Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A powerful, pitch-perfect moment at the Grammy Awards

Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky

Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky delivers a pre-recorded address during the Grammy Awards

Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images

Davies is a podcast consultant, host and solutions journalist at daviescontent.com.

The sudden change in mood probably came as a complete surprise to the worldwide audience watching the Grammys. Right in the middle of Sunday night’s musical performances and glitzy celebrations, a bearded wartime leader, dressed in an everyman olive-green T-shirt, made a brief yet solemn plea for the lives of his people.

“Our musicians wear body armor instead of tuxedos. They sing to our wounded in hospitals,” said Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky. “Support us in any way you can, but not silence. … And then peace will come.”

It was a passionate, profound message — as were Zelensky’s other recent video-taped statements to Congress, the European Parliament and the U.K. Parliament. At the Grammys, his stark words of controlled rage against Russia’s invasion almost seem to tumble out of him.


The moment also provided a powerful new definition of what it means to be pitch perfect. The former TV actor and comedian turned politician certainly understands the visual impact of his chosen medium.

“The T-shirt is a reminder of Mr. Zelensky’s origins as a regular guy; a connection between him and the citizen-soldiers fighting on the streets; a sign he shares their hardship,” wrote New York Times fashion critic Vanessa Friedman last month. He could have chosen to wear a business suit. “That Mr. Zelensky chose instead to adopt what may be the single most accessible garment around — the T-shirt — is as clear a statement of solidarity with his people as any of his rhetoric.”

The brevity of the language makes Zelensky’s messages all the more powerful, and his brave decision to remain in Kyiv, a city still under Russian bombardment, is another reason why he is so widely admired.

“In a matter of weeks, Ukrainian President Zelensky has become a beacon to the world, a wartime leader rallying his country, a symbol of courage in the face of personal danger, a politician who has shown anew the power of words and language,” wrote veteran political writer Dan Balz.

Direct comparisons have been made to Winston Churchill, who used the medium of radio and speeches in the House of Commons to rally the British people during the dark days of June 1940, when a German Nazi invasion was a distinct threat.

“We shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender,” Prime Minister Churchill said then. In his address last month to the British Parliament, Zelensky echoed that famous speech.

“We shall fight in the woods, in the fields, on the beaches, in the cities and villages, in the streets. We shall fight in the hills … on the banks of the Kalmius and the Dnieper. And we shall not surrender,” he said. In a break with tradition, the Ukrainian president was given a long standing ovation by British lawmakers.

All of this drama comes at a trying time for democracy around the world, when autocratic leaders have become more outspoken in their dismissal of systems that protect free expression and value individual liberties. Zelensky’s well-chosen words at the Grammys were another powerful reminder of what’s at stake not only for his embattled nation, but for those in many other nations who need encouragement as they defend democratic values they hold dear.

Richard Davies is a journalist, podcast consultant and host at daviescontent.com.

Read More

Is Bombing Iran Deja Vu All Over Again?

The B-2 "Spirit" Stealth Bomber flys over the 136th Rose Parade Presented By Honda on Jan. 1, 2025, in Pasadena, California. (Jerod Harris/Getty Images/TNS)

Jerod Harris/Getty Images/TNS)

Is Bombing Iran Deja Vu All Over Again?

After a short and successful war with Iraq, President George H.W. Bush claimed in 1991 that “the ghosts of Vietnam have been laid to rest beneath the sands of the Arabian desert.” Bush was referring to what was commonly called the “Vietnam syndrome.” The idea was that the Vietnam War had so scarred the American psyche that we forever lost confidence in American power.

The elder President Bush was partially right. The first Iraq war was certainly popular. And his successor, President Clinton, used American power — in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere — with the general approval of the media and the public.

Keep ReadingShow less
Conspiratorial Thinking Isn’t Growing–Its Consequences Are
a close up of a typewriter with the word conspiracy on it

Conspiratorial Thinking Isn’t Growing–Its Consequences Are

The Comet Ping Pong Pizzagate shooting, the plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and a man’s livestreamed beheading of his father last year were all fueled by conspiracy theories. But while the headlines suggest that conspiratorial thinking is on the rise, this is not the case. Research points to no increase in conspiratorial thinking. Still, to a more dangerous reality: the conspiracies taking hold and being amplified by political ideologues are increasingly correlated with violence against particular groups. Fortunately, promising new research points to actions we can take to reduce conspiratorial thinking in communities across the US.

Some journalists claim that this is “a golden age of conspiracy theories,” and the public agrees. As of 2022, 59% of Americans think that people are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories today than 25 years ago, and 73% of Americans think conspiracy theories are “out of control.” Most blame this perceived increase on the role of social media and the internet.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illness, Presidents, and Confidantes

U.S. President Joe Biden speaks at the Economic Club of Washington, DC September 19, 2024 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Win McNamee

Illness, Presidents, and Confidantes

Ever since the reality of President Biden’s mental and physical decline has been made public, ink is being spent, bemoaning that the nation was at risk because the President was not fit to make crucial decisions twenty-four hours a day.

Isn’t it foolish that, in a constitutional republic with clear separation and interdependence of powers, we should rely on one human being to make a decision at three in the morning that could have grievous consequences for the whole nation and the world? Are we under the illusion that we must and can elect an all-wise, always-on, energizer-bunny, superhero?

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

Trump's reliance on inflammatory, and often dehumanizing, language is not an unfortunate quirk—it’s a deliberate tactic.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

From ‘Obliteration’ to ‘Enemies Within’: Trump’s Language Echoes Authoritarianism

When President Trump declared that the U.S. strikes “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, it wasn’t just a policy claim—it was an exercise in narrative control. Predictably, his assertion was met with both support and skepticism. Yet more than a comment on military efficacy, the statement falls into a broader pattern that underscores how Trump uses language not just to communicate but to dominate.

Alongside top officials like CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump claimed the strikes set Iran’s nuclear ambitions back by years. However, conflicting intelligence assessments tell a more nuanced story. A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency report concluded that while infrastructure was damaged and entrances sealed, core components such as centrifuges remained largely intact. Iran had already relocated much of its enriched uranium. The International Atomic Energy Agency echoed that damage was reparable.

Keep ReadingShow less