 |
|
|
|||||
Two federal judges ruled nearly simultaneously on Friday that President Donald Trumps administration must continue to fund SNAP, the nations biggest food aid program, using contingency funds during the government shutdown. The judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island gave the administration leeway on whether to fund the program partially or in full for November. The rulings came a day before the U.S. Department of Agriculture planned to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program because it said it could no longer keep funding it due to the shutdown. The program serves about 1 in 8 Americans and is a major piece of the nations social safety netand it costs about $8 billion per month nationally. Democratic state attorneys general or governors from 25 states, as well as the District of Columbia, challenged the plan to pause the program, contending that the administration has a legal obligation to keep it running in their jurisdictions. The administration said it wasnt allowed to use a contingency fund with about $5 billion in it for the program, which reversed a USDA plan from before the shutdown that said money would be tapped to keep SNAP running. The Democratic officials argued that not only could that money be used, but it must be. They also said a separate fund with around $23 billion is available for the cause. In Providence, Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell ruled from the bench in a case filed by cities and nonprofits that the program must be funded using at least the contingency funds, and he asked for an update on progress by Monday. Along with ordering the federal government to use emergency reserves to backfill SNAP benefits, McConnell ruled that all previous work requirement waivers must continue to be honored. The USDA, during the shutdown, has terminated existing waivers that exempted work requirements for older adults, veterans, and others. The courts ruling protects millions of families, seniors, and veterans from being used as leverage in a political fight and upholds the principle that no one in America should go hungry, Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said of the Rhode Island decision. There were similar elements in the Boston case, where U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled in a written opinion that the USDA has to pay for SNAP, calling the suspension unlawful. She ordered the federal government to advise the court by Monday as to whether they will use the contingency funds to provide reduced SNAP benefits for November or fully fund the program using both contingency funds and additional available funds. Defendants suspension of SNAP payments was based on the erroneous conclusion that the Contingency Funds could not be used to ensure continuation of SNAP payments, she wrote. This court has now clarified that Defendants are required to use those Contingency Funds as necessary for the SNAP program. It wasnt immediately clear how quickly the debit cards that beneficiaries use to buy groceries could be reloaded after the ruling. That process often takes one to two weeks. The rulings are likely to face appeals. States, food banks, and SNAP recipients have been bracing for an abrupt shift in how low-income people can get groceries. Advocates and beneficiaries say halting the food aid would force people to choose between buying groceries and paying other bills. The majority of states have announced more or expedited funding for food banks or novel ways to load at least some benefits onto the debit cards used in the program. At a Washington news conference earlier Friday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, whose department runs SNAP, said the contingency funds in question would not cover the cost of SNAP for long. Speaking at a press conference with House Speaker Mike Johnson at the Capitol, she blamed Democrats for conducting a disgusting dereliction of duty by refusing to end their Senate filibuster as they hold out for an extension of healthcare funds. A push this week to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown failed in Congress. To qualify for SNAP in 2025, a family of fours net income after certain expenses cant exceed the federal poverty line, which is about $31,000 per year. Last year, SNAP provided assistance to 41 million people, nearly two-thirds of whom were families with children. By Michael Casey, Geoff Mulvihill, and Kimberlee Kruesi, Associated Press Associated Press reporter Lisa Mascaro contributed.
Category:
E-Commerce
Its certainly been a spooky week for the Walt Disney Co. and Google. The two corporations are in the midst of a carriage dispute that has resulted in a blackout of Disneys networks on Google-owned YouTube TV, leaving viewers unable to access popular channels including ESPN and ABC. Disney began notifying viewers on October 23 about the dispute and warning that its networks could be removed from the pay-TV streaming platform. All of that came to a head in the last 48 hours as the two parties failed to come to an agreement on a new deal, and YouTube TV began removing Disneys networks about 30 minutes before the previous carriage deal expired at midnight Eastern time. One area of contention between the two seems to be around pricing, with Disney asking for rate hikes that Google isnt agreeing to. A number of YouTube TV subscribers complained on social media about having their access cut, with some noting how the situation is reminiscent of the contract battles that have long plagued cable television. I’ll never forget how liberating it was in 2018 to cut the cord & subscribe to YouTube TV, John Martin, a radio host on sports station 92.9 FM ESPN, wrote on X, adding that “Nothing good ever lasts, kids. I wish cable just figured it out,” one X user wrote. “[This] should be the time they try to win others back but basically are like, hold my beer. hah, another user wrote. Still another said: I just switched, and now I have to find ANOTHER streaming platform.” Companies play the blame game Reached for comment, Google directed Fast Company to a statement released by YouTube on Thursday. Last week, Disney used the threat of a blackout on YouTube TV as a negotiating tactic to force deal terms that would raise prices on our customers, the post on YouTubes blog read. Theyre now following through on that threat, suspending their content on YouTube TV. This decision directly harms our subscribers while benefiting their own live TV products, including Hulu + Live TV and Fubo. The post continued to say that while the situation is a frustrating and disappointing outcome for YouTube TV subscribers, the company said it was urging Disney to work constructively to reach a fair agreement that restores their networks to YouTube TV. If an agreement wasnt reached and the content remained off YouTube TV, Google said it would offer subscribers a $20 credit. Disney, meanwhile, is pointing the finger at Google, accusing the tech giant of using its market dominance to eliminate the competition and undercut the industry-standard terms that it says it has already negotiated with other distributors. Unfortunately, Googles YouTube TV has chosen to deny their subscribers the content they value most by refusing to pay fair rates for our channels, including ESPN and ABC, a Disney spokesperson said. Without a new agreement in place, their subscribers will not have access to our programming, which includes the best lineup in live sportsanchored by the NFL, NBA, and college football, with 13 of the top 25 college teams playing this weekend. On Friday, a memo was shared with Disney Entertainment and ESPN employees from Disney Entertainment co-chairs Dana Walden and Alan Berg and ESPN chairman Jimmy Pitaro, regarding YouTube TV. The memo, obtained by Fast Company, reiterated a similar sentiment as the statement. The three executives wrote that Googles actions make clear how little regard they have for their customers and are consistent with an attitude which has been prevalent throughout our negotiationsYouTube TV and its owner, Google, are not interested in achieving a fair deal with us. The bottom line is that our channels are extremely valuable, and we can only continue to program them with the sports and entertainment viewers love most if we stand our ground against tactics that threaten the integrity of our business and the value of our creative work, the note concluded. Which channels are being blacked out? The networks impacted and being removed from YouTube TV include ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNews, Freeform, FX, FXX, FXM, Disney Channel, Disney Junior, Disney XD, SEC Network, Nat Geo, Nat Geo Wild, ABC News Live, ACC Network, and Localish, as well as ESPN Deportes, Baby TV Espaol, and Nat Geo Mundo for those with the Spanish plan. This isnt the first time that corporations have butted heads over the distribution of television content, nor is it the first time that YouTube TV has gotten into disputes with other entertainment giants. Paramount Global (now Paramount Skydance), Fox Corporation, and NBCUniversal all recently battled with the streaming service, though they were able to eventually reach a deal to avert a blackout. YouTube TV also previously dropped Univision and other TelevisaUnivision-owned networks in September after the two parties could not come to an agreement. Meanwhile, Disney and Charter Communications had a public dispute over a renewal in 2023, though the two parties were able to resolve the problem to avert a blackout. The impact on subscribers Experts in the industry said those who suffer most from these ongoing carriage renewal disputes are the customers. Brandon Katz, director of insights and content strategy at Greenlight Analytics, said that while carriage disputes have always been present in the linear pay-TV era, the fragmentation of current at-home entertainment makes the lapses much more noticeable, especially when dealing with sports broadcast rights that are strewn across the small-screen ecosystem. When consumers are juggling multiple subscriptions, often directed by access to specific content such as sports channels, their removal causes added friction, Katz told Fast Company. That friction often leads to a temporary spike in cancellations and, in this instance, perhaps a short-term bump in ESPN Unlimited and/or Disney Bundle sign-ups. Convenience, cost, and access rule consumer decision-making in the convoluted streaming era. YouTube TV is estimated to be the fourth-largest multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) in the United States, rivaling traditional cable providers with around 10 million subscribers. That means it wields enormous leverage, although Katz did point out that blackouts caused by disputes like this typically dont last too long. Even when these disputes result in a blackout, they don’t usually extend past a couple weeks, Katz said. I fully expect YouTube TV and Disney to reach a deal in the near future. However, the increasing frequency of these disputes and the overextended nature of sports rights these days make it particularly frustrating for consumers, who ultimately vote wih their wallets.
Category:
E-Commerce
Ted Bundy had courtroom groupies. Jeffrey Dahmer and Richard Ramirez were sent love letters in prison. Now, in the age of social media, thousands like, share, and thirst in the comments over stylized fan edits of serial killers. Theres a term for this psychological phenomenon: hybristophilia. A new study has found a connection between young womens engagement with this type of TikTok content and their sexual attraction to criminals. Those who liked or repeatedly watched clips glorifying notorious serial killers, such as Bundy and Dahmer, or fictional villains like Joe Goldberg from Netflixs You, scored higher for hybristophilia than those who scrolled past such content, according to the peer-reviewed research published in the journal Deviant Behavior, the only journal that specifically and exclusively addresses social deviance. The findings also indicate that personality traits like Machiavellianism and psychopathy are strong predictors of these tendencies. Previous research on hybristophilia often focused on women already in relationships with convicted offenders. Instead, researchers at the University of Huddersfield, aimed to explore how this attraction emerges in younger generations, particularly through social media platforms like TikTok. The study analyzed 66 TikToks and 91 comments posted between 2020 and 2024, then surveyed nearly 100 female TikTok users aged 18 to 27, measuring hybristophilia levels, empathy and dark personality traits. As seen in the recent reaction to Healthcare CEO killer Luigi Mangione, who has been obsessively idolized online and sent fan mail in prison, the halo effect can play in these killers favor. Conventionally attractive offenders like Mangione often have their crimes minimized, while researchers found comments like Daddy or Smash commonly used in reference to notorious serial killers. Some users even expressed what the study called a victim fantasy, with 7.6% of participants admitting to having sexual fantasies about conventionally attractive offenders like Bundy. In their research, the studys authors found violent behaviors were often romanticized, recast as crimes of loyalty or passion. Some expressed the belief that love could reform the killers, a theme the researchers called I Can Fix Him. In some cases, social media users conflated the serial killers with their Hollywood counterparts, a phenomenon known as actor-offender transference. Attraction to actors like Zac Efron or Evan Peters, who played Bundy and Dahmer on-screen, then spilled into attraction to the real-life killers. For those concerned that innocently scrolling social media will suddenly have them fantasizing about serial killers, dont fear. The study found exposure to content romanticizing offenders on a social media feed did not by itself predict an attraction to criminals. Only when users engaged in the content by watching, commenting, or otherwise interacting, did a link present itself.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||