decisions – whether those decisions are about whom to vote for or about public policy itself. Maintaining and strengthening public broadcasting preserves media diversity and advances important principles of self-government.

Congress’ cuts to public broadcasting will diminish the range and volume of the free press and the independent reporting it provides. Ronald Reagan once described a free press as vital for the United States to succeed in its “noble experiment in self-government.” From that perspective, more independent reporting – not less – will prove the best remedy for any worry about partisan spin.

Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. PBS and NPR are generally unbiased, independent of government propaganda and provide key benefits to US democracy – https://theconversation.com/pbs-and-npr-are-generally-unbiased-independent-of-government-propaganda-and-provide-key-benefits-to-us-democracy-261512

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Joyeeta Gupta, Professor, Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam

In September 2024, members of the United Nations adopted the Pact for the Future at the Summit of the Future, held in New York City. The pact, including its two annexes on the Declaration on Future Generations and the Global Digital Compact, builds on multilateral agreements following the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

---

Read more:
How the United Nations’ Pact for the Future could help heal a fractured world

---

The pact commits to “protect the needs and interests of present and future generations through the actions stated in the pact.” These actions address the digital divide, inclusion, digital space that respects human rights and promotes responsible governance of artificial intelligence (AI).

Additionally, the Declaration on Future Generations includes 10 principles and some actions. The pact also encourages accelerated development of AI, while considering both its positive and negative aspects within a broader aim to protect human rights.

Meeting needs

As the former co-chair of the Earth Commission and current co-chair of the UN 10-member group, I have worked on incorporating justice issues within environmental studies. Along with my colleagues, we recently published an article where we explain how we have developed Earth system boundaries based on the principle of not causing significant harm to others as part of a broader human rights and Earth systems justice approach.

While the pact acknowledges and builds on the Sustainable Development Goals, it does not adequately take into account the latest science that shows we have crossed many safe and just Earth system boundaries. There’s also a challenge here: if we were to meet everyone’s minimum needs as required by the social Sustainable Development Goals, we will cross boundaries further.

A human rights approach

The pact and its annexes make reference to justice, future generations and Africa. Justice is anchored in a human rights approach. The pact only mentions reducing harm in relation to digital platforms and explosive weapons, but this could be strengthened with the addition of the no-harm principle — not causing significant harm to human and non-human others — in other areas such as climate change. Other forms of justice are scarcely accounted for.

These include epistemic justice (or how different knowledge systems are included), and data justice (the right to create, control, access, apply and profit from data). Procedural justice — the right to information, decision-making, civic space and courts relating to the allocation of resources and responsibilities — is also vital.

Other important forms of justice include recognition justice, interspecies, and intragenerational justice. Earth system justice is needed to identify and live within Earth system boundaries and equitably share resources and risks.

The pact notes that “if we do not change course, we risk tipping into a future of persistent crisis and breakdown,” but it does not make reference to the latest science on planetary boundaries.

Climate justice

We argue that implementing the pact requires recognizing how boundaries, foundations and inequality are inextricably are linked together. The Earth Commission argues that safe planetary boundaries are not necessarily just. To minimize significant harm to others, it may be necessary to have more stringent targets.

For example, 1.5 C is the proposed safe climate boundary for climate change, while 1 C is the proposed just boundary since, at this level, already tens of millions of people are exposed to extreme heat and humidity. Eight safe and just boundaries for climate, water, nutrients, biosphere and aerosols have been identified, seven of which have been crossed.

---

Read more:
What are ‘planetary boundaries’ and why should we care?

---

In terms of foundations, theoretically, meeting people’s minimum needs would lead to further crossing these boundaries. We need to recognize that living within safe and just boundaries requires meeting everyone’s minimum needs.

This requires deploying efficient technologies and redistributing resources to make up the deficit. But governments are reluctant to take this approach, probably because it limits the use of resources and sinks.

Technological support

Living within climate boundaries will require a just transition. Globally, if we wish to remain below the safe climate boundary, we will have to completely stop using fossil fuels. Since most remaining fossil fuel reserves are in the developing world, this will put a heavy burden on them. At the same time, climate impacts are considerable, so finance for a just energy transformation is needed.

While the pact restates the importance of the 2030 agenda in bolstering sustainable development, it lacks a credible mechanism for monitoring whether the national pledges are implemented. This will require strong collaboration among policy, science and the private sector.

There is a wealth of information in Earth observations from space that can assist in monitoring progress. This information, if made available to researchers and policymakers, can be integrated into national, regional and global environmental risk assessments.

Digital twins are another technological development that can support these assessments. The European Commission’s Digital Twin of the Ocean, for example, is a virtual model. It integrates diverse ocean data sources and leverages the power of big data, advanced computing and AI to provide real-time insights and scenario simulations under a variety of conditions. Such systems can enhance our ability to cope with environmental challenges.

As AI is likely to dramatically develop in the few two years, it is critical to be ready to shape and use its potential in a positive way to implement the Pact while reducing its dependence on fossil fuels.

A ‘cash flow crisis’

Finally, the pact calls for urgent, predictable and stable funding for the UN and developing countries. This will enable UN bodies to deliver services and administer programs in accordance with international law. The UN Secretariat is facing a severe “cash flow crisis,” as major contributors are paying too late or too little.

The UN Honour Roll lists member states that have paid membership fees in full: 151 of 193 countries paid in full, but only 51 of them on time in 2024. Among 13 countries with assessed fees of more than US$50 million, only Canada, the United Kingdom, the Republic of Korea, Germany and Italy paid on time.

With most members paying late, and large ones not paying till later or only partially, this severely constrains the ability of the UN to provide planned, impartial and inclusive services to the global community.

There is also a need for funding to enable developing countries to adapt and transform. But if such funding comes through loans, this may further exacerbate existing developing country debt: in 2023, developing countries made debt repayments of US$1.4 trillion.

We need redistribution of resources. Until then, it is critical that new technologies such as AI are deployed to help us return within the boundaries and meet minimum needs without exacerbating climate change through its fossil fuels dependence. The UN plays a critical role in facilitating human, environmental and earthy system justice, but shrinking resources hamper its ability to deliver.

Joyeeta Gupta receives funding from European Research Council and the Dutch Research Council (NWO).

– ref. AI and other future technologies will be necessary — but not sufficient — for enacting the UN’s Pact for the Future – https://theconversation.com/ai-and-other-future-technologies-will-be-necessary-but-not-sufficient-for-enacting-the-uns-pact-for-the-future-247511

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Mylon Ollila, PhD Candidate in Indigenous Economic Policy, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue (UQAT)

Canada faces economic headwinds due to geopolitical change, including a trade war with its closest economic partner, the United States.

Canada’s policymakers are searching for new, sustainable sources of economic strength. One such source is already here and is being overlooked: the emerging Indigenous economy. It has the potential to boost Canada’s economy by more than $60 billion a year.

But Indigenous Peoples are still largely seen as an economic liability to manage instead of an opportunity for growth. It is time for a mindset shift. For it to happen, the federal government should remove unfair economic barriers and invest in closing the employment and income gap.

Canada’s future depends on Indigenous Peoples

Economic growth is projected to decline over the coming years for developed nations, with Canada expected to have the lowest GDP of the 38 OECD countries by 2060. As growth stalls, living standards will decline and governments will face increased fiscal pressure.

Compounding this challenge is Canada’s aging labour force. The number of people aged 65 and over is growing six times faster than the number of children aged 14 and under — those who will be entering the job market in the coming years. This demographic shift places additional pressure on pensions, the health-care system and the economy.

---

Read more:
Enabling better aging: The 4 things seniors need, and the 4 things that need to change

---

But these gloomy projections often overlook one of Canada’s comparative advantages: a young Indigenous population, growing at a rate outpacing the non-Indigenous population. While Indigenous Peoples comprise five per cent of Canada’s population, they only contribute 2.4 per cent of the total GDP.

If Indigenous Peoples could participate in the economy at the same rate as non-Indigenous Canadians, their GDP contribution could increase from about $55 billion to well over $100 billion annually.

Despite this potential, Canada has largely failed to invest in Indigenous Peoples and reform the colonial structures that create inequality.

While some progress has been made, such as the First Nations Fiscal Management Act that offers communities tools to strengthen their economies, progress is still too slow.

Economic barriers hold back First Nations

There are two parts to every economy: economic advantages and the institutions that make those advantages actionable. Some institutions lower the costs of doing business and encourage investment, while others do the opposite. Investment naturally flows to places that have both economic advantages and low costs of doing business.

In Canada, strong property rights lower the costs of doing business and support the finance of business ventures. An efficient tax system creates predictability and allows governments to provide services. Business-grade infrastructure reduces logistical costs. All these institutions work together to support Canada’s economic development.

In contrast, First Nations communities are constrained by Canadian institutions. The Indian Act limits First Nations’ authority over their own affairs, segregating them from mainstream finance mechanisms. Unclear legal jurisdiction between federal, provincial and Indigenous governments and weak property rights discourage business investments.

Limited authority and fiscal powers mean First Nations governments cannot provide services at national standards and must depend on other governments.

Compounding these issues is the fragmented, insufficient and culturally inappropriate nature of federal support systems. First Nations people have economic advantages and an entrepreneurial spirit, but they are burdened with unfair economic barriers, such as inadequate infrastructure, limited access to capital and administrative hurdles.

Investing in Indigenous economies is vital

In 1997, the Royal Bank of Canada predicted that not investing in Indigenous Peoples would widen the socioeconomic gap. As predicted, this is what happened.

Canada has consistently chosen to manage poverty instead of investing in growth. While financial support for Indigenous Peoples more than doubled over the last decade, it only resulted in modest improvement in living standards.

The RoadMap Project, a national initiative led by the First Nations Financial Management Board and other Indigenous organizations, proposes a pathway to economic reconciliation. Investing in the Indigenous economy means supporting Indigenous training, providing access to capital for Indigenous organizations and reforming the institutions that continue to impose systemic barriers.

Education is one of the most effective ways to reduce poverty, improve health outcomes and drive economic development. The federal government should therefore support training programs designed to meet Indigenous needs.

Online learning could help remote communities achieve educational goals, but its success depends on major investments in high-speed internet access, which remains lacking in many areas.

Indigenous organizations are best positioned to understand and respond to local training needs. That is why Indigenous control over revenue transfers and program design must be central to any future investments in education. To support this, the federal government should partner with Indigenous education institutions to develop common goals and values.

Financing and supporting Indigenous growth

Indigenous Peoples develop new businesses at nine times the Canadian average, but only receive 0.2 per cent of available credit. Most Indigenous enterprises are small and cannot grow without viable financing options.

Yet, individual Indigenous entrepreneurs and First Nations governments face challenges securing loans and financial support.

Internationally, development banks have been used to fill credit gaps when the private sector is unable to meet the needs of emerging economies.

In Canada, the First Nations Financial Management Board and other Indigenous organizations are calling for a similar solution: the creation of an Indigenous Development Finance Organization. By lending to Indigenous governments and businesses, this finance organization could bridge the gap between the financial markets and the Indigenous economy.

While investments in capacity and development finance are urgent needs, only the dismantling of economic barriers and increased access to effective institutions can assure Indigenous development.

Legislation such as the First Nations Fiscal Management Act and the Framework Agreement on First Nation Land Management can support Indigenous economies through taxation, budgeting, land codes and financial laws. They offer a pathway between the Indian Act framework and self-government, without waiting on lengthy negotiations.

Growing stronger together

Canada’s economic future will remain uncertain if short-term solutions keep being prioritized while ignoring the growth potential of the Indigenous economy. Improvements to the status quo are no longer sufficient.

The federal government must support Indigenous-led initiatives like the RoadMap Project to foster shared growth and prosperity for Indigenous Peoples and all Canadians alike. Investments are needed to narrow the employment and income gap through new supports for capacity, access to capital and institutional reform.

Mylon Ollila is a Senior Strategist for the First Nations Financial Management Board.

Hugo Asselin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. As Canada’s economy faces serious challenges, the Indigenous economy offers solutions – https://theconversation.com/as-canadas-economy-faces-serious-challenges-the-indigenous-economy-offers-solutions-261252

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Christopher Dietzel, Postdoctoral fellow, the DIGS Lab, Concordia University

Dating apps like Tinder, Bumble and Grindr have become a ubiquitous part of modern dating for young people looking to meet potential partners. However, many Gen Z users are increasingly forgoing dating apps, feeling burnt out by the whole process.

---

Read more:
Why in-person dating is making a comeback — and why Gen Z is struggling with it

---

Dating apps have been plagued with concerns about harassment, sexual and gender-based violence, romance scams and other safety issues. These risks are elevated for LGBTQ+ people who can experience hate crimes, physical violence and other harms when using dating apps.

With anti-LGBTQ+ movements rising in Canada, the United States and around the world, it is important to understand the potential dangers of online dating and how LGBTQ+ people can promote their safety.

We recently conducted an online survey that looks into LGBTQ+ people’s experiences with dating apps in Canada as part of a research project at Concordia University’s Digital Intimacy, Gender & Sexuality (DIGS) Lab. We analyzed 624 participant responses that reveal the different harms LGBTQ+ users face and the strategies they use to mitigate those harms.

---

Dating today can feel like a mix of endless swipes, red flags and shifting expectations. From decoding mixed signals to balancing independence with intimacy, relationships in your 20s and 30s come with unique challenges. Love IRL is the latest series from Quarter Life that explores it all.

These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love to help you build meaningful connections, no matter your relationship status.

---

Harms against LGBTQ+ dating app users

LGBTQ+ dating users can experience a variety of harms, including unwanted sexual advances, harassment, coercion, discrimination and catfishing.

The most common types of harms that participants experienced were sexual harms (like receiving unsolicited sexual content, sexual harassment and sexual assault), emotional harms (like bullying and threatening behavior) and social harms (like discrimination and exclusion). Sexual harm was more common online and emotional harm was more common in person.

Many trans and non-binary participants were insulted with slurs and told their identity was not real by other dating app users. Some people they matched with would also verbally attack them or make death threats. Other trans and non-binary participants reported that people were often nice and friendly online, but then would harass them in person.

Like other studies have found, objectification and fetishization were also common for trans and non-binary users.

Racialized LGBTQ+ users said people often made racist comments or used slurs against them. Racial stereotyping and fetishizing was also common. For example, one participant said that she received “comments about my body based on my race and implications of what a Black woman could do with her lips.”

As an example of the discrimination Asian men experience, one participant said “white people tend to fetishize Asian bodies and assume they’re submissive.” Other research has similarly found that racial exclusion and racial fetishization are common on dating apps.

There were participants who reported being drugged or sexually assaulted when they met someone in person. Unfortunately, many people who use dating apps say that they have experienced sexual violence online or in person.

Younger LGBTQ+ users reported feeling pressured or coerced into doing sexual acts by older users. For example, one participant said they felt pushed into doing sexual acts they were not comfortable with.

Sextortion is on the rise among youth, and dating apps can facilitate sextortion and romance scams.

Strategies for staying safe

If you or someone you know uses dating apps, there are steps you can take to make your experience safer.

The LGBTQ+ people in our study employed strategies like verifying someone’s identity through video calls or by checking out their social media profiles. When meeting someone in person for the first time, participants would choose to meet in a public space and share their location with family or close friends.

These are some examples of common strategies, often encouraged by dating app companies, that you can employ to promote your safety.

Safety is not just the individual’s responsibility, however. Dating app companies need to keep their users safe, and participants from the survey gave suggestions to make dating apps safer. For instance, many recommended better content moderation systems to filter out inappropriate messages and problematic users.

Participants wanted features to make it easier for marginalized communities to connect and avoid people who harass or discriminate. They also wanted better enforcement and stricter consequences for people who violated an app’s community guidelines, like making it impossible, not just harder, for banned users to get back on the apps.

Some dating apps have recently implemented new safety features, but many users find their moderation systems inadequate.

Protecting your privacy

Dating apps have also been criticized for prioritizing profits over users’ security and well-being. That said, users do not want dating apps to police their every move. Too much moderation can impede authenticity and spontaneity.

Another thing to think about is how new technology is being incorporated into the apps you use and what that means for your safety and privacy. Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming more popular and accessible, and dating app companies are integrating this technology into their platforms to help manage user safety.

However, AI in online dating raises new concerns about data privacy, content moderation and technological bias — all of which can negatively impact the user experience.

App terms and conditions are notoriously long and difficult to understand, and most people are unlikely to read them at all.

However, there is information publicly available to help you understand how your data will be used and stored. There are also features in some apps to help you manage your privacy.

With evolving technologies and changes in the sociopolitical climate, these safety issues are not going away. In fact, they may become more complicated in the future. It is crucial to think about what you can do promote your safety while using dating apps, both online and in person.

Christopher Dietzel receives funding from Le Fonds de recherche du Québec – Société et culture (FRQSC).

André Matar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. More than just a bad date: Navigating harms on LGBTQ+ dating apps – https://theconversation.com/more-than-just-a-bad-date-navigating-harms-on-lgbtq-dating-apps-252297

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ali Shiri, Professor of Information Science & Vice Dean, Faculty of Graduate & Postdoctoral Studies, University of Alberta

Generative AI, especially large language models (LLMs), present exciting and unprecedented opportunities and complex challenges for academic research and scholarship.

As the different versions of LLMs (such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity.ai and Grok) continue to proliferate, academic research is beginning to undergo a significant transformation.

Students, researchers and instructors in higher education need AI literacy knowledge, competencies and skills to address these challenges and risks.

In a time of rapid change, students and academics are advised to look to their institutions, programs and units for discipline-specific policy or guidelines regulating the use of AI.

Researcher use of AI

A recent study led by a data science researcher found that at least 13.5 per cent of biomedical abstracts last year showed signs of AI-generated text.

---

Read more:
AI-detection software isn’t the solution to classroom cheating — assessment has to shift

---

Large language models can now support nearly every stage of the research process, although caution and human oversight are always needed to judge when use is appropriate, ethical or warranted — and to account for questions of quality control and accuracy. LLMs can:

• Help brainstorm, generate and refine research ideas and formulate hypotheses;

• Design experiments and conduct and synthesize literature reviews;

• Write and debug code;

• Analyze and visualize both qualitative and quantitative data;

• Develop interdisciplinary theoretical and methodological frameworks;

• Suggest relevant sources and citations, summarize complex texts and draft abstracts;

• Support the dissemination and presentation of research findings, in popular formats.

However, there are significant concerns and challenges surrounding the appropriate, ethical, responsible and effective use of generative AI tools in the conduct of research, writing and research dissemination. These include:

• Misrepresentation of data and authorship;

• Difficulty in replication of research results;

• Data and algorithmic biases and inaccuracies;

• User and data privacy and confidentiality;

• Quality of outputs, data and citation fabrication;

• And copyright and intellectual property infringement.

AI research assistants, ‘deep research’ AI agents

There are two categories of emerging LLM-enhanced tools that support academic research:

1. AI research assistants: The number of AI research assistants that support different aspects and steps of the research process is growing at an exponential rate. These technologies have the potential to enhance and extend traditional research methods in academic work. Examples include AI assistants that support:

• Concept mapping (Kumu, GitMind, MindMeister);

• Literature and systematic reviews (Elicit, Undermind, NotebookLM, SciSpace);

• Literature search (Consensus, ResearchRabbit, Connected Papers, Scite);

• Literature analysis and summarization (Scholarcy, Paper Digest, Keenious);

• And research topic and trend detection and analysis (Scinapse, tlooto, Dimension AI).

2. ‘Deep research’ AI agents: The field of artificial intelligence is advancing quickly with the rise of “deep research” AI agents. These next-generation agents combine LLMs, retrieval-augmented generation and sophisticated reasoning frameworks to conduct in-depth, multi-step analyses.

Research is currently being conducted to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of deep research tools. New evaluation criteria are being developed to assess their performance and quality.

Criteria include elements such as cost, speed, editing ease and overall user experience — as well as citation and writing quality, and how these deep research tools adhere to prompts.

The purpose of deep research tools is to meticulously extract, analyze and synthesize scholarly information, empirical data and diverse perspectives from a wide array of online and social media sources. The output is a detailed report, complete with citations, offering in-depth insights into complex topics.

In just a short span of four months (December 2024 to February 2025), several companies (like Google Gemini, Perplexity.ai and ChatGPT) introduced their “deep research” platforms.

The Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, a non-profit AI research institute based in Seattle, is experimenting with a new open access research tool called Ai2 ScholarQA that helps researchers conduct literature reviews more efficiently by providing more in-depth answers.

Emerging guidelines

Several guidelines have been developed to encourage the responsible and ethical use of generative AI in research and writing. Examples include:

• The Government of Canada Guide on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence. This counsels federal institutions and academics to explore potential uses of generative AI tools, and follow a recommended framework for decision-making about them, including responsible communication and transparency.

• Guidance from publicly funded federal agencies — collectively known as the Tri-Council Agency — offering research grants and programs covering different research disciplines.

• The Observatory in AI Policies in Canadian Post-Secondary Education, run by the firm Higher Education Strategy Associates, lists AI policies and guidelines developed by more than 30 Canadian higher education institutions.

LLMs support interdisciplinary research

LLMs are also powerful tools to support interdisciplinary research. Recent emerging research (yet to be peer reviewed) on the effectiveness of LLMs for research suggests they have great potential in areas such as biological sciences, chemical sciences, engineering, environmental as well as social sciences. It also suggests LLMs can help eliminate disciplinary silos by bringing together data and methods from different fields and automating data collection and generation to create interdisciplinary datasets.

Helping to analyze and summarize large volumes of research across various disciplines can aid interdisciplinary collaboration. “Expert finder” AI-powered platforms can analyze researcher profiles and publication networks to map expertise, identify potential collaborators across fields and reveal unexpected interdisciplinary connections.

This emerging knowledge suggests these models will be able to help researchers drive breakthroughs by combining insights from diverse fields — like epidemiology and physics, climate science and economics or social science and climate data — to address complex problems.

---

Read more:
The world is not moving fast enough on climate change — social sciences can help explain why

---

Research-focused AI literacy

Canadian universities and research partnerships are providing AI literacy education to people in universities and beyond.

The Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute offers K-12 AI literacy programming and other resources. The institute is a not-for profit organization and part of Canada’s Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy.

Many universities are offering AI literacy educational opportunities that focus specifically on the use of generative AI tools in assisting research activities.

Collaborative university work is also happening. For example, as vice dean of the Faculty of Graduate & Postdoctoral Studies at the University of Alberta (and an information science professor), I have worked with deans from the University of Manitoba, the University of Winnipeg and Vancouver Island University to develop guidelines and recommendations around generative AI and graduate and postdoctoral research and supervision.

Considering the growing power and capabilities of large language models, there is an urgent need to develop AI literacy training tailored for academic researchers.

This training should focus on both the potential and the limitations of these tools in the different stages of the research process and writing.

Ali Shiri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. AI in universities: How large language models are transforming research – https://theconversation.com/ai-in-universities-how-large-language-models-are-transforming-research-260547

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Hanri Mostert, SARChI Chair for Mineral Law in Africa, University of Cape Town

A US-brokered peace deal between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda binds the two African nations to a worrying arrangement: one where a country signs away its mineral resources to a superpower in return for opaque assurances of security.

The peace deal, signed in June 2025, aims to end three decades of conflict between the DRC and Rwanda.

A key part of the agreement binds both nations to developing a regional economic integration framework. This arrangement would expand cooperation between the two states, the US government and American investors on “transparent, formalized end-to-end mineral chains”.

Despite its immense mineral wealth, the DRC is among the five poorest countries in the world. It has been seeking US investment in its mineral sector.

The US has in turn touted a potential multi-billion-dollar investment programme to anchor its mineral supply chains in the traumatised and poor territory.

The peace that the June 2025 deal promises, therefore, hinges on chaining mineral supply to the US in exchange for Washington’s powerful – but vaguely formulated – military oversight.

The peace agreement further establishes a joint oversight committee – with representatives from the African Union, Qatar and the US – to receive complaints and resolve disputes between the DRC and Rwanda.

But beyond the joint oversight committee, the peace deal creates no specific security obligations for the US.

The relationship between the DRC and Rwanda has been marred by war and tension since the bloody First (1996-1997) and Second (1998-2003) Congo wars. At the heart of much of this conflict is the DRC’s mineral wealth. It has fuelled competition, exploitation and armed violence.

This latest peace deal introduces a resources-for-security arrangement. Such deals aren’t new in Africa. They first emerged in the early 2000s as resources-for-infrastructure transactions. Here, a foreign state would agree to build economic and social infrastructure (roads, ports, airports, hospitals) in an African state. In exchange, it would get a major stake in a government-owned mining company. Or gain preferential access to the host country’s minerals.

We have studied mineral law and governance in Africa for more than 20 years. The question that emerges now is whether a US-brokered resources-for-security agreement will help the DRC benefit from its resources.

Based on our research on mining, development and sustainability, we believe this is unlikely.

This is because resources-for-security is the latest version of a resource-bartering approach that China and Russia pioneered in countries such as Angola, the Central African Republic and the DRC.

Resource bartering in Africa has eroded the sovereignty and bargaining power of mineral-rich nations such as the DRC and Angola.

Further, resources-for-security deals are less transparent and more complicated than prior resource bartering agreements.

DRC’s security gaps

The DRC is endowed with major deposits of critical minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium, manganese and tantalum. These are the building blocks for 21st century technologies: artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, wind energy and military security hardware. Rwanda has less mineral wealth than its neighbour, but is the world’s third-largest producer of tantalum, used in electronics, aerospace and medical devices.

For almost 30 years, minerals have fuelled conflict and severe violence, especially in eastern DRC. Tungsten, tantalum and gold (referred to as 3TG) finance and drive conflict as government forces and an estimated 130 armed groups vie for control over lucrative mining sites. Several reports and studies have implicated the DRC’s neighbours – Rwanda and Uganda – in supporting the illegal extraction of 3TG in this region.

The DRC government has failed to extend security over its vast (2.3 million square kilometres) and diverse territory (109 million people, representing 250 ethnic groups). Limited resources, logistical challenges and corruption have weakened its armed forces.

This context makes the United States’ military backing enormously attractive. But our research shows there are traps.

What states risk losing

Resources-for-infrastructure and resources-for-security deals generally offer African nations short-term stability, financing or global goodwill. However, the costs are often long-term because of an erosion of sovereign control.

Here’s how this happens:

• certain clauses in such contracts can freeze future regulatory reforms, limiting legislative autonomy

• other clauses may lock in low prices for years, leaving resource-selling states unable to benefit when commodity prices surge

• arbitration clauses often shift disputes to international forums, bypassing local courts

• infrastructure loans are often secured via resource revenues used as loan security. This effectively ringfences exports and undermines sovereign fiscal control.

Examples of loss or near-loss of sovereignty from these sorts of deals abound in Africa.

For instance, Angola’s US$2 billion oil-backed loan from China Eximbank in 2004. This was repayable in monthly deliveries of oil, with revenues directed to Chinese-controlled accounts. The loan’s design deprived Angolan authorities of decision-making power over that income stream even before the oil was extracted.

These deals also fragment accountability. They often span multiple ministries (such as defence, mining and trade), avoiding robust oversight or accountability. Fragmentation makes resource sectors vulnerable to elite capture. Powerful insiders can manipulate agreements for private gain.

In the DRC, this has created a violent kleptocracy, where resource wealth is systematically diverted away from popular benefit.

Finally, there is the risk of re-entrenching extractive trauma. Communities displaced for mining and environmental degradation in many countries across Africa illustrate the long-standing harm to livelihoods, health and social cohesion.

These are not new problems. But where extraction is tied to security or infrastructure, such damage risks becoming permanent features, not temporary costs.

What needs to change

Critical minerals are “critical” because they’re hard to mine or substitute. Additionally, their supply chains are strategically vulnerable and politically exposed. Whoever controls these minerals controls the future. Africa must make sure it doesn’t trade that future away.

In a world being reshaped by global interests in critical minerals, African states must not underestimate the strategic value of their mineral resources. They hold considerable leverage.

But leverage only works if it is wielded strategically. This means:

• investing in institutional strength and legal capacity to negotiate better deals

• demanding local value creation and addition

• requiring transparency and parliamentary oversight for minerals-related agreements

• refusing deals that bypass human rights, environmental or sovereignty standards.

Africa has the resources. It must hold on to the power they wield.

Hanri Mostert receives funding from the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa. She is a member of the Expropriation Expert Group and a steering committee member of the International Bar Association’s (IBA) Academic Advisory Group (AAG) in the Sector for Energy, Environmental, Resources and Infrastructure Law (SEERIL).

Tracy-Lynn Field receives funding from the Claude Leon Foundation. She is a non-executive director of the Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa.

– ref. Africa’s minerals are being bartered for security: why it’s a bad idea – https://theconversation.com/africas-minerals-are-being-bartered-for-security-why-its-a-bad-idea-260594

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Marian Selorm Sapah, Senior lecturer, University of Ghana

Impact craters are formed when an object from space such as a meteoroid, asteroid or comet strikes the Earth at a very high velocity. This leaves an excavated circular hole on the Earth’s surface.

It is a basic geological process that has shaped the planets from their formation to today. It creates landscapes and surface materials across our solar system. The moon is covered with them, as are planets like Mercury, Mars and Venus. On Earth, impacts have influenced the evolution of life and even provided valuable mineral and energy resources. However, very few of the impact craters on Earth are visible because of various processes that obscure or erase them.

Most of the recognised impact craters on Earth are buried under sediments or have been deeply eroded. That means they no longer preserve their initial forms.

The Bosumtwi impact crater in Ghana is different, however. It is well preserved (not deeply eroded or buried under sediments). Its well-defined, near-circular basin, filled by a lake, is surrounded by a prominent crater rim that rises above the surface of the lake and an outer circular plateau. This makes it a target for several research questions.

As an Earth scientist, I joined a research team from 2019 to better understand the morphology of the crater. We carried out a morphological analysis of the crater (a study of its form, structure and geological features).

This study concluded that the activities of illegal miners are a threat to the sustainability of the crater. We also discovered that the features of the Bosumtwi impact crater can be considered as a terrestrial representation for a special type of impact crater known as rampart craters. These are common on the planets Mars and Venus and are found on icy bodies of the outer solar system (like Ganymede, Europa, Dione, Tethys and Charon).

For future studies, the Bosumtwi impact crater can be used to help understand how rampart craters form on Mars and Venus. So the Bosumtwi impact crater should be protected and preserved.

---

Read more:
Curious Kids: Why are there so few impact craters on Earth?

---

The crater

The Bosumtwi impact crater is in Ghana’s mineral-rich Ashanti gold belt. It is the location of the only natural inland lake in Ghana. As one of the world’s best-preserved young meteorite impact craters it is designated as an International Union of Geological Sciences geoheritage site.

It is one of only 190 confirmed impact crater sites worldwide, one of only 20 on the African continent. Its lake is one of six meteoritic lakes in the world, recognised for their outstanding scientific value.

At almost 1.07 million years old, the crater offers unparalleled opportunities for studying impact processes, climate history and planetary evolution. It’s an irreplaceable natural laboratory for researchers and educators.

Beyond its scientific importance, the crater holds cultural significance for the Ashanti people of Ghana. The lake at its centre serves as a sacred site and spiritual landmark. The crater’s breathtaking landscape also supports eco-tourism and local livelihoods, contributing to Ghana’s economic development while maintaining exceptional aesthetic value.

The research

As part of further research work on the 2019 study, in 2025 we have discovered through field work and satellite data analysis that illegal artisanal mining is prevalent in the area and threatening the crater. This refers to informal, labour-intensive extraction of minerals, primarily gold. It is conducted by individuals or small groups using basic tools and rudimentary machinery. The use of toxic chemicals such as mercury and cyanide, and practices such as river dredging, cause severe environmental harm.

Illegal miners are encroaching on and around the crater rim, posing severe threats to its environment and sustainability. Their activities have become more prevalent over the course of less than 10 years, indicating a growing problem. If unchecked, it could lead to irreversible damage to the crater.

These mining operations risk contaminating the lake with toxic heavy metals. The consequences of these are grave. They include destroying critical geological evidence, accelerating deforestation, and degrading the land. All this damages the crater’s scientific, cultural and economic value.

The International Union of Geological Sciences geoheritage designation of the crater underscores the urgent need for protection measures. The loss of this rare geological wonder would represent not just a national tragedy for Ghana, but a blow to global scientific heritage.

Immediate action is required. This includes enhanced satellite monitoring (tracking illegal mining, deforestation and environmental changes) using optical imagery (such as Sentinel-2, Landsat, PlanetScope). These tools can detect forest loss, identify mining pits and sediment runoff, and analyse changes over time.

Stricter enforcement of mining bans, and community engagement programmes, will help preserve the Bosumtwi impact crater’s unique attributes for future generations of scientists, students, tourists and local communities who depend on its resources.

Marian Selorm Sapah does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Ghana has a rare treasure, a crater made when a meteor hit Earth: why it needs to be protected – https://theconversation.com/ghana-has-a-rare-treasure-a-crater-made-when-a-meteor-hit-earth-why-it-needs-to-be-protected-260600

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Hayes Mabweazara, Senior Lecturer in Sociological & Cultural Studies (Media, Culture & Society), University of Glasgow

Media capture happens when media outlets lose their independence and fall under the influence of political or financial interests. This often leads to news content that favours power instead of public accountability.

Media Capture in Africa and Latin America: Power and Resistance is a new book edited by news media scholars Hayes Mawindi Mabweazara and Bethia Pearson. It explores how this dynamic plays out in the global south and how journalists and citizens are resisting it. We asked them four questions.

---

What is media capture and how has it reshaped itself in recent times?

Media capture describes how media outlets are influenced, manipulated or controlled by powerful actors – often governments or large corporations – to serve their interests. It’s an idea that helps us understand how powerful groups in society can have a negative influence on news media. While this idea isn’t new, what has changed is how subtly and pervasively it now operates.

These groups include big technology organisations that own digital media platforms – such as X, owned by xAI (Elon Musk), and Instagram and Facebook, owned by Meta. But it’s also important to consider Google as a large search engine that shapes the news content and audience of many other platforms.

This matters because the media are important for the functioning of democratic societies. Ideally, they provide information, represent different groups and issues in society, and hold powerful actors to account.

For example, one of the key roles of the media is to provide accurate information for citizens to be able to decide how to vote in elections. Or to decide what they think about important issues. One big concern, then, is the effect of inaccurate or biased information on democracy.

Or it might be that accurate information is harder to access because algorithms and platforms make it easier to access inaccurate or biased information. These can be intended and unintended consequences of the technology itself, but algorithms can amplify misinformation and fake news – especially if this content has the potential to go viral.

So, what’s particular about media capture in the global south?

This is a really interesting question that is still being investigated, but we have some ideas.

First of all, it’s useful to know that media capture scholarship from the global north emerged around the time of the 2008 financial crisis. The influence of financial institutions on business journalists was one of the first areas of study. Since then, research in the US has focused on the capture of government-funded media organisations like Voice of America. And on how digital platforms like Google and Facebook can lead to capture.

In the global south, scholars have drawn attention to the importance of large media corporations in understanding media capture. For example, in Latin America, there’s a high level of what’s called “media concentration”. This is when many media outlets are owned by a few companies. These companies often own companies in other sectors, which means that critical reporting on business interests presents a conflict of interest.

---

Read more:
Public trust in the media is at a new low: a radical rethink of journalism is needed

---

But to focus on Africa, scholars have drawn attention to governments as a source of pressure on journalists and editors. This can be through direct pressure or what we might call “covert” pressure. Withholding advertising that helps to fund media outlets is an example, or offering financial incentives to stop investigating certain topics.

Researchers are also concerned about the influence of big tech in Africa. Digital platforms like Google and Facebook can shape the news and information that citizens have access to.

Can you share some of the studies from the book?

Our book includes many interesting studies – from Colombia, Brazil and Mexico in Latin America to Ethiopia and Morocco in Africa. We’ll share a few African cases here to give an overview of the issues.

The book’s contribution on Ghana warns us that although more overt “old” types of media capture may have subsided, transitional democracies can feature messier, more nuanced forms of media control. This can be evident in government pressures and through capture of regulators.

In the Morocco chapter, we see the threat to media freedom presented by digital platforms owned by global tech giants. This is known as “infrastructural capture”. It means news organisations become dependent on tech giants to set the rules of the game for democratic communication.

Another compelling case is Nigeria, where researchers explore ties between media ownership and political patronage. The authors argue that the Nigerian press is failing in its democratic duty because of its reliance on advertising and sponsorship income from the state. Added to this are ineffective regulatory mechanisms and close relationships with some big businesses that own newspapers and printing presses.

How can media capture be resisted in the global south?

The studies in the book show some ways forward and we do think it’s important to be optimistic! Resistance takes many forms. Sometimes it comes through legal and policy reform aimed at increasing transparency and media diversity. In other cases, it’s driven by social movements, investigative journalists and independent media who continue to operate under pressure.

The chapter on Uganda shows that journalist groups working with media advocacy organisations can strategically act to resist government media capture and harmful regulations. For example, to push back against one legislative change, several groups formed a temporary network called Article 29 (named after the article in the Ugandan constitution protecting free speech) and the African Centre for Media Excellence produced a report criticising the proposed changes.

---

Read more:
Western media outlets are trying to fix their racist, stereotypical coverage of Africa. Is it time African media did the same?

---

One of the chapters on Ghana also shows how networks such as journalists, media associations, human rights groups and legal organisations can mobilise to push back against government influence. Organisations including the Ghana Journalists Association and Ghana Independent Broadcasters Association have played key roles in, for example, taking the media regulator to court to overturn laws that would have led to censorship. These findings are echoed in Latin America, where research on Mexico and Colombia also found professional journalism to be a strong source of resistance.

The conversation must also include rethinking how we define capture itself. If we frame it only as total control, we risk missing the everyday ways influence operates – and the spaces where it can be resisted. We would also say it’s really important that citizens are aware and alert to the issues when they think about how they access news media and what platforms they use. This is sometimes called “media literacy” and is about people being more knowledgeable about where trustworthy news comes from.

---

You can listen to a podcast about the book over here.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. African media are threatened by governments and big tech – book tracks the latest trends – https://theconversation.com/african-media-are-threatened-by-governments-and-big-tech-book-tracks-the-latest-trends-258017

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Mariapaola McGurk, Lecturer in Innovation & Entrepreneurship, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Johannesburg is weathering a storm of crises. Nowhere is its complex tangle of challenges more visible than in the inner city, where crime, overcrowding, and infrastructure collapse – such as roads literally exploding – paint a grim picture. Cultural institutions haven’t been spared either, with long-standing landmarks like the Johannesburg Art Gallery caught in cycles of neglect and crisis.

---

Read more:
South Africa doesn’t need new cities: it needs to focus on fixing what it’s got

---

Yet, while many avoid the inner city or speak only of its decline, the creative and cultural practitioners of Johannesburg never left. In fact, artists, architects, fashion designers, animators, musicians and the like have been hard at work. They’re building, dreaming and shaping a new urban reality that could become the beacon of hope this city needs.

As a researcher and visual artist, I recently completed a PhD study that focused on Johannesburg’s cultural and creative industries. My research revealed that a clear understanding of the existing structures and dynamics within this industry is essential for developing effective strategies to strengthen its role in local economic development.

Here I explore one such opportunity: creative hubs. I argue that they represent a low-hanging fruit for the inner city’s growth and revitalisation.

Urban renewal

Numerous articles have explored strategies for the city’s economic development and urban renewal. One group of scholars recently outlined four critical focus areas: coordinated efforts across government levels; an active civil society; a shift in political culture; and restored leadership in a revitalised administration.

These are vital interventions, but they still beg a deeper question. What is the new “gold” of the “City of Gold”, the mining town founded in 1886 and on track to become a megacity by 2030?

What is it that truly sets Johannesburg apart, nationally and globally? What strengths already exist that, if nurtured, could help address the city’s challenges? The answer may not lie in building something entirely new, but in recognising and investing in what already thrives. The city’s people, its culture, and its extraordinary creativity.

In 2004, Unesco launched the Creative Cities Network. Today it comprises 246 cities in 80 member states. South Africa has three cities in the network: Cape Town (design), Durban (literature) and Overstrand (gastronomy). Johannesburg has never applied to belong.

Cities are acknowledging the economic and social value of the cultural and creative industries, particularly in addressing challenges such as youth unemployment, micro-enterprise growth, equity and community development.

Yet cities globally are grappling with how to retain creative professionals. This is the case in cities like Toronto, Sydney, Los Angeles, Cologne or Barcelona. Rising property prices, the redevelopment of industrial areas into commercial or luxury spaces, and short-term rental agreements are displacing these professionals from the urban cores they help energise. Cities are coming up with incentives and programmes to correct this.

A recent World Cities Cultural Forum report offers a solution in the form of Creative Land Trusts. These permanently hold land and assets at affordable rates for creatives. They take property out of speculative real estate markets. They’re designed to support not galleries or theatres, but the studios and workspaces where creative production actually happens.

Similar initiatives are happening in London, Helsinki and San Francisco.

Mapping Johannesburg’s creative hubs

Unlike cities that are trying to reverse the exodus of creatives, Johannesburg’s inner city has seen a recent surge in creative hub development.

A creative hub is a physical or digital space (in this case physical) designed to bring together cultural and creative professionals for studio space, collaboration, networking and the exchange of ideas.

Over the last year, 21 creative hubs have been mapped in the city, the majority newly established. Notable examples include Transwerke Studios, Asisebenze Art Atelier, Victoria Yards and Oovookoo. Remarkably, 19 of the 21 hubs identified in my open-source mapping process are in the inner city. Only two are government run – Transwerke and Downtown Music Hub.

Across Johannesburg, creative hubs buzz with independent activity, yet share a common commitment to cultivating talent, business support and community impact. They are evidence of innovative partnerships between creatives and property developers.

Inside these spaces, artists and creatives get opportunities through gallerist and investor visits (access to markets). They build practical and entrepreneurial skills through tailored workshops. And they collaborate on projects that place social upliftment at their heart.

Some hubs focus on offering studio spaces, while others extend their reach beyond their walls, blending artistic expression with community development and public engagement.

By actively building community and opportunity, creative hubs are becoming

lighthouses for the new urban economy.

They are small business incubators, urban beautification engines and potential cultural tourism hotspots. An event like Contra Fair opens the doors of art studio hubs once a year. Entrepreneur and social activist Tebogo Moalusi has now taken the lead in the establishment of Creative20. This will become a platform for revitalising Johannesburg’s creative cities campaign.

Neglected by the city

And yet the cultural and creative industries remain almost entirely absent from the city’s strategic planning. The Johannesburg 2040: Growth and Development Strategy fails even to mention the sector.

This is despite Gauteng, the province that houses Johannesburg, being the epicentre of South Africa’s creative economy. It contributes 46.3% of the industry’s gross domestic product and generates the highest employment impact. Johannesburg hosts the majority of creative businesses in the province.

---

Read more:
The real Johannesburg: 6 powerful photos from a gritty new book on the city

---

The Gauteng 2030 Strategy highlights three high-growth sectors: agro-processing, cultural and creative industries, and high-tech/knowledge sectors, including digital and gaming. Two of these directly involve the creative economy. Yet there’s been little effort to integrate them into Johannesburg’s urban development agenda.

If Johannesburg is serious about inclusive economic development and sustainable urban growth, it must recognise and invest in the cultural and creative industries which are already thriving within its borders.

Mariapaola McGurk consults to Creative20 Organisation

– ref. Johannesburg’s creative hubs are booming: how artists are rejuvenating a failing inner city – https://theconversation.com/johannesburgs-creative-hubs-are-booming-how-artists-are-rejuvenating-a-failing-inner-city-260224

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Daniel H. Magilow, Professor of German, University of Tennessee

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz recently sparked controversy by comparing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to Nazi Germany’s notorious secret police, the Gestapo.

“Donald Trump’s modern-day Gestapo is scooping folks up off the streets,” Walz said during a May 2025 speech at the University of Minnesota Law School’s commencement ceremony.

“They’re in unmarked vans, wearing masks, being shipped off to foreign torture dungeons, no chance to mount a defense, not even a chance to kiss a loved one goodbye, just grabbed up by masked agents, shoved into those vans, and disappeared,” Walz added.

ICE, tasked with enforcing immigration policies, has dramatically increased the number of nationwide arrests of immigrants since President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025. ICE’s arrests of immigrants have more than doubled in 38 states since then.

In recent months, other Democratic politicians, including U.S Rep. Dan Goldman of New York, have also compared ICE to the Gestapo, or Adolf Hitler’s “secret police,” as Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts said in April.

But do ICE’s tactics actually resemble those of the Gestapo?

Because I am a scholar of modern Germany and the Holocaust, people regularly ask me if this analogy is accurate. The answer is complicated.

Understanding the Gestapo

The Nazi regime established the Gestapo, short for the German phrase Geheime Staatspolizei, meaning secret state police, soon after Hitler became chancellor of Germany in January 1933. Among other responsibilities, the Gestapo was tasked with investigating political crimes and monitoring opposition activity. It later enforced racial laws in Germany and across occupied Europe.

As part of its daily work, the Gestapo identified and monitored the regime’s political enemies. It arrested, interrogated, detained and tortured suspects and sent others to concentration camps. To identify suspects, it often relied on anonymous denunciations that came not only from zealous Nazis, but also from disgruntled neighbors or business competitors who tipped off the Gestapo to Jews and other people.

While the Gestapo was relatively small in terms of personnel, it projected an image of being, as one scholar wrote, “omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.”

It enforced the regime’s will and suppressed dissent not through sheer manpower but by creating a pervasive sense of fear. This aura of menace and terror has long outlived the Nazi regime itself.

ICE’s operations

ICE, with around 21,000 officers and staff operating in a country of more than 340 million, is smaller both in absolute terms and on a per capita basis. At its height between 1943 and 1945, the Gestapo had between 40,000 and 50,000 personnel in a country of 79 million.

ICE is set to expand its work in the next few years with an additional US$75 billion in funding that Congress appropriated in July as part of Trump’s tax and spending bill.

And while ICE focuses on immigration, the Gestapo had a more expansive role. It was responsible for suppressing all forms of political dissent, not just violations of immigration law.

ICE operates with vastly more advanced technologies that did not exist in the 1940s, including facial recognition and social media monitoring.

There is technically more transparency around ICE’s work than the Gestapo’s, since ICE is a federal agency that is subject to its work and information being reviewed by politicians and the public alike. But in June 2020, the first Trump administration reclassified ICE, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, as a “security/sensitive agency.” This designation makes it harder for people to request and receive information about ICE’s work through Freedom of Information Act records requests.

Like the Gestapo, ICE can seem performative in its work, like when it carried out a dramatic July raid of a cannabis farm in California in which balaclava-wearing officers used tear gas against protesters.

The Gestapo in today’s world

Since World War II and the fall of the Nazi regime, the term Gestapo has become shorthand in the United States to describe police repression.

Using the word Gestapo to describe the worst possible authoritarian oppression has been popularized in popular movies in everything from the 1943 film “Casablanca” and “The Black Gestapo” in 1975 to “Inglourious Basterds” in 2009 and “Jojo Rabbit” in 2019.

Walz’s remarks in May, though provocative, were also far from isolated in politics. Politicians from both sides of the aisle, as well as political observers, regularly use Gestapo and Nazi metaphors to attack their opponents.

In 2022, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia famously confused the term Gestapo with gazpacho soup in a gaffe that went viral. “Now we have Nancy Pelosi’s gazpacho police spying on members of Congress,” she said.

In 2024, Trump accused President Joe Biden of running a “Gestapo administration” as the Justice Department prosecuted Trump for attempting to overturn the 2020 election.

Overall, mentions of the word Gestapo in social media increased by 184% between 2017 and 2024, according to the nonprofit group Foundation to Combat Antisemitism.

The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum is among the organizations that have condemned making comparisons to the Holocaust and the Nazis for many reasons, including their historical inaccuracy and because they are insulting to people whose families remain scarred by the Holocaust.

What historical comparisons really say

Analogies can be useful for clarifying complex ideas. But especially when they stretch across decades and vastly different political contexts, they risk oversimplifying and trivializing history.

I believe that comparing ICE to the Gestapo is less a historical judgment than a reflection of modern anxiety – a fear that the U.S. is veering toward authoritarianism reminiscent of 1930s Germany.

If politicians and other public figures are looking for historical comparisons to modern law enforcement agencies that use severe tactics, there is, unfortunately, no shortage of options: the Soviet Union’s secret police agencies NKVD and KGB, Iran’s former secret police and intelligence agency SAVAK or East Germany’s Stasi, to name just a few.
All of those organizations denied suspects due process and grossly violated human rights in order to protect political regimes – but they don’t necessarily easily compare to ICE, either.

Still, politicians and political observers alike most often turn to the Gestapo and other Nazi references instead.

Ultimately, the Gestapo, Nazi Germany and the Holocaust serve as a powerful, shared cultural reference point. The catastrophes of World War II epitomize the worst possible outcomes of evil left unchecked.

They have become the master moral paradigm and an ethical compass for the world today. In an age of polarization, World War II and the Holocaust remain the mirror in which Americans examine their present.

Daniel H. Magilow received funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities (although DOGE cancelled the grant in April 2025).

He serves as Co-Editor-in-Chief of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, the journal of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies

– ref. Comparing ICE to the Gestapo reveals people’s fears for the US – a Holocaust scholar explains why Nazi analogies remain common, yet risky – https://theconversation.com/comparing-ice-to-the-gestapo-reveals-peoples-fears-for-the-us-a-holocaust-scholar-explains-why-nazi-analogies-remain-common-yet-risky-260767

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA – By James F. Holden, Professor of Microbiology, UMass Amherst

People have long wondered what life was first like on Earth, and if there is life in our solar system beyond our planet. Scientists have reason to believe that some of the moons in our solar system – like Jupiter’s Europa and Saturn’s Enceladus – may contain deep, salty liquid oceans under an icy shell. Seafloor volcanoes could heat these moons’ oceans and provide the basic chemicals needed for life.

Similar deep-sea volcanoes found on Earth support microbial life that lives inside solid rock without sunlight and oxygen. Some of these microbes, called thermophiles, live at temperatures hot enough to boil water on the surface. They grow from the chemicals coming out of active volcanoes.

Because these microorganisms existed before there was photosynthesis or oxygen on Earth, scientists think these deep-sea volcanoes and microbes could resemble the earliest habitats and life on Earth, and beyond.

To determine if life could exist beyond Earth in these ocean worlds, NASA sent the Cassini spacecraft to orbit Saturn in 1997. The agency has also sent three spacecraft to orbit Jupiter: Galileo in 1989, Juno in 2011 and most recently Europa Clipper in 2024. These spacecraft flew and will fly close to Enceladus and Europa to measure their habitability for life using a suite of instruments.

However, for planetary scientists to interpret the data they collect, they need to first understand how similar habitats function and host life on Earth.

My microbiology laboratory at the University of Massachusetts Amherst studies thermophiles from hot springs at deep-sea volcanoes, also called hydrothermal vents.

Diving deep for samples of life

I grew up in Spokane, Washington, and had over an inch of volcanic ash land on my home when Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980. That event led to my fascination with volcanoes.

Several years later, while studying oceanography in college, I collected samples from Mount St. Helens’ hot springs and studied a thermophile from the site. I later collected samples at hydrothermal vents along an undersea volcanic mountain range hundreds of miles off the coast of Washington and Oregon. I have continued to study these hydrothermal vents and their microbes for nearly four decades.

Submarine pilots collect the samples my team uses from hydrothermal vents using human-occupied submarines or remotely operated submersibles. These vehicles are lowered into the ocean from research ships where scientists conduct research 24 hours a day, often for weeks at a time.

The samples collected include rocks and heated hydrothermal fluids that rise from cracks in the seafloor.

The submarines use mechanical arms to collect the rocks and special sampling pumps and bags to collect the hydrothermal fluids. The submarines usually remain on the seafloor for about a day before returning samples to the surface. They make multiple trips to the seafloor on each expedition.

Inside the solid rock of the seafloor, hydrothermal fluids as hot at 662 degrees Fahrenheit (350 Celsius) mix with cold seawater in cracks and pores of the rock. The mixture of hydrothermal fluid and seawater creates the ideal temperatures and chemical conditions that thermophiles need to live and grow.

When the submarines return to the ship, scientists – including my research team – begin analyzing the chemistry, minerals and organic material like DNA in the collected water and rock samples.

These samples contain live microbes that we can cultivate, so we grow the microbes we are interested in studying while on the ship. The samples provide a snapshot of how microbes live and grow in their natural environment.

Thermophiles in the lab

Back in my laboratory in Amherst, my research team isolates new microbes from the hydrothermal vent samples and grows them under conditions that mimic those they experience in nature. We feed them volcanic chemicals like hydrogen, carbon dioxide, sulfur and iron and measure their ability to produce compounds like methane, hydrogen sulfide and the magnetic mineral magnetite.

Oxygen is typically deadly for these organisms, so we grow them in synthetic hydrothermal fluid and in sealed tubes or in large bioreactors free of oxygen. This way, we can control the temperature and chemical conditions they need for growth.

From these experiments, we look for distinguishing chemical signals that these organisms produce which spacecraft or instruments that land on extraterrestrial surfaces could potentially detect.

We also create computer models that best describe how we think these microbes grow and compete with other organisms in hydrothermal vents. We can apply these models to conditions we think existed on early Earth or on ocean worlds to see how these microbes might fare under those conditions.

We then analyze the proteins from the thermophiles we collect to understand how these organisms function and adapt to changing environmental conditions. All this information guides our understanding of how life can exist in extreme environments on and beyond Earth.

Uses for thermophiles in biotechnology

In addition to providing helpful information to planetary scientists, research on thermophiles provides other benefits as well. Many of the proteins in thermophiles are new to science and useful for biotechnology.

The best example of this is an enzyme called DNA polymerase, which is used to artificially replicate DNA in the lab by the polymerase chain reaction. The DNA polymerase first used for polymerase chain reaction was purified from the thermophilic bacterium Thermus aquaticus in 1976. This enzyme needs to be heat resistant for the replication technique to work. Everything from genome sequencing to clinical diagnoses, crime solving, genealogy tests and genetic engineering uses DNA polymerase.

My lab and others are exploring how thermophiles can be used to degrade waste and produce commercially useful products. Some of these organisms grow on waste milk from dairy farms and brewery wastewater – materials that cause fish kills and dead zones in ponds and bays. The microbes then produce biohydrogen from the waste – a compound that can be used as an energy source.

Hydrothermal vents are among the most fascinating and unusual environments on Earth. With them, windows to the first life on Earth and beyond may lie at the bottom of our oceans.

James F. Holden receives funding from NASA.

– ref. Microbes in deep-sea volcanoes can help scientists learn about early life on Earth, or even life beyond our planet – https://theconversation.com/microbes-in-deep-sea-volcanoes-can-help-scientists-learn-about-early-life-on-earth-or-even-life-beyond-our-planet-260977

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Timiebi Aganaba, Assistant Professor of Space and Society, Arizona State University

“India is on the Moon,” S. Somanath, chairman of the Indian Space Research Organization, announced in August 2023. The announcement meant India had joined the short list of countries to have visited the Moon, and the applause and shouts of joy that followed signified that this achievement wasn’t just a scientific one, but a cultural one.

Over the past decade, many countries have established new space programs, including multiple African nations. India and Israel – nations that were not technical contributors to the space race in the 1960s and ‘70s – have attempted landings on the lunar surface.

With more countries joining the evolving space economy, many of our colleagues in space strategy, policy ethics and law have celebrated the democratization of space: the hope that space is now more accessible for diverse participants.

We are a team of researchers based across four countries with expertise in space policy and law, ethics, geography and anthropology who have written about the difficulties and importance of inclusion in space.

Major players like the U.S., the European Union and China may once have dominated space and seen it as a place to try out new commercial and military ventures. Emerging new players in space, like other countries, commercial interests and nongovernmental organizations, may have other goals and rationales. Unexpected new initiatives from these newcomers could shift perceptions of space from something to dominate and possess to something more inclusive, equitable and democratic.

We address these emerging and historical tensions in a paper published in May 2025 in the journal Nature, in which we describe the difficulties and importance of including nontraditional actors and Indigenous peoples in the space industry.

Continuing inequalities among space players

Not all countries’ space agencies are equal. Newer agencies often don’t have the same resources behind them that large, established players do.

The U.S. and Chinese programs receive much more funding than those of any other country. Because they are most frequently sending up satellites and proposing new ideas puts them in the position to establish conventions for satellite systems, landing sites and resource extraction that everyone else may have to follow.

Sometimes, countries may have operated on the assumption that owning a satellite would give them the appearance of soft or hard geopolitical power as a space nation – and ultimately gain relevance.

In reality, student groups of today can develop small satellites, called CubeSats, autonomously, and recent scholarship has concluded that even successful space missions may negatively affect the international relationships between some countries and their partners. The respect a country expects to receive may not materialize, and the costs to keep up can outstrip gains in potential prestige.

Environmental protection and Indigenous perspectives

Usually, building the infrastructure necessary to test and launch rockets requires a remote area with established roads. In many cases, companies and space agencies have placed these facilities on lands where Indigenous peoples have strong claims, which can lead to land disputes, like in western Australia.

Many of these sites have already been subject to human-made changes, through mining and resource extraction in the past. Many sites have been ground zero for tensions with Indigenous peoples over land use. Within these contested spaces, disputes are rife.

Because of these tensions around land use, it is important to include Indigenous claims and perspectives. Doing so can help make sure that the goal of protecting the environments of outer space and Earth are not cast aside while building space infrastructure here on Earth.

Some efforts are driving this more inclusive approach to engagement in space, including initiatives like “Dark and Quiet Skies”, a movement that works to ensure that people can stargaze and engage with the stars without noise or sound pollution. This movement and other inclusive approaches operate on the principle of reciprocity: that more players getting involved with space can benefit all.

Researchers have recognized similar dynamics within the larger space industry. Some scholars have come to the conclusion that even though the space industry is “pay to play,” commitments to reciprocity can help ensure that players in space exploration who may not have the financial or infrastructural means to support individual efforts can still access broader structures of support.

The downside of more players entering space is that this expansion can make protecting the environment – both on Earth and beyond – even harder.

The more players there are, at both private and international levels, the more difficult sustainable space exploration could become. Even with good will and the best of intentions, it would be difficult to enforce uniform standards for the exploration and use of space resources that would protect the lunar surface, Mars and beyond.

It may also grow harder to police the launch of satellites and dedicated constellations. Limiting the number of satellites could prevent space junk, protect the satellites already in orbit and allow everyone to have a clear view of the night sky. However, this would have to compete with efforts to expand internet access to all.

What is space exploration for?

Before tackling these issues, we find it useful to think about the larger goal of space exploration, and what the different approaches are. One approach would be the fast and inclusive democratization of space – making it easier for more players to join in. Another would be a more conservative and slower “big player” approach, which would restrict who can go to space.

The conservative approach is liable to leave developing nations and Indigenous peoples firmly on the outside of a key process shaping humanity’s shared future.

But a faster and more inclusive approach to space would not be easy to run. More serious players means it would be harder to come to an agreement about regulations, as well as the larger goals for human expansion into space.

Narratives around emerging technologies, such as those required for space exploration, can change over time, as people begin to see them in action.

Technology that we take for granted today was once viewed as futuristic or fantastical, and sometimes with suspicion. For example, at the end of the 1940s, George Orwell imagined a world in which totalitarian systems used tele-screens and videoconferencing to control the masses.

Earlier in the same decade, Thomas J. Watson, then president of IBM, notoriously predicted that there would be a global market for about five computers. We as humans often fear or mistrust future technologies.

However, not all technological shifts are detrimental, and some technological changes can have clear benefits. In the future, robots may perform tasks too dangerous, too difficult or too dull and repetitive for humans. Biotechnology may make life healthier. Artificial intelligence can sift through vast amounts of data and turn it into reliable guesswork. Researchers can also see genuine downsides to each of these technologies.

Space exploration is harder to squeeze into one streamlined narrative about the anticipated benefits. The process is just too big and too transformative.

To return to the question if we should go to space, our team argues that it is not a question of whether or not we should go, but rather a question of why we do it, who benefits from space exploration and how we can democratize access to broader segments of society. Including a diversity of opinions and viewpoints can help find productive ways forward.

Ultimately, it is not necessary for everyone to land on one single narrative about the value of space exploration. Even our team of four researchers doesn’t share a single set of beliefs about its value. But bringing more nations, tribes and companies into discussions around its potential value can help create collaborative and worthwhile goals at an international scale.

Tony Milligan receives funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant agreement No. 856543).

Adam Fish, Deondre Smiles, and Timiebi Aganaba do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘Democratizing space’ is more than just adding new players – it comes with questions around sustainability and sovereignty – https://theconversation.com/democratizing-space-is-more-than-just-adding-new-players-it-comes-with-questions-around-sustainability-and-sovereignty-257306

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Julie Phillippi, Associate Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery and Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh

Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com.

---

Why is heart cancer so rare? – Jackson, age 12, Davis, California

---

You probably know someone who is affected by cancer. This disease results when cells divide uncontrollably and can make a person sick, sometimes very seriously.

Cancer can occur anywhere in the body because every tissue and organ is made up of billions or even trillions of cells. But there are some parts of the body where cancer doesn’t happen as often, such as the heart. Studies show 3 in 10,000 people develop heart cancer. In comparison, 1 in 20 women are expected to develop breast cancer. Why is that?

I’m a biologist who specializes in the blood vessels of the cardiovascular system. A big part of my work focuses on how cells interact with their environment to regulate the function of tissues and organs. Disease can develop when things go wrong.

Turns out, heart cells have unique features that make them super resistant to cancer.

How cancer starts

Cells produce more cells to grow, replace older or worn-out cells or to repair damaged tissues. This process is called cell division. Each type of cell in the body divides at different rates based on multiple factors, including what their function is and a person’s age.

For example, the cells of a growing human embryo divide extremely fast, undergoing four divisions in three days. The cells that make up the skin, nails and hair regularly replenish across your lifespan. Bone cells divide at a rate that will give you an entirely new skeleton approximately every 10 years.

Whether and how often a cell divides is tightly regulated by a series of molecular checkpoints. During cell division, genes within DNA are duplicated and evenly distributed into two daughter cells. Damage to these genes caused by exposure to harmful chemicals, ultraviolet light or radiation can result in mutations that cause disease. Mutations can just happen randomly, too. When there are mutations on the genes regulating cell division, cancer can develop.

What protects heart cells from cancer?

Even though the heart is the first organ to form and start working during early development, cells in the adult heart divide very few times after birth, with division dramatically declining after age 20. In fact, less than 50% of heart cells are replaced over the course of an average human life. That means half of the heart cells you’re born with will be helping pump blood for your entire life.

This low rate of cell division in the adult heart likely serves as its primary defense against cancer. The less often a cell divides, the fewer opportunities there are for mistakes during DNA replication.

The heart is also less directly exposed to cancer-causing factors, such as UV light on the skin or inhaled substances in the lung, due to its protected location in the chest.

Unfortunately, the heart’s low rate of cell division has some downsides, such as a reduced ability to repair and replace cells damaged by disease, injury or aging.

Why heart cancer still happens

Even with the heart’s resistance to cancer, tumors may still form.

When cancer is found in the heart, it’s often the result of cancer cells migrating from another part of the body to the heart. This process is called metastasis. Certain types of skin cancers or cancers in the chest are more likely to spread to the heart, though this is still rare.

When they do happen, heart tumors can be quite serious and more aggressive than other cancers. A study analyzing more than 100,000 heart cancer cases in the United States found that patients who underwent surgery and chemotherapy to treat their heart cancer survived longer than those who did not.

Successful cancer care spans multiple areas of medicine. These include palliative care, which focuses on relieving pain and addressing symptoms, and integrative medicine, which considers the mind-body-spirit connection.

Heart cancer holds clues to heart regeneration

Understanding how heart cells divide and what causes that process to change offers clues about disease and shapes ideas for new treatments.

For example, research into how heart cells divide helps scientists better understand why the heart doesn’t heal well after a heart attack. Researchers found that although failing hearts have more dividing cells than healthy hearts, they need help to recover fully.

New technologies, such as the ability to reprogram blood cells into heart cells, have allowed researchers to develop new heart disease models to study and one day achieve heart regeneration. This opens doors for new treatments for heart diseases, including cancer.

Understanding why cancer doesn’t happen is just as important for developing new and better treatments as knowing why it does. The answers to both questions lie truly at the heart.

---

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

Julie Phillippi receives funding from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute.

– ref. Why is heart cancer so rare? A biologist explains – https://theconversation.com/why-is-heart-cancer-so-rare-a-biologist-explains-256055

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Asher Kaufman, Professor of History and Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame

A fragile ceasefire was put in place in southern Syria on July 19, 2025, after days of violence between Druze militias and Bedouin tribes that drew in government forces and prompted Israeli strikes on the capital, Damascus, as a warning to pull back from Druze areas. The United States helped broker the latest agreement, fearing a spillover of violence to other parts of Syria.

The conflict’s quick escalation brings to the fore multiple layers of politics and identity in the region – particularly among the Druze, who form an important minority in several countries and make up about 2% of Israel’s population. As a historian of the Middle East, I have researched Druze cross-border communal ties and followed closely their predicaments since the start of the Syrian civil war in March 2011.

Cross-border brotherhood

The Druze are a monotheistic religious community that split from a branch of Shiite Islam in the 11th century. Today, they live mainly in three countries: Lebanon, Syria and Israel, with a small presence in northern Jordan.

Despite their geographical dispersion, they have managed to retain a strong sense of communal identity. One of the most important creeds of their faith is “protection of brothers of the faith.”

Another article of faith that helps to buttress shared communal solidarity is belief in reincarnation: that with physical death, the soul is transferred to the body of a newly born Druze.

Although Druze history shows that the community is not always united, the belief in and practice of cross-border solidarity is very strong. According to their popular saying, “the Druze are like a copper tray. Wherever you hit it, the whole tray reverberates.”

National identity

After World War I, the creation of the modern states in the Middle East divided the Druze community between Syria, Lebanon and the British mandate of Palestine, which is now Israel.

In Israel, they have largely integrated into the Jewish state. Like Jewish citizens, Druze men are required to serve in the military, and many have attained leadership positions in the security sector and politics.

A popular cliché has developed about their “blood oath” with the Jewish state. In a July 15 statement, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz cited Israel’s “deep covenant of blood with our Druze citizens” and their connections to Druze in Syria.

Their integration has been marred by discrimination, a prime example of which is the 2018 law that defines Israel as the nation-state for Jews. Still, many retain a strong sense of Israeli identity that sets them apart from Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel.

An additional Druze community lives in the Golan Heights, territory that Israel seized from Syria in 1967 and has occupied since. Most Druze there declined to receive Israeli citizenship, and remained loyal to Syria until the outbreak of the civil war there. Since then, there has been a notable change in their relationship with Israel, marked by increased numbers who have acquired Israeli citizenship.

Druze communities elsewhere in the region have also adopted aspects of their countries’ culture, including Arab nationalism and Syrian or Lebanese national sentiments. Still, cross-border solidarity among Druze has remained strong – and often resurfaced in times of crisis.

War in Syria

When the Syrian civil war erupted in March 2011, Syrian Druze were targeted at times by both the Assad regime, which pressured them to support it, and by Islamist rebel groups that regarded them as infidels. The Druze straddled a fine line throughout the war, seeking, not always successfully, to be left on their own.

In 2015, that tension came to a boiling point. Druze regions throughout Syria became sites of military confrontations, involving Druze militias, the Syrian army and opposition fighters.

Israeli Druze organized mass rallies in support of their brothers in Syria and called on the Israeli government to intervene. Israel, in turn, protected Syrian Druze villages close to its border with Syria in the Golan Heights. The Israeli government covertly supported Druze areas deeper in Syria, and sent clear messages to combatants on all sides not to harm the Druze.

Since the fall of the Assad regime in Damascus in December 2024, Ahmad al-Sharaa, the new Syrian leader, has attempted to bring divided and ruined Syria together under his authority.

However, religious and ethnic minorities have been highly suspicious of the new government. Many of its members hail from al-Sharaa’s own militia during the civil war, Hayat Tahrir al Sham, which targeted religious minorities and enforced its own interpretation of Islam on the population under its control.

Spiraling crisis

The most recent violence took place in Mount Druze, a region in Sweida province that is home to most of the community in Syria. It was sparked by an incident where a local Bedouin band robbed and killed a Druze man. The incident quickly became a catalyst for major fighting between Druze, Bedouins and dispatched units of the Syrian army.

State security forces tried to impose their authority, but in the process killed scores of Druze. They also violated Druze cultural norms by filming the forced shaving of Druze men’s mustaches, including respected religious men, and posting the clips on social media. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, more than 1,100 people have been killed in the fighting.

The fragile agreement that the Sweida Druze signed with the new government in May, as part of the government’s efforts to solidify authority over the divided country, collapsed following these incidents.

Befitting the saying about the reverberation of the copper tray, Israeli Druze immediately mobilized, joined by Druze in the Golan Heights. Hundreds crossed the border to Syria. Many called on the government in Jerusalem to intervene, though others were opposed.

On July 16, the Israeli military targeted the Syrian army by striking Damascus – sending a clear threat to al-Sharaa. Israel also struck military targets in southern Syria.

Later that day, the Syrian government reached a ceasefire agreement with the Druze in Sweida, which collapsed soon after. On July 19, following more fighting and violence – and mediation by the United States, Turkey and Jordan – a new ceasefire was put in place, though new fighting has been reported.

A changing Middle East

Even before these recent incidents, Israel became a key player in post-Assad Syria by occupying areas close to their shared border. Now, Israel has deepened its involvement by defending the Druze population in the country – as many Israeli Druze had hoped it would since the start of the civil war in 2011.

Apart from supporting the Druze, Israel’s military actions are also tied to its efforts to project power amid the tectonic shifts in the Middle East since the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7, 2023. In Syria, it seeks to guarantee its influence on the reshaping of the country after civil war. Domestically, Netanyahu is interested in prolonging Israel’s state of emergency, as it extends the survival of his far-right and unpopular government. Syria provides him with another front to maintain this state of emergency.

For many Israeli Druze, meanwhile, this still-unfolding episode constitutes another example in their history of seeking to protect their brothers in faith. Among Druze in the Middle East, they are uniquely positioned, with many serving in the region’s most powerful military.

On July 19, Israel’s public broadcaster, Kan news, reported that 2,000 Israeli Druze, including reserve soldiers, signed a petition that said: “we are getting ready to volunteer to fight alongside our brothers in Sweida. It is our time to defend our brothers, our land and our religion.”

Asher Kaufman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Amid fragile ceasefire, violence in southern Syria brings Druze communities’ complex cross-border ties to the fore – https://theconversation.com/amid-fragile-ceasefire-violence-in-southern-syria-brings-druze-communities-complex-cross-border-ties-to-the-fore-261337

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Kevin Morris, Research Professor of Social Work, University of Denver

In a 2022 survey of 3,000 U.S. adults, more than one-third of respondents reported that on most days, they feel “completely overwhelmed” by stress. At the same time, a growing body of research is documenting the negative health consequences of higher stress levels, which include increased rates of cancer, heart disease, autoimmune conditions and even dementia.

Assuming people’s daily lives are unlikely to get less stressful anytime soon, simple and effective ways to mitigate these effects are needed.

This is where dogs can help.

As researchers at the University of Denver’s Institute for Human-Animal Connection, we study the effects animal companions have on their humans.

Dozens of studies over the last 40 years have confirmed that pet dogs help humans feel more relaxed. This would explain the growing phenomenon of people relying on emotional support dogs to assist them in navigating everyday life. Dog owners have also been shown to have a 24% lower risk of death and a four times greater chance of surviving for at least a year after a heart attack.

Now, a new study that we conducted with a team of colleagues suggests that dogs might have a deeper and more biologically complex effect on humans than scientists previously believed. And this complexity may have profound implications for human health.

How stress works

The human response to stress is a finely tuned and coordinated set of various physiological pathways. Previous studies of the effects of dogs on human stress focused on just one pathway at a time. For our study, we zoomed out a bit and measured multiple biological indicators of the body’s state, or biomarkers, from both of the body’s major stress pathways. This allowed us to get a more complete picture of how a dog’s presence affects stress in the human body.

The stress pathways we measured are the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal, or HPA, axis and the sympathoadrenal medullary, or SAM, axis.

When a person experiences a stressful event, the SAM axis acts quickly, triggering a “fight or flight” response that includes a surge of adrenaline, leading to a burst of energy that helps us meet threats. This response can be measured through an enzyme called alpha-amylase.

At the same time, but a little more slowly, the HPA axis activates the adrenal glands to produce the hormone cortisol. This can help a person meet threats that might last for hours or even days. If everything goes well, when the danger ends, both axes settle down, and the body goes back to its calm state.

While stress can be an uncomfortable feeling, it has been important to human survival. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors had to respond effectively to acute stress events like an animal attack. In such instances, over-responding could be as ineffective as under-responding. Staying in an optimal stress response zone maximized humans’ chances of survival.

More to the story

After cortisol is released by the adrenal glands, it eventually makes its way into your saliva, making it an easily accessible biomarker to track responses. Because of this, most research on dogs and stress has focused on salivary cortisol alone.

For example, several studies have found that people exposed to a stressful situation have a lower cortisol response if they’re with a dog than if they’re alone – even lower than if they’re with a friend.

While these studies have shown that having a dog nearby can lower cortisol levels during a stressful event, suggesting the person is calmer, we suspected that was just part of the story.

What our study measured

For our study, we recruited about 40 dog owners to participate in a 15-minute gold standard laboratory stress test. This involves public speaking and oral math in front of a panel of expressionless people posing as behavioral specialists.

The participants were randomly assigned to bring their dogs to the lab with them or to leave their dogs at home. We measured cortisol in blood samples taken before, immediately after and about 45 minutes following the test as a biomarker of HPA axis activity. And unlike previous studies, we also measured the enzyme alpha-amylase in the same blood samples as a biomarker of the SAM axis.

As expected based on previous studies, the people who had their dog with them showed lower cortisol spikes. But we also found that people with their dog experienced a clear spike of alpha-amylase, while those without their dog showed almost no response.

No response may sound like a good thing, but in fact, a flat alpha-amylase response can be a sign of a dysregulated response to stress, often seen in people experiencing high stress responses, chronic stress or even PTSD. This lack of response is caused by chronic or overwhelming stress that can change how our nervous system responds to stressors.

In contrast, the participants with their dogs had a more balanced response: Their cortisol didn’t spike too high, but their alpha-amylase still activated. This shows that they were alert and engaged throughout the test, then able to return to normal within 45 minutes. That’s the sweet spot for handling stress effectively. Our research suggests that our canine companions keep us in a healthy zone of stress response.

Dogs and human health

This more nuanced understanding of the biological effects of dogs on the human stress response opens up exciting possibilities. Based on the results of our study, our team has begun a new study using thousands of biomarkers to delve deeper into the biology of how psychiatric service dogs reduce PTSD in military veterans.

But one thing is already clear: Dogs aren’t just good company. They might just be one of the most accessible and effective tools for staying healthy in a stressful world.

Kevin Morris receives funding for this research from the Morris Animal Foundation, the Human-Animal Bond Research Institute, and the University of Denver.

Jaci Gandenberger receives funding from the University of Denver to support this research.

– ref. Dogs are helping people regulate stress even more than expected, research shows – https://theconversation.com/dogs-are-helping-people-regulate-stress-even-more-than-expected-research-shows-254563