Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Meet the change leaders: Hugo Balta

Hugo Balta

Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Hugo Balta is a 30-year multimedia journalism veteran with multiple market and platform experience that includes leadership positions at NBC, Telemundo, ABC, CBS and PB. He is a two-time president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

Balta, who lives in Chicago with his family, is the publisher of the Latino News Network. LNN’s mission is to provide greater visibility and voice to the Hispanic-Latino community, amplify the work of others in doing the same, mentor and provide young journalists with real world experiences, and apply the principles of solutions journalism in producing stories focused on the social determinants of health and democracy.


“As other news outlets are forced to retreat, we are meeting the challenge and advancing,” explained Balta. “It’s a presidential election year, the migrant crisis at the border is spilling over cities across the country, Covid is still gripping the community, poverty, unequal access to health care, lack of education, stigma, and racism-coverage addressing the social determinants of health and democracy has never been more important for Latinos.”

Balta, who recently joined The Fulcrum as director of solutions journalism and DEI initiatives, is also an adjunct professor in the journalism department at Columbia College Chicago.

He previously worked at the Chicago Reporter as executive editor, WBBM News Radio as editor and WTTW Chicago as news director.

Balta is the only person to serve twice as president of NAHJ. He was inducted into the organization’s Hall of Fame in 2016. A graduate of Seton Hall University, Balta has completed executive leadership programs at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business. He is also an accredited Solutions Journalism Network trainer.

I had the wonderful opportunity to interview Balta in late July for the CityBiz “Meet the Change Leaders” series. Watch to learn the full extent of his democracy reform work:

- YouTubewww.youtube.com


Read More

An illustration of a block with the words, "AI," on it, surrounded by slightly smaller caution signs.

The future of AI should be measured by its impact on ordinary Americans—not just tech executives and investors. Exploring AI inequality, labor concerns, and responsible innovation.

Getty Images, J Studios

The Kayla Test: Exploring How AI Impacts Everyday Americans

We’re failing the Kayla Test and running out of time to pass it. Whether AI goes “well” for the country is not a question anyone in SF or DC can answer. To assess whether AI is truly advancing the interests of Americans, AI stakeholders must engage with more than power users, tokenmaxxers, and Fortune 500 CEOs. A better evaluation is to talk to folks like Kayla, my Lyft driver in Morgantown, WV, and find out what they think about AI. It's a test I stumbled upon while traveling from an AI event at the West Virginia University College of Law to one at Stanford Law.

Kayla asked me what I do for a living. I told her that I’m a law professor focused on AI policy. Those were the last words I said for the remainder of the ride to the airport.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close up of a person on their phone at night.

From “Patriot Games” to The Hunger Games, how spectacle, social media, and political culture risk normalizing violence and eroding empathy.

Getty Images, Westend61

The Capitol Is Counting on Us to Laugh

When the Trump administration announced the Patriot Games, many people laughed. Selecting two children per state for a nationally televised sports competition looked too much like Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games to take seriously. But that instinct, to laugh rather than look closer, is one the Capitol is counting on. It has always been easier to normalize violence when it arrives dressed as entertainment or patriotism.

Here’s what I mean: The Hunger Games starts with the reaping, the moment when a Capitol official selects two children, one boy and one girl, to fight to the death against tributes from every other district. The games were created as an annual reminder of a failed rebellion, to remind the districts that dissent has consequences. At first, many Capitol residents saw the games as a just punishment. But sentiments shifted as the spectacle grew—when citizens could bet on winners, when a death march transformed into a beauty pageant, when murder became a pathway to celebrity.

Keep ReadingShow less
Technology and Presidential Election

Anthropic’s Mythos AI raises alarms about surveillance, deepfakes, and democracy. Why urgent AI regulation is needed as U.S. policy struggles to keep pace.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

How the Latest in AI Threatens Democracy

On April 24, America got a wake-up call from Anthropic, one of the nation’s leading artificial intelligence companies. It announced a new AI tool, called Mythos, that can identify flaws in computer networks and software systems that, as Politico puts it, “Even the brightest human minds have been unable to identify.”

A machine smarter than the “brightest human minds” sounds like a line from a dystopian science fiction movie. And if that weren’t scary enough, we now have a government populated by people who seem oblivious to the risks AI poses to democracy and humanity itself.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less