Quantcast
Channel: Co.Labs
Viewing all 36575 articles
Browse latest View live

14 More Billionaires Just Signed Up For The Giving Pledge

$
0
0

Fourteen more billionaires just took The Giving Pledge, an increasingly common pact among ultra-deep-pocketed donors to give the majority of their wealth away to charitable causes within their lifetime. The commitment started in 2010 when Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffet began calling for others to join them in giving away half their wealth, either before they die or in their will.

In total, 168 individuals or families have since committed, from 21 countries. This year’s recruiting class was down a few members from last year’s total of 17, but shares an interesting distinction of being, well, rather indistinct.

In total, 168 individuals or families have committed, from 21 countries.  [Source Images: Christina Sicoli/Unsplash (photo), Softulka/iStock (pattern)]
With a couple thousand billionaires around the world, it’s only natural that not all signatories will be as well known as Gates, Buffet, or other previous no-first-name-required signatories like Zuckerberg and Rockefeller, the latter of whom passed this year. In a way, that’s the point: to normalize this kind of behavior so joining becomes less a fame-making exception than common practice.

This year’s list includes members from Australia, Cyprus, Monaco, Norway, Slovenia, and Tanzania. As the group notes in a press release, the fortunes were minted across a wide spectrum of industries, from agriculture to casino gaming to technology. Their passions also range from climate change to poverty and health and medical issues. As Melinda Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation put it during the announcement, that means a variety of entrepreneurial views, offering more “learning from their diverse experiences.”

Their passions range from climate change to poverty and health and medical issues. [Source Images: Christina Sicoli/Unsplash (photo), Softulka/iStock (pattern)]
The U.S.-based contributors include Dagmar Dolby, wife of sound system magnate Ray Dolby of Dolby Laboratories, who died in 2013. Dolby has been an avid pro-choice activist and already contributes heavily toward brain health and Alzheimer’s disease research. There is also Nick Hanauer, a serial entrepreneur and venture capitalist, who founded Civic Ventures, a public policy incubator in Seattle, and his wife Leslie.

Cheap-beer-swilling hipsters have their own representative in Dean and Marianne Metropoulos: Dean heads Metropoulos & Co., the food and drink conglomerate best known for turning around sagging brands like Pabst Blue Ribbon and Hostess. China, which Fast Company has previously reported as a potentially emerging force for this kind of giving, doubled its overall representation by adding two new members to the fold.

You can read full bios of all Pledge members here.


Sarah Silverman: “If You Don’t Look At Your Old Sh*t and Cringe, You’re Not Growing”

$
0
0

The audience is dead silent.

Of course they are; Sarah Silverman, whose vibe is like a deceptive full-body thumbs-up, is in the middle of a horrifying story. This comedy special has taken a grim turn indeed. Sarah’s sister, the subject of the story, is unaware of the grave danger she’s in. Just when the tension reaches maximum discomfort, though, she expertly defuses it with a combustible kicker. As the laughs die down, the comic reveals that the fun of telling this joke is watching the audience go through it with her.

“I’m your show,” she tells the crowd, “but you’re also my show.”

That line, from Silverman’s new special, A Speck of Dust, was also used during her Emmy-winning 2013 show, We Are Miracles. It forces the live audience to become suddenly conscious of standup as a two-sided discussion. We’ve been watching Silverman grow as a comedian and a cultural force over the past couple decades, and she’s been watching us as well—absorbing the various reactions she’s provoked and using them to cultivate a deeper self-awareness. Perhaps only by being so observant and adaptive could she have delivered her latest special, the most comprehensive and funniest statement of her career so far.

Produced from the deep pockets of Netflix—which has been leading what’s essentially an arms race against HBO for dominance in the field of high-profile comedy specials—A Speck Of Dust feels more like a special than a collection of jokes. It’s cohesive. It’s thematic. It’s got running jokes and callbacks, and an unforgettable Easter Egg in the closing credits. (Seriously, stick around for the credits.)

It takes the comic’s self-awareness to a new level, deconstructing her own jokes for the audience as she’s telling them, peeling away the artifice behind it all.

“I like letting myself be changed by new information,” Silverman tells me. “I think we live in a country where people cling to what they know to be true—whether they’re presented with facts to the contrary or not. In comedy, that can be a real career-killer. People find success in one thing and then feel beholden to do just that one thing, and that’s how you become an irrelevant caricature. You have to be able to lose people and fail.”

Silverman’s own failure cycle—if you skip over her brief Saturday Night Live stint, years on Mr. Show, and early thankless girlfriend roles in movies—started a year after the film Passion of the Christ led faithful moviegoers to box office glory. That’s when Silverman released her first special, Jesus Is Magic, into theaters. It was standup as cinema vérité, interlaced with sketches and songs, all directed by frequent collaborator Liam Lynch. It was here, in her somewhat religious-themed coming out party, that Silverman established her style: thought-provoking concepts wrapped in aggressively stupid packaging.

“I was raped by a doctor…” she says in one notorious joke from that special. “Which is so bittersweet for a Jewish girl.”

It was a sledgehammer swung with an angelic smile. That joke is what came to define her as a comic, for better or worse—the comedy world is still debating whether rape jokes should be off limits. She has mixed feelings about it now.

“I think that joke has almost become a classic—not to be obnoxious—but it’s also become a relic,” Silverman says. “It’s so from another time, and it’s interesting to have done comedy through such totally different times. There’s so much in my first special that makes me cringe, but I’m not ashamed of it. You have to be accountable. And if you don’t look back at your old shit and cringe, you’re not growing.”

Jesus Is Magic also includes a run of racially charged bits, which are delivered in character as the musings of a well-meaning but misguided Pollyanna. Looking back, though, Silverman sees them more as the product of privilege. She grew up in a middle-class family of New Hampshire Democrats. Her best friend was black (no, really). She naively felt that her good intentions gave her license to say whatever she wanted on stage in service of a greater point.

“I mean, talk about a liberal bubble,” Silverman says.

The aura of throwing heavy words too lightly followed her for years. She was rebuked for using ‘chink’ in a joke on a Conan appearance in the early 2000s, for which she apologized, and she was the subject of several think pieces. Gradually, she shed this aspect of her act.

Sarah Silverman: We Are Miracles, 2013

But even in Jesus is Magic, she delivers the most risqué jokes with a hint of self-awareness. “You live and learn and hopefully you grow,” she faux-reflects, after a racially charged joke. After that special, however, she really did live and learn, and she definitely grew.

A whole lot happened after Jesus Is Magic. Silverman created a popular Comedy Central series, wrote a bestselling memoir, and starred in movies like the Disney smash Wreck-It Ralph, and the indie dramedy Take This Waltz. She’d also become politically active, making videos to support voters’ rights, throwing a benefit for the NAACP, and working with the group Lady Parts Justice, to help ensure women’s access to birth control and abortion. She listened to her critics and investigated her beliefs, and this introspection is reflected nearly a decade later in We Are Miracles.

For instance, this second special, like its predecessor, also contains a rape joke, only this time it’s a rape joke about rape jokes. The self-conscious detachment meant to excuse her earlier material now informs the punchline itself. It’s still shocking, but she’s figured out how to hone the sledgehammer into something more precise.

A Speck Of Dust, 2017 [Photo: Michael Rowe, courtesy of Netflix]
By the time she recorded her Netflix special earlier this year, she’d burnished it into a surgical weapon.

“[A Speck of Dust] is a reflection of where I’m at, and where the world is right now,” Silverman says, pausing. I can feel a joke coming. Then she adds, “It’s also just about God and family and cum and shitting.”

She’s come a long way from Jesus is Magic. And so have we.

Thanks To Telepresence Robots, Kids Can Attend School From Home

$
0
0

Earlier this year, 11-year-old Cloe Gray spent months at home from her Maryland elementary school after having surgery. But she still took part in her fifth-grade class, strolled the halls with her best friend, and joined her classmates at the school cafeteria.

She did it by using a telepresence robot, an internet-enabled videoconferencing machine on wheels that looks like a tablet attached to a Segway.

“She was able to participate in class,” says her mother, Tiffany Gray. “She’d raise the robot up to be able to raise her hand. She participated in group sessions, reading activities.”

Before the machine from the Burlingame, Calif., startup Double Robotics entered her life, Cloe worked on her schoolwork at home and was visited a few times a week by a traveling teacher.

[Photo: courtesy of Double Robotics]
“I felt like she was starting to fall behind,” Cloe’s mother says. “She wasn’t looking forward to getting out of bed or getting motivated. But once we got the Double robot she was more excited to get up and get ready—just like a normal day for her.”

Thanks to the robot, which Cloe used from January through April before physically returning to school, she was able to get back into her ordinary routine. Each day, she’d log in to the Double server and steer her robot from its overnight berth in a guidance counselor’s office to her classroom. Teachers sent written work home with her brother so she could follow along with her classmates. When the class left the room for “specials” like art or music, or for the lunchroom, a friend would help make sure the robot got where it needed to go. And when the fifth graders went to recess, Cloe would steer the bot back to its docking station for a quick charge.

“A large part of her recovery was just being around her friends,” Tiffany Gray says.

Cloe was the first elementary school student in Maryland’s Anne Arundel County school system to use a telepresence robot, but other students in the district have used them as well. Double estimates that there are about 300 of its devices in use in schools around the world, and another robot-maker, the Cambridge, Mass.-based VGo, has delivered approximately 800 of its own telepresence bots to schools. These machines enable homebound students to attend school while recovering from illness or surgery, or when dealing with immune disorders that make it unsafe for them to be with large groups of people.

Lyndon Baty, 15, attends class via a VGo robot. Baty (seen on the screen) has immune system complications due to polycystic kidney disease. [Photo: Deanne Fitzmaurice/Sports Illustrated/Getty Images, courtesy of Vgo]
“They can do all the things that in classroom students can do, like break off in small groups, look at each other,” says David Cann, cofounder and CEO of Double Robotics.

When the company was founded, Cann says it focused on the better known workplace applications of the devices, which enabled remote employees to participate in meetings and watercooler discussions. (Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency whistleblower in exile in Russia, also uses a telepresence bot to give lectures and attend events around the world).

People began asking about using the machines in the classroom, Cann says. (The devices cost about $3,000, with a small discount available to people who use them for educational purposes.) He and his colleagues initially didn’t know how the robots would fare, but Double Robotics has found that after the initial novelty wears off, the machines and the students who use them usually fit into schools quite well.

[Photo: courtesy of Vgo]
“Actually, we find that in schools, the kids get used to it faster than employees and adults do at companies,” he says.

The machines, usually paid for either with funding for students with special needs or from grants and donations, allow students who might otherwise be socially isolated to stay in touch and even make eye contact with classmates and teachers. That helps keep their spirits up and helps them stay motivated academically, according to Judy Olson, a professor at the Department of Informatics at the University of California, Irvine. Olson is the coauthor of a paper on telepresence robots in education that was presented at the Association for Computing Machinery’s recent annual conference on human-computer interaction.

“There was a little boy who had a heart condition, and when the mother heard about the opportunity for a telepresence robot, she was excited about it but said, ‘I don’t think he has the energy for it,'” Olson says. “But when he got the telepresence robot, the very first day he was on it for 6 hours.”

The student even tried out for his school’s choir and was able to sing along with the group, thanks to the speakers and microphone on the machine. “He’s got a voice, he can hear, it’s all real-time,” Olson says.

And while adults sometimes worry that the robot-linked students might be bullied or teased by their classmates, that’s generally just not the case, says Ned Semonite, VP of products at VGo.

“The student who is on the robot is really sort of the rockstar in the school,” he says. “Everybody wants to be friends with the kid in the robot.”

[Photo: courtesy of Double Robotics]
But the spotlight isn’t for everyone. Some students who try the robots end up returning them, uncomfortable with the attention from classmates. And some teachers have raised questions about having cameras and microphones effectively monitoring everything that happens in the classroom, concerned about student privacy or about parents monitoring their teaching.

“There needs to be just a clarification of expectations,” says Veronica Newhart, a grad student at UC Irvine’s School of Education and the other coauthor of the recent paper.

Robot manufacturers can also help ensure privacy: VGo’s robots can be configured to only activate at certain times of day, so students can’t use them to roam the halls at night, says Semonite. And Double has allowed schools to disable features that let the robots snap and save photos of their surroundings.

Internet connectivity can also sometimes be an issue for the robots. Tiffany Gray says Cloe was occasionally unable to attend class due to school Wi-Fi issues, and Olson says she’s recommended that schools consider mounting cellular hotspots on the devices, which can also help them on excursions outside of school.

“They even go on field trips,” she says. “They are restricted in field trips right now to places that have Wi-Fi.”

But within school, students with robots are largely able to participate in activities alongside their classmates. One student Newhart encountered rolls her robot to an after-school robotics club, working on her own creation from home or collaborating with classmates to design a group bot. And some students dress up their robots, adorning them with a distinctive T-shirt or accessories.

“I just interviewed the family of a first grader, and they did not dress up her robot, but her classmates dressed it up for her,” Newhart says. “Every semester they re-dress it up.”

The Supplement Industry Is Devastating The Environment–Can Algae Fix It?

$
0
0

Over the course of the last decade, the U.S. developed an obsession with omega-3 fatty acids. As study after study coalesced around the idea that this nutrient, found commonly in seafood, could alleviate a host of woes from cardiovascular issues to mental decline, Americans began popping omega-3 supplements, mostly in the form of fish oil pills, by the bushel. It became a multibillion dollar industry.

But the scramble to get the (still debatable) benefits of omega-3s has lead to devastating overfishing of fish species like menhaden, which are crucial to the aquatic ecosystem, and has landed others, like whale sharks, on the endangered species list. With Americans’ enthusiasm for omega-3s showing no signs of cooling, finding an alternative to fish-derived nutrients became imperative. And Qualitas Health, a Texas-based nutrition company, has landed on a solution: algae.

“We’ve got to be way more creative with how we think about food and nutrition, and where that comes from.” [Photo: Qualitas Health]
Fish oil supplements are produced by treating and processing mass-caught fish in order to extract the oil that fills the softgels you can buy at the drugstore. But as author Paul Greenberg noted in the New York Times in 2009, the fish that become fish oil are the bottom-of-the-food-chain dwellers menhaden. “Nearly every fish a fish eater likes to eat eats menhaden,” Greenberg wrote. “Bluefin tuna, striped bass, redfish, and bluefish are just a few of the diners at the menhaden buffet. All of these fish are high in omega-3 fatty acids but are unable themselves to synthesize them. The omega-3s they have come from menhaden.” As more of these fish disappear into softgels, the nutritional supply of more consumer-friendly fish has become threatened.

Around 19 million (8% of the total population) adult Americans, lured by the health benefits, take omega-3 supplements in the form of fish oil. It’s far and away the most commonly consumed supplement in the country, and its ascent has been rapid: 8 million more people reported taking omega-3s in 2012 than did in 2007. As the demand for supplements continues to grow, Qualitas CEO Miguel Calatayud tells Fast Company, his company is setting out to offer a plant-based alternative to the unsustainable and devastating fish and krill supplements currently driving that growth and dominating the market.

Eight million more people reported taking omega-3s in 2012 than did in 2007. [Photo: Qualitas Health]
Qualitas has been cultivating algae in a 45-acre facility in Imperial, Texas, since 2012. It recently announced an expansion to a 100-acre facility in Columbus, New Mexico, in partnership with the commercial crop production company Green Stream Farms, which will more than triple Qualitas’s output.

In the company’s early days, Qualitas VP of operations Rebecca White tells Fast Company, “it was mainly about selling the omega-3s from algae as a bulk ingredient, and doing business-to-business sales.” But in March of 2016, Calatayud came on board as CEO and brought with him years of experience in the nutrition startup realm, and a vision to turn commercially grown algae into a viable and sustainable player in the health and wellness scene.

“The whole point is to use as much of the biomass as possible.” [Photo: Qualitas Health]
“People have the idea that omega-3s come from fish, but really, they’re getting the nutrients from algae,” White says. Qualitas, through cutting directly to the source, is capitalizing on a train of thought that cultivating this briny plant could help preserve both ocean ecosystems and human health. As Catharine Arnston, founder of the supplement company EnergyBits, told Fast Company just a few months ago: “In 10 years, [algae] is going to be in everything.” Algae’s nutritional profile is hard to argue with: The compact, sea-smelling plant is packed with protein (around 40%), vitamin A, vitamin B12, and iron, and, as Qualitas has already capitalized on, omega-3. “We’re really trying to promote a different perspective on algae—not as a science project, but as an agricultural venture,” Calatayud says. “This is a super-crop.”

In March, Qualitas introduced its inaugural line of omega-3 supplements, called alGeepa, to the Texas retail chain H-E-B, and plans to scale the availability of its products to the rest of the U.S. following its production expansion. And that’s not the only part of the supplement industry it’s targeting: The company is also working on an algae-derived protein product, and a fiber supplement developed from the cell wall. “The whole point is to use as much of the biomass as possible,” White says. While the seafood industry currently has the monopoly on the omega-3 supplement industry, Qualitas, through scaling up its operations, is aiming to prove that nutritional elements like protein and omega-3, which are associated mainly with seafood and livestock, can come from a source that’s entirely sustainable and vegan.

Especially in the arid climates of Texas and New Mexico, where few crops grow and livestock is the dominant industry, Qualitas’s operations represent a radical reimagining of what the land can do.  [Photo: Qualitas Health]
Concurrent to the rise of fish oil supplements has been a shift in interest toward eating more seafood, which is positioned as a healthier and more nutrient-packed source of protein than beef or chicken. But whether delivered in supplement or fillet form, the health benefits of seafood eventually run up against the fact that the industry is not sustainable enough to support the demand for its benefits.

While the industry comes to terms with the nutritional value of the plant, companies like Qualitas are determined to prove its viability as a large-scale crop–and the expansion to the New Mexico facility is at the forefront of that shift. “We’ve got to be way more creative with how we think about food and nutrition, and where that comes from,” White says. A variety of companies are looking to peas and soy as alternatives to the protein derived from the climate-change-driving livestock industry, but algae, White says, is a more sustainable and efficient option.

Especially in the arid climates of Texas and New Mexico, where few crops grow and livestock is the dominant industry, Qualitas’s operations represent a radical reimagining of what the land can do. A handful of companies like TerraVia and ADM are using a fermentation process to grow algae in steel tanks, and while those processes are helping to grow the industry and pique interest in algae-based products, what’s unique about Qualitas, says Matt Carr, executive director of the Algae Biomass Organization, is its progress in growing algae photosynthetically–using just the sun and carbon dioxide, like just another land-based crop, but doing so in a climate and region otherwise hostile to agriculture.

Because algae thrives in ocean-like climates, the Qualitas facilities, while water-intensive, utilize mostly brackish water. [Photo: Qualitas Health]
To grow algae–a distinctly aquatic plant–in the middle of the southwestern deserts, Qualitas dug trenches (which they call raceways, because of their resemblance to a track) into the land. While other land-based algae production facilities line their ponds with plastic, Qualitas takes advantage of the region’s clay-like soil, and packs it tightly to form the base of the ponds. One acre of algae production on Qualitas’s facilities, White says, results in around 6,000 pounds of the essential amino acids found in protein; one acre of pea cultivation, in contrast, produces around 20 pounds.

And because algae thrives in ocean-like climates, the Qualitas facilities, while water-intensive, utilize mostly brackish water. White estimates that each acre of production requires around five gallons of fresh water, but that’s mostly reserved for staff drinking water and lab use; all of the water in the ponds is, essentially, sea water. Qualitas’s 150 production acres equates to the nearly 45,000 acres of land required to cultivate the same value of peas.

Qualitas’s expansion will put the viability of its model to a much more rigorous test. “If they can demonstrate that their system works and doesn’t crash, and can sustainably produce commercial algae volumes, we’ll likely see a pretty rapid uptake of algae as a broader substitute,” Carr says.

Defiant U.S. Mayors Vow To Uphold Paris Climate Accord

$
0
0

President Trump’s latest challenger: mayors of American cities.

On Wednesday it was reported that President Trump intends to withdraw from the Paris accord on climate change, two senior White House officials told CNN. The decision, which has yet to be formally confirmed, would break the U.S. from its global partners in the fight to curb global warming.

Should the president pull out, it would mean the U.S. would be one of only three nations in the UN climate group to not sign the deal. (Currently, only Syria and Nicaragua have not signed.) In seceding, the U.S. would become the largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions not included in the agreement.

[Photo: jonathan riley/Unsplash]
In response, numerous big cities have vowed to break with Washington in hopes of reinstating the country’s commitment to the environment. Multiple city leaders publicly stated their decision to abide by the accord, whether or not President Trump is on board.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio promised to uphold the agreement, going so far as to attack President Trump for ignoring his city’s needs.

“President Trump should know that climate change is a dagger aimed straight at the heart of New York City,” the mayor tweeted on Wednesday. “We’ll take matters into our own hands.”

[Photo: Alex Iby/Chicago]
Likewise, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel issued a strong condemnation of what he called an “alarming” decision to ignore the consensus of 194 countries and the entire scientific community.

“Chicago will not skirt our responsibility to act,” Emanuel said in a statement. “We will work with cities around the country to reduce our emissions in accordance with the Paris Agreement, and urge President Trump to keep our nation’s commitment as well.”

Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed called Trump’s intentions an “assault on our future stability,” while Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh said, “If this administration turns its back to the environment, cities like Boston will have to step up.”

Efforts by city governments to curtail President Trump’s environmental actions have been in play for several months. In March, 70 mayors and city council leaders joined together to pen a letter to the president, urging him to preserve global environment goals.

“The local commitment to acting on climate change is as strong as ever,” it read. “As the elected officials closest and most directly accountable to residents, we cannot let our communities down by taking a step back on our actions and commitments to address climate change,” the group said.

[Photo: Austin Lee/Unsplash]
Earlier this month, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti also voiced his support of cities independently abiding by the accord.

“If the White House withdraws from the Paris climate accord, we’re going to adopt it in Los Angeles,” Garcetti tweeted. There are more than 10 million people in Los Angeles county, and the city is the third largest metropolitan economy in the world, with a GDP of more than $700 billion.

City leaders are not alone in their efforts. As expected, the unofficial news caused a flurry of concern in D.C., the scientific community, universities, and the private business sector. Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted that he would leave President Donald Trump’s advisory councils should the White House proceed with the withdrawal.

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi also released a statement expressing her concern over the rumored move, calling it a “grave threat to our planet’s future” and “threatening our national and global security.”

Meanwhile, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who serves as board president of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, has worked alongside Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo to help urge city officials to tackle climate change policies.

In an interview with Fast Company, Hidalgo discussed how mayors have a “a very important role” in challenging how our political parties operate.

“Donald Trump is not the one who’s going to decide whether he applies the Paris agreement or not. It’s the cities,” Hidalgo said. “Big cities are responsible for 70% of greenhouse-gas emissions. We have a political responsibility, as mayors, to say, ‘We must act now.’ Because tomorrow it will be too late.”

As of Wednesday evening, the president’s decision was not yet announced. When questioned by White House reporters as to the timing of the formal announcement, Press Secretary Sean Spicer did not give a precise day or time, instead stating, “What I am saying is that when the president has a decision to make, he will let it be known.”

How The DNC (And RNC) Are Preparing For The Inevitable Next Cyberattack

$
0
0

It’s been six months since a presidential election roiled by Russian cyberattacks, and there’s little reason to think Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton will be the last U.S. candidates to face challenges from overseas hackers. Just last month, French President Emmanuel Macron won a close election despite being targeted for phishing attacks by Fancy Bear, the same Russian government-sponsored hacking group tied to last year’s infamous hack of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta. (And that group has reportedly already moved on to stir up trouble in upcoming elections in Germany and the U.K.)

Cyberattacks have become the new normal in the cutthroat world of political warfare, obsessed over by commentators and candidates such as Clinton, who laid out her theory of Fancy Bear’s methodology during an interview at the Recode conference on Wednesday. In her remarks, she also blamed the DNC for its poor data operation and emphasized how important it is to understand how these cyberattacks were carried out in order to better defend ourselves against them in the future. At this point, the details of the phishing attacks on the DNC have been exhaustively described (and the apparently failed attempt to hack the RNC’s servers).

So, what have the DNC and RNC done to improve their cybersecurity? Both political parties have been understandably tight-lipped about their cybersecurity plans and any upgrades they’ve made since the election, although some cybersecurity experts with knowledge of their operations tell Fast Company that they’ve seen the DNC move much aggressively than they have in the past, reaching out to Silicon Valley much more frequently for assistance with their efforts.  

“Under the leadership of Tom Perez, we are rebuilding our party to meet the challenges of tomorrow, and that includes hiring a chief cybersecurity officer,” a DNC spokesperson said in an email to Fast Company. The spokesperson declined to comment on a timeline for hiring the security officer. CrowdStrike officials also declined to comment on the firm’s current relationship with the DNC.

The DNC had last year announced the creation of a cybersecurity advisory board following the disclosure of the hacks, but it has since shared little about the board’s activities or progress. Members of the board contacted by Fast Company referred inquiries back to the DNC.

Chris Finan, a former White House cybersecurity advisor who is now CEO of Bay Area security startup Manifold Technology, says he’s been impressed with the work DNC higher-ups have done so far on cybersecurity and preparing to combat fake news stories on social media, though he’s unable to share specifics.

“I have seen the DNC taking it quite seriously,” he says. “They’ve brought in some big names, some very prominent people, they’re coming out here to Silicon Valley at least once a quarter, probably more like once a month, to try to bring together a cross section of expertise, both from inside the Beltway–the policy community–but also across the tech and social media community.”

Similarly, a spokesperson for the Republican National Committee said simply that “the RNC takes cybersecurity seriously.” The RNC didn’t respond to subsequent inquiries from Fast Company seeking more detail.

During the 2016 election, Fancy Bear leaked internal DNC emails that suggested party insiders favored Hillary Clinton over Senator Bernie Sanders, her chief primary rival. The leaks led to the resignation of top party officials, including DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, shortly before the election. Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was also the victim of a separate phishing attack, also linked to Fancy Bear, that led to the leak of about a decade’s worth of his email messages.

Russian hackers apparently also targeted Republican campaigns—Senator Lindsey Graham has said they breached his campaign systems, and a set of Republican campaign emails were leaked through a site linked to Fancy Bear. And while Trump has praised his party for avoiding hacks on the scale the Democrats saw, former FBI director James Comey has said “state-level campaigns” and “old domains of the RNC” were hacked using similar techniques. The Russian hackers, widely believed to have favored Trump’s candidacy, apparently didn’t release that material.

Without information from the party committees themselves, it’s difficult to say what steps they’ve since taken to improve digital security. Unlike some companies and government agencies that offer bug bounty programs where hackers are invited to probe their digital defenses, the two major parties don’t offer any public programs where experts can try to breach their systems without fear of prosecution.

But some security analysts have used publicly available information—data automatically delivered to anyone who accesses political sites or looks up information about them in public domain name databases—to partially assess the cyber practices of parties and particular candidates. Jonathan Lampe, the founder of political cybersecurity firm Cybertical, regularly scores political sites on factors like whether they serve pages through encrypted web connections, whether their content management software is up-to-date, and whether they show CMS usernames or allow password resets on publicly available pages. Taking a recent look at the sites of the two party committees with the help of an automated tool, Lampe gave both an “A” grade, saying they seem to have further locked down their security since the recent election.

“The national committees—it looks like they have definitely done some work very recently to clean up their act,” he says. “It definitely was post-election.”

And on a local level, candidates and local party organizations are increasingly turning to third-party providers to host and secure their digital platforms rather than attempting to manage them in-house, says Jim Gilliam , founder and CEO of NationBuilder. The Los Angeles company says its digital tools are the most-used political software in the world, with clients across the spectrum from California Governor Jerry Brown to former Senator Rick Santorum. The company offers penetration against denial of service attacks, secure donation platforms, and database access controls to protect against insider attacks.

“There’s a lot of controls in NationBuilder to make it so someone can’t run away with someone’s email list,” Gilliam says.

Its scale and popularity help it offer security and reliability that smaller campaigns, in particular, previously found hard to achieve setting up servers on their own, Gilliam says.

“Your nephew or your niece was the one who did that for you, and the quality was really low, and yet the demands were really high,” he says.

Some campaigns are moving to mainstream cloud providers like Google for email, and they, too, with their dedicated security departments, can almost always offer better safeguards than an in-house team, Gilliam says.

“A lot are still running their own servers, but there is definitely a move to things like Gmail, in particular,” he says.

Still, the types of attacks the Russian hackers seem to prefer to initially gain access to networks, using sophisticated phishing emails that trick users into willingly sharing their passwords rather than exploiting network security flaws, are often considered difficult to defend against. Even with workers trained to recognize the signs of phishing, it’s easy for someone to be tricked into clicking on a dodgy link on a hectic afternoon.

The attack that ensnared Podesta was reportedly facilitated by a typo in an email from an IT worker, who accidentally declared the email “legitimate” when he meant to say just the opposite.

“The bad guys use those [phishing attacks] because they’re really effective: The success rate is just so high with that,” says Michael Buratowski, senior vice president of cybersecurity services at Fidelis Cybersecurity, one of the firms which attributed the DNC hack to Fancy Bear.

It’s effectively impossible to test an organization’s vulnerability to phishing attacks without permission, since neither IT managers nor legal authorities are likely to take kindly to anyone sending unsolicited, fraudulent emails to test an organization’s defenses. So it’s difficult to know for certain how well-equipped either party now is to head off such attacks, which will almost inevitably be tried again in the future.

“Unequivocally, we will see these tactics used again—we’re already seeing it in Europe,” Finan says. “I think they’re going to be emboldened to be even more aggressive, because frankly this campaign succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.”

Yet its latest ploy in France fell flat—partly because Emmanuel Macron’s party was prepared for such an assault. Fancy Bear attempted phishing attacks on Macron’s campaign throughout the election process, according to a recent report from security firm Trend Micro. One of its methods was to reportedly register domain names deceptively similar to those of Macron’s party, a technique that could be used to facilitate phishing attacks.  The campaign reportedly took active steps to thwart phishing attempts, circulating warning lists of fake campaign-linked websites to staffers and even filling out forms on the bogus sites with fake credentials in an effort to slow down the hackers, according to a report in the Daily Beast.

A trove of apparently stolen Macron campaign documents was leaked shortly before the election, though it seemed to have little effect on election results, and it’s widely believed the hack was linked to the phishing attacks or to the Russian government.

“Even the average citizen might be impacted as Pawn Storm tries to manipulate people’s opinions about domestic and international affairs,” warned Trend Micro. “The group’s operations and methods might also serve as an example for other actors, who may copy tactics and repurpose them to fit their own objectives.”

At the same time, experts say, political campaigns can face particular security challenges as they rapidly add staff and volunteers during election cycles.

“Good security programs usually have the people, they have the technology, and they have established policies in them—it can take months and years for those programs to be built up and matured and made reliable and all that sorts of stuff,” says Matthew Gardiner, senior product marketing manager at email security firm Mimecast. “These campaigns are kind of like these temporarily assembled companies that more or less disband when the campaign’s over, which seem very likely to not have strong controls.”

Campaigns also require geographically dispersed workers to be able to share data, says Shawn Henry, chief security officer of CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm which worked with the DNC to investigate last year’s hacks. It’s just not practical to tell campaign workers they can only access their email from a locked-down computer in the office.

“Many of the individuals will likely be working from the field, outside of the VPN, using a variety of devices to access and share data,” Henry, also the president of CrowdStrike’s services division, wrote in an email to Fast Company. “Needless to say, as a result the risk exposure of the organization increases.”

Political organizations need to be ready to face unexpected attacks from well-funded spy organizations, which means they need digital tools to detect and stave off attacks—and policies designed to limit how much damage any successful attacks can do. That’s something the major parties are likely paying more attention to now, ” says Buratowski.

“I think that the DNC and the RNC probably have a bit more money to put into security measures in light of an event like this,” he says. “I would imagine there’s probably going to be a review of how they handle conversations and how long they retain data, along those lines.”

Ideally, the national party organizations should use their resources to take the lead on computer security matters, guiding local candidates and party groups in keeping their systems safe, says Finan.

“There is no sophistication at the sort of House district level and local levels among political operatives about security practices,” he says. “It’s not enough if the DNC and the RNC harden themselves if they’re not also passing knowledge, working with these campaigns early on to get them to think about and prioritize security.”

Unraveling The Controversy Over The CRISPR Mutations Study

$
0
0

A new research paper is stirring up controversy among scientists interested in using DNA editing to treat disease.

In a two-page article published in the journal Nature Methods on May 30, a group of six scientists report an alarming number of so-called “off-target mutations” in mice that underwent an experimental gene repair therapy.

CRISPR, the hot new gene-editing technique that’s taken biology by storm, is no stranger to headlines. What is unusual, however, is a scientific article so clearly describing a potentially fatal shortcoming of this promising technology.

The research community is digesting this news—with many experts suggesting flaws with the experiment, not the revolutionary technique.

Unwanted DNA Changes

The research team sought to repair a genetic mutation known to cause a form of blindness in mice. This could be accomplished, they showed, by changing just one DNA letter in the mouse genome.

They were able to successfully correct the targeted mutation in each of the two mice they treated. But they also observed an alarming number of additional DNA changes—more than 1,600 per mouse—in areas of the genome they did not intend to modify.

The authors attribute these unintended mutations to the experimental CRISPR-based gene-editing therapy they used.

Cas9, the CRISPR enzyme that snips DNA, in contact with its target. [Graph: via rcsb.org]
A central promise of CRISPR-based gene editing is its ability to pinpoint particular genes. But if this technology produces dangerous side effects by creating unexpected and unwanted mutations across the genome, that could hamper or even derail many of its applications. Several previous research articles have reported off-target effects of CRISPR, but far fewer than this group found.

Reaction Is Skeptical

The publicly traded biotech companies seeking to commercialize CRISPR-based gene therapies—Editas Medicine, Intellia Therapeutics, and Crispr Therapeuticsall took immediate stock market hits based on the news.

Experts in the field quickly responded.

“Either the enzyme is acting at near optimal efficiency or something fishy is going on here,” tweeted Matthew Taliaferro, a postdoctoral fellow at MIT who studies gene expression and genetic disease.

The Cas9 enzyme in the CRISPR system is what actually cuts DNA, leading to genetic changes. Unusually high levels of enzyme activity could account for the observed off-target mutations—more cutting equals more chances for the cell to mutate its DNA. Different labs use slightly different methods to try to ensure the right amount of cuts happen only where intended.

Gaétan Burgio, whose laboratory at the Australian National University is working to understand the role that cellular context plays on CRISPR efficiency, believes the paper’s central claim that CRISPR caused such an alarming number of off-target mutations is “not substantiated.”

Burgio says there could be a range of reasons for seeing so many unexpected changes in the mice, including problems with accurately detecting DNA variation, the extremely small number of mice used, random events happening after Cas9 acted, or, he concedes, problems with CRISPR itself.

Burgio has been editing the DNA of mice using CRISPR since 2014 and has never seen a comparable level of off-target mutation. He says he’s confident that additional research will refute these recent findings.

Continuing CRISPR Work

Although the news of this two-mouse experiment fired up the science-focused parts of the Twittersphere, the issue it raises is not new to the field.

Researchers have known for a few years now that off-target mutations are likely given certain CRISPR protocols. More precise variants of the Cas9 enzyme have been shown to improve targeting in human tissue in the lab.

Researchers have also focused on developing methods to more efficiently locate off-target mutations in the animals they study.

As scientists continue to hone the gene-editing technique, we recognize there’s still a way to go before CRISPR will be ready for safe and effective gene therapy in humans.


Ian Haydon is a doctoral student in Biochemistry at the University of Washington. This story originally appeared at The Conversation.

How Apple’s Echo-Style Speaker Could Be A Winner — Or A Complete Flop

$
0
0

The annual frenzy of Apple product rumors has a new offering this year: An Amazon Echo-style smart speaker with Siri built in has long seemed inevitable, but now the details are trickling in. Apple’s smart speaker, reportedly to be announced at WWDC next week, will boast “virtual surround sound technology” and higher quality audio, according to Bloomberg.

It will also reportedly feature plenty of integration with Apple services like HomeKit and Apple Music, in addition to being controlled using Siri, Apple’s six-year-old voice control technology. From the sound of it, Apple’s Siri speaker could be a huge deal—or not, depending on the details. So, should you be excited?

Apple’s Smart Speaker Could Be Its Next Killer Product

When Amazon released the Echo smart speaker in 2015, few expected it to be a blockbuster hit. But it was; Amazon has reportedly sold over 10 million Alexa-powered devices like the Echo and Echo Dot, spawning competitors like the Google Home and making Alexa the go-to voice control platform for third-party developers. Even Sonos, the wireless hi-fi multi-room speaker company founded in 2002, suddenly shifted gears to prioritize voice control after the Echo’s explosive success.

Clearly, there’s a demand for these gadgets. That’s a good sign for Apple, which has a knack for borrowing existing ideas and adding its own design polish and marketing prowess–often with great success. In this case, Apple appears to be focused on audio quality and clever acoustic technology to make its speaker tempting to consumers. Bloomberg elaborates:

Along with generating virtual surround sound, the speakers being tested are louder and reproduce sound more crisply than rival offerings, the people said. Apple has also considered including sensors that measure a room’s acoustics and automatically adjust audio levels during use, one of the people said.

Damn. An excellent-sounding speaker with a sleek, non-obtrusive design would be compelling enough, but the ability to tune the speaker to the room (like Sonos’s TruePlay tech, it sounds like) and mimic surround sound could push it over the top in the eyes of consumers. It might even be useful for home theater setups, depending on the design and audio input options.

At the very least, it will be a marked improvement over your laptop speakers, low-end Bluetooth speakers, and even the Amazon Echo. While Amazon’s speaker isn’t terrible-sounding, it’s not hard to imagine Apple’s acoustics engineers one-upping the Echo’s sound quality. Giving owners the option to tweak the sound based on their environment is a nice touch, too.

The HomeKit integration is promising too. The first time I watched a friend ask Alexa to turn the lights on in his apartment, I definitely had one of those “Holy shit, Minority Report is real life” moments. Of course, HomeKit integrates not only with smart lights like Phillips Hue (and others), but a long list of smart locks, thermostats, and other household sensors. Owners of Alphabet’s line of Nest smart home products are still out of luck, though, because sometimes competitive tech giants act like middle schoolers at our expense.

How Apple Could Screw This Up

The motivation for Apple to build a speaker like this is pretty obvious: If it takes off, it can bolster Apple’s own services like HomeKit, Siri, and Apple Music—and even integrate tightly with other iOS features like Mail, Calendar, Reminders, and anything else Siri is already tapped into. A successful smart speaker could be the foothold in the smart home of the future that Apple executives have been dreaming of for years.

But as usual, Apple has to balance that self-interest with the wants and needs of its customers—something it doesn’t always do flawlessly. Opening up iOS to third-party developers and launching the App Store proved to be a transformative move. But by contrast, it took Apple five years to open Siri up to developers and integrations have been slow to roll out.

The usefulness of the Apple smart speaker—and thus its likely success—will hinge much more heavily on Siri than has ever been the case for an Apple product. For the iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple TV, Siri is a nice, sometimes convenient way to interact with a machine, but it’s not necessary. In fact, the majority of my interactions with Siri happen by accident, thanks to my own butt. I just don’t use it that much.

A Siri-powered device in the home could change that, provided it works well enough. Right now, I can update Facebook, call a Lyft, and search Yelp using Siri. But I can’t play songs from Spotify, for instance. SiriKit doesn’t support music playback from third-party apps, presumably because Apple is Apple and it wants you to subscribe to Apple Music.

But freedom of choice is paramount to an experience like this. I can listen to a wide range of different music services on Sonos and my Amazon Echo. Locking its speaker users into Apple Music would be a deal killer for people who already subscribe to other music services, so much so that I would be surprised if Apple went this route. But again, Apple is Apple. You never know.

Amazon’s approach to this conundrum is a respectable one; you can stream music services like Spotify and Pandora on Echo devices, but if you sign up for Amazon Music Unlimited (the company’s answer to Spotify), you get much more advanced and granular voice control options (“Alexa, play that song that goes, ‘Hey now, you’re an all-star”). Amazon’s music service is also cheaper for Echo owners and Prime subscribers. So, you don’t have to subscribe to Amazon’s music service to use the Echo, but the company tries to make the option tempting. Apple would be wise to strike a similar balance, prioritizing its own services without limiting its customers’ freedom of choice.

Alas, we’re still at the rumor stage of the pre-WWDC speculation cycle, so what Apple winds up doing remains anybody’s guess. But suffice it to say that iOS-addicted music fans like me—not to mention the competition—will be watching Apple’s next move closely.


Forget Focus—Here’s When Task Switching Makes You More Productive

$
0
0

“Focus. Focus. Focus.” It’s a mantra I repeat to myself when I want to kick my brain into high gear.

The only hitch is that it doesn’t always work. In fact, some situations just aren’t meant for long stretches of intense, unbroken focus. You know all about the futility of multitasking, but there are actually times when your “monotasking” efforts go too far—or at least go on for too long, and lead to diminishing returns.

That being so, here are three common situations when intentionally switching tasks (sooner than you might think) is the most efficient thing you can do to stay productive.

1. Knocking Out Small, Boring Tasks

Most of us tend to procrastinate on our most mundane, mindless work, leaving certain tasks lingering on our to-do lists for weeks, months, or even years. Soon enough, they grow mold like long-forgotten leftovers jammed into the back of the refrigerator.

One little trick I’ve found to help overcome small-task fatigue—not to mention boring-task avoidance—is to stop trying to polish them all off in one sitting. Instead, I try to deliberately switch gears between different types of activities, even if they’re all minor, tedious to-do list items. Letting your mind wander at will within a certain type of task can reduce your resistance to them.

For example, when I sit down in the morning to plan my workday, I go through the same checklist every time. This can be a pretty dry process. However, I give myself freedom to accomplish the checklist in any order I like. I might start by answering some business emails, then look over calendar tasks, then flip back to answering more business emails, then hop over to rattle off a few quick replies to my most pressing personal emails, then finally finish clearing out my business inbox, and then go through my tickler files. By giving myself the flexibility to switch back and forth between tasks, I keep myself from getting bogged down on any one activity.

Another effective way to task-switch is to toggle between boring and (relatively) exciting tasks. For example, I know I need to get certain administrative tasks done each day, but it can be really hard to motivate myself if there’s no clear deadline. I somehow always find something “more important” to do.

So I made it a rule that before I can do anything from my book-marketing task list—an activity I actually find exciting—I needed to do one small item from my administrative to-do list.

By sticking with this intentional task-switching, I find that I manage to get paperwork filled out that I’ve been putting off and still manage to make some real headway on my book marketing efforts; I don’t have to choose between them. The promise of soon being able to do something fun helps me quit procrastinating on what’s not fun.

2. Rotating Your Most Deep-Focus Tasks

For most modern workers, getting in even an hour or two of concentrated work time is a feat. But if you’re among the lucky few who can clear even longer stretches to focus on tasks requiring thoughtful attention, you should still plan on setting a timer.

According to author Cal Newport, “If you study [the] absolute world-class, best virtuoso violin players, none of them put in more than about four or so hours of practice in a day, because that’s the cognitive limit.” As he explained in an Accidental Creative podcast in 2013, “this limit actually shows up in a lot of different fields where people do intense training.”

Instead, Newport continued, “they often break this into two sessions, of two hours and then two hours . . . I think if you’re able to do three, maybe four hours of this sort of deep work in a typical day, you’re hitting basically the mental speed limit.”


Related:Constant Connectivity Is Killing Your Focus—Here’s What To Do About It


So when it comes to the most difficult tasks of your workweek, you might want to plan ahead for task switching. Maybe you’ll start your day with with background reading or research, then work on problem-solving or writing, take a break for lunch, do more reading, complete another deep work session, and then end the day with something much lighter, like email. This way you’ll have devoted most of your day to deeply focused work without getting drained by a single, high-concentration task.

Building in variety doesn’t mean constantly breaking concentration to do something mindless. By switching gears periodically, you can stay in a focused headspace without getting mentally fatigued, then struggling to refocus after your powers of concentration inevitably fail you.

3. Problem-Solving

Sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to stop trying to solve it. When you feel stumped, Fast Company columnist Art Markman recently pointed out, it’s usually because your brain is having difficulty retrieving new bits of information from your memory. That’s when procrastination (of a sort) can help.


Related:Your Brain Has A “Shuffle” Button—Here’s How To Use It


Switching tasks can break your brain out of a focused mode that isn’t getting you anywhere and lead you into a more diffuse mental state—where useful ideas are more likely to shake loose.

That could mean working on a different sort of task for the rest of the day, or even not working at all for awhile; sometimes just going for a walk or chatting with a colleague is exactly what your brain needs. Maybe you need to start work on a new project you haven’t begun digging into at all just yet. (Or maybe you just need a vacation.) Whether it’s stepping away for a few hours, days, or even weeks before coming back with fresh eyes, breaks like these can help you problem-solve better than forced focus might.

Just remember: You aren’t procrastinating. You’re just giving your brain the variety it needs to stay alert—and productive—for longer.

Comedy Central’s “Handy” Series Might Be The Perfect Branded Content Storyline

$
0
0

They’re everywhere. Serving food, eating food, using tools, holding beer bottles, holding burgers. Wherever you look in advertising, you’re going to see a lot of hands. In many cases, these hands will be without a body. The magical closeup. And for this, marketers employ a most particular specialist–the hand model.

Diving hand-first into the world of hand models is a branded series from Comedy Central called Handy, that follows the adventures of hand model Erik Thomas Layne as he navigates the ups and downs of advertising. The latest episode chronicles Layne doing his thing for a Sabra Hummus ad, where we learn how one man’s hand can become a woman’s hand, then a child’s hand, and the difference between a “dip and scoop,” and a “swoosh and scoop.” It’s funny, ridiculous, and, ultimately, still actually a Sabra Hummus ad.

Created by writer/director Josh Miller, each episode is two and a half minutes, taking up an entire commercial break on the network, and features Layne working behind the scenes of a fictional ad. The branded content hook is, the show’s sponsor is also the brand featured in the fictional ad. Oh, and the actor playing Layne is real-life hand model Erich LaneMiller knows it’s all very meta.

“We’re a film crew filming a film crew filming a commercial for a brand that the overall show is, technically, a commercial for,” says Miller, who began his career as an advertising copywriter and creative director at agencies like Cliff Freeman & Partners and Team One, before turning to directing full-time.

The series is a funny, Extras-meets-advertising look at the ridiculous world of commercials, and one awkwardly self-important hand model in particular. It’s also perhaps the perfect set-up for a branded content series. The brand and product aren’t just shoehorned in, but integral to the story. They’re in on the joke.

In fact, based on his past in advertising, Miller gets each brand’s IRL brand strategy they’d use for a real ad as the foundation for the fake ad in any given episode. “The ads themselves aren’t jokey, but it’s behind the scenes where things can get ridiculous,” says Miller. “We always talk about not going too broad, so the performances are really rooted in reality.”

The series is based on a short film Miller made with Lane called Hand Job: Portrait of a Male Hand Model, that played film festivals including the Seattle International Film Festival, Hawaii International Film Festival, and San Francisco Indiefest. The original idea for the film hit Miller while shooting a real commercial for Fruit Vines candy in 2015 with Lane.

“If you have any experience in advertising or fashion, you know that hand models are quite particular and peculiar–they wear white gloves, they’re afraid to shake your hand, they’ve got multimillion dollar liability clauses for their hands, they walk with their hands up surgeon-style so the blood doesn’t flow down into their hands and make them too veiny,” says Miller. “So I was just intrigued by that as a character.”

In the Fruit Vines ad, there’s a scene where the hand is in a minivan trunk, and the hand model they had was too tall to fit. “So we ended up casting Erik, and the moment I knew we found the right guy was when I saw on his hand shot that he described his skin tone as ‘peaches and cream.’

Beth Trentacoste, SVP, creative director at Comedy Central parent Viacom’s in-house branded content division Viacom Velocity, says when she first heard about the film Miller was creating around a hand model, she knew instantly that the idea could be developed into a great short-form branded entertainment series. “Brands and advertising are a natural part of a hand model’s life, so a brand is endemic to the story,” says Trentacoste. “Plus a hand model’s job is to make a product look good. It’s an outstanding platform for branded content that can work for so many different kinds of brands.”

So far the series has featured Erik Thomas Layne’s hands crack crabs for Joe’s Crab Shack, propose marriage for Zales Diamonds, and swoosh and scoop for Sabra Hummus. It’s only a matter of time before we can see him awkwardly overthink his handy role for a beer ad, right?

Confused By All Of Facebook’s Changes To News Feed And Trending? Here’s A Timeline

$
0
0

If you’re confused about Facebook’s ongoing efforts to clean up its news feed, you’re not alone. For the last year, the company’s billion-plus users have experienced a series of updates and tweaks to the core elements of the platform, all in response to troubling headlines about the preponderance of click bait and fake news. It all began last May, with Gizmodo‘s blockbuster investigativereport claiming that conservative content was being actively suppressed by Facebook’s Trending Topics team. That was followed by headlines during the fall and winter about fake news impacting the presidential election, helping turn the tide for Donald Trump. Those stories prompted plenty of soul-searching at Facebook’s headquarters in Menlo Park, as well as a lengthy, iterative series of changes intended to demonstrate its commitment to objectivity and responsibility when it comes to its trending news product and general news feed.

So how has Facebook changed over the last year? Every few months the company releases a little information about how its algorithm has shifted and its UI has been improved, but it’s always tentative and incremental. To try to better understand what course of action Facebook has in mind, here’s a timeline of everything the company has announced since the Gizmodo report on May 9, 2016.

So, What Does It All Mean?

After a year of updates, what has really changed? An entire trending news team was disbanded, and the company has offered plenty of assurances that the filtering process has become more automated and more objective. And Facebook keeps insisting that it wants stories both authentic and informative pushed to the top of our feeds (while maintaining that it’s not a publisher, just a platform).

The biggest emphasis has been to crack down on fake news, albeit with mixed results. There certainly seem to be far fewer fictitious and deceptively written posts cluttering the news feed, but as the Guardian recently reported, the problem still persists. And Facebook continues to have trouble stemming the tide of clickbait, despite all of its various efforts over the past year.

Most of all, while trending continues to be a part of the Facebook experience, there doesn’t seem to be as much of a clear vision. Every new update only slightly changes what the product is, and some updates seem suspiciously like older versions.

Facebook has become a front page for most people–whether or not the company admits to being a media company or not. What these changes amount to are hedges and sidesteps about how a massive platform should be feeding users content. Instead of an overall vision about how to implement a global social network, we see remedies and quick fixes to systemic problems.

Facebook is walking a tightrope by determining what is false and what is merely ideologically slanted. And despite a year’s worth of bad headlines, it still seems to be trying to figure out where to go next. The big question is whether the product has improved. While Facebook continues to update its algorithm, which may or may not hurt publishers, are users being served better content?

How These Remote Workers Convinced Their Bosses And Clients They Can Work From Anywhere

$
0
0

IBM recently informed its thousands of remote workers that the jig was up: They’d either have to relocate to one of the tech company’s offices or find new jobs. To be fair, only 56% of employers offer any kind of flexible work arrangements, but the move was met with criticism all the same. Even so, when big companies back away from remote work, it sends the message that remote workers aren’t as productive—a preconception that many need to go the extra mile to dispel.

Fast Company asked three full-time remote workers how they convince wary bosses and clients that they’ll be just as effective working at a distance as they would at company headquarters. Here’s what they said.


Related: IBM’s Remote Work Reversal Is A Losing Battle Against The New Normal


Put In Face Time First

Melody Thomas’s current job, as webmaster for the website of the University of South Carolina’s Arnold School of Public Health, wasn’t advertised as a remote position. But since her hiring manager knew Thomas lived 45 minutes from campus, she included that option as part of the offer.

“We made an agreement that for the first three months, I’d work in the office every day, and afterwards I’d come in only three days out of the week,” she says. “After working there for six months, I began to work remotely every day.”

Annik LaRoche Bradford did something similar before she and her husband left Canada a year ago to begin to house sit around the world. A communications consultant, LaRoche Bradford had spent the previous six years building up a base of clients—mostly content and advertising agencies with which she’d already forged solid working relationships.

But to make sure they’d stick with her, she says, “I invested over a year [prior to departing] . . . making sure my clients ‘built a habit’ of sending me work. I worked long hours, turned projects around on ridiculously short deadlines, spent a lot of time in face-to-face meetings, and brought goodies to their offices.”

All that in-person interaction eventually paid off. “I wanted to make sure that my clients knew me, knew my work, and knew they could trust me even from a distance.” Now a newly minted digital nomad, LaRoche Bradford has spent the past year in Thailand, Australia, and Austria, and has returned to Thailand to volunteer with an NGO in Chiang Mai. But she plans to pick up and move again in the next few months with her client base in tow.


Related:Sorry, Bali—Seven Underrated Hubs For Digital Nomads


Make Yourself Essential

After a stint at another major book publisher, Erica Warren went back to working for Macmillan in 2014. But the job she returned to was a more tech-heavy role than the production role she’d held there previously. At the time, Warren was working on her master’s degree in predictive analytics at New York University, and her new job at Macmillan was to develop user support systems for new tech initiatives that would be rolling out company-wide.

Warren knew that gave her a chance to make herself virtually indispensable. “Over the course of two to three years, I basically taught myself pretty niche programming things and built a tool for our specific workflow that’s now super-required to succeed in a bunch of projects we’re doing”—many of which, she adds, are directly saving the company money. “I don’t think it’s exaggerating to say that nobody else could do this,” says Warren.

Even so, she and her wife had planned to move to the West Coast after Warren finished grad school, which she imagined would mean finding a new job. Like Thomas, Warren hadn’t given much thought to full-time remote work. But after discussing it with her manager—who all but said the company couldn’t afford to lose her—they set up an arrangement, and Warren has been working remotely from Portland since January.

Set Up Regular Check-Ins (Even If You Aren’t Asked To)

Before making the move, Warren says, “I was very anxious about being visibly productive, especially with a new director in my department.” Her team reassured her they weren’t concerned, but Warren was proactive anyway about setting up regular one-on-one check-ins with her boss, and she now spends more time on the phone with colleagues than she used to, “just so they know I’m here.”

“The kind of work I do is suited to clear, measurable goals,” Warren says, which also helps head off any worries about her productivity. Her team takes an agile project management approach that includes daily goal setting, so it’s always apparent how much she gets done.

Thomas also set up a weekly meeting with her boss “to discuss where we are on certain projects, expected deliverables, etc.” There are six people on her team, but she’s the only webmaster, so Thomas not only emails with her coworkers pretty regularly but also checks in via Google Hangouts to hash out any issues in real time. And like Warren’s at Macmillan, Thomas’s team also uses “a project management system to submit work requests, and we’re able to keep track on who’s working on what daily.”

Use The Time Difference As A Selling Point

Not every remote worker is half a world away from their bosses or clients, but for those who are, it can be an asset. “Most of my work comes through email,” LaRoche Bradford points out, “so whether it is received in Montreal—where I’m from—or halfway around the world, it makes no difference.”

“It’s been useful for my clients who work on very tight deadlines,” she adds. “And it has helped me say yes to more projects because, although my clients are going to bed, my day has just started. By the time they get up the next morning, the final document is in their inbox. That makes them really happy!”


Related:How To Land A Promotion Without Going To The Office


These three remote workers may be the exceptions on teams that are otherwise based onsite. But Warren isn’t buying the argument that remote arrangements can’t work at scale.

As she sees it, the common refrain coming out of HR departments that “if we let you do it, then we’ll have to let everyone do it,” is an after-the-fact excuse for holding onto bad hires. “Managers know who is a high performer and who is not—it’s not a secret,” Warren says. “If you have people that you’re afraid if they’re working out of your sight, then they aren’t getting work done, why are they working for you in the first place?”

“That’s not a ‘work remotely’ problem,” she says. “That’s a management problem.”

The Best Way To Make New Friends According To Science

$
0
0

When your calendar’s full, finding time to get together with friends can feel like work. Making new friends, however, can be even more daunting. Who has the energy? And how do you get over the awkwardness?

But you probably know that opting to binge watch House Of Cards  isn’t the best move for your well-being. “Friendship is enormously powerful in terms of happiness levels,” says Eric Barker, author of Barking Up The Wrong Tree: The Surprising Science Behind Why Everything You Know About Success Is (Mostly) Wrong .

Research by Nicholas Christakis at Yale found that relationships are the number one promoter of happiness in life.” A bigger network leads to bigger happiness, according to the Yale study. “When friends of friends become happier, it ripples through the social circle,” says Barker. “Your happiness can affect theirs.”

In fact, a weak social circle is bad for your health, adds Barker. According to research from Brigham Young University, not having enough friends is the same risk factor as smoking 15 cigarettes a day.

Building your social circle is important, but there are ways to go about it that can boost your success. Here are four methods of making new friends, and the research that will convince you to make the effort.

1. Contact Old Friends

Connecting with the friends you already have is a good place to start, says Barker. Cold networking feels sleazy, according to research by Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino, so you’re less likely to do it.

“Reaching out to old friends is an effective way to make connections, and you already know these people so it’s not hard,” says Barker. “Those people can introduce you to more people.”

It helps to leverage your “superconnectors.” “If you look at your contact list on your smartphone you will probably see that some uber-connected friend introduced you to 10 or 15 other people,” says Barker. “Making more connections is like card counting. Be smart and start with superconnectors.”

Barker suggests looking at your Facebook or LinkedIn connections. Send an email to arrange lunch or coffee, and let them know you’re interested in meeting more people. They may have recommendations and can make introductions.

2. Make Friends At Work

Coworkers are a great source of new friendships, says Barker. You already spend a lot of time together and are in close proximity. Just like when you were in school, you can build relationships at the office lunch table. Look for people who sit at the larger tables. Research from Ben Waber, a visiting scientist at MIT, found that people who sit at large tables are similar to superconnectors, having bigger networks and more knowledge about their colleagues.

It also pays to hang out at the office water cooler. One study shows that 70% to 90% of office gossip tends to be true, and knowing what’s going on helps you stay connected and get ahead, says Barker.

Taking the time to create work relationships has an added bonus: The best predictor of work team success is how the team members feel about each other, writes Shawn Acor in his book The Happiness Advantage: The Seven Principles of Positive Psychology That Fuels Success and Performance at Work.

3. Be a Good Listener And Find Things In Common

Similarity bonds people, connecting them across the widest range of things. The key to being liked is finding shared connections, and there’s a mountain of research to back it up, says Barker.

People like other people whose names are similar, they prefer brands that share their own initials, and they gravitate toward people who move in the same the way.

When you have conversations with new people, leverage this fact by highlighting similarities. “You don’t want to be sneaky and create similarities, but when you’re talking to someone, get to know them and highlight connections in a way that’s genuine and authentic,” says Barker.

Simply being a good listener is a great way to bond. Your brain gets more pleasure from talking about yourself than it does from food or money, according to Princeton University neuroscientist Diana Tamir. Asking someone questions about themselves also creates a sense of intimacy, according to SUNY psychology professor Arthur Aron.

4. Join Or Start A Group

Denmark has the happiest people in the world, and one reason is that 92% of its population belongs to a social group, ranging from sports to cultural interests, says Barker. If you’re not already in a group, Barker suggests starting one, such as a weekly networking lunch, book club, movie night, or wine tasting.

Groups are organized around a shared hobby or passion, which plays into the power of similarity. And there are benefits for widening your circle. Your close friends are likely to live in your area, hear about the same things, and know of the same opportunities. Tapping into weaker ties will help you hear about things you wouldn’t hear about otherwise, says Barker.

Once You Make Friends, Do This To Keep Them

Making and keeping friends takes time, and the best way to follow through is to put it on your calendar, says Barker.

Arizona State University anthropology professor Daniel Hruschka reviewed studies on the causes of friendship conflict, and the most common reason for problems was due to time commitments, says Barker.

If you want to remain friends with someone, check in at least once every two weeks, according to research from Notre Dame. It helps to put a reminder on your calendar.

The Only 4 Speaking Tips You Need When You’re The Youngest One In The Room

$
0
0

I was 30 years old and had only been a speaking coach for a year when my mentor set me up with a few meetings with senior execs in New York. At one of them, a public relations VP pulled me aside to say, “Our CEO is going on TV later today. While you’re here, could you coach him?”

I was nervous. I had never coached a CEO before, let alone the head of a Fortune 100 company who was about to go on the air. But this was a big opportunity—I couldn’t say no. So I went into the studio with the CEO (in his 50s) and two VPs (in their 40s). I focused on what I knew and trusted in my skills.

Long story short, it turned out fine—the CEO nailed it and said afterward that I’d been a big help. When you’re just starting your career, you’ll find yourself in lots of situations where you’re the youngest person in the room and you’re asked to share your expertise. These are a few indispensable speaking tips that can help.

1. Don’t Act Like A Suit

When you walk into a meeting with seasoned execs, you might feel a little intimidated. So to compensate, you might think, “Okay, I’ve got this—I’m going to show them I take myself seriously.” So you stiffen up and square your shoulders. You put on a blank face, and you don’t move. You become flat and inauthentic—a “suit”—and it doesn’t do you any favors.

Loosen up. No matter how old you are, or how deep your experience is (or isn’t), most work environments today are pretty casual. At a minimum, they require a more dimensional self-presentation. That means you need to hold your body at ease. You need to relax your face, allowing your natural expressions to come through. You need to gesture to help your thoughts flow; think 3-D, not flat.


Related:Three Ways To Use Gestures While Speaking Without Feeling Ridiculous


2. Steer Clear Of Humor

You also need to fight the impulse to be funny. Humor can be a great way to release some tension, but your chances of landing a job with a multigenerational and multicultural audience are slim.

Besides, your audience probably isn’t expecting to laugh. When I was a theater director, I learned that you had to get your audience warmed up and ready to laugh before throwing in any humor. There needs to be a build-up before you deliver the punchline. So if you walk into a meeting with a cold, off-the-cuff joke (even a tiny one), you probably aren’t going to get much of a laugh.

You’ll draw attention to your discomfort, not your ideas. Just because you drop the faux seriousness doesn’t mean you should start cracking one-liners.

3. Keep It Conversational

The best solution is a happy medium: Keep your speaking simple and straightforward. Ditch the pretentious business jargon and stick with normal, conversational words.

Say “hide” when you mean hide, not “obfuscate.” While you might feel the need to compensate for your lack of experience by making sure people can see how smart you are, that’s a mistake. Keep your sentences short and straightforward, not long and academic. If you try too hard to sound smart, you’ll end up tripping over yourself with overly complex sentences that run on and on. Your listeners will get confused, and soon enough, even you might not know what you’re talking about anymore.

Don’t try to impress anybody. This isn’t a sweeping, formal address. It’s just a conversation.

4. Ask Questions

You’re the youngest person in the room, and you want to be taken seriously, but don’t let that discourage you from asking questions—even if you think they’re dumb.

Business leaders love to hear from young people because they bring a fresh perspective, without the blinders and assumptions that tend to accrue from years of experience. You might think your relative ignorance is a drawback, but it really isn’t; your “dumb” question may prod everyone in the room to see an issue from a completely new angle.

For example, a new hire at my company recently asked, “Why do we need a CRM [customer relationship management] system?” That wasn’t a dumb remark. It reminded us of the reasons we needed a CRM system in the first place, and how we were using the one we already had in place. That kicked off a conversation about improving our sales and marketing processes that we wouldn’t have had otherwise. So if you’re curious, ask away.

You’re bound to find yourself in situations where you feel out of your depth and surrounded by people with a lot more seniority. But that doesn’t have to be a such a bad thing. Stick with what you know, and remember these four tips, and you’ll say something smart or valuable every time.

Robots, Drones, And Lego Creations Invade Apple’s iPad Coding Environment For Kids

$
0
0

At last year’s Apple WWDC conference, the company’s “one more thing” kicker at its keynote wasn’t a headline-grabber–but it was nonetheless intriguing. The company introduced Swift Playgrounds, an iPad app that let kids (and other coding newbies) write their own iOS programs using its Swift language. The goal was to teach coding in a playful, interactive, distinctly Apple-esque way.

Almost a year later, Apple says that Swift Playgrounds has been downloaded a million times. And on Monday, June 5–the day of this year’s WWDC keynote–the company is releasing Swift Playgrounds 1.5, an update that expands the programming environment’s domain beyond iOS apps by showing kids how to write code to control robots, drones, and other gizmos.

Two critters built with Lego’s Mindstorms EV3.

That’s not an entirely new frontier for Swift Playgrounds: You can already use it to talk to external devices via Bluetooth, a capability that some third parties have adopted to make their offerings Playgrounds-compatible. But now Apple is working with several gadget makers to bring educational materials related to this capability directly into Swift Playgrounds, making it not just technically possible but a core aspect of the programming environment.

That will make Swift Playgrounds more fun–who wouldn’t want to teach a drone to do flips mid-air?–but there’s also a serious aspect to Swift Playgrounds’ mission. “Coding is a lingua franca in the world today,” said Susan Prescott, Apple’s VP of product marketing for apps, markets, and services, at a press event the company held to preview the software update. “A lot of the world around is is run by software. We think kids everywhere should have the opportunity to code.”

Though unstated by Apple, there’s also a business case for these kinds of features. Google’s Chromebooks have made enormous inroads in the educational market once dominated by Apple gear, but their cloud-based approach to computing isn’t well suited to writing code to manipulate physical devices in the real world. It’s in Apple’s interest to give the iPad tangible schoolroom capabilities that a Chromebook can’t match.

“What’s better than a kid engaged on an iPad?” Prescott asked. “A kid engaged on an iPad. With a robot.”

Hardware Brigade

Apple’s collaborators in this initiative include Lego (with its Mindstorms robotic building system), Parrot (drones), Sphero (the Sprk+ and BB-8 robots), Ubtech (the Jimu Robot MeeBot robot), Wonder Workshop (the Dash robot), and Skoog (a music-making cube). In each case, Swift Playgrounds 1.5 will include projects that step budding coders through creating something entertaining using the environment’s interface, which puts code on the left-hand side of the iPad’s screen and a preview of what that code accomplishes on the right. For instance, they’ll be able to program a real-world version of Pong that uses a Sprk+ bot as a ball and the feet of two human players as paddles.

More advanced and ambitious coders will also be able to treat the ability to control these devices via Swift Playgrounds more like a blank sheet of paper, devising their own sequences of commands to accomplish feats entirely of their own imagining. For instance, it’ll be possible to use code to specify a Parrot drone’s yaw, pitch, and roll.

A Parrot drone and iPad Pro in foreground, with other Swift Playgrounds-compatible gadgets behind them.
A Parrot drone and iPad Pro in the foreground, with other Swift Playgrounds-compatible gadgets behind them.

At Apple’s preview event, a couple of teachers who have been working with a pre-release version of Swift Playgrounds 1.5 in their classrooms spoke about their experiences. They echoed the company’s mantra about the importance of teaching young people to code, and said that the software’s new version delivered on its promise. Kelly Croy, a teacher at Oak Harbor Middle School in Oak Harbor, Ohio, added that the school’s computing and robotics programs have been largely separate until now, and Swift Playgrounds is blurring the lines in ways that make it a powerful tool: “It’s giving students a voice in areas they’ve never had before.”


Is This The Golden Age Of Entrepreneurialism? The Statistics Say No

$
0
0

Given the prominence of Uber, Facebook, and other tech super-brands in our lives, the current moment may seem like a golden age for startups. These companies’ success in rising from nothing would seem to indicate that we’re living in an economy that embraces change and continues to innovate.

Right? Well, look at the statistics and the prospects for entrepreneurialism seem less healthy. America is producing fewer startups now than previous eras. Fewer jobs are being created by new businesses. And what new companies do exist are hopelessly concentrated among certain industries and geographies. Metros like Los Angeles and New York dominate the scene; most other cities are largely stagnant.

In 2014, the economy hatched 154,000 fewer new companies than in 2006, despite the economy being almost 10% larger. [Illustration: wacomka/iStock]
The lack of new business groups is a big reason for a lack of new job growth, a new report shows. In 2014, the economy hatched 154,000 fewer new companies than in 2006, despite the economy being almost 10% larger. If you assume, based on history, that each new business creates six new positions in its first year, that means 3.4 million fewer jobs in the 2006-2014 period than we might have expected.

“In the popular consciousness, startups have never been more celebrated or focused on,” says John Lettieri, co-founder of the Economic Innovation Group (EIG), a centrist think tank supported by several Silicon Valley illuminati, in an interview. “We’ve never had a more entrepreneur-friendly popular culture. Tech companies have brought startups to the forefront. It’s just that overall, across the American economy as a whole, there’s a lot less dynamism than we’ve seen.”

Between 2010 and 2014, New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Houston, and Dallas produced the same net increase in firms (births minus deaths) than the rest of the country put together.  [Illustration: wacomka/iStock]
With the depressing title of Dynamism in Retreat, EIG’s report shows that fewer people are moving across state-lines for work, that new companies account for a lower percentage of job hires than traditionally, and that job turnover rates are declining (from a high of 12.4% annually in 1999 to a low of 7.2% in 2015). These are all indications of decreasing “churn”–the process that has driven the economy in the past. Since the recession, firm closures have outpaced firm births, on average. In 2014, more than 200 metro areas had higher death than birth rates for companies.

“The recession led to this huge wiping out of one-industry towns, particularly in those places that were heavily dependent on the industrial or manufacturing economy,” says EIG cofounder Steve Glickman. “We’re asking: What’s around the corner for them? And we’re seeing a shockingly low rate of new businesses that can become the new employers for those regions of the country.”

As the internet took off in the 1990s, evangelists proclaimed that the businesses of the future could be anywhere–even in people’s bedrooms or basements. But the report shows that new firms tend to be congregated in fewer and fewer places. Between 2010 and 2014, New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Houston, and Dallas produced the same net increase in companies (births minus deaths) than the rest of the country put together. Half the country’s metro areas saw falls in companies numbers over the period.

The economy is increasingly concentrated in the type of innovation it pursues. “The increase in patenting in the information technology and health sectors masks a steep decline in the innovation intensity of the rest of the economy,” the report says. Today, the U.S generates only two non-health and non-IT patents for every $1 billion in gross domestic product, compared to the 1980s when it was more than four. Less innovation, says the report, means less disruption, as older companies tend to be more risk-averse than new ones. And it could be a factor explaining why substantially fewer companies are coming to IPO these days.

In 2014, companies 16 years and older accounted for 74% of jobs in 2014, compared with 60% in 1992. [Illustration: wacomka/iStock]
In many industries, longer-running incumbent companies are increasingly powerful. Between 1997 and 2012, two-thirds of industries saw an increase in market concentration, measured by the sales going to top-four companies. Highly concentrated sectors include logistics, wireless communications, and book publishing, and the effect seems to be to limit employment opportunities. New businesses produce higher rates of job creation on a per dollar of wealth created basis than larger companies. In 2014, companies 16 years and older accounted for 74% of jobs in 2014, compared with 60% in 1992.

Lettieri and Glickman want to see markets opened up to more vigorous rivalry. For example, we could do away with onerous occupational licensing requirements. Currently you need a certificate from a regulatory authority before you can sell flowers in Florida or become a cosmetologist in Minnesota (which probably stops people becoming either). Or we could stop companies from forcing employees into non-compete agreements, even for relatively low-skill work. These stop workers setting up their own firms, or moving to other companies. Or, we could support tax changes that encourage investment in struggling areas. The EIG is a strong advocate for the Investing in Opportunity Act, which proposes favorable tax treatment for investors putting money into distressed “opportunity zones,” and has supporters on both sides of Congress.

Lettieri argues that an economic dynamism agenda can receive cross-party support where more controversial policies struggle. “There’s a lot of debate in Congress about the future of the economy, but there’s broad bipartisan and empirical support for restoring historic levels of dynamism and really restoring power to entrepreneurs and workers over incumbents and entrenched interests,” he says.

Inside FX’s “Fearless” Rise To TV Domination

$
0
0

Most TV network slogans can easily be glossed over as pithy marketing phrases that are more in the vein of vision-boarding than an accurate reflection of what its lineup has to offer. FX’s slogan “Fearless,” however, is worth considering. Although “There Is No Box” gave way to “Fearless” in 2013, FX has been consistently skirting the norms of network television since its inception in 1994, most notably with its string of unflinchingly gritty and subversive dramas in the early 2000s (The Shield, Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me) that can be seen as some of the harbingers of TV’s current golden era.

“It took us a while to arrive at ‘Fearless’ as our brand moniker, but it really is a mission statement for us,” says John Landgraf, CEO of FX Networks and FX Productions. “We want you to feel when you’re watching our shows that you don’t know what’s going to happen and that you’re not in a safe place that is governed by guardrails that are going to keep you from going off. Most people would rather go to the theme park version of the thing rather than the thing itself. And that’s fine–I think there’s a place in this world for safety. That’s not the experience that we provide.”

John Landgraf [Photo: via Wikimedia]
That said, being “Fearless” shouldn’t be mistaken for being reckless. During Landgraf’s 14 years at FX he’s taken the network on a controlled nosedive into inventive storytelling, refining the FX brand to be synonymous with doing more through less.

Back in 2015 during the Television Critics Association press tour, Landgraf railed against the boom in programming across digital and traditional networks, giving rise to the now often-cited term “peak TV.” And he isn’t off the mark, necessarily. Earlier this year, Netflix announced that it would up its original shows from 600 hours in 2016 to 1,000. There’s something to be said for giving consumers choice, but what concerns Landgraf is what’s potentially lost in such a break-neck scramble for more.

“There’s no way we’re going to make as many shows as Netflix–we’re not going to win through quantity,” Landgraf says. “What I decided I wanted to try to do is build a sense of what an FX series is, that there is something happening here in terms of innovation, quality, fearlessness, and originality. And if you have an appetite for that, FX is a channel that’s worth paying attention to. I think HBO has done a really good job of that. HBO is more than just a group of shows–it’s a brand. And my point of view was we’ve got to stand for something–we’ve got to turn FX into a brand that means something.”

Prior to FX, Landgraf spent 15 years as a producer and TV executive who found success in developing seminal shows including ER, The West Wing, and Friends. However, those experiences proved to be the exception, not the rule.

“I was just very frustrated at that time with the state of broadcast television. I felt like it was playing defense, not offense,” Landgraf says. “I struggled a lot during that period time as a producer to support artists in the way I wanted to. I felt like the business process was conspiring to dull down the vision of the artist.”

Nip/Tuck [Photo: courtesy of FX]
Fast forward to Peter Liguori, former president and general manager of FX, approaching Landgraf to join FX in 2004 as president of entertainment–a proposition that, admittedly, Landgraf was skeptical about.

“Basic cable really hadn’t proven its ability at that point to make excellent programming except for Nip/Tuck and The Shield. So I sat down and watched all the episodes of The Shield and all the episodes of Nip/Tuck and I was excited,” Landgraf says. “I was really blown away by the uncompromising, aggressive originality of those shows. They didn’t seem to care what you thought of them. They were made to be what they are and you can love it or you can hate it, but it didn’t feel like it was a product that had been focus-grouped to death.”

Operating under the banner of “Fearless,” Landgraf has steered FX to its most prominent position ever, marked by its flashpoint in 2016 by setting a basic cable record of 56 Emmy Award nominations with 18 wins. FX’s portfolio of critical and commercial powerhouses like The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story, Atlanta, Louie, American Horror Story, and Feud have put the network squarely in the spotlight with the added pressure of maintaining its place among the elite of prestige TV.

Susan Sarandon as Bette Davis in Feud [Photo: courtesy of FX]
“When I started here I had a lot of anxieties about how are we going to find the next hit show. And now that I’ve been doing this for 14 years, here’s what I realize: If we create the environment where we know how to [sense] talent and then we actually help them make better work instead of compressing it, good work will come,” Landgraf says. “It’s not like we’re a heat-seeking missile that’s finding finished excellence and plucking it out of the air. We’re getting in on the ground [level].”

Empowering creatives to make their shows how they see fit without boxes to check from the suits has given a unique platform for the likes of Ryan Murphy (American Horror Story, Feud), Louis C.K. (Louie), Pamela Adlon (Better Things), and perhaps Landgraf’s strongest case study Donald Glover.

Glover’s Golden Globe-winning comedy Atlanta has become yet another crown jewel for FX because Landgraf had the foresight to see Glover’s unique perspective–and to know that he, a white man of a particular age, couldn’t be the one to bring that vision to fruition.

Keith Stanfield as Darius, Brian Tyree Henry as Alfred Miles, Donald Glover as Earnest Marks in Atlanta [Photo: Guy D’Alema, courtesy of FX]
“I don’t know how to make a show about four young African-American characters in Atlanta. [Glover] knows how to make that show. He knows how to make a show about the contemporary millennial experience. He knows how to make a show about music,” Landgraf says. “I know how to make any show the best version of what it is because the team and I will try to get inside the intent of the artist and [say]: First of all Donald, or whomever we’re working with, let us describe to you what we think you’re trying to do. Now, given our understanding of what this show is, you should consider X, Y, or Z to make the best possible version of that show that you’re trying to make.”


Related:Why “Atlanta” Creator Donald Glover Is One Of The Most Creative People In Business In 2017


Landgraf’s North Star in the abstract realm of “Fearless” is always asking himself what point of view hasn’t he seen on TV? FX’s early suite of prestige programming laid the network’s foundation, but it was a foundation that looked too similar: The Shield, Nip/Tuck, and Rescue Me all focused on white, male anti-heroes. Landgraf was quick to spot the trend, but it led him to what he refers to as “both the biggest mistake I ever made as a programmer, and maybe the best decision I ever made as a programmer”: He passed on Breaking Bad to pick up Damages, starring Glenn Close and Rose Byrne.

Breaking Bad turned out to be maybe the greatest white, male anti-hero show ever made, and obviously one of the best television shows ever made. On the one hand I wish I had it, but on the other hand I didn’t want to put a fourth white, male anti-hero show on the air,” Landgraf says. “Damages was at least trying to put an older female and a younger female point of view on the air–it was trying to take the anti-hero genre in a different direction. There are plenty of people that would like to see different versions of the same television show over and over again.”

Rose Byrne in Damages [Photo: courtesy of FX]
“In my experience the artists who come to work here have some radical idea about how they want to break down and reinvent a genre,” Landgraf continues. “They want to get under the surface of a genre, they want to get under the surface of character in a way that’s fundamentally challenging. We don’t have to tell the same stories over and over again. You can build a television show around anybody’s point of view.”

Part of being “Fearless,” of course, is learning to incur the inevitable misfires. Take, for example, 2012’s short-lived series Totally Biased with W. Kamau Bell, the author and comedian‘s take on a late-night show. Landgraf says Totally Biased lasted for just two seasons because, in hindsight, it was three years early.

“I think it was very hard for Kamau to do a daily show–he would have needed to do a weekly show for a longer period of time. But I feel like that show probably would work if we were doing it today,” Landgraf says. “I know there was something there because I know that guy has a perspective that’s distinctive and that belongs on television that wasn’t on television.”

Shea Whigham as Sheriff Moe Dammik, Carrie Coon as Gloria Burgle in Fargo [Photo: Chris Large, courtesy of FX]
Years ago, Landgraf earned the affectionate title of the “Mayor of TV” and it’s a position he doesn’t take lightly. Landgraf has been instrumental in cementing FX’s brand as a network that’s willing to take the calculated risks, misfires and all, that are necessary in continuing the push for new perspectives in storytelling.

“We still love the magic of creativity, ambition, and artistry. I want the show that isn’t just another version of a show I’ve seen before,” Landgraf says. “Atlanta comes along and I’ve just never seen anything like that. If we, through our own fear and our own cautiousness, either verbally or nonverbally told Donald ‘you better not fail’ or ‘we’re just not comfortable with not understanding this,’ [we wouldn’t be taking risks.]”

“Certainly when you run a business you have a lot of competitive challenges. But ultimately problem solving can stifle creativity, in the sense that if you have to know the answers today, then all you can come up with [are the best answers for that day],” Landgraf continues. “In the most innovative answers, there’s a process of risk taking. There is a process of trial and error. And so I’ve gotten less scared and maybe that’s why we chose ‘Fearless.’ I have gotten less scared of not knowing the answer. One of the things that we’re really good at as an organization is we’re good at not having to know the answer.”

Three Signs Impostor Syndrome Might Be Silently Hurting Your Career

$
0
0

When it comes to confidence, I am the quintessential example of someone who feels wholly unqualified to do his job. Some people close to me have said that it’s a good way to keep myself humble. But trust me, there are times when the feeling of being an impostor has completely derailed me at work.

Based on my very real experience, here are a few signs that your impostor syndrome has crossed the line from being something you should be aware of–and something that’s keeping you from being a functioning member of society.


Related: How I’ve Learned From Other Women To Fight Impostor Syndrome


1. You’re Not Getting Any Work Done

It’s easy to wallow in self-pity and assume that you’re just a little too dumb to be doing the job you’re doing. But, when your work is simply not getting done, it’s unfair to blame this on the fact that you don’t feel qualified to do the job.

Of course, I can relate to the feeling that at any moment, you’re going to get “found out” and your boss is going to ask you to never show your face again. But if that’s causing you to miss important deadlines and let your teammates down, that’s a completely different story.

How to deal: Someone much smarter than me once told me that a bad first attempt is way better than no attempt at all. So when your impostor syndrome has you afraid to take a pass at an important project, just remember–lots of feedback on something you worked on is a much better place for you and anyone else involved to start with. And chances are, that first attempt will be way better than you think it’ll be.

2. You Assume Every Conversation With Your Boss Will Involve Firing You

Hey, I get it. It’s really tough when you start hearing whispers about your job–especially when those rumblings are based on rumors you’ve made up yourself. But unless you fear your boss because she’s told you that you’re one mistake away from the unemployment line, there’s nothing productive that can come from waiting around for your manager to walk over to your desk and fire you.


Related:Six Habits Of People Who Confuse Ego With Self Confidence 


Not only is it based on absolutely no truth, it can put you in the type of mind-set that makes it impossible to do your job well or even improve where you need to improve.

How to deal: If you’re really this nervous about your job status, find some time to talk to your boss about what’s going on. Assuming you have a good (enough) relationship with your manager, it’s as easy as saying, “I’m wondering if you have any feedback about my recent performance.” Even if you don’t like what you hear, at least you’ll have a clearer idea of what you need to improve.

But if you can’t get a meeting the second you need one, be honest with yourself. What can you learn to get better at your job? If you’re proactive about improving, trust me–you’ll worry much less about getting the boot, and much more about understanding how you can grow your skills.

3. You Start Frantically Looking For New Jobs

When you’re feeling like you can’t do your job, it’s only natural to say, “Hey, I should probably find something new before they tell me that I’m an embarrassment and ask me to leave.”


Related:Science-Backed Ways To Build Confidence When You Feel Like You’re Out Of Your League 


But again, this is a great way to distract yourself from the fact that not only can you improve at your work–but that you’re also pretty qualified to do what you’ve been hired to do anyway. And when you panic and start looking for something you’re “more equipped to do,” chances are you’ll just end up finding something that doesn’t make you feel any more secure.

How to deal: If this is you, ask yourself whether you’re searching for a new job because you really want to find something new–or if you’re doing it to avoid being fired. If you really hate what you’re doing, then go for it.

But if you’re enjoying your work and are just trying to avoid getting the boot, you should probably take my advice from above, have that chat with your boss, and get that necessary confidence boost that you’re not in danger of becoming unemployed. No really, I spoke to my boss about my insecurities (and wrote about it here) and it was a game-changer.

There’s a lot to be said about dealing with the feeling that you’re just not good enough. But at much as I can relate, there are times when you need to take a good look in the mirror. How much are you getting in your own way?

As someone who deals with it on a daily basis, take it from me–there are plenty of things you’re taking the wrong way, and there are ways you can combat them before it gets completely out of control.


This article originally appeared on The Daily Muse and is reprinted with permission. 

More From The Muse:

Danny McBride Goes Full Danny McBride In This New Xbox Ad

$
0
0

WHAT: Danny McBride aims his rage at the notion of “less is more” in a new ad for Xbox Game Pass.

WHO: Xbox, Ayzenberg, Caviar

WHY WE CARE: As fans of Eastbound & Down, Vice Principals, or This Is The End know, there’s nothing quite like a Danny McBride rant. And here we get McBride in full ad mode (remember his K-Swiss MFCEO?), this time to debunk the idea that more isn’t actually more. Math! He wants more of everything, and makes a compelling argument, no matter how unrealistic. “I’d like more people to come up to me on the street and say, ‘Hey Danny, you were great in Your Highness.'”

Wealthsimple Unveils The Supreme Retirement Plan To NYC Streetwear Fanatics

$
0
0

WHAT: A billboard across from the NYC flagship of iconic streetwear brand Supreme, to show the young and fashionable waiting in line for the newest gear how they may tap their passion for limited editions for retirement.

WHO: Fintech newcomer Wealthsimple

WHY WE CARE: When most of us think of retirement advice, it’s someone in a suit, folding their hands, looking at us with parental concern, and telling us if we don’t save as much as possible for our retirement right now, our golden years will consist of tuna fish coupons and maybe a Walmart greeter gig. But as Wealthsimple has pointed out before, it’s all about investment advice for young people, from the perspective of young people. And there may be nothing that screams this goal more emphatically than this billboard, and its Supreme Retirement Plan. It’s simple, it speaks directly to a specific audience in their own language. It’s like a Hypebeast MBA. And it makes sense–just look up a pair of Adidas Yeezy’s on eBay to see their investment potential.

Viewing all 36575 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images