Skip to content
Project 2025
Donate to support
diverse voices
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
How do you solve a problem like Candace Owens?

How do you solve a problem like Candace Owens?

When a Lifelong Friendship Ends in the MAGA Era

When a Lifelong Friendship Ends in the MAGA Era

As DOJ Begins To Release Epstein Files, His Many Victims Deserve More Attention Than the Powerful Men in His ‘Client List’

As DOJ Begins To Release Epstein Files, His Many Victims Deserve More Attention Than the Powerful Men in His ‘Client List’

Congress Shouldn’t Let Federal Tort Claims Become Political Gifts

Congress Shouldn’t Let Federal Tort Claims Become Political Gifts

More Artists Boycott Trump‑Renamed Kennedy Center

More Artists Boycott Trump‑Renamed Kennedy Center

Podcast: Regulating social media

Podcast: Regulating social media
The Fulcrum
By The FulcrumMar 30, 2022
The Fulcrum
The Fulcrum staff.
See More Writings by author

There are dozens of bills in Congress that would regulate social media in some way, but this week’s Civic Genius podcast guest has another idea to throw into the mix. Paul Barrett is Deputy Director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at New York University, and his new report recommends that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulate social media companies.

Could this proposal cut back online misinformation without running afoul of the First Amendment? Listen in to hear Barrett explain why he thinks so.

Listen now

Latest news

Someone using an AI chatbot on their phone.
Media & Technology

Why Workplace Wellbeing AI Needs a New Ethics of Consent

Women holding signs to defend diversity at Havard
Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Diversity Has Become a Dirty Word. It Doesn’t Have to Be.

The Domestic Sting: Why the Tariff Bill is Arriving at the American Door
Economy

The Domestic Sting: Why the Tariff Bill is Arriving at the American Door

An illustration of a paper that says "Ranked-Choice" with options listed below.
Electoral Reforms

Why Mathematicians Love Ranked Choice Voting

Read More

Meta Undermining Trust but Verify through Paid Links
Facebook launches voting resource tool
Facebook launches voting resource tool

Meta Undermining Trust but Verify through Paid Links

Facebook is testing limits on shared external links, which would become a paid feature through their Meta Verified program, which costs $14.99 per month.

This change solidifies that verification badges are now meaningless signifiers. Yet it wasn’t always so; the verified internet was built to support participation and trust. Beginning with Twitter’s verification program launched in 2009, a checkmark next to a username indicated that an account had been verified to represent a notable person or official account for a business. We could believe that an elected official or a brand name was who they said they were online. When Twitter Blue, and later X Premium, began to support paid blue checkmarks in November of 2022, the visual identification of verification became deceptive. Think Fake Eli Lilly accounts posting about free insulin and impersonation accounts for Elon Musk himself.

This week’s move by Meta echoes changes at Twitter/X, despite the significant evidence that it leaves information quality and user experience in a worse place than before. Despite what Facebook says, all this tells anyone is that you paid.

Keep ReadingShow less
artificial intelligence

Rather than blame AI for young Americans struggling to find work, we need to build: build new educational institutions, new retraining and upskilling programs, and, most importantly, new firms.

Surasak Suwanmake/Getty Images

Blame AI or Build With AI? Only One Approach Creates Jobs

We’re failing young Americans. Many of them are struggling to find work. Unemployment among 16- to 24-year-olds topped 10.5% in August. Even among those who do find a job, many of them are settling for lower-paying roles. More than 50% of college grads are underemployed. To make matters worse, the path forward to a more stable, lucrative career is seemingly up in the air. High school grads in their twenties find jobs at nearly the same rate as those with four-year degrees.

We have two options: blame or build. The first involves blaming AI, as if this new technology is entirely to blame for the current economic malaise facing Gen Z. This course of action involves slowing or even stopping AI adoption. For example, there’s so-called robot taxes. The thinking goes that by placing financial penalties on firms that lean into AI, there will be more roles left to Gen Z and workers in general. Then there’s the idea of banning or limiting the use of AI in hiring and firing decisions. Applicants who have struggled to find work suggest that increased use of AI may be partially at fault. Others have called for providing workers with a greater say in whether and to what extent their firm uses AI. This may help firms find ways to integrate AI in a way that augments workers rather than replace them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Parv Mehta Is Leading the Fight Against AI Misinformation

A visual representation of deep fake and disinformation concepts, featuring various related keywords in green on a dark background, symbolizing the spread of false information and the impact of artificial intelligence.

Getty Images

Parv Mehta Is Leading the Fight Against AI Misinformation

At a moment when the country is grappling with the civic consequences of rapidly advancing technology, Parv Mehta stands out as one of the most forward‑thinking young leaders of his generation. Recognized as one of the 500 Gen Zers named to the 2025 Carnegie Young Leaders for Civic Preparedness cohort, Mehta represents the kind of grounded, community‑rooted innovator the program was designed to elevate.

A high school student from Washington state, Parv has emerged as a leading youth voice on the dangers of artificial intelligence and deepfakes. He recognized early that his generation would inherit a world where misinformation spreads faster than truth—and where young people are often the most vulnerable targets. Motivated by years of computer science classes and a growing awareness of AI’s risks, he launched a project to educate students across Washington about deepfake technology, media literacy, and digital safety.

Keep ReadingShow less
child holding smartphone

As Australia bans social media for kids under 16, U.S. parents face a harder truth: online safety isn’t an individual choice; it’s a collective responsibility.

Getty Images/Keiko Iwabuchi

Parents Must Quit Infighting to Keep Kids Safe Online

Last week, Australia’s social media ban for children under age 16 officially took effect. It remains to be seen how this law will shape families' behavior; however, it’s at least a stand against the tech takeover of childhood. Here in the U.S., however, we're in a different boat — a consensus on what's best for kids feels much harder to come by among both lawmakers and parents.

In order to make true progress on this issue, we must resist the fallacy of parental individualism – that what you choose for your own child is up to you alone. That it’s a personal, or family, decision to allow smartphones, or certain apps, or social media. But it’s not a personal decision. The choice you make for your family and your kids affects them and their friends, their friends' siblings, their classmates, and so on. If there is no general consensus around parenting decisions when it comes to tech, all kids are affected.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026