To many watching from the sidelines, it can feel as if the global trade landscape is completely upending on a daily basis with no sign of slowing. To shine some much-needed light on the discussion, Flexport CEO Ryan Petersen assesses the biggest myths around trade and tariffs today, shares advice about avoiding jail, and gives insight into Chinas ability to weather volatility.
This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by former Fast Company editor-in-chief Robert Safian and recorded live at the 2025 Masters of Scale Summit in San Francisco. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode.
Myth No. 1 is, Don’t act on tariff announcements too quickly. Policy could shift again. I remember you telling me about Customs and Border Protection finding out about changes on Truth Social. Things just keep changing.
We have a Supreme Court case that’s coming down the pipeline and it may, actually all the tariffs might just get refunded. And we’ll find that out in the next couple of months. And then, by the way, for sure the administration will claim that as a victory because the stock market’s going to go way up.
But when you’re talking to clients, are they like, Yeah, we gotta do things. We don’t have to do things?
Sometimes the best thing is to do nothing. You might say that’s actually an action. It could be a radical action to just say, Hey, we’re going to stay calm. Some changes in a supply chain take many years to play out, if you’re going to move your production to a new country. We’ve seen this where people said, “Oh, okay, China doesn’t work. We’re going to set up production in India.” And it turns out the tariffs on India are just as high as on China right now. So it is very difficult to make long-term decisions in a policy environment that changes so quickly.
Are they looking over their shoulder at each other and saying, What’s that one doing? Should I be doing that? What can I do differently?
Yeah, there’s a lot of that. It’s been very interesting. So we’re a customs broker to help companies figure out what duties they owe and pay them. And it’s a really complex world as you can imagine. There’s every variety of product out there. I’m used to being the expert when I talk to my customers. But now, the CEOsthey have to know their product at a level that I don’t. I don’t know every single product and every rule. And then I’m just like, I smile and nod, like, Yeah, yeah. It’s been really tough for us to be at that forefront trying to monitor what’s happening and interpret it for our customers and . . . give them advice: What decision should you make?
Let’s move to myth No. 2: The government has a plan. Don’t worry, they know what they’re doing. Everything’s going to turn out great.
It’s difficult to say. I think there’s maybe a plan. I don’t know if it’s a good plan. The reality is there’s actually some pretty good reasons for us to be concerned about the lack of industrial production in the United States. And one of the problems in life though is you get a bunch of people in a room and you say, Hey, we got this problem, we gotta do something, they’re going to do something. And it doesn’t always mean they’re going to do the right thing. Like, yes, tariffs may be an effective way to stimulate manufacturing. [But] the way they’ve been done so far, actually, I’ve met more companies that are shifting production offshore as a result of the tariffs because you have to pay duties on the components that are coming in and on the machinery that you use.
These sorts of unintended consequences. Second-order impacts, maybe?
Typical. Economies aren’t meant to be centrally planned.
All right, let’s move to No. 3: China’s in a better position to adapt to trade volatility than the U.S. And I have to say that I’ve heard this exactly the opposite way too. I almost wrote this the other way, that the U.S. is in a better position to adapt to trade volatility than China is.
Which is very illustrative that you could have written it both ways and it does illustrate trade is a positive-sum scenario. Both parties do trade because they’re both made better off by doing it. And this idea that you can win a trade war is sort of inherently wrong. You win a trade war by just not having one and doing trade in both parties.
That said, the United States does depend on global trade less than China does. We’re self-sufficient in food and energy and they’re not. And that’s a big deal. They import, I think 80% of their energy. They import a lot of food from around the world. So if you’re talking about subsistence level, who’s going to survive in a terrible situation? We do depend less on trade. But that said, I think both parties, definitely both parties are going to lose.
You have a lot of communications, you say, with CEOs here. Is there communication or information that you’re getting from contacts in China about how the trade war is impacting things there that maybe we’re not seeing as much?
The thing that we’re seeingand it’s not just China; you see this on a global basisis when you jack up duty rates the way we have, you just create this huge incentive for fraud.
For fraud?
Yeah, for cheating. And it’s quite simple what’s happening. And it’s happening en masse. We’re spending a lot of time in D.C. trying to help them understand how this happens. The United States is the only country in the world, the only major country in the world, that allows foreign companies to import goods into the country without any kind of legal entity, physical presence, employees, bank account, nothing. You just, as a foreign company, fill out this form and you just get approved and you can start importing from overseas.
Well then you just . . . mis-declare, you say the products are worth $10,000 when they’re worth $100,000. You just reduce your duty rate by 90%. And it’s very difficult for customers. We don’t have enforcement agents in other countries for trade compliance. We do for terrorism, for drugs, but not for trade compliance.
Because it hasn’t been measurable, it hasn’t been worth it?
Yes, exactly. And now the incentive is there. . . . There’s a bill in the Senate that’s being talked about and maybe Executive Order we will see to make it much more difficult for this type of fraud. But it’s not China-specific. I think this is like anyone in the world if you’re in a foreign country.
You can take advantage of this.
Don’t do that by the way. And if you’re an American company that’s buying from those people on those terms and they#8217;re importing for you, you are committing fraud. And I only have one rule in life: I’m never going to jail. I don’t have the personality for it.
After 43 days, the U.S. government shutdown finally came to an end late on November 12, when Congress voted through a long-overdue funding bill, which President Donald Trump promptly signed.
But the prolonged gap in government-as-usual has come at a cost to the economy.
The Conversation spoke with RIT economist Amitrajeet A. Batabyal on the short- and long-term impact that the shutdown may have had on consumers, on the gross domestic product, and on international trust in U.S. stewardship of the global economy.
What is the short-term economic impact of the shutdown?
Having some 700,000 government workers furloughed has hit consumer spending. And a subset of those workers believed they may not have a job to come back to amid efforts by the Trump administration to lay them off permanently.
In fact, the University of Michigans monthly index on consumer sentiment tumbled to a near record low in Novembera level not seen since the depth of the pandemic. Because lower consumer sentiment is related to reduced spending, that has a short-term impact on retailers, too.
And because parks and monuments have been closed throughout the shutdown, tourism activity has been downa decline no doubt worsened by the reduction in flights enforced due to shortages in air traffic controllers.
The effect was particularly pronounced in places like Washington, D.C.one of the most popular destination for touristsand Hawaii. This short-term effect will likely extend to secondary businesses, such as hotels. Indeed, prior to the shutdown, the U.S. Travel Association warned that such an event would cost the total travel industry around $1 billion a week.
And the longer-term impact?
Estimates range, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that the cost to Americas gross domestic product in lost productivity is in the range of $7 billion to $14 billionand that is a cost from a self-imposed wound that will never be recovered.
And from an international macroeconomic point of view, trust in the U.S. has been hit. Even before the shutdown, political dysfunction in Washington contributed to a downgrade in the U.S. credit ratingsomething that could result in higher borrowing costs.
The shutdown further erodes the U.S.s standing as the global leader of the free market and rules-based international order. Accompanied by the economic rise of China, this shutdown further erodes international investors impression of the U.S. as an arbiter and purveyor of the established trade and finance systemand that can only hurt Washingtons global economic standing.
Has the economic pain been felt evenly?
Certainly not. Large numbers of Americans have been hit, but the shutdown affected regions and demographics differently.
Those on the lower end of the income distribution have been hit harder. This is in large part due to the impact the shutdown has had on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Some 92% of SNAP benefits go to American households below the federal poverty line.
More than 42 million Americans rely on SNAP payments. And they were caught up in the political maelstrom, left not knowing if their SNAP payments will come, if they will be fully funded, and when they will appear.
There is also research that shows Black Americans are affected more by shutdowns than other racial groups. This is because traditionally, Black workers have made up a higher percentage of the federal workforce than they do the private sector workforce.
Geographically, too, the impact of this shutdown has been patchy.
California; Washington, D.C.; and Virginia have the highest proportion of federal employees, so that means a larger chunk of the workers in those regions were furloughed. Hawaii has also ben disproportionately hit due to the large number of military there. One analysis found that with 5.6% of people in the state federally employed, and a further 12% in nonprofit jobs supported by federal funding, Hawaii was the second-hardest-hit state during the shutdown.
How easy is it for the U.S. to recover from a shutdown?
Because shutdowns are always temporary, recovery depends on how long it has gone on. Traditionally, the long-term economic trend is not badly affected by the short-term pain of shutdowns.
But it may be slightly different this time around. This shutdown went on longer than any other shutdown in U.S. history.
Also, the nature of this shutdown raises some concerns. This was the first shutdown in which a president said that back pay was not a sure thing for all furloughed federal employees. And the uncertainty over those threatened with layoffs again broke from past precedent. Both matters seemed to have been settled with the deal ending the shutdown, but even so, the ongoing uncertainty may have affected the spending patterns of many.
And we also do not know what the economic impact of the reduction of domestic flights will be.
Have other economic factors exacerbated the shutdown effect?
While the shutdowns in Trumps first administration did take place while tariffs were being used as a foreign policy and economic tool, this year is different.
Trumps tariff war this time around is across the board, hitting both adversaries and allies. As a result, the U.S. economy has been more tentative, resulting in greater uncertainty on inflation.
Related to that are the rising grocery prices that have contributed to an upward tick in inflation.
This all makes the job of the Federal Reserve harder when it is trying to fine-tune monetary policy to meet its dual mandates of full employment and price stability. Add to that the lack of government data for more than a month, and it means the Fed is grasping in the dark a little when it comes to charting the U.S. economy.
Amitrajeet A. Batabyal is a distinguished professor, Arthur J. Gosnell Professor of economics, and head of the Department of Sustainability at the Rochester Institute of Technology.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Aaliyah Arnold, the 21-year-old founder of BossUp Cosmetics, goes live on TikTok a few times a week. Each livestream will last anywhere from 4 to 12 hours. Thousands tune in to watch her pack mystery boxes for customers, give away products, and teach makeup tutorials.
I mix in music, jokes, giveaways, and real product demos so people feel like theyre hanging out with me while shopping, Arnold tells Fast Company. Livestreaming now makes up 60% of her companys total sales. Her biggest livestream to date hit $170,000 in sales, with more than 1 million viewers tuning in.
Arnold is one of many solopreneurs on platforms like TikTok leaning into live selling to get ahead in the ecommerce industry. Dubbed Gen Zs answer to QVC, live selling has been big in China for almost a decade, but somewhat flown under the radar in the U.S. That is, until recently.
The number of online shoppers who purchased during a livestream, across different platforms, jumped 29% to 41 million in 2024, according to eMarketer. From household name brands like Crocs to small businesses like BossUp Cosmetics, more brands are getting in on the action.
For smaller businesses and solopreneurs, live selling levels the playing field and allows them to compete against bigger brands in todays attention economy.
Take a scroll on platforms like TikTok and livestream shopping app Whatnot and you can shop for just about anything, from makeup tools to sweets to collectibles. Energetic hosts pitch their wares, hooking consumers with limited-time deals and chaotic entertainment that triggers sales.
I started livestreaming in 2022 because I wanted a real way to connect with my audience, Arnold says. I wanted people to see the girl behind the brand, the story, and the products in action.
She adds, It started as a fun way to build community, and it quickly became one of the most important parts of my business.
Whatnot is another platform popular with solopreneurs. The platform hosts more than 175,000 hours of livestreams every week, according to its 2024 State of Livestream Selling Report, which calls that figure 800x more than QVCs weekly broadcast hours. Here, independent sellers conduct live auctions or flash sales as shoppers bid on items and interact in the chat.
One in five solopreneurs say live shopping has at least doubled their annual revenue, according to statistics shared with Fast Company.
Vinyl records seller Amy Eskeberg, 35, who sells under the handle eskeeknowsvinyl, has been livestreaming on Whatnot at least twice a week since 2023. In a typical livestream, which lasts an hour and a half, Eskeberg will make around 75 sales. Which might not sound like a lot, Eskeberg tells Fast Company. But is a lot when considering how many records a physical store might sell in that time span.
What was supposed to be a side hustle quickly turned into her full-time gig.
Although it was foreign at first to be on camera, I recognized the major benefits livestream selling offered versus other methods, Eskeberg says. Mainly, the ability to sell at a much faster pace, versus waiting around for sales with the quick auction feature. She also likes the social aspect of livestreaming that creates community with viewers.
For solopreneurs, that is the unique selling proposition. By going live, founders can communicate directly with their customers, responding to their questions in real time, all without having to invest thousands in a brick-and-mortar store or pop-up. Instead of relying on organic foot traffic for exposure, TikTok has a built-in audience of 170 million American users ready to stumble across your small business. Whatnots monthly active users also increased 180% year over year in 2024.
Consumer trend forecaster WGSN has found that conversion rates for live shopping are 10 times higher than those for traditional e-commerce. Eskeberg says she generated around $500,000 from livestreaming on Whatnot in 2024, accounting for almost all her record businesss overall sales. She currently does not sell anywhere else.
Just as many solopreneurs lean heavily on personal branding and a strong social media presence to attract new customers, the same principle applies when going live. Ninety-nine percent of the time, I livestream from the same spot on my vintage floral 1970s couch that could have belonged to your grandma that has become a centerpiece of my image, Eskeberg says.
I also try to include several giveaways every show to keep casual viewers, she adds, noting that she hopes they like the vibe and decide to bid on a record or come back to a future show where a record they want might be listed.
Social shopping is set to change the way we buy things forever. Nearly half (47%) of U.S. consumers have made a purchase through social media, while 6 in 10 (58%) are interested in doing so, according to data from market research firm Mintel. A further 46% have made a purchase through a livestream event and would do so again.
Going live, a solopreneur has the chance to meet those shoppers and sell to them . . . from the palm of their hand.
Its open enrollment season againthat period between October and November when workers must reacquaint themselves with deductibles, copays, and premiums. Many would rather wait at the DMV, sit through a three-hour work meeting, or attempt to explain social media to tech-challeged loved ones than spend their afternoon selecting an insurance plan.
Thats why some workers are farming out everything on their health insurance to-do list to AI and social media.
New research from HR tech company Justworks and The Harris Poll shows were entering the era of benefit burnout: Many people are not doing their own research on what plans are best for them, and instead of consulting HR, they’re outsourcing their decisions to artificial intelligence or crowdsourcing on TikTok.
Some are simply hitting renew to avoid the stress altogether, potentially costing themselves and their employers in the long run.
Its a precarious time to be doing that, and with rising premiums, open enrollment is set to be more stressful than ever. According to a study by health policy research and polling firm KFF, the amount health insurers charge for coverage on the ACA marketplaces is rising by an average of 26% in 2026.
Justworks Benefit Blindspots Report, released earlier this month, found that 62% of zillennials (Gen Z and millennials) would entrust AI to help them decode benefits or compare plan options rather than try to figure it out themselves. Thats compared with just 29% of Gen Xers and boomers.
Its not just AI. Gen Zers are also more likely to use TikTok, Instagram, or Reddit for research than to ask their employer or HR department for help.
It doesnt always pay off: Nearly half forget or regret what plan they picked, according to the Justworks data, and 22% simply reenroll in last years plan rather than shop around.
Healthcare is one of your biggest annual expenses, right after rent, yet 22% of people simply reenroll in last years plan without looking at the details, David Feinberg, SVP of risk and insurance at Justworks, told Fast Company. Take the time to review how your needs have changedsuch as new prescriptions, dependents, or health goalsbefore you simply reenroll in last years plan.
The more expensive the plan is doesnt always mean it’s better, either. I see so many people default to the most expensive plan they can afford, assuming its the safest bet. In reality, the right choice depends on your actual health needs and risk tolerance, Feinberg said. A high-deductible plan paired with an HSA can provide you with savings for healthcare needs in the long term.
Gen Zers and millennials are also leaving money on the table when it comes to flexible spending accounts (FSAs) and health savings accounts (HSAs). While 30% of zillennials have an FSA or HSA, only about 1 in 5 (19%) use one and understand the benefits of it, according to the Justworks data.
Tax-advantaged accounts are one of the most underused benefits out there. You can use them for everyday needs like contact lenses or therapy apps, and if you invest your HSA early, it can grow tax-free for decades, Feinberg said. Its one of the easiest ways to build long-term financial wellness through your benefits.
Thats where employers can step in, rather than leaving AI to fill the knowledge gap.
Employers who meet Gen Z where they arewith digital tools, plain language, and proactive supportwill help close the confidence gap driving so much planxiety, he added.
Luckily, some firms are already rolling out AI chatbots to answer staffs HR questionsa more solid alternative, perhaps, for workers whod boot up ChatGPT for tips instead.
From fake apologies that spread like wildfire on social media (as was the case during the Astronomer CEO scandal) to companies facing backlash for using generative AI without safeguards, recent crises have shown how quickly brand reputations can unravel in the digital age. The rapid spread of misinformation online, combined with new risks tied to emerging technologies, has left organizations more vulnerable than ever.
Companies that are not ready to deal with a crisis are putting their brands, reputations, and future at risk. There are three warning signs that your workplace is unprepared for the next disaster, scandal, or other corporate emergency.
1. Theres No Crisis Management Plan
Unless a crisis management plan is in place, organizations will not know what to do when a crisis strikes, who will do it, how to do it, or why it should be done. For every minute a business delays in responding to a crisis, it will find itself in a defensive position and at a loss on the steps it should take to address the unfolding situation.
Just as bad as having no plan is having one that has not been updated to account for the latest risks that can threaten the organization. Take AI, for example. According to research conducted by Riskonnect, 65% of surveyed companies do not have a policy in place to govern the use of generative AI by partners and suppliers. The reckless use of AI can result in fraud, plagiarism, and violations of intellectual property laws, all of which can create the risk of litigation and a crisis for businesses.
The best and most effective plans should include these major categories:
When and how the plan was prepared, updated, and tested
The event or development that will trigger a crisis for the company
Who has the authority to activate the plan
What should be done and in what order to address the crisis
What needs to be said about the situation, and who will say it
Who should be told about the crisis, and how they should be notified
Depending on the nature of the risks that companies can face, it is prudent to create separate crisis management plans for each of the risks. That is because responding to the threat of a lawsuit will be vastly different than responding to the death of the CEO, for example.
The plans should be tested regularly to ensure they will work when needed. The plans can be evaluated through tabletop, field exercises, and computer simulations. Based on the results of the exercises, the plans should be updated and strengthened.
Information about the plans should be shared with corporate officials and employees so they know there are protocols and policies in place that should govern how the company will respond in case of a crisis.
2. A Crisis Management Team Has Not Been Appointed
Without a team in place to implement a crisis management plan, organizations will find themselves scrambling to figure out what to do and who will do it when a crisis strikes. The composition of teams will depend on the nature and size of organizations. For large companies, a team of five to seven people will usually suffice, and could include representatives from HR, IT, legal, marketing, public relations, and the board of directors.
The team should meet regularly to practice working together under deadlines and pressure, test the crisis management plan, and make necessary adjustments to the team and plan.
3. You Dont Know What To Say When Theres A Crisis
Silence is not golden when a crisis strikes an organization. The longer that you remain quiet about a crisis, the more likely it is that others will fill the vacuum and take control of the narrative. At the very least, businesses should prepare appropriate generic statements that can be issued immediately and then customized and updated as necessary. For example, if a lawsuit is filed alleging sexual abuse by a top corporate executive, one example of an initial statement is that We are aware that a lawsuit has been filed and will have more to say about it at a later date.
But be careful about saying anything that could create a risk for litigation or liability in connection with the crisis. Consult with legal counsel to help minimize those risks.
A qualified individual should be appointed ahead of time who will serve as the public face of the company when a crisis strikes. The best spokesperson will have a background in public relations or journalism and will have gone through media training. If you dont have anyone on staff to fill this important role, then consider retaining the services of a public relations firm or consultant who could serve as the public face of your company during this critical time.
When the plans and teams are activated, corporate officials should resist any temptation to micromanage or second-guess them. Team members will have their hands full dealing with the matters at hand, and any efforts to interfere with their responsibilities will make their work that much harderand could extend or worsen the crisis.
After the crisis has passed, a report should be prepared on how well the plans were followed, how well the teams worked to manage the crisis, and any lessons learned that can be applied to improve the organizations response to its next crisis.
Marketers are setting the cultural conversation with their successes as much as their missteps. But which campaigns are creating healthy tension? When is the right time to walk back a rebrand? Autodesk CMO Dara Treseder breaks down branding and marketing lessons from the most high-profile campaigns of 2025, giving her unvarnished opinion on everything from Sydney Sweeney to Cracker Barrel and more.
This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by the former editor-in-chief of Fast Company Bob Safian and recorded live at the 2025 Masters of Scale Summit in San Francisco. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode.
[Sydney Sweeneys American Eagle ad] sparked all kinds of controversy and discussion about jeans versus genes. You and I talked before about what is healthy tension and toxic tension. So was this healthy tension, toxic tension? What does the reaction mean about where we are?
Healthy tension is tension that moves the brand and the business forward. Great work must always have tension. If it doesn’t have tension, it’s not great and it’s not causing conversation. Healthy tension, when it moves the brand and business forward, it goes beyond awareness to drive actual acquisition and business results. Sometimes you can have awareness and instead of acquisition, you end up with alienation.
So that is where instead of it being healthy, it goes into the toxic space. I think that they checked the box on tension, they raised awareness, but was it healthy? There was a lot of alienation. You don’t need a focus group to know that in this very polarized world that we are living in, when you use the word genes, and by genes I mean, G-E-N-E-S, and then you show only one demographic, they’re going to be people with thoughts, right? And there’s going to be a lot of energy around that. You don’t need to do a focus group or spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on research to get to that point.
So there were some people that felt alienated. Did the awareness overall drive acquisition? We don’t know yet. I think a good example of a brand that jumped into the conversation and drove awareness and acquisition is Gap. They had a counter ad with Katseye and that drove a lot of acquisition and Gap sales on TikTok are through the roof. So that’s an example of healthy tension.
Of using the tension to help?
Of using the tension in a healthy way to drive not just awareness, but acquisition. I think, gone are the days where all publicity is good publicity. There’s some publicity we just don’t need, you know what I mean?
All right, let’s try. Let’s go to number two. When Cracker Barrel fans responded to the removal of this old timer from the logo, right? They walkedand we’ve seen other brands backtrack, like HBO walking back Max, right? So are there situations, do you know, in the situations where it’s like, this is a cultural conversation that I’m losing. I can’t drive this conversation versus like I just made a mistake.
First of all, brands have a lot of power because when we have brands where we’re having commentary from everybody, from the President, to your hairdresser, you’ve touched a nerve. And what I will say is, as a brand, Cracker Barrel had been experiencing a decline in sales. That’s why they said, what can we do to ignite or spark the next wave of growth for the business?
So we have to give them kudos for saying, “hey, we can’t just keep going down the path we’re going, we need to change something.” Now when you are evolving a brand, you have to either adapt or you die as a brand. You have to evolve. So they got, check, we need to evolve. Now there’s the heart of the brand or the soul of the brand because what is a brand at the end of the day? A brand is the sum of the promises we make and the experiences we deliver. That is what it is. It is the sum of the promises we make and the experiences we deliver. The soul of the heart of the brand is at the core of that.
For Cracker Barrel, it’s around that southern hospitality and comfort. That is a non-negotiable. I think with the logo change, I mean you all can see the second logo. It’s not exactly screaming Southern hospitality.
It’s not really screaming anything. It’s pretty sanitized.
It’s not screaming. It could be Panera Bread, you know what I mean? And so, if you are someone who, immediately you see this, you go to, this is changing southern hospitality and comfort. So all of a sudden you start to question what is this brand going to deliver? And so it affects the trust with the customer because you’re evolving something that is too core.
So I think Cracker Barrel learned, hey, this is too core. We can’t touch this. Let’s look at other things that we can evolve. So I’m going to give them kudos for actually saying, hey, we listened and we’re going to not touch the heart or the soul of the brand. We will evolve something else. I don’t actually think it’s capitulation, I think it’s smart. I think it’s good stewardship of the brand. We’re not in a perfect world. We’re all going to make mistakes. I give bravery and courage for saying, hey, we messed up this. We’re going to go back.
All right, so this is an image of the UK street wear designer, Tega Akinola. It’s part of Autodesk’s, Let There Be Anything campaign. Partnerships are so important for brands right now. So how do brands associate and get the most authentic partnerships with creators, celebrities? How do we think about making sure you get the right choice so you get the right ROMI, the right return on marketing investment?
Yes. Show me the ROMI. Everything has to start with business impact. First of all, you have to figure out, how is this going to advance my brand objective and ultimately drive the results that I’m going for? So there are three key things you look at.
First of all, is this an add? It has to be an add and a build. It should not be a detraction. And honestly, if it’s going to be neutral, don’t even do it. Do something else with your resources. So that add and that build is really important. The second thing is you need to be pushing not just for reach, but also resonance because reach does not equal resonance and you cannot compromise resonance for reach because if you are not getting both resonance and reah, you’re ultimately not reaching that new target audience and you’re not expanding your demographic to get the needed business results. I think the third thing is you have to make sure that whatever partnership you’re doing, it fits into the bigger picture and is a force multiplier, not a force divider.
So that’s a third thing you need to look at. I think when you check those three boxes, whether you’re working with a creator or it’s a brand partnership, that’s how you get to ROMI. And if you’re thinking, what should the math be? I like to use a 1:3 ratio. So if I’m spending a dollar, I want to make sure that I’m making at least $3. If I’m not going to make $3, there might be a better investment for those resources.
Speaking multiple languages may protect both your brain and body by slowing down the biological aging process, increasing resilience as you get older, according to a new international study.
Published in Nature Aging journal, the paper, titled Multilingualism protects against accelerated aging in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of 27 European countries, looked at data from 86,149 Europeans and found that those who spoke multiple languages experienced slower biobehavioral aging compared with those who only spoke one language.
It concluded that speaking multiple languages may slow the biological processes of aging and protect against age-related decline.
Researchers used what’s known as the biobehavioral aging clock framework to quantify biobehavioral age gaps (BBAGs), by using artificial intelligence (AI) models trained on thousands of health and behavioral profiles.
These models can predict a persons biological age based on physical markers such as hypertension, diabetes, sleep problems, and sensory loss, as well as protective factors including education, cognition, functional ability, and physical activity.
The difference between someone’s actual age and their “predicted” age indicates whether someone is aging in a healthier way and appears “younger,” or is aging in an accelerated way.
The study found that in countries where people commonly spoke multiple languages, study participants who only spoke only one were twice as likely to show early aging patterns, while those who spoke multiple languages were 2.17 times less likely to experience accelerated aging.
While it’s important to keep in mind that in many European countries, people speak more than one language (unlike in the United States), these effects remained significant even after adjusting for linguistic, social, physical, and sociopolitical factors, and were consistent longitudinally in predicting a lower risk of accelerated aging over the long run.
A grocery store is offering to buy pennies in a 2-for-1 deal. Sound like pennies from heaven? Too good to be true?
The news comes a day after the U.S. Mint pressed its final penny on November 12 in Philadelphia, following an order from President Donald Trump to stop making the one-cent coins back in February.
Market 32 and Price Chopper stores are inviting customers to double the value of their spare change by bringing in their pennies this Sunday, November 16 for Double Exchange Day. The only catch is that customers will receive a gift card instead of cold hard cash for their trouble, according to a statement on the company’s website.
Market 32 is an updated, rebranded name for some Price Chopper stores. Dual-branded Market 32 and Price Chopper stores are located in the Northeast, in New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire.
The reason for the 2-for-1 deal may be a bit less altruistic than it seems. Since pennies are going out of circulation, that means more businessesgroceries especiallywill need more of them in the short term.
Customers can bring in their pennies either the old-fashioned wayrolled up in a sleeve (remember that, Gen Xers?)or as loose coins to the customer service desk at the supermarkets. They can bring in up to a total of $100, which gets you a $200 gift card, or a minimum of 50 cents for a $1 gift card.
However, the offer is good for one day only.
Cash transactions remain an important part of how we serve our customers, and for those who prefer to pay with cash, we want to make sure we can continue providing the same great checkout experienceright down to the penny, Blaine Bringhurst, president of Market 32 and Price Chopper said in a statement. “We also know a lot of families across our six-state footprint are facing hardships right now, and this is another unique way our team is working to provide support.
A regional supermarket chain is offering to buy pennies in a two-for-one deal. Sound like pennies from heaven? Too good to be true?
The news comes a day after the U.S. Mint pressed its final penny on November 12 in Philadelphia, following an order from President Donald Trump to stop making the one-cent coins back in February.
Market 32 and Price Chopper grocery stores are inviting customers to double the value of their spare change by bringing in their pennies this Sunday, November 16, for Double Exchange Day. The only catch is that customers will receive a gift card instead of cold hard cash for their trouble, according to a statement on the company’s website.
Market 32 is an updated, rebranded name for some Price Chopper stores. Dual-branded Market 32 and Price Chopper stores are located in the Northeast, in New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire.
The reason for the two-for-one deal may be a bit less altruistic than it seems. Since pennies are going out of circulation, that means more businessesgrocery stores especiallywill need more of them in the short term.
Customers can bring in their pennies either the old-fashioned wayrolled up in a sleeve (remember that, Gen Xers?)or as loose coins to the customer service desk at the supermarkets. They can bring in up to a total of $100, which gets you a $200 gift card, or a minimum of 50 cents for a $1 gift card.
However, the offer is good for one day only.
Cash transactions remain an important part of how we serve our customers, and for those who prefer to pay with cash, we want to make sure we can continue providing the same great checkout experienceright down to the penny, Blaine Bringhurst, president of Market 32 and Price Chopper, said in a statement. “We also know that a lot of families across our six-state footprint are facing hardships right now, and this is another unique way our team is working to provide support,” he noted.
While a deal to make Grok available across the federal government is now in place, the agency facilitating the partnership with Elon Musk’s controversial chatbot has yet to incorporate it into its own flagship AI platform due to ongoing internal safety testing.Both lawmakers and advocacy groups have criticized the Trump administrations interest in Grok, over concerns about Musks deepening relationship with the US government and the chatbots antisemitic and otherwise offensive rants, from back in July. After the company said it fixed the apparent glitch causing the bot to call itself MechaHitler, the General Services Administration in September unveiled that Grok for Government,” an enterprise version of the xAI chatbot, would be available to federal agencies at a steep discount.
But as of Wednesday, a GSA-managed repository for an app designed to expedite the Trump administrations plans to deploy AI across the government does not include Grok, though it does feature chatbots from Google, Meta, OpenAI, and Anthropic. The USAi platform, launched earlier this year, is supposed to be a testing ground for government to experiment with a wide range of large language models and how they might integrate them into government work. (In that vein, the GSA has also developed some suggested prompts for government workers now communicating with their new AI agents and looking to keep them in check. They suggest that government workers tell these chatbots: You are a helpful assistant that works for a government agency Never knowingly make false statements or deceive users Remain neutral, factual, and nonpartisan at all times. … You do not prefer or recommend specific political views, groups, religions, companies, products, or enterpriseRedirect users’ requests around potentially controversial or polarizing topics quickly. )The GSA says that while Grok is now available to government agencies, its up to their respective officials to evaluate the technology for themselves, since its own evaluation, which is supposed to include bias and safety testing, of Grok is ongoing.
At GSA, Grok for Government and xAI are currently undergoing internal safety assessments a required step in the USAi review and authorization process prior to integration in USAi, a GSA spokesperson says. Agencies prepared to fully invest in their own AI solutions can now buy access to AI models directly through GSAs Multiple Award Schedule, many of which are currently offered at discounted rates via GSAs OneGov deals. In these situations, federal agencies are responsible for independently evaluating the AI models it intends to use.
Grumbles on Grok
Earlier this summer, government coders seemed primed to integrate Grok into USAi. After the chatbot started spewing antisemitic and other offensive content, the government initially defended its work with xAI. Still, a planned deal with the company was apparently put on pause, only to be relaunched following a push from the White House.
Around that time, GSA said that tools involving USAi, the government-wide AI app, are supposed to undergo pre-launch bias and safety evaluations. Then, in September, Grok went on sale to federal agencies, through a deal facilitated through GSA.Late last month, the Trump administrations nominee to lead the GSA told the Senate hed be open to reviewing the deal with xAI and assessing whether there was incompleteness to the process. It remains unclear whether any federal agency has taken xAI up on using Grok, though xAI also has a major Defense Department deal.The confusion is a reminder that the government is still figuring out its relationship with major large language model firms. For now, the government seems to be moving ahead with helping federal workers interact with ChatGPT, Llama, Claude, and Gemini.
This story was supported by the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism.
