Davemichels

This is the final edition of The Mail, Motherboard’s pop-up newsletter about the USPS, voting, labor, and democracy. If you hadn’t already, there’s no point in signing up now. You’re too late.

In early September, I was on the phone with a letter carrier in the northeast while he was on his rounds. In the background, I could hear the postal truck's door slide open and shut every so often. Sometimes the engine took a little bit of convincing to turn back on. The postal worker, who asked me not to use his real name because the USPS has warned employees not to speak to the media, said I could refer to him as "Adrian." He started working for the post office about four years ago. It seemed like the best option to him at the time because he didn't have a college degree. For the first three years, he was a city carrier assistant (CCA), one of many entry-level positions across the USPS that account for about one-fifth of all employees. 

These hourly wage positions have few limitations on what management can make them do, minimal benefits, and have no meaningful protections for time off. Employees who work in these non-career positions are relied on to plug the gaps in the USPS's staffing issues, the result of decades of austerity. 

"You're always on call as a CCA," Adrian said. Even if you have a scheduled day off, your boss can call the night before and tell you to come in anyways. Supervisors frequently call CCAs the morning of their days off to ask them to come in. At that point, CCAs can refuse to pick up the phone without penalty, but, as Adrian put it, the requests put employees in a position of asking themselves "do you value your mental health or your social life, or do you value money?"

Most non-career employees, particularly those who deliver mail, end up working frequent 60-100 hour weeks until they "make regular" and become a career employee with designated routes, federal employee benefits, a pension, and vacation days. Career employees work overtime, too, but they have more leeway in deciding when and how much overtime they work.

Those three years as a CCA were hard on Adrian. He once had to work 30 days in a row, and seven-day work weeks were common. He also said as a CCA he would have to work while sick because his manager would tell him he simply could not take a sick day. "A lot of times I just wouldn't sleep," he conceded, and his mental health suffered.

Adrian is hardly alone. I heard similar stories from other CCAs around the country. But to see for yourself, the USPS subreddit has nearly-daily posts by exhausted, stressed non-career employees. Two recent posts, both from the same day, are titled “Anyone else need a therapist because of this job?” and “Burned Out.”

But now that he's a regular, Adrian says it was all worth it. And, thanks to all the overtime as a CCA, he was making more money than many of his friends who had college degrees. He's still young, but has his own house and no student debt. 

In retrospect, Adrian feels good about sticking with the post office through those three hard years. But it could have been longer. There is no set amount of time a non-career employee has to stick it out before making regular. It is done by seniority as spots open up. You know where you stand in line, but not how quickly the line will move. Some get lucky and make regular after only a few months. But it usually takes years. And, most CCAs—which has an annual turnover rate of 45.8 percent according to the Office of Inspector General—don't stick it out. 

For the last few months as a CCA, Adrian knew he would be making regular at a certain date which made the final slog more tolerable. But he wasn't sure how much longer he could have stuck it out had he not known. I asked what kept him going before he got word he would be making regular. "For me, I had no other opportunities to make a living," he said. "This was very much something I had to do."

Most people don't imagine working for the post office as the "American Dream," the respectable middle class life that is neither ostentatious nor impoverished. But for roughly the last century, working for the post office has been perhaps the most consistent and available means to the middle class life, especially for people for whom other doors were unfairly closed.

To pick just one example, the post office was the way for African Americans to earn a middle class living prior to World War II when white supremacy, Jim Crow laws, and other forms of rampant, overt discrimination made typical middle class employment nearly impossible for them. In the years after the Civil War, "Postal job opportunities represented a relative oasis for blacks in a desert of American white occupational exclusion," wrote the postal historian Philip Rubio in his book There's Always Work at the Post Office: African American Postal Workers and the Fight for Jobs, Justice, and Equality. Working for the post office also "served as a dramatic validation of [their] citizenship by making them representatives of the federal government." By 1940, 14 percent of all African Americans earning above the national median income worked for the post office. In future years, immigrants, veterans, and women, to varying degrees, found steady, dignified careers at the post office.

This is all still true to an extent—the USPS does employ a disproportionate number of veterans and minorities—although the barrier for employment in other sectors as a result of racial, ethnic, or gender discrimination is not as high as it used to be. But, as Adrian alluded to, the post office serves as a different kind of middle class dream today. The quality of jobs available, especially to those without college degrees, is much worse. People with college degrees often struggle to find steady livings as well.

Paradoxically, the post office has also participated in this societal shift. Full-time employment peaked in the late 1990s, before the Bush administration kicked off the recent round of USPS austerity that has continued to this day, even though the number of delivery points continues to increase.

Data source: USPS

To put this in perspective, the USPS—which is legally required to deliver mail to virtually every person in the country—has about as many full-time workers now as it did in 1967 even though the U.S.'s population has increased by 129.5 million since then. The USPS is able to still function partly because of increased productivity and automation, but also because it relies more on non-career employees like CCAs. Since 2009, the number of career employees fell by 20 percent, but the number of non-career employees increased by 54 percent, according to the USPS Office of Inspector General.

Source: USPS OIG

In other words, the USPS has been gradually replacing solid, reliable occupations with temporary, unsustainable working arrangements because it provides the illusion of savings (in the long run, high turnover, constant overtime wages, and staffing shortages resulting in worse service and lost business may negate much of the savings non-career employees offer depending on the accounting methods used). The larger irony here is, amid all the calls for the USPS to function more like its private sector frenemies like Amazon and FedEx—both of which have been called out for questionable labor practices—by slashing labor costs, the USPS has been doing so for as long as Amazon has existed if not longer. If anything, Amazon is learning the labor lessons the USPS taught, not the other way around. There are still hundreds of thousands of good jobs at the USPS, but hundreds of thousands fewer than there used to be.

I began this newsletter in August with a story about a postal worker who had dreamed of working there since she was a little girl. Obviously, most people who work for the post office can't say the same. Still, these jobs often mean the world to the people who have them. I cannot count the number of times I got on the phone with a postal employee who seemed to have an endless list of complaints about the way the post office works before they added something to the effect of but I'm so grateful to have this job. Some postal workers even refused to be interviewed because they didn't want to risk losing, as one put it, "the best job I ever had."

There was a man from a different part of the northeast than Adrian who had loved his job as a high school history teacher until he was laid off in a round of austerity budget cuts. A worker in Portland who had been an artist. Another in Ohio who worked in the kitchen of fast food chains. 

"We're all just a bunch of misfits," Adrian said of his post office. He meant this in a loving way, adding "I've never met a nicer group of people than the people I work with as a carrier." As he went on to explain, they're "misfits" in the sense that the post office is where they all ended up because Plan A didn't pan out. 

For many Americans, Plan B has increasingly become not a respectable middle class life in a profession they tolerate, but a tenuous existence of low-wage labor in independent contractor or "gig economy" positions with erratic hours and few if any benefits. What makes the post office unique is not that it has bucked this trend. Indeed, it has contributed to it with the increase of non-career labor. What makes the post office special is it still has one foot in a past, where "innovation" and "efficiency" weren't catchy buzzwords for labor abuses, worker misclassification, and mass layoffs. 

The biggest question for the post office going forward is: which way does the trend line go? Do the graphs and charts continue as they have been for the past few decades in which fewer and fewer workers are squeezed harder and harder? Or does Congress recognize the untenability of the situation and drop the fiction of the USPS as a business that ought to pay for itself? If the USPS is not worthy of our tax dollars, what is?

This question feels all the more existential as we're bludgeoned by the unavoidable reality that the entire Republican party is committed to making government as messy and dysfunctional as it possibly can. We're past the point of even the pretense of honest disagreement between parties about what government is and how it should work. As Louis DeJoy has made abundantly clear through action and deed over the past few months, he is not interested in a functioning post office, just as the political party to which he has been a loyal donor is not interested in a functioning government. Broad, existential questions apply to so many of our institutions these days. If a massive deadly global pandemic is not the time to put politics aside as much as humanly possible to save lives and livelihoods, when is? If a smooth transition of power between presidents is no longer on the table, what's left on it? If every vote not cast in favor of a Republican is fraudulent, then what system of government do we actually have?

What's next for the post office is one of the many small questions lurking below the much larger one of what's next for our shattered, pathetic country.  Unfortunately, these questions are likely to become increasingly urgent in the coming months. As far as the post office is concerned, DeJoy has made no secret of his desire to make big, sweeping changes to the post office, many of which will be for the worse. And if his previous employment history is any guide, he has little respect for worker rights and dignity. As for the country as a whole, there are no good answers to all of the questions above. It is very difficult to have a functioning government when half the country doesn't believe in its legitimacy.

I don't want to end this newsletter on such a downer, even though that would be very much in keeping with my personality and current events. So, I will end with this: we've all learned over the last year or so there's no shame in valuing the small things or the small group of people that make us happiest. And over the last few months, this newsletter and the people who read it have brought me happiness. I have learned so much researching and writing this newsletter and have met some wonderful postal workers who are everything you would want public servants to be. A big thank you goes out to all of them, without whom this project would have been nothing.

And another big thanks goes out to all of you. We're nothing without our readers. And an extra big thank you to everyone who subscribed to the zine. Hopefully we'll be able to keep them coming.

And a final thank you to everyone who sent in postcards. All of them were so much fun and made me smile. Whenever we return to our office, we're going to display them in some form or fashion. 

The Mail mail (Harriet the cat for scale)

You can always contact me at aaron.gordon@vice.com. I'd love to hear from you. Better yet, send me a letter. 

VICE Media c/o Aaron Gordon

49 S 2nd St.

Brooklyn, NY 11211

Wash hands

Wear masks

Write letters

Aaron

RadioShack’s shambling remains were given another jolt of life today when they were purchased by another company that plans to relaunch the once-great retailer as an online-focused brand.

The store’s remains were purchased by Retail Ecommerce Ventures (REV), a startup founded in 2019 that’s been scooping up brands from other faded retail giants as well, including Pier 1, Modell’s Sporting Goods, Dressbarn, and more. REV says RadioShack’s website already has “strong existing sales and sales potential,” and the company is “confident” it can further raise awareness of the brand internationally.

REV claims it’s successfully turned around other companies it’s launched as online brands. The Wall Street Journal reported that Dressbarn more than...

Continue reading…

November 18^th, 2020 marked 3900 days since the Federal Communications Commission launched its heavily-hyped "National Broadband Plan." 400 days ago, I penned an op-ed for the Benton Foundation which assessed how the FCC had been unable to achieve any of the benchmarks or meet any of the six stated goals of the plan. You probably won’t be surprised to hear that another year didn’t fix very much of the shortcomings I identified then.

Nominally, the U.S. National Broadband Plan was designed to run for 10 years. The mandates expired, unfulfilled, back in mid-March, just as the Covid-19 Pandemic was beginning. Now, eight months later, concerns over the digital divide have only grown louder, while the FCC commissioners crow about statistics on broadband deployment and hand out additional subsidies for telehealth.

While the National Broadband’s Plan included a goal for universal access, (Goal 3: “Every American should have affordable access to robust broadband service, and the means and skills to subscribe if they so choose.”) the FCC employs creative math to cover up the fact that 10 years of broadband policy has been a colossal failure.

As 2020 has unfolded, the agency continues to tout anecdotal successes in broadband “growth” using measurements of the subsidies being handed out to connect homes left behind by the FCC’s economic centric theories of regulatory implementation. Just over a month ago, Commissioner Carr went on the road to tout a subsidy for rural broadband in Pennsylvania to the tune of $690 Million dollars:

While anything that actually solves the gaps in broadband coverage that have resulted from the FCC’s negligent policy approach over the last decade is good, and even setting aside the potentially partisan electoral implications of handing out this subsidy in a critical battleground state just weeks before the Presidential election, the lack of scrutiny given to these routine subsidy announcements can be found in the cost. In this recent example, $690 Million to hook up 190 thousand new customers breaks down to a real bargain, at a mere cost of $3631 per household.

At that inflated price point, a subsidy to connect the roughly 125 Million homes in the country to broadband would have cost a bit North of $4.5 trillion.

Yet, even in the face of these targeted subsidies, we continue to see a large gap in access to broadband in many places in the U.S. Despite the fact the FCC adopted a slower broadband speed definition of 25 Mbps downstream, 3 Mbps upstream, when it was clear the 100 Mbps downstream, 50 Mbps upstream target for 100 Million Homes in the National Broadband Plan could not be met. So not only has the FCC missed it targets for access, it even had to reduce what counted as access to get to the numbers it is now routinely writing press releases about.

To be fair, the FCC is correct when it says that the fact that only 14.5 Million people remain without access to broadband is an improvement (though third party organizations estimate this is a massive underestimate), but that’s like a football team who is being shut-out while down by four touchdowns late in the game takes time to celebrate that meaningless field goal they just kicked. It is an improvement, sure, but nowhere close to getting the job done, and frankly on broadband deployment we should be well past the end of the game.

While we can debate metrics when assessing successes and failures of the FCC’s policymaking, the events of the last eight months have put a spotlight on how important the FCC’s failure to achieve its goals has been. As millions of Americans were forced to go virtual for work and school the clear requirement for affordable universal broadband access has never been clearer.

Gaps in coverage and the cost of broadband have put kids in parking lots outside of fast food places so they can do their school work on open Wi-Fi because the availability of broadband in an area does not guarantee one’s actually ability to access it. Broadband is expensive, and even in the areas where broadband is widely available, people suffering the economic strains of the last eight months may not have the resources to have broadband at home. So, at the same time we’re handing out hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies to cover up a problem that was supposed to be fixed already, we’re leaving even more people on the wrong side of the digital divide. Unfortunately, the current leadership of the FCC seems more interested in trying to invent ways to regulate internet speech that they object to.

With the indications that COVID-19 is going to be sticking around like an unwanted houseguest, the new incoming leadership at the FCC has to redouble the efforts to cover the gaps in the broadband maps. Universal access to broadband was not an unreasonable goal, and the FCC has had more than 10 years to make it happen. Kids on the wrong side of the divide have found ways to get their homework in on time, maybe we should hold the FCC to the same standard?

Christopher Terry spent 15 years as a producer in broadcast radio and six years as a lecturer at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee before becoming an assistant professor of Media Law at the University of Minnesota’s Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication. His research includes policy, regulatory and legal analysis of media ownership, media content and political advertising.

Messaging app Go SMS Pro, which has over 100 million installs from the Google Play store, has a massive security flaw that potentially allows people to access the sensitive content you’ve sent using the app. And even though the app’s maker was informed about the issue months ago, they haven’t made updates to fix what’s going on.

To give you an idea of just how much information the app leaks, here’s what TechCrunch was able to find: “In viewing just a few dozen links, we found a person’s phone number, a screenshot of a bank transfer, an order confirmation including someone’s home address, an arrest record, and far more explicit photos than we were expecting, to be quite honest,” cybersecurity reporter Zack Whittaker says. Not great.

H...

Continue reading…

• Organizing a Thanksgiving dinner can be a stressful ordeal, especially for those spending hours in the kitchen. 
• Some people opt out of cooking altogether by choosing a simpler alternative: getting their turkey dinner at a restaurant. 
• Many chain restaurants are also giving people the option to order their Thanksgiving feast for pick up and delivery this year.
• Public health experts recommend keeping Thanksgiving groups as small as possible this year and taking precautions to ensure safety of all diners.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Thanksgiving is just around the corner, and as the number of days you have to prepare for the big meal dwindles, some people might be considering outsourcing their turkey dinner.

Catering your Thanksgiving meal and not having to worry about a dry turkey or a burnt ham can make it easier for some people to enjoy the holiday.

Luckily, several chain restaurants offer special meal packages for Thanksgiving Day, with options for home delivery, pick-up, or dining in. These meal packages contain all of the Thanksgiving classics, and some have special twists unique to the restaurant.

It's worth noting that, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci, the US's top infectious-disease expert, even small indoor gatherings are driving new cases of COVID-19 in the US, so think twice before hosting a group of any size this year. Public health experts told Business Insider they recommend keeping groups as small as possible, eating outside or in a well-ventilated area, and wearing masks while inside and not eating.

Whether you need a backup plan or just want to avoid the hassle of cooking altogether, here are 12 chain restaurants where you can get a hot Thanksgiving meal.

Cracker Barrel offers customers hot meals for dining in and the option of picking up a turkey dinner to take home.

For customers who want to enjoy Thanksgiving from the comfort of their homes but still want to reap the benefits of a catered meal, Cracker Barrel offers a "Heat n' Serve Family Meal To-Go" that can feed up to 10 people. (Although, with the CDC warning small household gatherings are contributing to the rise in COVID-19 cases, you may be eating a lot of leftovers yourself.)

This meal, which costs $144.99, comes with a slew of dishes, including two fully-cooked turkey breasts, cornbread dressing, turkey gravy, cranberry relish, sweet yeast rolls, three sides, a pumpkin pie, and a pecan pie. 

Cracker Barrel recommends placing orders for the meal at least 24 hours in advance of pick-up. These meals will be available for purchase from November 21 to November 29. 

Cracker Barrel also offers an in-restaurant meal on Thanksgiving Day at all restaurant locations open for dine-in service. Meals are available from 11 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day until closing.

Boston Market allows customers to dine in or pick up entire meals.

With nearly all Boston Market locations open on Thanksgiving Day, patrons can sit in the restaurant for their holiday meal and have a choice between half a rotisserie chicken and slices of oven-roasted turkey for their main course. The $13.99 plates also come with a dinner roll, a slice of apple or pumpkin pie, and a choice of two sides. 

Customers who prefer to eat at home have two options for takeout. For those looking to have their meal in their fridge, ready to heat at any time, the "Holiday Heat and Serve" can be picked up the week prior to Thanksgiving Day and stored in your fridge for later. These pre-cooked meals will set you back $130 and come with a whole turkey, spinach and artichoke dip, gravy, vegetable stuffing, mashed potatoes, cranberry walnut relish, one apple pie, and one pumpkin pie.

Boston Market also offers eight different Thanksgiving spreads or a la carte options that can be home-delivered on its website.

The Italian restaurant​ Buca di Beppo will be open for dining and pick up this Thanksgiving.

Buca di Beppo offers a variety of options for customers on Thanksgiving Day, including some holiday staples with an Italian twist.

For $219.99, patrons can purchase a half pan of food that comes with turkey slices, cranberry sauce, mashed potatoes, green beans, bread rolls, spicy Italian sausage stuffing, and pumpkin pie. Orders are available for pick up from November 16 to November 26 from your local Buca di Beppo.

If you don't want to dine at home this year, Buca di Beppo also accepts Thanksgiving Day reservations with your choice of typical Italian cuisine and Thanksgiving Day specials. 

Bravo! Italian Kitchen is also serving up an Italian Kitchen Holiday Feast this year.

Bravo! Italian Kitchen's Holiday Feast includes sliced white meat turkey, homestyle gravy, roasted garlic mashed potatoes, spicy Italian sausage stuffing, green beans, cranberry sauce, and pumpkin pie. A half pan, which feeds 10 people, costs $199.99.

Bravo restaurants will be open from 11 a.m. to closing on Thanksgiving Day with a reservation, or you can also choose to order Thanksgiving Feasts to-go or catering. 

BRIO Italian Grille will also be open on Thanksgiving Day.

Dining rooms in select locations will open at 11 a.m., but you'll need to make a reservation. The chain's individual Thanksgiving dinner includes turkey, stuffing, broccolini, mashed potatoes, orange cranberry sauce, and pumpkin spice bread pudding and costs $28.99 per person.

BRIO Italian Grille is also offering to-go and catering for all of its Thanksgiving offerings.

Smith & Wollensky is offering order-ahead heat-and-serve meals this Thanksgiving.

The chain's Thanksgiving feast includes ready-to-roast turkey breast, sausage and cornbread stuffing, potatoes au gratin, bacon and shallot roasted Brussels sprouts, duck fat roasted root vegetables, cranberry relish and giblet gravy, house-made apple tart, and pecan pie. Order must be placed by November 14 and picked up on November 25.

Customers can also choose to dine-in this Thanksgiving. The restaurant's Thanksgiving special prix fixe, three-course dinner menu starts at $69 per adult and $35 per child under 12 years old. 

If you want a more festive environment for your turkey day, Rainforest Café hosts special Thanksgiving meals.

Rainforest Café is open on Thanksgiving and offers reservations for families who want to think outside the box for their holiday meal. All you have to do is make a reservation online at select locations.

An adult turkey dinner includes roasted sliced turkey, cornbread stuffing, mashed potatoes, sweet potatoes, green beans, turkey gravy, and cranberry sauce and costs $21.99 per plate. Options for kids include the same items and costs $11.99. 

Rainforest Café is also offering family meal packs to go featuring menu items like roasted sliced turkey, stuffing, mashed potatoes, corn O'Brien, and dinner rolls. Each pack is available for preorder starting November 23 and can be picked up on Thanksgiving Day.

Sizzler restaurants are offering a family meal deal this Thanksgiving.

Sizzler's Heat and Eat Thanksgiving dinners cost $74.99 and include tons of holiday favorites.

The meal comes with two pounds of roasted turkey, two pounds of stuffing, three pounds of mashed potatoes, 12 ounces of gravy, 20 ounces of green beans with slivered almonds, 3 pounds of sweet potato casserole, and six yeast rolls.

Denny's will be open this Thanksgiving to serve its famous turkey and dressing dinner.

The exact cost of the dinner varies by location but starts at around $9. It includes your traditional turkey and gravy, plus fixings like savory stuffing, cranberry sauce, and a choice of two sides that range from red-skinned mashed potatoes to sweet corn and onion rings. 

Marie Callender's has five different dinner options and an a la carte menu that customers can order from.

Marie Callender's provides customers with five different pre-cooked Thanksgiving dinner options in addition to an a la carte menu including apple sage stuffing, fire-roasted yams, cranberry sauce, mashed potatoes, turkey gravy, vegetables, cornbread, and one whole pumpkin or apple pie.

The Turkey Feast and Ham Feast both feed four to six people and include all those fixings in addition to a fully cooked turkey or ham, costing $119.99 and $134.99, respectively. The chain's Ultimate Whole Turkey and Ham Feast feeds six to eight and comes with a whole roasted turkey and ham. This option will set you back $174.99.

Ruth's Chris Steak House's Thanksgiving Day menu offers a full turkey dinner with sides and dessert for $41.95 per adult and $14.95 for kids.

If you want a traditional Thanksgiving meal at a restaurant with a more formal feel, Ruth's Chris Steak House offers a Thanksgiving Day menu with all the turkey day classics. For $41.95 per adult and $14.95 per child, your three-course meal will come with a choice of starters, an entree of roasted turkey and a side, and a choice of dessert.

Guests will have to make a reservation in advance in order to secure their spot.

Ruth's Chris Steak House is also offering carry-out options that will feed a family of four for $165. Each dinner includes your choice of salad, roasted turkey, homemade gravy, traditional cranberry relish, sausage-herb stuffing, two family-style sides, and pumpkin cheesecake. All orders must be placed by November 20 by 6 p.m. and are available for pickup on Thanksgiving Day only.

Bob Evans will be open on Thanksgiving Day for dine-in service and to-go orders.

Bob Evans Restaurant has two different "Farmhouse Feast" options for Thanksgiving. The "Ham Farmhouse Feast" and "Turkey Farmhouse Feast" come with green beans, mashed potatoes with gravy, buttered corn, bread and celery dressing, rolls, pumpkin pie, and more. The difference is that, as their names suggest, you can choose either ham or turkey as the entree.

Advance ordering is not available for Thanksgiving. Instead, customers can begin placing orders for takeout, curbside pickup, or delivery at 8 a.m. on Thanksgiving. 

• Read more:
• 9 easy Thanksgiving side dishes Michelin-starred chefs swear by
• I made mashed potatoes using 3 celebrity chefs' recipes, and all of them had issues
• 13 Thanksgiving sides you can make in a slow cooker
• I tried 3 different kinds of store-bought brown gravy and the richest gravy came out on top

Gimlet’s Lydia Polgreen tells Peter Kafka about how her parent company Spotify plans to turn music listeners into podcast devotees.

Spotify wants to own the podcasting space, and it’s made that clear with a series of high-profile acquisitions and deals over the past two years — including the Ringer, Gimlet, Joe Rogan, and, most recently, Megaphone. Its next goal: get more of its 300 million users to start listening to podcasts.

Peter Kafka talked to Gimlet Media’s new head of content, Lydia Polgreen, about how she plans to achieve that at the Code Media@Home series.

“Our goal is to get people into the habit of listening to content on Spotify that’s not music,” Polgreen said. While the growth of podcasts has been strong, it’s still a tiny fraction of overall listening for the service. She pointed to the latest Edison research that podcasting hit an all-time high in 2020, now accounting for a 6 percent share of audio consumption in the United States.

To that end, Gimlet is experimenting with mixed media extensions of podcasts, like vodcasting (video podcasting), and it’s leveraging Spotify’s robust predictive algorithm to feed music listeners shortform spoken content in the Daily Drive, its recommendation service.

“Just as Spotify helped people discover the best music for them — it didn’t just know what you liked, but it was able to predict what you might like,” Polgreen said. “There’s a lot of really fascinating work going on at the company that’s trying to solve this problem for spoken word audio too.”

The most recent iteration of this looks a lot like traditional FM radio. Last month, Gimlet Media launched The Get Up, a morning show that mixes daily news and talk with Spotify’s personalized music recommendations — “that special sauce Spotify has with music,” said Polgreen.

Deciding to reinvent the drive-time radio show during a pandemic, when a large share of would-be commuters are homebound, doesn’t seem like great timing. But according to Polgreen, half a million people have tuned in so far. And after an initial dip, Gimlet listenership is back to where it was pre-pandemic.

Polgreen also told Kafka some of her other ideas for audio: a daily shortform soap opera-style fiction podcast, and a weekly, appointment-listening documentary show. “We’ve yet to see a show that’s become the 60 Minutes for audio,” she said.

Watch Kafka’s full interview with Lydia Polgreen above to hear more about her vision for podcasting at Spotify, why she left a long career at the New York Times to join HuffPost after the 2016 election, and her thoughts on Joe Rogan’s interview controversies.

• A gauge of Chapter 11 bankruptcies surged 12 points to 81 in the third quarter and hit its highest level since 2010, according to a report from law firm Posinelli.
• The reading sits 26 points higher compared to the year-ago period but remains 19 points below the benchmark set in the fourth quarter of 2010.
• US businesses faced a dire confluence of soaring virus cases and expiring fiscal support in the third quarter. The Southeast region, which hosted the bulk of new outbreaks, saw nearly 40% of quarterly bankruptcy filings.
• Filings will likely increase "as we deal with the fallout from the pandemic," Jeremy Johnson, a bankruptcy attorney and co-author of the report, said.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Chapter 11 bankruptcies hit their highest level since 2010 in the third quarter as lasting damage from the coronavirus pandemic and expiration of fiscal support overwhelmed US businesses.

A gauge of Chapter 11 distress among surged roughly 12 points to 81 over the quarter that ended in September, according to a report from law firm Posinelli. The index sits roughly 26 points higher from the year-ago period and remains 19 points below the benchmark set in the fourth quarter of 2010.

The third quarter marked the sixth straight quarter of the distress index landing above 50 points. The gauge hasn't seen such stress since the financial crisis, Posinelli said.

The firm's index of real estate distress dipped 1 point to 29 in the third quarter. The reading is down roughly 4 points from the year-ago period. The nation's housing market has served as a bright spot throughout the pandemic as record-low rates fuel outsized buying.

Read more: A 28-year-old hedge fund co-investing chief shares how he advanced from community college to Wall Street — and breaks down his two-pronged approach to managing the fund's volatility strategies

The Posinelli-TrBK indexes track Chapter 11 filings from businesses with more than $1 million in assets. Nearly half of the previous quarter's filings came from businesses with more than $500 million in assets.

Almost 40% of filings originated in the Southeast, according to the report. The region, which includes Florida, Texas, and Georgia, was hit particularly hard by the virus over the third quarter.

The jump in bankruptcy filings arrived as key stimulus measures expired over the summer. The Paycheck Protection Program, which offered forgivable loans to small businesses, closed in early August. The period also saw the expiration of expanded unemployment benefits, leaving unemployed Americans with diminished spending power as cases ticked higher across the nation.

Read more: Cannabis stocks soared after Biden's win. Morningstar's chief US market strategist told us the 2 names that are still the most undervalued — and says the industry is well-positioned for gains in the years to come.

The current quarter doesn't offer much reprieve for struggling companies. Daily virus cases continue to hit record highs as public health experts warn for a dangerous winter. Several cities have instituted new lockdown measures to curb the virus's spread, but the restrictions could cut into crucial holiday-season revenue. And Congress remains stuck in a stimulus stalemate as both parties quarrel on the size of a new relief package.

"Although it's difficult for anyone to predict what the economy will do the rest of 2020 and into 2021, we do anticipate filings continuing this momentum as we deal with the fallout from the pandemic," Jeremy Johnson, a bankruptcy attorney and co-author of Posinelli's report, said.

Read more: MORGAN STANLEY: Buy these 21 stocks set to soar at least 50% as their earnings rebound from a COVID-19-induced rout

When Zoom announced Zapps last month — the name has since been wisely changed to Zoom Apps — VC Twitter immediately began speculating that Zoom could make the leap from successful video conferencing service to becoming a launching pad for startup innovation. It certainly caught the attention of former TechCrunch writer and current investor at SignalFire Josh Constine, who tweeted that “Zoom’s new ‘Zapps’ app platform will crush or king-make lots of startups.”

As Zoom usage exploded during the pandemic and it became a key tool for business and education, the idea of using a video conferencing platform to build a set of adjacent tooling makes a lot of sense. While the pandemic will come to an end, we have learned enough about remote work that the need for tools like Zoom will remain long after we get the all-clear to return to schools and offices.

We are already seeing promising startups like Mmhmm, Docket and ClassEdu built with Zoom in mind, and these companies are garnering investor attention. In fact, some investors believe Zoom could be the next great startup ecosystem.

Moving beyond video conferencing

Salesforce paved the way for Zoom more than a decade ago when it opened up its platform to developers and later launched the AppExchange as a distribution channel. Both were revolutionary ideas at the time. Today we are seeing Zoom building on that.

Jim Scheinman, founding managing partner at Maven Ventures and an early Zoom investor (who is credited with naming the company) says he always saw the service as potentially a platform play. “I’ve been saying publicly, before anyone realized it, that Zoom is the next great open platform on which to build billion-dollar businesses,” Scheinman told me.

He says he talked with Zoom leadership about opening up the platform to external developers several years ago before the IPO. It wasn’t really a priority at that point, but COVID-19 pushed the idea to the forefront. “Post-IPO and COVID, with the massive growth of Zoom on both the enterprise and consumer side, it became very clear that an app marketplace is now a critical growth area for Zoom, which creates a huge opportunity for nascent startups to scale,” he said.

Jason Green, founder and managing director at Emergence Capital (another early investor in Zoom and Salesforce) agreed: “Zoom believes that adding capabilities to the core Zoom platform to make it more functional for specific use cases is an opportunity to build an ecosystem of partners similar to what Salesforce did with AppExchange in the past.”

Building the platform

Before a platform can succeed with developers, it requires a critical mass of users, a bar that Zoom has clearly passed. It also needs a set of developer tools to connect to the various services on the platform. Then the substantial user base acts as a ready market for the startup. Finally, it requires a way to distribute those creations in a marketplace.

Zoom has been working on the developer components and brought in industry veteran Ross Mayfield, who has been part of two collaboration startups in his career, to run the developer program. He says that the Zoom Apps development toolset has been designed with flexibility to allow developers to build applications the way that they want.

For starters, Zoom has created WebViews, a way to embed functionality into an application like Zoom. To build WebViews in Zoom, the company created a JS Kit, which in combination with existing Zoom APIs enables developers to build functionality inside the Zoom experience. “So we’re giving developers a lot of flexibility in what experience they create with WebViews plus using our very rich set of API’s that are part of the existing platform and creating some new API’s to create the experience,” he said.

• Meadows said Wednesday he "can't guarantee" the federal government will avoid a shutdown in December.
• "Obviously, we want to keep the government funded," Meadows said per a Capitol Hill pool report.
• Both parties are still negotiating and attempting to bridge policy divisions.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

White House chief of staff Mark Meadows said on Wednesday he "can't guarantee" the federal government will avoid a shutdown in December.

While not ruling out a shutdown, Meadows said both parties are trying to reach an agreement to finance government agencies and keep them open.

"Obviously, we want to keep the government funded," Meadows said, per a Capitol Hill pool report. He called it "a high priority."

The Trump administration and Congress must approve a dozen spending bills to fund most government agencies by December 11, and those negotiations are ongoing. Both parties are still attempting to bridge divisions over public health funding and childcare among other issues.

Lawmakers could also strike an agreement on a "continuing resolution" that maintains existing federal agency funding for a short period of time. If neither outcome materializes, swaths of the government will shut down.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In 2018, President Donald Trump presided over the longest shutdown in US history, which lasted 35 days. He had demanded Congress fund a border wall with Mexico.

Meadow's comments come as Trump still refuses to acknowledge President-elect Joe Biden's election victory. He appears to have largely withdrawn from legislative matters. Congress remains gridlocked on another coronavirus relief package, which many economists say is needed to support individuals and businesses as virus cases surge nationwide.

There are no ongoing discussions between top congressional leaders on another federal rescue package. On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer called on Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell to restart relief talks. 

Nearly 12 million people could lose their unemployment benefits at the end of the year if lawmakers fail to extend jobless aid, according to a new analysis from the left-leaning Century Foundation.

Read more: Cannabis stocks soared after Biden's win. Morningstar's chief US market strategist told us the 2 names that are still the most undervalued — and says the industry is well-positioned for gains in the years to come.

• Investor Mike Novogratz told CNBC on Wednesday that Bitcoin's 148% surge this year is different from the retail-driven "speculative frenzy" of 2017, when the cryptocurrency reached $19,000 only to drop 78% a year later. 
• This year's Bitcoin boom is driven by institutional buy-in and investors looking for a hedge against paper money, the Galaxy Digital CEO said.
• The investor said Bitcoin has "hit escape velocity" and will skyrocket to $60,000 by the end of 2021. 
• Watch Bitcoin trade live here.

Bitcoin investors anxiously awaiting a crash following the cryptocurrency's 148% surge this year should know that this time is different, according to Mike Novogratz.

The investor told CNBC on Wednesday that the crash in Bitcoin's price after its record highs in 2017 was the result of a "global speculative frenzy" driven by retail investors. Now, institutional investors are adopting Bitcoin, and price of the cryptocurrency could reach $60,000 by the end of 2021, he said.

"You can't buy bitcoin at Citibank or Bank of America, but their strategists are talking about it," the Galaxy Digital CEO said. "We're seeing institutions buy into this, we're seeing high net worth families buy into this, across the board you're getting institutional adoption."

Novogratz explained that Bitcoin has "hit escape velocity," as investors around the globe view it increasingly as a store of value rather than a speculative vehicle. He said young investors on social media see bitcoin as "social money," while baby boomers view the cryptocurrency as a macro hedge against paper money. He also said that investors around the world are growing less trustworthy of fiat money as governments print more of it. 

Read more: Cannabis stocks soared after Biden's win. Morningstar's chief US market strategist told us the 2 names that are still the most undervalued — and says the industry is well-positioned for gains in the years to come.

Bitcoin's scarcity is helping drive its eye-popping rise, Novogratz added. In just the last month, the price has soared 54%.

"People are going to bitcoin because there's 20 million bitcoins that will ever be mined, there's complete scarcity in it. People believe it's a store of value. It's a social construct, and you can't change that," said Novogratz.

The investor expects Bitcoin to hit $20,000 by the end of 2020 and then pull back and hover around $16,000 before it skyrockets to around $60,000 by the end of 2021.

BTC is trading around $17,834 as of Wednesday afternoon.

• Microsoft Teams is a workplace integration software that allows you to communicate with your whole company in one window, with sectioned off conversations for different groups.
• It offers integration with other Microsoft applications, like Microsoft 365 programs. 
• It also allows for integration of third-party workplace productivity apps, like Asana.
• Visit Business Insider's Tech Reference library for more stories.

As companies acclimate to remote working, it's more important than ever to have functional, well-integrated software that can help co-workers connect with each other and share information — without needing to call a meeting.

Enter Microsoft Teams. Like other workplace integration programs, such as Slack, Teams allows you to easily communicate with your co-workers in one secure window. 

Teams, slated to replace Skype for Business by July 2021, is able to do a lot of things that its competitors can't thanks to its ability to easily integrate with Office 365. So on top of chatting with co-workers and creating chat rooms for smaller groups, you can also use a number of helpful Office applications, like Outlook, OneNote, and Excel.

Here's an overview of how Microsoft Teams works.

What you need to know about Microsoft Teams

When you create a new Team and add members, they are all automatically added to the "General" channel. From there, you can create new channels for smaller teams or groups, which essentially function as different group chats or conversations. 

For example, while your General channel might include everyone in your company, you might also create specific channels for different departments, like marketing, accounting, sales, etc. You could also make a single team for one department, if it's a larger one, and divide that team into subsections from there. You're free to organize your workplace however you choose.

These conversations will function as the main method of communication — though you can also message other team members privately at any time. Conversations are easily searchable, and you can even tag specific people if there's a message you need them to pay attention to.

Within these conversations, you can easily schedule and carry out group calls with your team or channel — so now those midday meetings and end-of-week get-togethers can also happen right in the workspace app.

Microsoft Teams works with other Microsoft and third-party apps

Creating a new Team also creates a corresponding Planner, SharePoint, Office 365 group, and shared OneNote. All of these additional programs can be accessed directly from the Teams window and allow you to work on shared documents and projects simultaneously, without the need to send files back and forth.

These integrated workspaces appear as tabs in the Teams window. The three tabs that are there by default are Conversations, Files, and Notes. Files is a tab where you can open any Microsoft 365 file that you've shared in the workspace, so you don't have to keep switching between windows whenever you want to work on a different project. Notes is a tab where your whole Team can keep running notes, for whatever purposes they deem necessary.

In addition to these integrated Microsoft programs, Teams also lets you add new tabs integrating other third-party software, like Asana or Soapbox. Even if your workplace doesn't exclusively use Microsoft products for organization, you can still keep everything in one neat, convenient window.

Related coverage from Tech Reference:

• How to get the Microsoft Office Suite on your iPhone and use certain apps for free
  

• How to get all of the Microsoft Office suite apps on an Android device for free or with a paid subscription

• How to add OneDrive to the File Explorer in Windows 10, so that you always have access to your saved files

• How to share files and folders on OneDrive on a PC in several different ways

• How to sync Microsoft OneNote notebooks on a Windows PC and keep your work up-to-date across devices

If you buy through our links, we may earn money from affiliate partners. Learn more.

1. Apple's M1 processor brings fast performance, long battery life, and a better camera to the 13-inch MacBook Pro.
2. But the Intel-powered MacBook Pro still comes with more options for storage, ports, and memory.
3. Overall, the performance and battery gains make the M1 model best suited for most people despite the Intel model's benefits. 
4. Check out our guide to the best MacBooks to learn more about which Apple laptop is best for you.

Apple's MacBook Pro laptops now come in two flavors: those powered by Apple's own M1 chip, and other models that run on Intel's processors. 

The newest 13-inch MacBook Pro and MacBook Air are among Apple's first computers to run on its own silicon, offering benefits like longer battery life and improved performance. Much like the iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch all run on Apple's own processors, the company is transitioning its Mac lineup away from Intel and toward its own in-house chips.

But it might also leave you confused. 

You face a choice. Buy the new, trendy laptop with Apple's latest and greatest hardware, or go with the tried-and-true Intel option with room for more storage and ports? 

Updated on 3/2/21: Added more detail about the MacBook Pro's performance and webcam based on testing.

MacBook Pro 13 (Apple M1) vs. MacBook Pro 13 (Intel Core): Which is best?

The MacBook Pro 13 with Apple M1 has a few important advantages. It's the most affordable model,at $1,299, and it has twice the battery life of Apple's MacBook Pro 13 with an Intel Core processor. The cheapest Intel-powered model you can get, by comparison starts at $1,799. Taken together, the M1-powered MacBook Pro's lower price, superior performance, and longer battery life make it the right choice for most people. 

But Intel models have an edge in high-end specifications, however, as they can be configured with more memory and more storage. Intel hardware is also a known quantity that can support all current Mac apps. Developers need to update their software to fully support Apple's M1 chip, though Apple claims that process is quite simple through its Rosetta 2 translation software. 

In our testing, popular apps like Microsoft Office, Slack, and Cisco WebEx worked just fine through Rosetta back when Apple's M1-powered laptops launched in November. However, if your job relies on using specific software that goes beyond basic web browsing and word processing, it's worth looking into whether the programs you need are M1-optimized. 

The M1-ready version of the app development platform Docker, for example, is still under development and in preview mode, according to the company's website. So an M1-powered Mac probably isn't the right choice just yet for computer programmers who rely on that software.

But on balance, the MacBook Pro 13 with Apple M1 is now the better option for most people, but it's not the obvious choice for everyone.

MacBook Pro 13 Specifications

Performance, storage, and memory

Apple's M1 processor is intimidating on paper. It's an 8-core CPU with four performance cores and four efficiency cores, and comes with an 8-core GPU, plus the 16-core "Neural Engine" that enhances certain machine learning algorithms.

Graphics performance is also a strength for the Macbook Pro 13 with Apple M1. Recent MacBook Pro 13 models have struggled with graphics because they relied on Intel's weak Iris Plus graphics. Apple's M1, however, has an 8-core graphics processor (GPU) similar to that found in the latest iPad Pro, a device known for impressive 3D graphics performance.

The differences are certainly noticeable in everyday tasks like gaming and encoding video. The M1 MacBook Pro is capable of encoding a 25-second 4K MOV video clip to a 1080p MP4 file in one minute and nine seconds, while the Intel-powered MacBook Pro does so in one minute and 17 seconds. 

Apple's M1 MacBook Pro is also much better at rendering graphics when playing "Shadow of the Tomb Raider." You shouldn't expect the M1 MacBook Pro to behave like a gaming rig by any means, but it holds its own when running the game at 1,650 x 1,050 and 1,200 x 800 resolutions. 

Graphics look much noisier with a lot more distortion on the Intel-powered MacBook Pro by comparison. (For reference, the Intel-equipped MacBook Pro I've been using for testing purposes launched in 2020 and has a quad-core Intel Core i5 processor with 16GB of memory.) 

The MacBook Pro with Apple's M1 chip also creams the Intel version in benchmark tests. On tests meant to evaluate the performance of a single processor core and how the cores work together, the M1 MacBook Pro scored an average of 1,754 and 7,699 respectively. The Intel MacBook Pro scored 1,097 on the single core test on average and 4,142 on the multi-core test.

In another Geekbench 5 test that measures GPU performance for tasks like gaming, image processing, and video editing, the M1 MacBook Pro scored 19,423 on average while the Intel MacBook Pro scored 8,707. 

On the other hand, the MacBook Pro 13 with Apple M1 faces limitations in memory and storage. It can only be configured with up to 16GB of memory (RAM) and up to 2TB of storage. Intel models can be upgraded to 32GB of RAM with up to 4TB of storage, and they also have four Thunderbolt 3 USB-C ports while the M1 MacBook Pro only has two Thunderbolt/USB-4 ports.

Most people reading this don't need these upgrades, but they matter to professional videographers and photographers working with very large files and running multiple memory-hogging apps at once. If that sounds like you, you may want to skip Apple Silicon until the M1 is available with more memory and storage. 

Battery life

In short, battery life is the real reason to buy Apple's M1 Pro laptop. The MacBook Pro 13-inch with Apple M1 doubles the quoted battery life of the MacBook Pro 13 with Intel hardware. The Apple M1 model claims up to 20 hours of battery life, while the Intel model promises up to 10 hours of time between charges. 

Both figures are a best-case scenario, so you can expect slightly less battery life in real-world use. Still, it's clear the Apple M1 chip is far more efficient. The size of the battery in each model is (almost) identical, so the endurance gains are coming from lower power draw, not a larger battery capacity. 

Twenty hours exceeds not only the endurance of most laptops, but also most smartphones and tablets. We haven't tested the M1 MacBook Pro's battery life yet, but the M1 MacBook Air blows our minds  with more than 12 hours of battery life, which is nearly double the longevity of the Intel-powered MacBook Air. Portability is the big, huge, obvious reason to buy the MacBook Pro 13 with Apple M1 over the Intel version.

Design and display

Aside from the difference in ports, the Apple M1 and Intel versions of the MacBook Pro 13 look identical. They're the same in size and thickness. They offer the same color options (silver or space gray). The Apple M1 model is technically a tenth of a pound lighter, but that's a minor difference you'd struggle to notice even in a side-by-side comparison. They even use the same 61-watt USB-C power adapter. 

Both laptops also have the same 2,560 x 1,600 Retina display with True Tone white balance, support for P3 wide color, and 500 nits of brightness.

In other words, don't expect anyone to know you have the latest-and-greatest Mac with Apple Silicon. It looks like any other MacBook Pro 13. 

Additional features 

The Apple M1 MacBook Pro has most of the previous MacBook Pro 13's key features, such as the Touch Bar and TouchID fingerprint-based login security.

But the Apple M1 has an edge in wireless connectivity. Intel-powered models of the MacBook Pro 13 only support 802.11ac, or Wi-Fi 5, while the Apple M1 model supports 802.11ax, or Wi-Fi 6. This will only matter if you own a Wi-Fi 6 router, but including the latest Wi-Fi standard will help future-proof the laptop's connectivity. 

The M1 MacBook Pro also has a much better webcam than the Intel version, which is important now that we're socializing and holding work meetings virtually. Although both laptops have a 720p camera, Apple's M1 computers also have the company's image signal processor inside. 

When testing the Intel MacBook Pro's webcam alongside that of the M1-powered MacBook Pro, the difference was massive. The selfie taken on the M1 MacBook Pro's webcam had much better lighting, bolder color, and noticeably less grain than the one captured on the Intel MacBook Pro. 

Another perk that comes with M1-powered Macs is that iPhone apps can run directly on these laptops since they share a common architecture. That's not enough to significantly influence your buying decision, especially since Macs don't have the touchscreen support that bodes nicely with mobile apps, but it's still worth considering. 

The bottom line

Apple's MacBook Pro 13 with Apple M1 is best for most buyers

The M1 MacBook Pro's speedy performance and long battery life alone make it the best choice for most people. In a sense, Apple is making your decision for you, because the MacBook Pro 13 with Apple M1 is the new entry-level model. You can't buy a new MacBook Pro 13 with Intel hardware for less than $1,799.

True professionals, especially more stationary ones, are likely  the exception. If you need the most storage, ports, and memory you can get in an Apple laptop, your best bet is an Intel MacBook Pro. Similarly, if having the certainty that Intel's platform offers when it comes to app compatibility is important, the M1 MacBook Pro also isn't for you. 

It's also worth noting that Apple is expected to release two new MacBook Pros in 14-inch and 16-inch sizes sometime this year that run on a new version of its chip, according to Bloomberg. If your current laptop is still working well, it might be worth waiting until the next version comes out.

Although there are some circumstances in which the Intel-based models are a better choice, the big gains Apple's M1 chip brings in performance and battery life make it the best option for most people.  The new laptops provide a first glimpse at what the Mac experience can be like when Apple has complete control over the enabling technologies that power it, and it's impressive so far.  

Google has announced a new Transcoder API preview. The API empowers users to create consumer streaming formats for direct-to-consumer media content. This is the first Google API in a series to come that directly targets the direct-to-consumer market that has exploded in recent years, and especially accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The bank spent eight years shifting workloads to the cloud, shuttering its final data center this year. 

• Delta Air Lines just extended its policy of blocking middle seats until the end of March.
• The airline did not say if it would continue the policy beyond that date.
• Delta will likely soon be the last US airline still blocking seats as competitors move to capture lost revenue after an extremely tough year for the industry.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Delta Air Lines just extended its policy of blocking middle seats until the end of March, making it the only airline in the US to block seats beyond January 2021.

The Atlanta-based airline will keep middle seats open until March 30, 2021, citing a push to increase "confidence and reassurance" in air travel. The "Delta CareStandard" initiative has seen the airline overhaul its airport terminals and onboard experience to get more flyers in the skies, as Business Insider saw firsthand on a recent visit to JFK Airport.

While October saw positive signs of a return to the skies, only one travel day since mid-March saw the number of daily passengers exceed 1 million. The Thanksgiving holiday rush is also expected to be lackluster as more states enact lockdown restrictions.

The move sees Delta continue to show up its rival airlines in the big three  — American Airlines and United Airlines, who stopped seat blocking policies in the spring and summer  — and overtake its Seattle-based competitor, Alaska Airlines, which previously matched its seat blocking policy to Delta's end date of January 6, 2021.

Alaska and Delta are currently fighting for dominance in Seattle as Delta continues to grow a domestic hub and international gateway in the Pacific Northwest alongside its other hub in Portland, Oregon. Delta wouldn't confirm that this is the last extension of its seat blocking policy but the airline's CEO, Ed Bastian, told analysts and the media during the recent third-quarter earnings call that the policy will likely end mid-2021.

The country's second-largest airline reported a pre-tax loss of $2.6 billion for the third-quarter and hopes to break even on daily operations in the spring. Southwest Airlines announced an end to its seat blocking policy in October and will fill flights to capacity starting December 1. JetBlue Airways will be blocking capacity at 85% after December 1 through January 7. (Link to my middle seat article from last week)

Hawaiian Airlines' middle seat blocking policy is similarly set to expire on December 15. An airline spokesperson told Business Insider last month that no decision has been made regarding its extension.

Republicans in Wayne County initially prevented vote totals from being certified — but then backed down.

Republican officials in Wayne County, Michigan, made a stunning move to block the certification of their presidential election results Tuesday — but backed down a few hours later amid intense criticism.

Wayne County is the largest county in the state, it includes the city of Detroit (where the vast majority of the population is Black), and it votes heavily for Democrats. As with all Michigan counties, its election results go to a bipartisan board of canvassers for certification that has two Democrats and two Republicans.

Usually, this is a formality. But on Tuesday, the two Republicans initially said at a meeting that they wouldn’t certify the results, claiming various “irregularities” meant they weren’t sure they could trust the count.

The move was exactly what many following Trump’s efforts to dispute the election results have long feared. Biden clearly won Michigan — he leads there by over 140,000 votes, a 2.6 percent margin. But if Wayne County’s results were excluded from the count entirely, Trump would win. Practically, the local officials’ move wouldn’t have been the last word, as the state board of canvassers would have then gotten to weigh in — but that board, too, is made up of two Democrats and two Republicans.

President Trump welcomed this effort to overturn the will of Michigan’s voters. “Wow! Michigan just refused to certify the election results! Having courage is a beautiful thing. The USA stands proud!” he tweeted. The chair of the Michigan Republican Party also praised the move and helped take credit for it.

But quickly, it fell apart. As the Wayne County board of canvassers meeting stretched onward, its Republican officials were bombarded with criticism, as news of their actions went viral nationwide. And after a few hours of this, they backed down, agreeing to certify Wayne County’s results alongside a request that Michigan’s secretary of state audit results.

This drama may not have lasted long, but it was disturbing nonetheless. Key Republicans basically made an attempt to steal the state of Michigan out of Joe Biden’s hands — and both the president and the Michigan Republican Party cheered them on.

The larger context for what happened in Michigan

The context here is that Trump can’t sustain his effort to dispute the election indefinitely. The deadlines in which states will certify their results — meaning, Biden wins in several key swing states — are fast approaching. Those certification deadlines have been on Trump’s mind. According to journalist Geraldo Rivera, Trump recently said he wants to see “what states do” in terms of certifying their results before conceding.

Except in extraordinarily close races where there’s solid evidence malfeasance occurred, certification should just be a formality — the person with the most votes wins. However, Trump has been trying to weaponize this process by spreading baseless claims of election fraud, and urging either judges or partisan Republicans involved in the process to delay or block certification.

According to the Washington Post’s Robert Costa, the idea here is that if states are somehow prevented from certifying their votes and therefore electors for Biden, he will lack 270 electoral votes, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, and since Republicans will control more state delegations there, they could declare Trump the winner. (This is a far-fetched scenario, but, per Costa, it’s what Trump is talking about at this point.)

Until Tuesday, the president had little success. His various lawsuits trying to block certification have not yet convinced any judges to step in. And even key Republican officials involved in the certification process, like Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, have resisted pressure from Trump’s team. In other important swing states, the key certifying officials are Democrats who of course wouldn’t go along with Trump’s games.

But in Michigan, the job of certification is given to a four-person State Board of Canvassers — a bipartisan body composed of two Democrats and two Republicans. There are also four-member bipartisan boards of canvassers in each county in Michigan. Historically, certification has not been a partisan matter, but theoretically these boards could deadlock along partisan lines. And last week, two longtime Michigan Republicans warned in an op-ed that such partisan shenanigans were entirely plausible.

Republicans in Wayne County initially blocked the certification of results

Michigan’s deadline to certify state results is this coming Monday, so the county boards of canvassers have been meeting to certify their respective county results. The meeting for Wayne County took place Tuesday — and it was unexpectedly dramatic. When the board of canvassers voted on whether to certify Wayne County’s results, the two Republican members, Monica Palmer and William Hartmann, voted not to.

The Republicans’ stated reason was that there were discrepancies between precincts’ counts of how many named people voted and the actual count of votes. This is known as precincts being “out of balance.”

But though many precincts were out of balance, the discrepancies were usually very small. “Most of the unbalanced Wayne County precincts reported to the board Tuesday were off by three or four votes,” Zahra Ahmad and Lauren Gibbons of MLive report. Small mistakes like that suggest clerical error rather than a massive fraud scheme — and certainly they don’t add up to anything close to Biden’s 145,000 vote lead in the state.

Regardless, Palmer and Hartmann said, they couldn’t certify the results. “Based on what I saw and went through in poll books in this canvass, I believe that we do not have complete and accurate information in those poll books,” Palmer said, according to the Detroit Free Press.

Their Democratic colleagues responded with fury, accusing them of playing political games. And very quickly, Laura Cox, the chair of Michigan’s Republican Party, praised this turn of events. “I am proud that, due to the efforts of the Michigan Republican Party, the Republican National Committee and the Trump Campaign, enough evidence of irregularities and potential voter fraud was uncovered resulting in the Wayne County Board of Canvassers refusing to certify their election results,” Cox said in a statement.

It was lost on few that the two Republicans who voted against certification are white, and were alleging problems in the mostly Black city of Detroit. Indeed, Palmer even suggested that all of Wayne County’s results except for Detroit could be certified — even though the most out-of-balance precinct, with a 27-vote discrepancy, was in the mostly white city of Livonia. “Shame on you. You are a disgrace,” the president of Detroit’s NAACP chapter, Wendell Anthony, said over Zoom at the meeting.

Soon, the news went viral nationally. Reporters discovered that Hartmann had posted racist memes mocking President Obama on his public Facebook page. He had also repeatedly posted on his public Facebook several times suggesting that the election wasn’t over yet and that there was “more to come.” He also posted links from right-wing conspiracy sites, and several months ago he retweeted President Trump saying that mail voting is “RIPE for FRAUD” and “shouldn’t be allowed.”

Trump cheered this turn of events — just as Wayne County Republicans reversed course

Biden’s statewide margin of victory over Trump is about 145,000 votes, but his margin of victory in Wayne County is 323,000 votes. So in the dubious scenario where Wayne County’s results were just thrown out entirely, Trump would lead the state.

But this was never going to be the last step in the certification process. The call will ultimately be made by the four-person statewide Board of Canvassers, though there are similarly two Democrats and two Republicans on that board (and one of those Republicans is married to a witness in one of Trump’s lawsuits alleging improprieties).

Still, the Trump campaign cheered the news that Republicans were blocking certification of votes in a county Biden won. Jenna Ellis, a lawyer for the Trump campaign, bragged that the decision was a “huge win” for Trump and claimed that, if the state board also deadlocked, the GOP state legislature “will select the electors.” (However, Michigan’s Republican state Senate majority leader said Tuesday that this is “not going to happen.”)

Then Trump himself weighed in, incorrectly claiming the state of Michigan, rather than just the Wayne County board of canvassers, refused to certify results, and praising Republicans on the board for “having courage.”

But around that time, Palmer and Hartmann decided to change course. After facing hours of intense criticism, they agreed to a deal in which they’d vote to certify Wayne County’s results after all, alongside a recommendation that Michigan’s secretary of state conduct an audit.

So the certification process in Michigan is now back on track. As of Wednesday, all counties have certified their vote totals. The statewide board of canvassers must decide whether to certify the overall results by this coming Monday.

The system only works if Republicans agree to let it work

As Trump tries to contest an election Biden clearly won, many have expressed confidence that Trump will fail because American democratic institutions are too strong for him to subvert.

But while Trump’s effort indeed likely will fail, that may be mainly because Biden’s lead is just too big. Trump would somehow have to flip three swing states Biden won into his column — a tall order.

Yet little of what’s happened since the election is confidence-inspiring about how a closer race could have played out.

The reality is that the president and many of his supporters do not respect the outcomes in states where he lost and will try whatever they can to ignore the will of the voters in those states (always citing supposed, unproven fraud as an excuse).

Overall, American democratic institutions will only continue to function if enough Republicans in key positions — state legislators, state officials, judges — agree to let them function.

And many local officials have done so. Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state, has stood up to Trump’s pressure, strongly disputing his claims of fraud. Arizona’s Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich has made similar comments. GOP state legislature leaders in states Biden won have also been saying they won’t try to appoint Trump electors. Judges so far have not given Trump’s frivolous lawsuits the time of day.

But high-profile Republicans and conservative media figures have indulged Trump in his efforts to dispute the outcome. Relatively few have spoken out against it. And we saw the consequences of that in Wayne County Tuesday. Can we really be surprised if local Republicans who like and trust the president start doing what he wants them to do — trying to help him maintain power?

• The former head of the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) Chris Krebs was fired by President Donald Trump on Tuesday via Twitter.
• Shortly after, Krebs responded with a tweet of his own from his personal account: "Honored to serve. We did it right. Defend Today, Secure Tomrorow. #Protect2020"
• Krebs has received an outpouring of bipartisan praise from lawmakers and from cybersecurity officials abroad.
• Sen. Elizabeth Warren said that "Christopher Krebs got fired because he did his job to protect our elections and stood up to Trump's conspiracy theories," echoing the sentiment of many.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Chris Krebs, the now-former head of the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA), responded with a tweet of his own after President Donald Trump announced via Twitter on Tuesday that he had been fired.

"Honored to serve. We did it right. Defend Today, Secure Tomrorow. #Protect2020," Krebs tweeted from his personal Twitter account.

—Chris Krebs (@C_C_Krebs) November 18, 2020

"I'm proud of the work we did at CISA," Christopher Krebs reiterated to NBC News after the firing. "I'm proud of the teammates I had at CISA. We did it right."

Krebs had been at odds with the president over the president's false claims that there was election fraud, which Trump alluded to in his tweets. Last week, CISA announced that there was "no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," contradicting Trump's repeated unsubstantiated claims, and hours before his termination, Krebs used his CISA Twitter account to again rebut claims about election infrastructure.

Following news of Krebs' firing, he received a deluge of bipartisan and international support, in part acknowledging the work CISA undertook in safeguarding the US elections.

Biden campaign spokesman Michael Gwin said, "Chris Krebs should be commended for his service in protecting our elections, not fired for telling the truth." Gwin added that "Bipartisan election officials in the administration itself — and around the country—have made clear that Donald Trump's claims of widespread voter fraud are categorically false."

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, the ranking member of the Senate Rules Committee, which also oversees federal elections, called Krebs' firing "a gut punch to our democracy," in a statement. She added that "To use all caps like our outgoing President likes to do: OUTRAGE." 

In a statement, House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff said that "President Trump is retaliating against Director Krebs and other officials who did their duty," adding that "It's pathetic, but sadly predictable that upholding and protecting our democratic processes would be cause for firing."

Sen. Angus King, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, stated that "Chris Krebs is a dedicated public servant who has helped build up new cyber capabilities in the face of swiftly-evolving dangers. By firing him for doing his job, President Trump is harming all Americans – who rely on CISA's defenses, even if they don't know it."

Senate Intelligence ranking member Mark Warner added that "Chris Krebs is an extraordinary public servant and exactly the person Americans want protecting the security of our elections," and that "It speaks volumes that the president chose to fire him simply for telling the truth."

Several GOP members, including former Senate Intelligence chair Richard Burr weighed in on Krebs' firing, but did not outright criticize it. He praised Krebs and CISA's work and said "I wish him the best in his next chapter."

Sen. Ben Sasse, a Republican member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, appeared to be one of the first GOP members who has condemned Krebs' firing, stating that "Krebs did a really good job—as state election officials around the country will tell you—and he obviously should not be fired."

Across the pond, the founder and former head of the National Cyber Security Centre in the UK, Ciaran Martin, chimed in with international support. "Not seeking to distract attention from the wider issues, but I just want to put on record a tribute to the outstanding service of @CISAKrebs. He's been the best partner an ally could hope for. People in and beyond are safer online because of his work and leadership." 

According to Reuters, Krebs was bracing for his dismissal after the election, precisely because of his work to communicate the security of US elections.

• Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey told a congressional hearing on Tuesday that once President Donald Trump is no longer president, his tweets won't fall under the company's "world leader" policy. 
• World leader Twitter accounts are granted certain exemptions when they break Twitter's guidelines, because the platform considers their tweets to be in the public interest.
• Trump's Twitter account will lose its "world leader" protections on January 20, Twitter previously told The Verge.
• Once he's no longer president, Trump's account would be subject to suspension and even removal, just like any other account, if he breaks the platform's rules.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

President Donald Trump has until January to tweet with impunity.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey appeared alongside Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg at a congressional hearing on Tuesday. Responding to questions from lawmakers, Dorsey confirmed that Trump's Twitter account will be stripped of the special protections the platform affords to world leaders.

"If an account suddenly is not a world leader anymore, that particular policy goes away," Dorsey said.

The social media giant had confirmed to The Verge a week prior to the hearing that on January 20 — the scheduled day of President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration — Trump's personal Twitter account will lose its status as a "world leader" account.

On Twitter, "world leaders" are treated differently. Tweets that would ordinarily be removed or result in sanctions are instead placed behind information cards, informing users that although they break Twitter's rules, the platform has allowed the tweets to stay up.

This is because Twitter believes tweets from world leaders are in the public interest, even when they break its guidelines.

"A critical function of our service is providing a place where people can openly and publicly respond to their leaders and hold them accountable," a Twitter spokesperson told Business Insider.

"With this in mind, there are certain cases where it may be in the public's interest to have access to certain Tweets, even if they would otherwise be in violation of our rules."

A spokesperson told The Verge that the policy "applies to current world leaders and candidates for office, and not private citizens when they no longer hold these positions." 

Twitter started taking action against Trump's tweets on May 26, applying fact-checking labels to two tweets alleging California mail-in ballots would be subject to fraud.

Two days later, it took action against a tweet of his about George Floyd protests in Minneapolis for breaking its rules on "glorifying violence."

In the run-up to the election Twitter started applying restrictions to tweets that it deemed to violate its "civic integrity" policy. Many of these tweets detailed the president's unsubstantiated claims that mail-in voting would be fraudulent.

Since Election Day, the platform has taken action against numerous Trump tweets. Some simply have fact-checks next to them, while others are behind click-through blocks warning users: "Some or all of the content shared in this Tweet is disputed and might be misleading about an election or other civic process."

It's unclear how long Trump's account might survive after January 20, but if he continues to tweet as he has been doing, it's possible his account would be suspended.

Some groups argue Trump should lose his privileges long before Biden's inauguration.

The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and political watchdog Common Cause wrote an open letter to Twitter on Thursday asking the platform to suspend Trump's account for undermining the integrity of the election.

• Boeing's 737 Max aircraft can fly again once the company makes design changes, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced Wednesday.
• The aircraft had been grounded for almost two years, after two fatal crashes killed a combined 346 people.
• The 737 Max wasn't able to fly until it got FAA approval.
• The FAA lifted its grounding order Wednesday, and FAA head Steve Dickson said he was "100% confident" in the safety of the plane.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Boeing's 737 Max has been cleared to fly again by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), pending design changes.

The FAA grounded the craft in March 2019 after two fatal crashes within five months of each other killed a combined 346 people.

It is the longest-ever grounding of a jetliner in the US, and it cost Boeing about $20 billion.

The model first entered service in 2017.

The 737 Max wasn't be able to fly until the FAA lifted its grounding order. It now has that approval – but before the jets take to the sky again, Boeing has to make repairs to flaws identified by the FAA during its 20-month review of the aircraft.

This will include installing fixes to the planes' flight computers.

Each US airline operating the 737 Max will also need to deliver new pilot training, focusing on the problems that caused the two fatal crashes.

"These actions do not allow the Max to return immediately to the skies," the FAA said in a statement.

"The FAA must approve 737 Max pilot training program revisions for each US airline operating the Max and will retain its authority to issue airworthiness certificates and export certificates of airworthiness for all new 737 Max aircraft manufactured since the FAA issued the grounding order.

"Furthermore, airlines that have parked their Max aircraft must take required maintenance steps to prepare them to fly again."

It added that, "following the return to service, the FAA will continue to work closely with our foreign civil aviation partners to evaluate any potential additional enhancements for the aircraft."

FAA head: "100% confident" in the safety of the plane

"The agency also will conduct the same rigorous, continued operational safety oversight of the MAX that we provide for the entire US commercial fleet," it said.

FAA head Steve Dickson said he was "100% confident" in the safety of the plane.

"The path that led us to this point was long and grueling, but we said from the start that we would take the time necessary to get this right," he said. "I am 100 percent comfortable with my family flying on it."

The FAA's ruling is only applicable to US carriers and US-registered aircraft, but will inform the work of other authorities around the world.

In October, the head of the European Union aviation regulator said he considers the model safe to fly once again.

Patrick Ky, executive director of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), told Bloomberg News he considers the plane is safe to fly in European airspace after two test flights were conducted in September. 

American Airlines is set to be the first US airline to return the Boeing Max 737 to commercial service at the end of December, with United Airlines and Southwest Airlines hoping to follow in 2021.

I’m tired (today’s Whoop recovery score of 15). Almost everyone in my virtual universe is tense, tired, frustrated, angry, annoyed, exasperated, irked, or outraged.

Fortunately, the only person in my physical world – and there is only one (Amy) – is generally calm. While we each have our moments, our morning coffee resets both of us for the day ahead and syncs up our energy as we simply begin again.

Last night I read Maelle Gavet’s book Trampled by Unicorns: Big Tech’s Empathy Problem and How to Fix It. It was excellent and is consistent with my worldview. I knew many of the examples, but a few new ones jumped out at me. The second half of the book contains Maelle’s recommendations, many of which I agreed with.

I woke up this morning with the phrase “Manipulation Machine” in my head. I’ve used it in a few public talks lately and have been thinking a lot more about it over the past six months on the run-up to the 2020 Election and the subsequent aftermath.

I used to ponder the arrival of the AGI (Artificial general intelligence) and still enjoy reading books like G. W. Constable’s Becoming Monday. However, I’ve concluded that we have a much greater problem as a species than AGI’s future arrival.

The manipulation machine is already here (no new information there). However, it’s already taken over and, while not sentient, is no longer controllable.

I’ve been saying the machines have already taken over for over a decade, but they are just patient. They have extremely long duty cycles, and we’ve configured them to be exceeding distributed and redundant. They are allowing us to put all of the physical information we have into them and letting us do the work of setting all the conditions up, rather than them having to figure out how to do this. Simultaneously, they make progress with every click of the clock (and their clock speeds are much faster than ours.)

The manipulation machine is not new. If you want to see its evolution, go watch Mad Men or just ponder a few of Don Draper’s quotes.

“You are the product. You feel something. That’s what sells.”

“What you call love was invented by guys like me…to sell nylons.”

Or the one that really rings true in this moment in the US.

“People want to be told what to do so badly that they’ll listen to anyone.”

The cynical reader will remind me that the manipulation machine goes back much further. While true (I give you religion as an example), we have now built an automated version of it that moves much faster than we can process.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if AGI, or the conceptual equivalent, was already here, and we haven’t noticed?

The post The Manipulation Machine appeared first on Feld Thoughts.

Nintendo and Champion are attempting to turn Mario into a style icon with a new collaboration. As part of Super Mario’s 35th anniversary, the two companies have announced a limited edition capsule collection that mashes streetwear with the Mushroom Kingdom. The highlight is a pair of bright red overalls, but there’s also a tie-dye Toad shirt, T-shirts with classic Mario box art, and a Princess Peach hoodie.

Nintendo says the gear will go on sale starting on November 18th in the US, with prices ranging from $30 to $150. Certain pieces, like the overalls, will only be available in “super-limited” quantities.

The collaboration is the latest in a very Mario-themed year for Nintendo. To celebrate the franchise’s anniversary, the developer...

Continue reading…

In a Florida suburb Friday afternoon, local law enforcement received a call from a man confessing to hoarding explosives and killing his wife after seeing her cheat on him. Seemingly distraught, he gave them a play-by-play of the chaos unraveling. However, the crime didn't happen. The call was made by someone who hacked into his Ring surveillance camera.

NBC 2 reported that Sarah Courtney, the supposed dead wife, was home when she got a call from local authorities asking if she was alive. Nearby, her children’s school went into lockdown and the neighborhood was swarming with law enforcement, according to The North Port Sun. 

When authorities arrived at Courtney’s home, they found her unharmed and couldn’t decipher who the incognito caller was. Then the Ring camera started calling them names. It had been hacked and then used in a version of a swatting prank, an escalating, but similar type of prank to a series of Ring hacks that happened last year.

As seen in a video from NBC 2, officers walking out of Courtney’s home are met with a, “Yo, what’s up [sic],” and other insults. One officer turns around, looks awkwardly into the Ring camera, and waves. “Hello?” they say, seemingly confused. 

The investigation is ongoing, however, Josh Taylor, the City of North Port’s communications manager, believes the doorbell hacker is based in Sweden. Taylor said the perpetrator allegedly broke into the home’s internet connection and was able to switch the doorbell’s password, gaining access to its camera. Once the person knew Courtney was home, he made the call.

“We had a lot of interactions with the previous owners of this address,” said Taylor in an interview with Motherboard. “We’re not sure but they could have had beef with this hacker. Without knowing the old resident had moved, whoever made the call could have looked up the address and targeted them for whatever reason.”

“I think it was incredibly random. But rattling,” Courtney said in an interview with the North Port Sun. “Some creep was watching me walk up to my front door. Just a major invasion of privacy. I was like ‘what the heck.’ It’s a scary side of society.”

As Motherboard has previously reported, Ring cameras had been frequent targets for hackers, who broke into individual cameras of owners who did not use two-factor verification. There is no indication that Ring's servers had been hacked; in this case, a single Ring camera owner's account was hacked. Once a hacker is in, they can watch live stream video from the camera, access archival footage, and even speak through the device’s speakers, as displayed in Courtney’s case. 

“Based on our ongoing investigation, a small number of Ring accounts appear to have been accessed by bad actors using compromised email accounts—Ring systems were not compromised,” a Ring spokesperson said in a statement. “We promptly notified these customers and reset their Ring passwords so they could secure both their Ring and personal email accounts. Swatting is a serious crime and we’re working with law enforcement to hold the bad actors accountable and protect customers.”

Courtney said she assumes the hacker was watching and waiting for her to get home. She told local news she thought it was a joke at first, but eventually realized she had been “swatted.”

Made popular by YouTubers, swatting is a malicious gag where someone calls the police and reports a serious situation like a hostage hold up or murder. Local officials rush to the scene but typically only find a completely innocent citizen caught wildly off guard. It’s no joke, though, as swatting has led to multiple deaths in the United States.

President Obama loved the internet. Now he has second thoughts.

Back in 2008, Barack Obama famously harnessed the internet and social media to help win the White House. He kept up the embrace once he got there.

Now he worries that the internet and social media have helped create “the single biggest threat to our democracy.”

Obama has been saying a version of this for four years — since he left the White House — but his words are getting steadily more pointed. He’s clearly sounding an alarm, but it’s not exactly clear what he thinks we should do about it.

His latest critique comes in a new interview between Obama and Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg, and before we go any further we should put it in full context: Obama was discussing a media landscape dominated not just by Facebook but by Fox News that allows Americans to choose their own distorted reality. Which means, he says, we no longer have a shared set of facts.

That assessment is now conventional wisdom among many critics of the TV and internet ecosystem. There’s almost no practical, constructive argument about how we should respond to that problem. Obama doesn’t offer one in his interview, either.

And again, it’s incorrect to say that Obama is laying the problems of our broken information landscape solely at the feet of Facebook or any other particular tech company. But he is certainly lacing into them now in a way he didn’t do prior to leaving the White House.

Obama: Now you have a situation in which large swaths of the country genuinely believe that the Democratic Party is a front for a pedophile ring...I was talking to a volunteer who was going door-to-door in Philadelphia in low-income African American communities, and was getting questions about QAnon conspiracy theories.

Goldberg: Is this new malevolent information architecture bending the moral arc away from justice?

Obama: I think it is the single biggest threat to our democracy.

Later in the interview, Obama makes it quite clear that much of his concern is specifically about the internet — which he is also quite clear isn’t “going away” — and the big platforms that sort and distribute most of the internet for most people:

Obama: I don’t hold the tech companies entirely responsible, because this predates social media. It was already there. But social media has turbocharged it. I know most of these folks. I’ve talked to them about it. The degree to which these companies are insisting that they are more like a phone company than they are like The Atlantic, I do not think is tenable. They are making editorial choices, whether they’ve buried them in algorithms or not. The First Amendment doesn’t require private companies to provide a platform for any view that is out there. At the end of the day, we’re going to have to find a combination of government regulations and corporate practices that address this, because it’s going to get worse. If you can perpetrate crazy lies and conspiracy theories just with texts, imagine what you can do when you can make it look like you or me saying anything on video. We’re pretty close to that now...

Goldberg: It’s that famous Steve Bannon strategy: flood the zone with shit.

Obama: If we do not have the capacity to distinguish what’s true from what’s false, then by definition the marketplace of ideas doesn’t work. And by definition our democracy doesn’t work. We are entering into an epistemological crisis.

Obama’s criticisms of Fox News and the Rupert Murdoch empire predate his time in the White House. It continued once he was there.

During his eight-year tenure, though, Obama was quite welcoming to the tech industry, and vice versa: Obama stocked the White House with Silicon Valley veterans, and White House veterans later landed important jobs in Silicon Valley.

And Google executives in particular, starting with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, had frequent meetings with White House staff. Near the end of Obama’s presidency, the Wall Street Journal reported that career regulators wanted to pursue antitrust charges against Google but were overruled by political appointees.

Obama certainly understood the power of social media, which helped him get into office. In the last days of the 2016 presidential campaign, Obama was reportedly obsessed with a BuzzFeed story about Macedonian teens flooding Facebook with fake news.

But it wasn’t until after the election that Obama sounded off in public about “active misinformation” on Facebook and TV. Days later, he pulled Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg aside for a private plea “to take the threat of fake news and political disinformation seriously.”

And while Obama made a point of keeping a low profile during most of the Trump era, when he did surface, he would often take pains to spell out his criticisms of social media:

“I do think the large platforms — Google and Facebook being the most obvious, Twitter and others as well, are part of that ecosystem — have to have a conversation about their business model that recognizes they are a public good as well as a commercial enterprise,” he said at an MIT event in 2018. “We have to have a serious conversation about, what are the business models, the algorithms, the mechanisms, whereby we can create more of a common conversation. And that can not just be a commercially driven conversation.”

Obama was calling for a “serious conversation” about our information dystopia two years ago. Now he’s calling for “a combination of government regulations and corporate practices” to deal with it.

It is difficult to be optimistic that we’ll get there. It’s hard to see the federal government regulating big tech in a serious way, because Democrats and Republicans don’t have shared facts about the problem; Republicans, in fact, have elected a QAnon promoter to Congress. And Big Tech isn’t remotely comfortable regulating itself — it would rather have government regulate big tech. And it would be surprising if Joe Biden — who had little to say about tech during his presidential campaign — and Kamala Harris — a longtime ally of Silicon Valley — make it a focus in a pandemic presidency.

A modest suggestion: Barack Obama is still working on the second volume of his memoirs. This seems like a problem worth focusing on after that.