Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Society needs to take a breather

Opinion

Sign saying "slow down"
gerenme/Getty Images

Frazier is an assistant professor at the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University. He previously clerked for the Montana Supreme Court.

Patience is a virtue. It’s a simple refrain I learned well in Mrs. Campbell’s class — rather than read the instructions on a pop quiz, I rushed to start answering the questions. Turns out I missed three bonus points for simply writing my name on the back of the page rather than the front. Speed, though, has become the dominant social, political and economic norm.

We need our food delivered in minutes — you can even pay to have your UberEats order prioritized over others. We need real-time updates on our social media feeds — news and nonsense from friends and foes alike, full of instantaneous “hot takes” rather than reasoned analysis. We demand our politicians deliver progress on our ideological aims now — candidates jockey to be viewed as the one most likely to succeed on short-term policy goals and partisan preferences. And, we expect and encourage companies to compete to be the “first mover” instead of the “steady and responsible actor.”

It’s time to slow things down. We need to resist our urge to act with haste. So here are a few suggestions for how we can exercise more patience — and, by doing so, save some lives, improve our politics and enhance our discourse.


First, let’s lower the speed limit just about everywhere and let’s enhance the use of automated ways to ticket those who prioritize their speed over the safety of others. It’s not rocket science that fewer bad things can happen when cars move slower — but don’t take my word for it. Instead, consider that officials in Edmonton, Canada, saw a 50 percent drop in fatal and injurious crashes following a 6 mph drop in the speed limit. These benefits can come at relatively low cost, too. The European Union mandated the use of intelligent speed assistance systems in all new cars to increase driver awareness of excessive speeds and to ease enforcement. We can and should do the same in the United States.

Next, let’s consider granting our elected officials a single, longer term. Imagine if senators only served a single, eight-year term. Do you think they might reevaluate how they spend their time in office? I sure do. Rather than waste a third or half of their day calling donors, they could spend more time talking with their colleagues about substantive reforms. And, in place of prioritizing bills they know will please their “base,” they can more thoroughly consider legislation that may not score political points but will nevertheless further the public interest.

Finally, let’s turn to social media. This may be the most obvious place where our addiction to speed has caused poor social outcomes. Speaking from unfortunate personal experience, I know that it can feel impossible to pull away from the drama and debates that endlessly populated my apps. And you may be able to relate to my temptation to post hot takes just to see how folks respond. Those urges are understandable because that’s what the apps are built to do. We can and should advocate for more responsible platform design. The Prosocial Design Network, a community of behavioral science and design experts, has a menu of proven strategies that platforms can incorporate to make their respective feeds more aligned with quality deliberation – ideally platforms would voluntarily adopt these straightforward approaches for a better social media experience.

Realizing a slower society won’t be easy. The steps mentioned above, though, can help create space for safer streets, a more responsive democracy and a more deliberative social media ecosystem. Here’s to moving slowly and thinking about things.


Read More

Illustration of a man and woman arguing

Arguments or debates, disputes or conflicts, verbal clashes. Angry men and women roar at each other

Getty Images

What If Polarization Is the Wrong Diagnosis?

I just listened to political scientist Lilliana Mason challenge one of the most familiar explanations of what is wrong with American politics.

We are constantly told that America suffers from polarization. Republicans and Democrats have moved too far apart. They distrust each other, increasingly regard one another as enemies, and have lost the ability to compromise. The prescribed remedies are familiar: more civility, more dialogue, less hostility, and a return to the political center.

Keep ReadingShow less
 Vintage Computer with AI Text on Screen and Neon Lighting, figures of people standing around it.

Calling AI “super” makes it sound omniscient. A faith leader coalition explains why the word “artificial” matters and what to do instead.

Royalty-free/Getty Images

Reject the Sand God. Call AI by Its True Name

President Trump recently signed an executive order telling federal agencies to replace the term "artificial intelligence" with "Super Intelligence." He said the word "artificial" makes the technology sound fake.

Many Americans already treat AI as a “super intelligence” that knows better and that they should confide in. Many already assign it the role of spiritual counsel, close confidante, or even romantic partner. In a Common Sense Media survey, one-third of teenagers claimed they had discussed serious personal matters with an AI instead of a person, and 31 percent said talking with an AI companion was as satisfying as talking with friends, or even more so. Bible Chat, an app that offers scripture-based advice and prayers, has been downloaded more than 30 million times.

Keep ReadingShow less
news video camera
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

When the Cameras Went Dark: What a Press Ban Reveals About American Journalism

When I came to the United States from India in 1982, I did not trust newspapers. Back home, everyone knew which party a paper favored before reading a line. American television felt different. My family watched Peter Jennings every evening, and later I found Larry King on CNN, who let his guests talk instead of telling viewers what to think. That habit of holding everyone to one standard has mostly faded.

On Sept. 18, President Trump announced he was banning CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House, saying their reporting was fake news. The next morning the Secret Service took reporters’ badges at the gate. The outlets sued on Monday, and Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS declined to take CNN’s turn in the television pool. On Sept. 24, Judge Timothy Kelly, whom Trump appointed, blocked the ban for 14 days. He found the outlets likely to win on due process, because reporters got no notice and no chance to respond, and he doubted the government’s national security explanation. Trump’s answer was to call the judge “totally disloyal.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman sitting and typing on laptop on her lap.

AI chatbots are always guessing, even when they sound sure. Experts and Claude itself explain the AI trust gap, bias and why to check sources.

Oscar Wong/Getty Images

AI’s Information Crisis: Why Trust Is Harder to Sustain Than Ever

In all the debates about human and machine intelligence, one thing has become clear: We humans love to talk about AI. We’ve speculated whether AI will create or eliminate jobs, revolutionize or destroy science, comfort or torment us, entertain us brilliantly or rot our brains, or some combination of all these things. But amid the noise, we may have paid too little attention to a subtler impact: how AI is disrupting our relationship to information and making it harder to know what to believe.

The problem isn’t just deepfakes, the malicious manipulation of images, video, and audio. Even benign, well-intentioned AI applications can be profoundly misleading. The nature of the large language models that power chatbots means that they are always guessing, however confident they seem. How can we use AI to produce reliable information that improves public discourse rather than distorting it?

Keep ReadingShow less