The gap between the release of the movie musicals Wicked: Part I and Wicked: For Good feels like the longest intermission ever. Eager fans had to wait a year before seeing the storys conclusion, which premieres November 21.
The creative team behind Wicked claims to have tried to condense the plot down to just one film, but an overabundance of material led to the decision to split it into two. Financial considerations also likely came into play as two films will make more money than one.
As fans celebrate Wicked: For Goods release week, let’s get you up to speed on everything you need to know, including projected box-office figures.
Whos in the movie?
Since Part I and For Good were shot back-to-back, many actors are reprising their roles.
Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande lead the way as former besties Elphaba and Glinda. Sexiest Man Alive Jonathan Bailey smolders as Prince Fiyero. Jeff Goldblum, Michelle Yeoh, Marissa Bode, and Ethan Slater all return as the Wizard, Madame Morrible, Nessarose, and Boq, respectively.
There are also some new faces in the sequels cast.
Young Glinda is played by 8-year-old Scarlett Spears. Colman Domingo lends his voice to the Cowardly Lion. And Bethany Weaver rocks the iconic blue gingham dress as Dorothy.
Are there new songs?
Expanding the musical into two movies gave composer Stephen Schwartz the opportunity to write new music.
Elphaba (Erivo) and Glinda (Grande) each have solos that were not featured in the original stage production. Early on in the film, Erivo belts out No Place Like Home.” Much later on, Grandes vocal chops are on full display in “The Girl in the Bubble. Both songs serve to flesh out the characters story arcs.
Several other songs, such as “Wonderful,” have been expanded.
Do you need to see the original Wicked?
The blunt answer is yes. Wicked: Part I is the first half of the stage musical. It would be hard to follow if you have never seen the beginning of the story.
Plus, the first installment received 10 Academy Award nominations and two Oscar trophiesfor Best Costume Design and Best Production Design. (Director Jon M. Chu was notably snubbed in the Best Director category.)
If you need to get up to speed quickly, YouTube has plenty of recaps.
What are critics saying?
While award season is not yet upon us, critics have given the film mixed reviews leaning toward the positive.
As of this writing, the film had a Tomatometer score of 72% and a Popcornmeter score of 97% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Vultures Bilge Ebiri liked the second film better than the first. He argued that the conclusion was more somber, more focused, more human than the first film. And it brings the Wicked cycle to a surprisingly satisfying conclusion, at least for now.
The BBCs Caryn James agreed wholeheartedly. This latest installment is more captivating than the last and enjoyable to watch throughout.
David Rooney of The Hollywood Reporter was particularly moved by Grandes performance of the new song. Grande floods it with so much feeling that it humanizes and enriches the character and, by extension, the whole movie, he mused.
Not everyone was so enthusiastic.
William Bibbiani from TheWrap called it quite bad because of the plot holes failing to explain its Wizard of Oz origins. The APs Jake Coyle said the film just doesnt delight.
Even though both Bibbiani and Coyle did not enjoy the film as a whole, they agreed that the actors gave amazing performances.
What are the box-office predictions?
Expectations are high for Wicked: For Good. The first film grossed more than $758 million worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo. Its debut weekend alone brought in more than $112 million and set the record for the best opening ever for a movie based on a Broadway musical.
Deadline predicts that the global opening weekend for Wicked: For Good will exceed its predecessor and bring in around $200 million.
Comcast-owned Universal Pictures, which is releasing the film, is projecting a more conservative estimate of $125 million, Variety reports, adding that the movies budget was $150 million.
The long interlude has allowed audiences to build up anticipation for the sequel. Time will tell whether they follow the yellow brick road back to movie theaters this holiday season.
Silicon Valleys giants crowd the list of the worlds most valuable companies, but drugmaker Eli Lilly is hot on their heels. The company topped a market capitalization of one trillion dollars on Friday, becoming the first business in the health industry to hit that milestone.
Lillys achievement comes during a tense week for stock watchers. AI chipmaker Nvidia, which itself became the first $5 trillion company less than a month ago, beat expectations with its latest quarterly earnings. But with AI overrepresented among the worlds top businesses and massive AI investments making headlines every day, investors remain skittish that excitement over the tech might be overblown.
While Lilly still sits just outside the global top ten most valuable companies, its rise demonstrates that non-tech businesses can still chart a path to the stock markets upper echelons. In Lillys case, that rise was powered by spiking interest in weight loss drugs a trend that has nothing to do with the white hot world of AI.
Rise of GLP-1s
The Indianapolis-based drugmaker enjoyed a massive 35% boost in its stock price this year, tapping into the rise of weight loss drugs with its own offering, tirzepatide. Lillys star drugs, Mounjaro and Zepbound, both package tirzepatide, with the former approved to treat Type 2 diabetes and the latter prescribed for weight loss or sleep apnea. Tirzepatide works by simulating two naturally-occurring gut hormones that influence digestion, appetite and help the body regulate blood sugar.
Lillys two hot weight loss drugs earned the company more than $10 billion in the third quarter of the year, accounting for more than half of its $17.6 billion in sales during the same period. By the end of October, Mounjaro and Zepbound had already made the company $25 billion more than the drugmakers total revenue in 2020.
Keeping its growth going after such a landmark year poses a challenge, but Lilly is already deep into the development of a new weight loss drug in pill form that offers a convenient alternative to regular injections. That drug, orforglipron, is a candidate for early FDA approval, a process that could put it on the market very quickly.
Eli Lilly bests the competition
As Lilly races to release its weight loss pill, rival drugmaker Novo Nordisk is doing the same. Novo Nordisk is also currently awaiting FDA approval for its own oral weight loss drug under the agencys new expedited process. Both drugmakers are also slashing the price of their injectable weight loss drugs after the Trump administration called on them to lower prices.
Im thrilled to announce that the two worlds largest pharmaceutical manufacturers, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, have agreed to offer their most popular GLP-1 weight-loss drugI call it the fat drug, rememberat drastic discounts, Trump said.
While Eli Lilly is riding high on the weight loss craze this year, Novo Nordisk isnt enjoying the same confidence from investors. Novo Nordisks value more than quintupled heading into last year, but the companys shares fell sharply in 2025 as its first-mover advantage in the weight loss market dissolved and compounding pharmacies took a bite out of its business.
Eli Lilly wasnt first to market, but it made up ground quickly, securing FDA approval for diabetes drug Mounjaro and its weight-management counterpart Zepbound. Eli Lilly shares have soared since those drugs started hitting the market, showing no sign of flagging.
Weve spent 150 years going after some of the hardest-to-treat disease stateslike [developing] lifesaving insulin [for diabetes], eradicating polio, revolutionizing depression with Prozacand were still laser-focused on innovation, Eli Lillys Global Chief Customer Officer Jennifer Oleksiw told Fast Company recently. But the game has changed. Its not delivering medicine; its taking that medicine and adding the right solutions, services and content, and making it personalized, accessible and scalable.
I think back to freshman year, when my friends and I would cram onto a lumpy dorm-issue twin bed and huddle around one phone, collectively cringing as we swiped through Hinge.
That was my first foray into dating apps. It took me a weekand a handful of dead-end chatsbefore I deleted it.
As it turns out, Im far from alone.
According to mobile app analytics company AppsFlyer, 65% of dating apps downloaded in 2024 were deleted within a month. This year, that number has climbed to 69%, AppsFlyer told Fast Company.
During the pandemic, dating apps were a lifeline. Gen Z spent much of their formative yearshigh school and early collegeon Zoom, and online dating was a natural extension of a life in lockdown.
Now, many young people want their love lives off-screen again.
Wendy Walsh, the in-house dating and relationship expert for DatingAdvice.com and a psychology professor at California State University Channel Islands, explains that this generation lost at least two years of social learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Theyre often terrified of talking on the phone or meeting in person, and dating appsdesigned to connect strangersessentially translate to their worst fear.
Yet younger adults continue to lead the way in online dating. According to Pew Research data from 2023, 53% of those younger than 30 have used a dating site or app, compared with 37% of adults ages 30 to 49, 20% of those 50 to 64, and 13% of adults 65 and older.
Digital natives are swiping left on dating apps
Last week, I conducted an informal poll of six Syracuse University students in their 20s who requested anonymitylargely because, as I noticed, they seemed embarrassed to be on dating apps in the first place.
When I asked them about their experiences more broadly, disappointment came through. One pointed out that conversations on the apps rarely progressed beyond the texting stage. Another said they preferred meeting people in person and mostly used the apps for casual flings.
Dating coach Grace Lee explained that college students often feel self-conscious about these platforms.
If you have any kind of social life, youre not supposed to need one,” she says, adding that college life comes with high expectations to be out and about, which dilates the feeling that theres something wrong with you if you rely on a dating app.
Most students I talked to seemed reluctant to discuss how often they engaged with the apps, while those who admitted to regular use did so with visible mortification.
This frustration is far from isolated. A 2024 Forbes Health survey found that 79% of Gen Z users experience some degree of fatigue with dating apps like Hinge, Tinder, and Bumbletheyre investing tons of time without finding genuine connections.
Walsh says the burnout comes from the paradox of choice. Having too many options leads the brain to value each one less. People swipe endlessly, believing something better is always one swipe away, which leaves them stuck in an algorithmic loophole.
And the numbers back it up: A nationwide Kinsey Institute and DatingAdvice.com survey found that most Gen Zers would rather meet someone offline, with 90.24% of respondents saying they prefer social gatherings, bookstores, classes, and clubs.
With a focus on self-care and authenticity, this generation feels that apps just dont deliver the kind of natural, low-effort spark theyre looking for.
Its a flop era for online dating
Dating app burnout isnt just a Gen Z thingthe “swiping fatigue” is hitting the whole online dating scene.
Match Groups recent financial results underline the shift. The parent company of Tinder, Hinge, Match.com, OkCupid, and Plenty of Fish posted a fourth-quarter revenue forecast below expectations, signaling trouble converting casual users into paid subscribers.
The company’s latest quarterly numbers show revenue at $914.3 million, up 2% compared with the same period last year, while “payers” declined by 5%.
Match Group stock (Nasdaq: MTCH) has struggled this year. As of Friday, it’s down roughly 1.11% year to date, compared with the Nasdaq composite index’s growth of more than 15% during the same period.
Tinder, once the company’s crown jewel, is wobbling: Revenue slid 3% year over year, and the number of paying users dropped by 7%, to 9.3 million.
Half of Tinders monthly active users are Gen Zers, but with subscribers declining, the company is scrambling to find new ways to keep younger users engaged.
Students I spoke with had similar thoughts on Tinder: “[Its more for] hookup culturefine for freshman year, but now Im looking for something more serious.”
Match Group’s competitor Bumble isnt faring any better, reporting a 10% revenue decline and laying off 30% of its staff earlier this year.
And yet, against all odds, Hinge is holding on tight. Gen Z accounts for 56% of its user base, and the app reported a 17% increase in paying users. Strong prompts and a focus on intentional dating seem to be working.
As Match Group COO Spencer Rascoff echoed at the Goldman Sachs conference: Theres this misconception that Gen Z doesnt use dating apps. They do. Just look at Hinge.
Is betting on AI the right move?
New nonautomated modes, like Tinder’s Double Date and College Mode, are resonatingespecially with younger users.
Double Date has taken off: 92% of its users are under 30, and women who pair up are three times more likely to send a “like” and four times more likely to match than when swiping solo, while College Mode is now used by 1 in 4 eligible student users.
Dating companies are now betting that AI features will lure Gen Z backbut theres a catch: Gen Z is actually mor uncomfortable with AI than older generations.
Several students I spoke with expressed discomfort with AI, noting that when its imposed in platforms, it feels unnatural and undermines the sense of authenticity.
Social psychologist Justin Lehmiller, senior research fellow at the Kinsey Institute, told Fast Company that his research shows most single adults dont want AI anywhere near their intimate lives.
Thats the potential pitfall for some apps,” Lehmiller says. “[If] they’re incorporating more of this technology that a lot of people don’t really trust, is that going to draw more folks in, or is it just going to keep pushing them away?
A Bloomberg survey mirrors this sentiment, revealing that Gen Z is hesitant about AI-generated bios or messages and favors authenticity.
How the big players are trying to win over Gen Z
Tinder appears to recognize the tension surrounding high-tech features. In a statement to Fast Company, the company said its shifting toward low-pressure, authentic experiences, and moving away from transactional connections.
The app uses AI for security, photo selection, and safety promptswithout turning conversations into my bot texting your bot, as Match Group leaders emphasize.
Similarly, Bumble CTO Vivek Sagi stated, We want to harness the power of AI. Our goal is not to replace love or dating with technology; its to make human connection better and more compatible.
Hinge is also leaning into AI, focusing on tools that help users without impersonating them. This includes features like prompt feedback, a built-in AI tool called “Top Photo,” and the Are You Sure? message filter.
And the subtlety seems to be working. The students I spoke with didnt even realize AI was involved in their daily swiping, and when I pointed it out, one gasped: I didnt put two and two together!
Hinge CEO Justin McLeod recently explained that generative AI is meant to supportnot replacepeople. Authenticity deeply matters, he said.
And Gen Z seems to agree.
This weekend, “Remove the Regime” protests in the capital are demanding an end to the Trump administration’s deployment of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., as well as President Donald Trump’s impeachment, calling the deployment an overreach of presidential powers and politically motivated.
A federal judge ruled Thursday that the troops’ deployment in D.C. is “unlawful.” This follows a similar ruling from a Tennessee state judge.
Trump has also deployed National Guard troops to a number of other American cities, including: Portland, Oregon; Los Angeles; Memphis, Tennessee; Washington, D.C.; and Chicagoall cities run by Democrats, under the pretense of crime reduction.
Here’s what to know about the protests.
What, where and when is the ‘Remove the Regime’ protest?
On Saturday, November 22, organizers will hold a peaceful protest in Washington, D.C. calling for an end to this administration, including Trump’s impeachment and removal from office.
The main rally and march takes place starts at the Lincoln Memorial at noon with speakers, and a musical performance from The Dropkick Murphys.
A ticketed fundraiser “One Cause, Four Bands at 7:00 p.m. will wrap up the event with a concert from musicians Earth to Eve, Gwen Levey & the Breakdown, Allstrike & Freedom Futures Collective.
The day before, on Friday, November 21, the group is also holding a Veterans Rally at 2:00 p.m. and a Comedy Church standup-comedy fundraiser at 7:30 p.m.
“We will have fun, but this is not for fun,” the “Remove the Regime” website says. “We intend to change the trajectory in this country and the conversation around the world.”
Saturday’s protest, follows the last No Kings protests, which drew an estimated 7 million people in all 50 states, as well as a number of other nationwide protests this year, including Hands Off” and May Day gatherings in which Americans across red and blue states gathered to voice their concerns with the current state of U.S. democracy.
Unlike those previous protests, “Remove the Regime” is only taking place in Washington, D.C. and focuses on what’s happening in Trump’s own backyard.
Who are the organizers behind the ‘Remove the Regime’ protest?
The Removal Coalition is made up of nearly two dozen organizations, including: Indivisible, 50501, Citizen’s Impeachment, Gaslit Nation, Flare, Remember Your Oath, and Fourteenth Now.
New research has found that AI-powered content moderation systems from Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, and DeepSeek dont always come to the same conclusions about bad language on the internet.
President Donald Trump is considering pressuring states to stop regulating artificial intelligence in a draft executive order obtained Thursday by The Associated Press, as some in Congress also consider whether to temporarily block states from regulating AI.
Trump and some Republicans argue that the limited regulations already enacted by states, and others that might follow, will dampen innovation and growth for the technology.
Critics from both political partiesas well as civil liberties and consumer rights groupsworry that banning state regulation would amount to a favor for big AI companies that enjoy little to no oversight.
While the draft executive order could change, heres what to know about states’ AI regulations and what Trump is proposing.
What state-level regulations exist and why
Four statesCalifornia, Colorado, Texas, and Utahhave passed laws that set some rules for AI across the private sector, according to the International Association of Privacy Professionals.
Those laws include limiting the collection of certain personal information and requiring more transparency from companies.
The laws are in response to AI that already pervades everyday life. The technology helps make consequential decisions for Americans, including who gets a job interview, an apartment lease, a home loan, and even certain medical care. But research has shown that it can make mistakes in those decisions, including by prioritizing a particular gender or race.
Its not a matter of AI makes mistakes and humans never do, said Calli Schroeder, director of the AI & Human Rights Program at the public interest group EPIC.
With a human, I can say, Hey, explain, how did you come to that conclusion? What factors did you consider? she continued. With an AI, I cant ask any of that, and I cant find that out. And frankly, half the time the programmers of the AI couldnt answer that question.”
States’ more ambitious AI regulation proposals require private companies to provide transparency and assess the possible risks of discrimination from their AI programs.
Beyond those more sweeping rules, many states have regulated parts of AI: barring the use of deepfakes in elections and to create nonconsensual porn, for example, or putting rules in place around the government’s own use of AI.
What Trump and some Republicans want to do
The draft executive order would direct federal agencies to identify burdensome state AI regulations and pressure states to not enact them, including by withholding federal funding or challenging the state laws in court.
It would also begin a process to develop a lighter-touch regulatory framework for the whole country that would override state AI laws.
Trump’s argument is that the patchwork of regulations across 50 states impedes AI companies’ growth, and allows China to catch up to the U.S. in the AI race. The president has also said state regulations are producing Woke AI.
The draft executive order that was leaked could change and should not be taken as final, said a senior Trump administration official who requested anonymity to describe internal White House discussions.
The official said the tentative plan is for Trump to sign the order Friday.
Separately, House Republican leadership is already discussing a proposal to temporarily block states from regulating AI, the chamber’s majority leader, Steve Scalise, told Punchbowl News this week.
It’s yet unclear what that proposal would look like, or which AI regulations it would override.
TechNet, which advocates for tech companies including Google and Amazon, has previously argued that pausing state regulations would benefit smaller AI companies still getting on their feet and allow time for lawmakers to develop a country-wide regulatory framework that balances innovation with accountability.
Why attempts at federal regulation have failed
Some Republicans in Congress have previously tried and failed to ban states from regulating AI.
Part of the challenge is that opposition is coming from their party’s own ranks.
Florida’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, said a federal law barring state regulation of AI was Not acceptable in a post on X this week.
DeSantis argued that the move would be a subsidy to Big Tech and would stop states from protecting against a list of things, including predatory applications that target children and online censorship of political speech.
A federal ban on states regulating AI is also unpopular, said Cody Venzke, senior policy counsel at the ACLUs National Political Advocacy Department.
The American people do not want AI to be discriminatory, to be unsafe, to be hallucinatory, Venzke said. So I dont think anyone is interested in winning the AI race if it means AI that is not trustworthy.
By Jesse Bedayn, Associated Press
Its a tough time to be looking for a job.
Amid wider economic uncertainty, some analysts have said that businesses are at a no-hire, no fire standstill. That’s caused many to limit new work to only a few specific roles, if not pause openings entirely. At the same time, sizable layoffs have continued to pile up raising worker anxieties across sectors.
Some companies have pointed to rising operational costs spanning from President Donald Trump’s barrage of new tariffs and shifts in consumer spending. Others cite corporate restructuring more broadly or, as seen with big names like Amazon, are redirecting money to artificial intelligence.
Federal employees have encountered additional doses of uncertainty, impacting worker sentiment around the job market overall. Shortly after Trump returned to office at the start of the year, federal jobs were cut by the thousands. And the record 43-day government shutdown also left many to work without paychecks.
The impasse put key economic data on hold, too. In a delayed report released Thursday, the Labor Department said U.S. employers added a surprising 119,000 jobs in September. But unemployment rose to 4.4% and other troubling details emerged, including revisions showing the economy actually lost 4,000 jobs in August. Theres also growing gender and racial disparities. The National Womens Law Center notes women only accounted for 21,000 of Septembers added jobs and that Black women over the age of 20, in particular, saw unemployment climb to 7.5% for the month.
The shutdown has left holes in more recent hiring numbers. The government says it wont release a full jobs report for October.
Here are some of the largest job cuts announced recently:
Verizon
In November, Verizon began laying off more than 13,000 employees. In a staff memo announcing the cuts, CEO Dan Schulman said that the telecommunications giant needed to simplify operations and reorient the entire company.
General Motors
General Motors moved to lay off about 1,700 workers across manufacturing sites in Michigan and Ohio in late October, as the auto giant adjusts to slowing demand for electric vehicles. Hundreds of additional employees are reportedly slated for temporary layoffs” at the start of next year.
Paramount
In long-awaited cuts just months after completing its $8 billion merger with Skydance, Paramount plans to lay off about 2,000 employees about 10% of its workforce. Paramount initiated roughly 1,000 of those layoffs in late October, according to a source familiar with the matter.
In November, Paramount also announced plans to eliminate 1,600 positions as part of divestitures of Televisión Federal in Argentina and Chilevision in Chile. And the company said another 600 employees had chosen voluntary severance packages as part of a coming push to return to the office full-time.
Amazon
Amazon said last month that it will cut about 14,000 corporate jobs, close to 4% of its workforce, as the online retail giant ramps up spending on AI while trimming costs elsewhere. A letter to employees said most workers would be given 90 days to look for a new position internally.
UPS
United Parcel Service has disclosed about 48,000 job cuts this year as part of turnaround efforts, which arrive amid wider shifts in the company’s shipping outputs. UPS also closed daily operations at 93 leased and owned buildings during the first nine months of this year.
Target
Target in October moved to eliminate about 1,800 corporate positions, or about 8% of its corporate workforce globally. The retailer said the cuts were part of wider streamlining efforts.
Nestlé
In mid-October, Nestlé said it would be cutting 16,000 jobs globally as part of wider cost cutting aimed at reviving its financial performance amid headwinds like rising commodity costs and U.S. imposed tariffs. The Swiss food giant said the layoffs would take place over the next two years.
Lufthansa Group
In September, Lufthansa Group said it would shed 4,000 jobs by 2030 pointing to the adoption of artificial intelligence, digitalization and consolidating work among member airlines.
Novo ordisk
Also in September, Danish pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk said it would cut 9,000 jobs, about 11% of its workforce. The company which makes drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy said the layoffs were part of wider restructuring, as it works to sell more obesity and diabetes medications amid rising competition.
ConocoPhillips
Oil giant ConocoPhillips announced plans in September to lay off up to a quarter of its workforce, as part of broader efforts from the company to cut costs. Between 2,600 and 3,250 workers were expected to be impacted, with most layoffs set to take place before the end of 2025.
Intel
Intel has moved to shed thousands of jobs with the struggling chipmaker working to revive its business. In July, CEO Lip-Bu Tan said Intel expected to end the year with 75,000 core workers, excluding subsidiaries, through layoffs and attrition. Thats down from 99,500 core employees reported the end of last year. The company previously announced a 15% workforce reduction.
Microsoft
In May, Microsoft began laying off about 6,000 workers across its workforce. And just months later, the tech giant said it would be cutting 9,000 positions marking its biggest round of layoffs seen in more than two years. The company has cited organizational changes, but the labor reductions also arrive as the company spends heavily on AI.
Procter & Gamble
In June, Procter & Gamble said it would cut up to 7,000 jobs over the next two years, 6% of the companys global workforce. The maker of Tide detergent and Pampers diapers said the cuts were part of a wider restructuring also arriving amid tariff pressures.
Wyatte Grantham-Philips, AP business writer
The controversy over Apple removing ICE tracking apps from its App Store isnt over.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a digital rights group, has filed suit to compel the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to release documentation of their communications with Apple and other tech platforms that led to the app removals.
It began in October when Apple first removed an app called ICEBlock, which allows users to report Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in their area. Attorney General Pam Bondi took credit for the takedown, telling reporters, We reached out to Apple today demanding they remove the ICEBlock app from their App Storeand Apple did so. The Attorney Generals office claimed the apps presented safety risks for ICE agents.
In the days that followed, Apple removed several other similar apps, explaining that they could potentially be used to target law enforcement officials. The company says the apps violate section 1.1.1 of its app store guidelines, which prohibits [d]efamatory, discriminatory, or mean-spirited content, including references or commentary about targeted groups, particularly if the app is likely to humiliate, intimidate or place a targeted individual or group in harms way.
Apple didnt immediately respond to a request for additional information.
And it wasn’t just Apple. Meta removed a Facebook group with 80,000 members called ICE Sighting-Chicagoland at the request (or demand) of the government. Chicago residents had been using the apps to warn neighbors when the masked federal agents were near area schools, grocery stores, and other community locations.
Google removed an ICE tracking app called Red Dot from its Google Play store, saying the app violated its policy against apps that share the location of what it describes as a vulnerable group.
Bondi vowed to continue engaging tech companies on the issue. But how the government engages matters, explains Mario Trujillo, one of the EFF attorneys who filed the lawsuit.
This has a lot of first amendment issues, and there’s this narrow line between permissible government persuasion and then impermissible unconstitutional coercion, Trujillo says. To really understand whether or not the government violated the first amendment, you really have to analyze the actual conversations.
Trujillo says the language and tone used by the government also matters. Was there an implicit threat or the threat of consequences if they didn’t do something?.
The EFF says people have a protected First Amendment right to document and share information about law enforcement activities performed in public. If government officials coerce third parties into suppressing protected activity, the group says, this can be unconstitutional, as the government cannot do indirectly what it is barred from doing directly.
In October, the EFF submitted a Freedom of Information Act request with the DOJ, the DHS agencies (including ICE) asking for the communications with the tech companies. None of the agencies responded, so EFF filed suit to compel the release of the records, Trujillo says.
Trujillo adds that its likely that other advocacy groups or media outlets have submitted similar FOIAs. Whoever succeeds in getting the communication records will make them public. If the communications reveal that the government coerced or threatened the tech companies, the stage may be set for a First Amendment lawsuit against the government.
The developer of the ICEBlock app, Joshua Aaron, believes the removal of his app is a violation of his First Amendment rights, and intends to fight Apples decision in court. Attempts to contact Aaron werent immediately successful.
The app was thoroughly vetted for three weeks by Apples legal and senior officials before approval, Aaron told Decrypt. Its been fine all this time. For them to do it now, thats why I say Im so disappointed.
The Trump administration announced on Thursday new oil drilling off the California and Florida coasts for the first time in decades, advancing a project that critics say could harm coastal communities and ecosystems, as President Donald Trump seeks to expand U.S. oil production.
The oil industry has been seeking access to new offshore areas, including Southern California and off the coast of Florida, as a way to boost U.S. energy security and jobs. The federal government has not allowed drilling in federal waters in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, which includes offshore Florida and part of offshore Alabama, since 1995, because of concerns about oil spills. California has some offshore oil rigs, but there has been no new leasing in federal waters since the mid-1980s.
Since taking office for a second time in January, Trump has systematically reversed former President Joe Bidens focus on slowing climate change to pursue what the Republican calls U.S. energy dominance in the global market. Trump, who recently called climate change the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, created a National Energy Dominance Council and directed it to move quickly to drive up already record-high U.S. energy production, particularly fossil fuels such as oil, coal and natural gas.
Meanwhile, Trumps administration has blocked renewable energy sources such as offshore wind and canceled billions of dollars in grants that supported hundreds of clean energy projects across the country.
The drilling proposal drew bipartisan pushback in Florida, where a spokesperson for Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said the Trump administration should reconsider and Republican Sen. Rick Scott said the states coasts must remain off the table for oil drilling. California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, a frequent Trump critic, called the administrations plan idiotic.
Tourism and access to clean beaches are key parts of the economy in both states.
Plans to allow drilling off California, Alaska and Florida’s coast
The administrations plan proposes six offshore lease sales between 2027 and 2030 in areas along the California coast.
It also calls for new drilling off the Florida coast in the Gulf of Mexico at least 100 miles from shore. Drilling leases would be sold in the newly designated South-Central Gulf region, adjacent to the central Gulfs thousands of wells and hundreds of drilling platforms.
The new designation distinguishes the targeted area from the Eastern Gulf where drilling is prohibited under a moratorium Trump signed in his first term. Industry representatives said the change was aimed at addressing concerns from Florida officials who oppose drilling near their tourism-friendly coasts.
The five-year plan also would compel more than 20 lease sales off the coast of Alaska, including a newly designated area known as the High Arctic, more than 200 miles offshore in the Arctic Ocean.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in announcing the sales that it would take years for the oil from new leases to get to market.
By moving forward with the development of a robust, forward-thinking leasing plan, we are ensuring that Americas offshore industry stays strong, our workers stay employed, and our nation remains energy dominant for decades to come, Burgum said in a statement.
The American Petroleum Institute called the new plan a historic step toward unleashing more offshore resources. Industry groups point to Californias history as an oil-producing state and say it already has infrastructure to support more production.
Opposition from California and Florida
Scott, a Trump ally, helped persuade officials in Trump’s first term to drop a similar offshore plan in 2018 when Scott was governor. Scott and Florida Republican Sen. Ashley Moody introduced legislation this month to maintain the drilling moratorium from Trump’s first term.
Newsom, who often touts the states status as a global climate leader, said in response to Thursday’s announcement that California would use every tool at our disposal to protect our coastline.
California has been a leader in restricting offshore drilling since an infamous 1969 Santa Barbara spill helped spark the modern environmental movement. While no new federal leases have been offered since the mid-1980s, drilling from existing platforms continues.
Newsom expressed support for greater offshore controls after a 2021 spill off Huntington Beach and has backed a congressional effort to ban new offshore drilling on the West Coast.
A Texas-based company, with support from the Trump administration, is seeking to restart production in waters off Santa Barbara damaged by a 2015 oil spill. The administration has hailed the plan by Houston-based Sable Offshore Corp. as the kind of project Trump wants to increase U.S. energy production.
Trump signed an executive order on the first day of his second term to reverse Bidens ban on future offshore oil drilling on the East and West coasts. A federal court later struck down Bidens order to withdraw 625 million acres of federal waters from oil development.
Environmental and economic concerns over oil spills
Lawmakers from California and Florida warned new offshore drilling would hurt coastal economies, jeopardize national security, ravage coastal ecosystems, and put the health and safety of millions of people at risk.
This is not just a little bit offshore drilling. This is the entire California coast, every inch of Alaska, even the eastern Gulf of Mexico, said California Rep. Jared Huffman. Basically, everywhere Big Oil has been salivating to drill for decades.
Rep. Jimmy Patronis of Florida led a group of Republican lawmakers who asked Trump in a Thursday letter to withdraw some parcels off the Florida coast from leasing. They warned that oil exploration could interfere with a training area for nearby military airbases. Allowing the parcels to go forward would have a chilling effect on the militarys ability to test new munitions, including hypersonic and counter drone weaponry, they wrote.
The state is also still recovering from the environmental and economic havoc caused by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spll, which fouled coasts across the Gulf, said Florida Democratic Rep. Kathy Castor.
A Santa Barbara group, the Environmental Defense Center, formed in response to the 1969 California spill, said the plan puts at risk the Santa Barbara Channel off Southern California, an important feeding ground for endangered blue, humpback, and fin whales.
There is no way to drill for oil without causing devastating impacts, said Maggie Hall, deputy chief counsel at the advocacy group. The risk is unacceptable.
Matthew Daly and Matthew Brown, Associated Press
Associated Press reporters Julie Watson, Sophie Austin, and Kate Payne contributed to this report.
POV: You have a type B coworker, TikTok creator Eric Sedeo posted last week. In the viral skit, the “coworker” rolls into the office past 10 a.m., pulling out a laptop with only 5% charge.
I went to bed at like 4 a.m. last night, he confesses. Seriously work is so hard today, he complains before taking a nap on the couch. When he is working, music is blaring and he is simultaneously on Instagram Live. Whens that big presentation? he asks. (Its today.)
If you dont have a type B coworker like this, its probably you.
Type b people EXPECT everything to work out fine for them and it always does, one commented. This is literally the person that actually gets promoted, another wrote.
On TikTok, videos on being type B are having a moment, racking up thousands of views and comments of those who can relate or identify with the chaos. Plenty also poke fun or air their frustrations with the type Bs in their lives.
The recent discourse essentially equates type A to someone who has their lives together, and type B to a more laidback go-with-the-flow personality.
Most feel an affinity one way or another, similar to the way we label ourselves as introverted or extroverted, or proudly claim INTJ or ISFP according to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. These personality stamps can be helpful when explaining particular tendencies, or finding ways to leverage strengths or inhibit weaknesses, particularly in the workplace.
But what happens when you identify as a highly strung type A in the office, but off the clock your life is a shambles? Alsoever hear of an introverted extrovert, or an extroverted introvert? Because they exist.
The problem with identifying one way or another, is that personality mostly exists on a spectrum. Pigeon-holing people as either/or risks assigning them traits they might not actually have. Someone might be hardworking and organized (traits associated with type A), but simultaneously be flexible and creative (typical type B traits).
Nor is one better than the other. People tend to highlight the more flattering traits associated with each type, while overlooking the less-desirable ones.
According to 2023 research published in Nature, startups that prioritized a diverse range of personalities were more likely to succeed.
The type A/B binary long predates TikTok, of course. It was first introduced in the late 1950s by cardiologists linking personality traits in white middle-class men to heart attack risk. It is now no longer widely regarded as a scientifically validated way to understand personality, but rather a fun conversation starter or useful Hinge prompt.
Still, pop psychology remains one of the internets favorite subjects to dissect. (In case you were curious about me: type A. Introverted Extrovert. INFJ.)
