TheChisel is the first and only civic engagement platform created to help people and institutions with opposing views find common ground and reach agreement - on facts and solutions. We offer you a unique platform to engage in public policy-making with experts from nonpartisan organizations and bipartisan coalitions. You can comment on proposals these experts have created—they'll listen to your feedback and revise the proposals to build consensus nationwide. And then, we'll help these organizations send these proposals to Congress. TheChisel is your vehicle for reclaiming your voice and your vote.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
We need a "children-first" approach to the digital world
Dec 31, 2024
On a recent appearance on the Team Never Quit podcast, I described the internet broadly and social media more specifically as a “democracy-killing force.” This wasn't hyperbole. The scope, scale, and speed with which the all-consuming Big Tech wave has unmoored us from ourselves, each other, and reality has been unprecedented in human history.
The heart of democracy is a government that operates "for the people" and "by the people" — upholding the highest levels of individual and collective freedom for its citizenry. It also, above all else, promotes "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This incredibly precious and audaciously ambitious mandate of our founding fathers is one that every generation has carried forward with a ruthless commitment to the American experiment: a commitment underwritten with sweat, tears, and blood.
What makes America so powerfully unique is its fundamental commitment to human flourishing: the ability to live by your own values, to strive, to grow, to fail, to love, and to drive onward the human race. American democracy is the means, and our people are the primary and only end.
And yet, we have allowed a rapacious tech ecosystem to undermine the heart of who we are — our commitment to human flourishing — and, much more concerningly, to undermine the promise of America for our youngest citizens.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
In the early 2000s and into the early 2010s, we used the term "internet culture." At the earliest stages of the digital movement, we broadly recognized that there was something distinct and different — and above all, not good — about this new online world. Technology has the dubious distinction of taking the worst of the human race and amplifying and elevating it into the mainstream. Anger, spite, outrage, narcissism, naked ambition, and outright sociopathy are the hallmarks. To succeed in the online world often requires taking on the worst of humanity.
Today, there's no relevant use of the term "internet culture" because the digital world is now so entangled with every aspect of our lives that we can just call it "culture." As part of this culture, children are introduced to a virtual world designed to productize them, rob them of time and purpose, and teach them that vanity, reactivity, and superficiality are the new foundations of success. These platforms hook them to a system that defines their self-worth according to how much of themselves they willingly give over to attention-driven profit machines and undercuts the democracy-critical concept of service before self.
The statistics are stark. According to Pew Research, 95% of U.S. teens report having access to a smartphone, and nearly half say they are online "almost constantly." That means in-person interactions – the ones that help us learn and grow as people – are rapidly being replaced. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt's research reveals the devastating consequences: Between 2010 and 2015, rates of depression among teen girls rose by 65%. Teen suicide rates, particularly among girls, saw the steepest increase in history - jumping 70% in the years between 2010 and 2017. Research shows that teens who spend five or more hours daily on social media are twice as likely to report depression and anxiety symptoms compared to their peers. Even more troubling, emergency room visits for self-harm among girls aged 10-14 tripled between 2010 and 2014. The correlation between this pervasive digital presence and the collapse of youth mental health is impossible to ignore.
Modern social media platforms function essentially as "digital narcotics," employing sophisticated algorithms deliberately engineered to create dependency and expose young users to content that often exceeds age-appropriate boundaries. Users are siloed into specific, niche ways of thinking – with content that confirms certain worldviews and demonizes others. This dynamic plants the seeds of division early, perpetuating a cycle of polarization that becomes increasingly entrenched as digital dependency grows.
The issue runs deeper than just content or screen time. As Nicholas Carr argues in The Shallows, the very nature of digital platforms reshapes how we think and process information. The constant notifications, infinite scrolling, and rapid context-switching aren't just distracting our youth – they're rewiring their neural pathways. Marshall McLuhan's famous insight that "the medium is the message" proves prophetic here: regardless of what content children consume online, the fragmented, dopamine-driven nature of social media platforms themselves is transforming how young minds develop. Traditional activities that build empathy and understanding – like sustained face-to-face conversations or cooperative communal or team-oriented activities – are being displaced by an environment that rewards quick judgments and tribal thinking and undercuts the democracy-critical concept of service before self.
If we are polarized now, just imagine what those divisions could look like in 10 or 15 years when digitally native children, who have been steeped in specific ways of thinking for their whole lives, grow into adults. The implications for democracy are chilling.
Addressing this concerning trajectory requires more than simple screen-time restrictions. Parents increasingly find that establishing healthy digital boundaries proves challenging, as these platforms are specifically designed to capture and maintain attention. For this reason, this issue can't be fully solved on an individual basis. We need societal-level solutions.
First and foremost, the government can and should hold Big Tech companies accountable for the pervasive harm they caused. Connecting with others, shopping, getting directions, and gathering information online should not come with screen addiction, emotional dysregulation, overexposure, and other more sinister online threats for ourselves — and certainly not for our children.
Common sense restrictions around social media for young people have already taken off in other countries around the world. Australia, for example, just banned social media for all kids under 16. Similar restrictions have gained traction in the United States, such as The Kids Online Safety Act (which was recently stalled but not before it gained massive bipartisan support from legislators on both sides of the aisle having passed the Senate 91-3).
Beyond governmental intervention, the private sector must evolve. Technology leaders and entrepreneurs should adopt a "children-first" development philosophy, prioritizing youth well-being throughout the design and development process, rather than treating it as an ancillary consideration.
We stand at a critical inflection point with the rise of artificial intelligence. If we continue down our current path, AI will amplify and accelerate the destructive dynamic of our digital ecosystem. Recommendation engines will become even more sophisticated at hijacking attention, digital experiences will become more immersive and addictive, and the distance between our children and authentic human experience will grow ever wider. This is not inevitable.
With thoughtful, child-first implementation, AI could instead become a powerful force for human flourishing. We can harness this technology to create digital spaces that foster genuine connection, reward cooperation over conflict, and support the development of the skills and values democracy requires. The choice — and responsibility — is ours.
The stakes couldn't be higher. Our democracy's survival depends on our ability to raise generations capable of thoughtful dialogue, critical thinking, and genuine human connection. By dismantling the divisive infrastructure of digital dependency and reconstructing the foundations of empathy and understanding, we can ensure that our children inherit not just a functioning democracy, but one that truly embodies the ideals of human flourishing our founders envisioned.
The time for half-measures has passed. To save America and ourselves, we must fix the internet for our children. Our democratic future depends on it.
-
Josh Thurman is the COO and Co-Founder of Angel Kids AI, and a highly decorated Navy SEAL
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Jimmy Carter: Defender of Democracy
Dec 30, 2024
Jimmy Carter, the 39th President of the United States, is being recognized for his steadfast commitment to the principles of democracy throughout his political career and beyond. Carter, the only Georgian ever elected to the White House, died on Sunday. He was 100 years old.
Carter is often celebrated for his steadfast commitment to the principles of democracy throughout his political career and beyond. From January 20, 1977, to January 20, 1981, his presidency was marked by a focus on human rights and democratic governance, both domestically and internationally.
Human Rights and Foreign Policy
US President Jimmy Carter delivering his inaugural address at the US Capitol in Washington, January 20th 1977. Vice President Walter Mondale (1928 - 2021) is seated at right, former President Gerald Ford (1913 - 2006) at left. (Photo by UPI/Bettmann Archive/Getty Images)
Carter's approach to foreign policy was notably different from that of many of his predecessors. He believed that the United States should not only promote its interests abroad but also uphold and advocate for human rights. This perspective was rooted in his personal convictions and guided his administration's dealings with various nations.
Carter articulated this vision in his inaugural address on January 20, 1977: "Because we are free, we can never be indifferent to the fate of freedom elsewhere. Our moral sense dictates a clear-cut preference for those societies which share with us an abiding respect for individual human rights.”
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
One of the significant aspects of Carter's foreign policy was his commitment to supporting democratically elected governments and advocating for political freedom. He was vocal in his opposition to authoritarian regimes, even those that were strategic allies of the U.S. at the time. This included a critical stance against the military dictatorships in Latin America and the apartheid regime in South Africa.
Carter withdrew U.S. support for the Somoza regime in Nicaragua. He reduced military aid to Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Ernesto Geisel in Brazil, and Jorge Rafael Videla in Argentina, citing concerns over human rights violations. He also negotiated the Torrijos–Carter Treaties, which established a timeline for the return of the Panama Canal to Panama in 1999.
By prioritizing human rights, Carter sought to reshape America's global image and encourage a more ethical foreign policy.
Promoting Democracy
One of Carter's most notable achievements in promoting democracy was the Camp David Accords in 1978. This landmark agreement between Egypt and Israel established a framework for peace in the Middle East and highlighted the importance of negotiation and dialogue in resolving conflicts. Carter's role as a mediator demonstrated his belief in the power of diplomacy and the necessity of democratic principles in achieving lasting peace.
“No region in the world has greater natural and human resources than this one, and nowhere have they been more heavily weighed down by intense hatred and frequent war,” he said as part of the address before a joint session of Congress on the Camp David meeting.
After leaving office, Carter continued to advocate for democracy and human rights around the globe. He founded the Carter Center in 1982, focusing on various initiatives, including promoting free and fair elections, improving global health, and resolving conflicts. The center has been involved in numerous election monitoring missions, helping to ensure that democratic processes are upheld in various countries.
Former President Jimmy Carter observes voting procedures in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, in 1990. Cynthia Johnson/Liaison
In Celebrate Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday and his work on elections, Patrick Merloe, senior associate and director of electoral programs at the National Democratic Institute (NDI), wrote: He (Carter) first observed a foreign election in 1989 as co-leader, with former President Gerald Ford, of the joint international election observation mission to Panama organized by the nonpartisan National Democratic Institute and what is now the International Republican Institute. His role in helping to expose Manuel Noriega’s attempted fraud in that election had profound effects in Panama and inspired Carter to do more.
“In my role of almost three decades leading NDI’s international election programs, I had the honor of working closely with Carter in numerous elections,” Merloe said. “I witnessed him bring together for the first time in years the two antagonistic leaders of Bangladesh and negotiate their renouncing violence in an upcoming election. I saw him help Liberia’s contentious presidential candidates accept electoral results. He brought international attention to the credibility of Palestinian elections and promoted confidence in Peru’s post-Fujimori elections when public trust was fragile. Carter's commitment to democracy has also been evident in his writings and public speeches. He has consistently emphasized the importance of civic engagement, the rule of law, and the protection of individual rights as foundational elements of a healthy democracy."
While Carter's dedication to democracy and human rights has earned him respect, his presidency faced significant challenges, including economic issues and the Iran Hostage Crisis. Critics argue that his emphasis on human rights sometimes complicated U.S. relations with countries strategically important to American interests. Nonetheless, Carter's vision of democracy as a universal value remains a significant aspect of his legacy.
President Bush Meets with Nobel Laureates, including fomer president, Jimmy Cartergeorgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov
Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.”
“War may sometimes be a necessary evil. But no matter how necessary, it is always an evil, never a good. We will not learn to live together in peace by killing each other’s children,” Carter said in his Nobel acceptance speech.
Keep ReadingShow less
2024: The year in misinformation
Dec 30, 2024
Record-breaking hurricanes, the rapid development and use of generative artificial intelligence technologies, anything Taylor Swift, two assassination attempts, and President-elect Donald Trump’s win were among the biggest news stories of 2024. But misinformation often spread as rapidly as the facts about these events did. Here are the top misinformation trends of 2024.
1. Fraudulent election fraud claims
In the weeks leading up to the 2024 presidential election, false claims aimed at casting doubt on the legitimacy of the electoral process were prevalent on social media. The News Literacy Project tracked viral election misinformation and archived hundreds of social media posts. The claims ranged from falsehoods about noncitizens voting to election technology suppliers altering tallies to satellites being used to change vote counts. But widespread voting irregularities have not been found and election fraud claims themselves proved fraudulent.
Newslit takeaway
Determining the source of a claim is key to staying reliably informed, so it’s important to ask where a photo originated or who made the assertion. Some accounts online, for example, are created to deceive people, and many were active during the campaign. In the days before the 2024 election, the FBI reported that Russia was behind several false viral claims, including one video that purported to show ballots for former President Donald Trump being destroyed.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
2. Taylor Swift misinformation
Global superstar Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour became the highest-grossing of all time in 2024, but among the RumorGuard team, she earned a more dubious (and far less formal) title: Misinformation’s biggest star. The singer’s likeness was repeatedly used online to spread false claims, including falsehoods about the 2020 election being stolen, political endorsements and repudiations (of President Joe Biden and both presidential candidates), and claims about climate change and economic inequality.
She also became one of the few entertainers to take a strong stance against the spread of disinformation. When President-elect Trump shared AI-generated images of “Swifties for Trump,” the singer released a statement saying: “The simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth.”
Newslit takeaway
Disinformation is spread online to influence people’s opinions, which is why popular celebrities are often employed as a conduit for those messages. These kinds of false claims can usually be debunked by checking the celebrity’s official social media accounts, reviewing credible news reports or doing a reverse image search.
3. Lies and AI
The rapid maturation of generative AI technologies continues to worry misinformation researchers. Not only have these tools proven capable of creating photo-realistic images and synthetic video, but they can also be used to mimic people’s voices and create content for nefarious websites. But at the same time, a much simpler form of misinformation still reigns supreme: The bald-faced lie. Sheer assertion claims – or false claims presented without any evidence – are one of the most popular forms of misinformation online.
Newslit takeaway
Whether an image is fabricated using AI or a statement is conjured out of thin air, looking for the source (or lack thereof) is an essential skill for news consumers.
4. Assassination attempt conspiracies
Disinformation is fueling a rise in conspiracy theories, which was readily apparent in the aftermath of the assassination attempts against former President Donald Trump. In addition to falsehoods that commonly spread during events like these — including shooter misidentifications, wild speculation around motives, and the shooter’s political party affiliation — some turned more conspiratorial as people claimed without evidence that the shootings were coordinated.
It’s worth noting that conspiracy theories were not constrained to one side of the political aisle. Rumors aimed at liberals claimed that the shooting was staged by Trump himself to get a boost in the polls.
Newslit takeaway
A gap in credible information in the immediate wake of a breaking news story allows conspiracy theories to quickly take root. Be patient during breaking news events, and remember that credible, verified information takes time to emerge.
5. A flood of hurricane rumors
The 2024 Atlantic hurricane season was extremely active and resulted in billions of dollars in damages along the east coast of the United States. While the federal response was praised by Republican governors in the affected states, the false belief that the federal government’s response was inadequate and amounted to little more than a $750 check persists. The claim was amplified by a Russian disinformation campaign to undermine trust in government and deepen partisan divides.
Other misinformation included false claims that FEMA was turning away donations and diverting funds for emergency response to the border, that the FAA was restricting airspace to stop rescue missions, and that the government geoengineered hurricanes Milton and Helene to intentionally damage Republican states.
Newslit takeaway
It’s easy to fall for claims that play into our preconceived biases. Learning how to differentiate between biased sources and reputable news is a key part of staying informed.
Dan Evon is the lead writer for RumorGuard, a website by the nonpartisan education nonprofit News Literacy Project that debunks viral falsehoods. He formerly was a fact-checker.
2024: The year in misinformation was first published by the News Literacy Project and republished with permission.
Keep ReadingShow less
Chicago's Southwest Side: Vision for Urban Revitalization
Dec 30, 2024
BRIDGEPORT, ILLINOIS – A young couple attached a kayak to the roof of an SUV before heading back home to Little Italy. Mere minutes before, Brian Delisi had finished his first kayaking venture on Bubbly Creek. He tested the waters solo this time, but his fiancée, Trina Mulligan, said they would return with two kayaks in the following few weeks. Save for a few fishermen, Park No. 571 in Bridgeport was empty on the chilly overcast Saturday afternoon.
McKinley Park Development Council (MPDC) hopes to see many more people on the South Branch of the Chicago River in the future. MPDC, an advisory nonprofit, published the South Branch Connectivity framework plan this summer. Theplan was sponsored by the Our Great Rivers grant funded through The Chicago Community Trust. It would connect McKinley Park, Bridgeport, Chinatown, and Pilsen with a continuous trail along the river and nudge the residents of these four neighborhoods to engage with the river itself.
“Urban waterways have been engineered for industry not only in Chicago but around the world,” Sage Rossman said. She manages community programs at Urban Rivers, a nonprofit that focuses on the conditions of the Chicago waterways.
Technically, Bubbly Creek is a channel that was dug artificially in the 19th century. Plants and warehouse facilities relying on barge traffic blocked people from recreational river use.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
“One of the biggest things locals can do is just to go outside and play on the river,” MPDC President Kate Eakin said. “The more people are using the waterfront, the easier it is to say we need more of it.”
A “good neighbor” collaboration is key to success
A Bubbly Creek kayaker is testing the waters. Maggie Cooper from the Shedd Aquarium says herons and turtles aren’t bothered by an increase in recreational activities on the South Branch of the Chicago River. Victoria Malis // The Fulcrum
Since the framework plan was published earlier this year, MPDC's role has changed. Now, the organization spreads collected institutional knowledge and liaises between developers and residents.
Implementing the South Branch Connectivity plan will require collaboration among many local players, including utility companies and railroads that own patches of land along the river, public pressure, and time.
Eakin said more than 80 percent of the South Branch riverfront is privately held. In recent years, market power has been driving significant land turnover.
Today, when a piece of land exchanges hands, new developers must comply with the Chicago River Design Guidelines: honor a 30-foot setback from the river, create a public path, install benches and lighting, and seed native plants. These guidelines were extended to the South Branch of the Chicago River from downtown only in 2019. Current owners who decide to start a new development along the river must also comply with the extended guidelines.
But these guidelines don't require the mandated paths to connect. That's where MPDC chimes in: the council shows the framework plan to developers and explains the community vision, urging new local players to act like "good neighbors" and honor the plan.
If the MPDC’s vision of the South Branch Connectivity initiative comes to fruition, a continuous riverfront will span from Western Avenue in McKinley Park to Ping Tom Park in Chinatown. Map courtesy of MPDC
"The point was to create an idea of what could happen," MPDC Project Manager Eladio Montenegro said. "There are groups interested in acquiring land along the river, and they're using our plan as a guide."
The Chinese American Service League is one of the area's most recent purchasers. The organization acquired land in Bridgeport in 2023 and is willing to reference the South Branch Connectivity project in its plans.
Developed with the help of the University of Illinois Chicago, College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs, and Living Habitats, a landscape architecture consulting firm, the connectivity framework draws inspiration from successful projects in Germany, Australia, and across the States. National success stories include South Waterfront Greenway in Portland, Oregon, and Allegheny RiverTrail Park in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.
The advisory framework doesn't lead to immediate changes but creates a vision, brings awareness, and connects stakeholder groups. Pilsen Environmental Rights and Reform Organization uses the framework and the same landscape architecture firm in Canal Origins Park renovation efforts sponsored by a recent tgrant from GreenLatinos and the Bezos Earth Fund.
The Chicago Department of Transportation shares MPDC's vision of a connected waterfront on the Southwest Side.
"Achieving these physical connections will depend on many factors, including existing infrastructure constraints, securing funding, property acquisition, detailed design and engineering, and collaboration with local, state, and federal partners, as well as community stakeholders," CDOT Director of Public Information Erica Schroeder wrote in an emailed statement.
Turning a negative into a positive
MPDC president Kate Eakin recalled stories older community members said at public engagement meetings: 60 years ago, they said they were "scooping the fat off the top of the river and using it to make soap."
Historically, slaughterhouses in the Union Stock Yards used Bubbly Creek as an open sewer. The South Branch of the Chicago River's nickname, Bubbly Creek, comes from bubbles on the river surface produced by animal waste decomposition.
"Many people still have a really negative perception of Bubbly Creek," said Sage Rossman from Urban Rivers.
Urban Rivers is best known for building a floating park along the east side of Goose Island called The Wild Mile. On Bubbly Creek, the nonprofit has installed multiple floating wetlands in collaboration with the Shedd Aquarium. Together, the two organizations plan to increase the number of wetlands on Bubbly Creek in 2025 and host more recreational and educational programs on the south segment of the river.
Urban Rivers and Shedd Aquarium installed multiple floating wetlands on Bubbly Creek, but a lack of boardwalks makes it hard to host recreational and educational programs along this river segment.Victoria Malis // The Fulcrum
According to Rossman, the current state of infrastructure in the South Branch of the Chicago River creates additional challenges. The North Branch has more river access points.
"We do so much more stuff on The Wild Mile because we have the boardwalk attached," Rossman said. "We can bring groups of 70 children down there easily."
Barge slips, distinctive of the river's south branch, provide special conditions for kingfishers and baby turtles. Maggie Cooper, manager of conservation action at the Shedd Aquarium, said an increase in recreational fishing and kayaking activities on Bubbly Creek won't disturb wildlife.
"As long as people are being respectful, the wildlife knows how to interact with us," Cooper said.
Victoria Malis is a Medill Investigative Lab reporter and an MSJ candidate at Northwestern University. Reporting on transportation and infrastructure on Chicago's Southwest Side.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More