Small Businesses Cutting Down on Hiring

Small businesses are a crucial source of jobs in the US, but many have slowed down their hiring in response to shifts in the economy and rising wages. This trend is reflected in a recent survey conducted for The Wall Street Journal, which found that the portion of small-business owners who expect to expand their workforce over the next year was below 50% for the second month in a row in May, hitting the lowest level since June 2020, Ruth Simon (WSJ) highlights.

Dion Rabouin (WSJ) highlights that the surge in hiring by American small businesses could run afoul of the Federal Reserve’s efforts to cool inflation. Small companies have been responsible for all of the job growth in the US since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic and account for almost four out of five available job openings (Rabouin). However, this trend is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it could be a sign that small businesses are optimistic about the future and confident in their ability to grow. Despite the slowdown in hiring, small businesses remain a crucial source of jobs in the US. While some companies have slowed the pace of hiring due to concerns about an economic slowdown, the demand from small businesses for new workers has not yet shown signs of declining.

It's also worth noting that the availability of workers has improved slightly in recent months, according to some reports. This could be due to a variety of factors, including workers returning to the workforce as pandemic-related concerns ease and wages increase as employers compete for talent.

Overall, while many small businesses have slowed down their hiring, they remain a crucial source of jobs in the US. As the economy continues to recover from the pandemic, it will be interesting to see how small businesses adapt and grow.

While the short-term implications for the labor shortage on small businesses may seem little now, what are the long-term implications? For one, loss of sales: Over 80% of small businesses reported a loss of sales due to the labor shortage, with 19% experiencing serious losses. Additionally, the loss of profits. 97% of small businesses seeking to hire new workers said hiring and retaining their workforces is hurting their bottom line. Solving the labor shortage problem will take time, and it will be interesting to see how small businesses adapt and grow in response to this challenge. Sources:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/workers-are-still-needed-but-many-small-businesses-have-slowed-hiring-dfa30be6

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/19/economy/worker-shortage-small-business/index.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/26/business/economy/small-business-recession.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamdunkelberg/2021/07/26/small-business-labor-shortage/?sh=506524f01fb0

https://www.wsj.com/articles/surge-in-hiring-by-small-business-complicates-feds-effort-to-cool-economy-11674627479

Strings on the J's and Strings on the Mind

From the beginning--all the way back to the Olympics in 1276 B.C. Greece--sports had been solely about athletic ability, whether it be strength, speed, or agility. However, in the last hundred years, the study of what goes on in the minds of athletes has become more intriguing and useful, and therefore more widely studied.

Basketball is a widely renowned sport that is infamous for generating news inside and outside of the athletic contests themselves. A few times this past year, we have seen a wide circulation of news stories on certain basketball players getting into trouble off the court and learning life lessons. Two examples are Ja Morant and Britney Griner, who have both found themselves detained due to their impaired decision-making.

The first basketball star to come out with personal issues was Metta Sandiford-Artest, formerly known as Ron Artest, before he first changed his name to Metta World Peace. He changed his name with six years left of his 18 year career to become an advocate for mental health in the sport.

Since then, many basketball stars have felt comfortable enough to come out and seek help for their mental health issues. Big names like Kyrie Irving and Kevin Durant come to mind, while others go less noticed like Demar DeRozan and Draymond Green. The fact that it took til the 2010s (Metta World Peace) for basketball stars to feel secure enough to reveal their mental health is reflective of the atmosphere of intense manhood infecting the NBA and other sports associations.

Now, in the modern day, behind the scenes of the actions of athletes, is a world of the health of the brains that people we avidly watch possess. Ja Morant is a prime example of this as he had signed a contract with his team as well as endorsements that totaled ~$350 million--becoming the face of the NBA underclass. Then, three times in the past four months he was caught with a firearm by witnesses and on video.

The repercussions for this were heavy as Morant lost $40 million dollars of contracts as well as a suspension from all team activities for a minimum of two weeks. Now, a few days after his most recent gun charge, he is awaiting another suspension and has realized that there is another option: getting counseling for his own mental health. 

Due to the growing popularity of focusing on a healthy mind and a healthy body, as well as the inclusive environment the NBA has grown into, bigger names are willing to come out and admit they need help. Instead of sparking up toxic manly smoke in the mirror, people that aren’t athletes should learn from those that are and become more inquisitive and accepting of mental health issues.

https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/sports/ja-morant-mental-health-counseling

www.history.com/this-day-in-history/first-modern-olympic-games

www.forbes.com/sites/ariannajohnson/2023/05/16/ja-morant-a-timeline-of-all-his-controversies/?sh=1b5c01c11703

CTE (Can Torment Everyone)

Although head injuries are the most detrimental, they are quite common in athletics. High contact sports like football, hockey, and rugby all quickly come to mind, but even sports that aren’t typically associated with concussions can have heavy tolls on athletes' health and wellbeing.

Soccer is one of these sports. While less contact occurs, and more fouls are called than in other sports, using your head to hit the ball is a huge part of the game and a tactic and skill that is implemented and utilized repeatedly.

Recently, more research has been done to uncover the issues that stem from the use of soccer players’ heads. As the pioneers and soccer legends of the last hundred years have passed away, doctors and psychologists have revealed that brain trauma is a leading cause in many of their deaths.

The topic would not need to be stressed so much if it weren’t for the blatant evidence suggesting that head safety must be focused on: “CTE can only be diagnosed posthumously. Vermillion, Fryatt and Conway died in 2020… been diagnosed with dementia… cognitive difficulties and depression for the last dozen years of his life before he died in 2021. Pantuosco also died in 2021… ‘All four had the most severe stage of the disease’” (Golen). Four of Major League Soccer’s original headways in the late 90s have already died due to the repeated head injuries they sustained during their careers. Worse, the last decades of their lives were tormented with depression and other neurocognitive disorders.

The detrimental issue is the fact that nothing is being done to prevent or soften the impact of the soccer ball. For just the second time, soccer officials, scientists, and medical professionals have gathered in Chicago for a head injury summit: “Last year, Scott Vermillion was announced as the first former MLS player to be diagnosed with CTE. His father, David Vermillion, said he would have made it his "first priority" to attend the summit if he had been invited” (“CTE”).

Overall, the soccer officials don’t take into account the players and their families that are physically affected. They put up the facade that they are sparking debate and changing the pressing issues of head trauma in the sport of soccer, while in reality, they are mirroring the legislative branch during a filibuster. This is when there is a prolonged debate over a topic so that nothing changes or can be done about that topic. This is what the owners of the soccer leagues and corporate deals want because instead of “wasting” their money on their player’s safety, they can just keep it the way it is right now by stalling. More needs to be done for the safety of all athletes, but especially in sports that aren’t thought of when head injuries are brought up.

https://poststar.com/sports/professional/cte-cases-in-soccer-players-raise-fresh-questions/article_464ccc66-7957-5904-b247-2e3ff3aacacc.html

Soccer, Health Officials Gather for Head Injury Summit Amid Criticism From CTE Researchers (usnews.com)

Soccer, health officials gather for head injury summit amid criticism from CTE researchers - ABC News (go.com)

A Closer Look at Biden’s New Homelessness Plan

Homeless Encampments in Los Angeles(via LA Times)

 President Biden recently unveiled a plan to tackle homelessness across the United States. The plan is to reduce homelessness in the US by 25% by 2025. By allotting money in the fiscal budget for this huge initiative, the Biden Administration seeks to reduce homelessness holistically and provide more permanent housing solutions for the diverse needs of the homeless population.

Homelessness has long been a major issue in the United States, with an estimated 580,000 individuals experiencing homelessness on any given night in 2020. The U.S. defines homeless as those housed in shelters or temporary/unstable housing situations. The Biden Administration found the most vulnerable populations to homelessness include veterans, people with disabilities, and those who identify as LGBTQ+. 

The COVID-19 pandemic only worsened the problem, with job losses and economic instability leading to more people becoming homeless or at risk of homelessness. The Biden administration has recognized the urgent need to address this issue and has put forth a plan to reduce homelessness and improve access to affordable housing. To combat the growing issue during the pandemic, the federal government invested $70 billion towards the homelessness problem back in 2020.

Biden's recent strategy for combating the issue of homelessness has outlined a series of objectives to tackle this widespread problem. The plan entails the expansion of existing programs and a boost in funding for initiatives like the Housing Choice Voucher Program, which aids individuals in securing secure and dependable housing. Strengthening various government agencies, such as The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Social Security Administration (SSA), and HHS, will also contribute to enhanced research and strategic allocation of resources. By investing in these social services, individuals can acquire and maintain steady employment while accessing necessary medical assistance.

Moreover, the strategy emphasizes the importance of targeting vulnerable populations at higher risk of homelessness. This includes allocating additional financial support to assist families with children and focusing on regions with significant homeless populations like Los Angeles and Houston.

Similar to any political endeavor, there exist skeptics who harbor reservations regarding Biden's recent strategy to combat homelessness. Some critics contend that the plan's emphasis on affordable housing is excessively narrow and disregards the underlying causes of homelessness, such as mental health challenges, addiction, and poverty. Moreover, critics question the plan's heavy reliance on federal funding, asserting that it may prove insufficient in effectively tackling the crisis. They propose that a comprehensive approach involving federal, state, and private funding is imperative to make substantial strides in reducing homelessness. Additionally, certain critics express concerns about the potential displacement of communities in regions where affordable housing is being developed. They argue that these developments might precipitate gentrification, consequently displacing those already grappling with housing insecurity.

 

While it is valid to harbor concerns regarding Biden's plan, it is crucial to acknowledge that it represents a stride forward in addressing the homelessness crisis. The plan will inevitably undergo modifications and adjustments during its implementation, and it is incumbent upon all of us to persistently advocate for policies and initiatives that prioritize the most vulnerable members of our communities.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/18/politics/white-house-announces-all-inside-program/index.html

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/05/18/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-initiative-to-tackle-unsheltered-homelessness/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-releases-plan-reduce-homelessness-numbers-match-pre-pandemic-rcna62370

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-01-10/county-state-of-emergency-homelessness

CIA's Video Outreach Campaign for Recruitment of Russian Hackers

 

A screenshot of the CIA's video(via CNN)

A video released by the CIA has created buzz on the internet, as they are aiming to appeal to and recruit hackers from Russia to aid the U.S. in ending the Ukraine war. The video, originally released on Russian news site Telegraph, has also gone viral on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. With this unique recruitment campaign from the CIA emerges, its positive and negative implications must be examined.

This initiative is a component of the CIA's wider plan to improve its cybersecurity defenses, particularly

against Russian hacking attempts in the wake of the Russia Ukraine conflict.

A fictitious hacker dubbed "Yuri," who is searching for fresh possibilities and challenges, is featured in the

video, alongside a statement urging viewers to join the CIA's cybersecurity team appears at the end of the

video. With the use of this video campaign, the CIA intends to appeal to skilled Russian hackers through

an ethos-driven plot. All in all, the CIA hopes to appeal to Russians who don't support the war on Ukraine,

and want to help the US in putting a stop to it.

This campaign could have potentially beneficial outcomes, as Russian hackers have a reputation for their

expertise in cyber warfare. By integrating new tactics and strategies through this recruitment, the CIA could

gain valuable insight in the process. From another standpoint, the US. may be able to improve their cyber

relations with these hackers by offering them an anonymous and safe way to partner up and protect

American interests. Russian hackers have a long standing negative stereotype in the US. for good reason,

this may be a strategic time to showcase the skills and talents of these individuals, and humanize the

hackers as they help aid the US.

This proposition from the CIA has concerned many people, as questions have been brought up of the safety risks of recruiting Russian hackers, notorious for meddling with past elections in the states. Russia and the US. have engaged in cyber warfare for years, and this new campaign could lead to an escalation of fresh hostilities. There is also a risk of the CIA inadvertently aiding criminal or terrorist groups who have Russian Hackers in their ranks. By actively seeking out and recruiting skilled hackers, the CIA may inadvertently create a market for their services. The safety of the hackers who decide to join the CIA should also be examined, as Russia has a long standing history of aggressively targeting those it perceives as enemies of the state.

This CIA strategy may prove to be a smart move in terms of gaining an advantage over Russia and possibly protect the cybersecurity of data in the United States. However, there are so many risks that come with seeking a partnership with Russian hackers, of a country that has poor relations with the US. The question still remains on whether the CIA's attempt to appeal to disillusioned Russians in the wake of the Ukraine war will be a success, or increase tensions in the long run.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/15/politics/cia-russia-spy-recruitment-video/index.html

https://www.whio.com/news/local/cia-launches-video-recruit-russian-spies-follows-fbis-footsteps/LWJS237LTFFLZHWYHKCJBST75Q/

https://www.pcgamer.com/russian-hackers-are-using-winrar-as-a-cyberweapon-against-ukraine/

https://www.businessinsider.com/cia-launched-telegram-channel-video-recruit-russia-officials-as-spies-2023-5

The U.S. Debt Limit and the Possibility of a Default

The US could run out of money and default on its obligations as early as June 1st if Congress does not address the issue by either raising or suspending the debt limit. The debt ceiling sets a legal limit for how much money the US can borrow, and it is currently sitting at $31 trillion dollars.

The US had originally hit the debt cap back in January earlier this year when Biden adopted special budgetary maneuvers to buy Congress time to either raise or suspend the limit. The pressure of a June deadline comes from April tax receipts that came in weaker than expected.

It has been shown in the past that waiting until the last minute to raise or suspend the debt limit can have negative impacts on consumer and business confidence, raise borrowing costs, and damage the credit score of the US. Defaulting would also raise unemployment rates and bring the US back into a recession

Recent timetable estimations place pressure on President Biden and House Republicans to come to an agreement. Previously, under Donald Trump's presidency, the Republicans have raised the debt ceiling without conditions, but now with Biden as the president, they are utilizing potential crisis as a political tool. The Republican majority house has passed a bill to raise the debt limit by $1.5 trillion dollars, but it is packaged with spending cuts and other measures that would repeal some of President Biden's recent legislative accomplishments which Democrats would likely not support.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/01/politics/debt-ceiling-yellen-congress-default/index.html 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1c3XSHNCDNU&ab_channel=CBSNews 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/us/politics/debt-limit-date-janet-yellen.html 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/05/01/congress-debt-limit-deadline-biden-mccarthy/ 

https://realeconomy.rsmus.com/what-would-happen-if-the-government-defaults-on-its-debt/

AI. Are we ready for it?

 It’s been 30 years since the World Wide Web was released to the public. At that time, listeners tuning into Morning Edition heard about a futuristic idea that could profoundly change their lives. "Imagine being able to communicate at-will with 10 million people all over the world," NPR's Neal Conan said. "Imagine having direct access to catalogs of hundreds of libraries as well as the most up-to-date news, business and weather reports. Imagine being able to get medical advice or gardening advice immediately from any number of experts. This is not a dream," he continued. "It's internet."

The internet has become an integral part of our lives. Whether it’s sourcing information for a school essay, purchasing products from Amazon, or watching a movie on Netflix, there are many benefits to our lives because of the internet: it has put the world at our fingertips. However, we are all still grappling with how to use it in healthy and productive ways. Whether it’s too much screen time, disturbing content, or algorithms that lead us down rabbit holes of misinformation, many of us have not found the right life balance with the internet.

And now, to add to the fray, we’re rapidly developing and entering an era of Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI systems are able to ingest massive amounts of training data and analyze it for correlations and patterns to make predictions about future states. This makes AI a potentially very powerful tool for positive things like helping us cure cancer or find solutions for climate change. However, many fear that this same tool can be used in very harmful ways.

This past week, Geoffrey Hinton, who has been called the ‘Godfather of AI’, left his role at Google so he can freely speak out about the potential dangers. He is concerned that AI’s current progression will be detrimental to our current society as no one truly knows the extent of what it’s capable of. Additionally, there is a competition between companies creating AI, where the aim is to release and improve the software in order to outcompete other organizations. The downside to this is the sacrifice of time and testing put into place in order to prioritize speed.

“It is hard to see how you can prevent the bad actors from using it for bad things,” Hinton said in an interview with The New York Times. “The idea that this stuff could actually get smarter than people — a few people believed that.” Many thought that this new era of technology wouldn’t be around for another half century, yet it is already being incorporated into our lives. While the theory of AI growing to be smarter than humans is merely theoretical, there are still more current issues at hand, such as job loss and privacy concerns, along with large amounts of misinformation on the internet – how will we be able to determine what is real and what is created by AI?

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/30/1172276538/world-wide-web-internet-anniversary

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/01/tech/geoffrey-hinton-leaves-google-ai-fears/index.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/artificial-intelligence-pioneer-leaves-google-warns-technologys-future-rcna82242

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/technology/ai-google-chatbot-engineer-quits-hinton.html

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Signs 6-Week Abortion Ban (Shhh … maybe no one will notice)

 Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who is widely expected to announce a 2024 run for the White house, signed into law a measure banning most abortions after six weeks in the Sunshine State. However, while signing SB 300 just hours after being passed by the Legislature, he waited until after 11 pm to publicly announce that he had done so.

Why the lack of fanfare? Because DeSantis is keenly aware that polling within his State shows that a majority in both parties oppose a six-week abortion ban. A University of North Florida poll in March “found 75% of 1,452 respondents said they either somewhat or strongly opposed the six-week ban. That included 61% of Republicans.” Nationally, Pew Research Center finds that “about six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases”.

The Florida governor is also aware of the large backlash that the overturning of Roe v. Wade has received, and how women’s reproductive rights have become a central issue for a majority of the country. Most women only find out they’re pregnant by the 5th or 6th week of pregnancy, meaning that for a lot of women in Florida, abortion will no longer be a viable option.

When asked about the policy, DeSantis is reported to have “appeared uncharacteristically tepid on the bill.” He has said, “We welcome pro-life legislation”; not exactly shouting about the new bill from the rooftops.

So, if and when Mr. DeSantis announces his presidential candidacy, he knows SB 300, the Heartbeat Protection Act, will be a setback when trying to win over the general electorate. No wonder he wants to keep it on the down-low.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/ron-desantis-signs-6-week-abortion-ban-law-florida-rcna78989

https://www.unf.edu/uploadedFiles/aa/coas/porl/UNF%20PORL%20Press%20Release%202-22-22.pdf

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/06/13/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-abortion-should-be-legal-in-all-or-most-cases-2/

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/14/1169933395/florida-gov-desantis-signs-6-week-abortion-ban-bill

Sudan Conflict: What it Means for the U.S.

Foreigners evacuating from Khartoum, Sudan. (AP)

Since April 15, Sudan has been caught up in a raging conflict for power between the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). While the U.S. embassy was closed off and all diplomats and military personnel were evacuated, there were thousands of registered U.S. citizens still left in Sudan, some of whom do not want to leave. The U.S. received some criticism of this inaction despite technically having "no legal obligation to evacuate citizens" and having relayed constant warnings over the years concerning the political state of Sudan; still, the U.S., along with African and Arab nations, the United Nations, and other countries, called for cease-fires in order to allow for citizens and Sudanese to flee. Currently, the U.S. is hoping to extend the U.S.-brokered 72-hour ceasefire, which ends today, in order to hold out for what could be the last chance for evacuation.

However, there is a lot on the line beyond these mass evacuations, as the outcome of the violence in Sudan has international implications. The U.S. has long supported Sudan in the hopes of democracy and stability for the country, recently providing more than $288 million in humanitarian aid in Sudan earlier this year and developing their relations through counter-terrorism cooperation. Susan Stigant, running the Africa programs at the U.S. Institute of Peace, says, "Having a stable Sudan that looks to the United States as a partner, a core partner, that's incredibly strategic." But these hopes for democracy have flown out the window as the two powers, Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (Sudan's de-facto ruler with support of SAF) and Gen Mohamed Hamden Dagalo, aka Hemedti (warlord followed by RSF), who previously worked together to stage the coup d'etat of former autocratic President Omar al-Bashir, broke out into a power struggle, neither of whom claims to have started it. The problem is that Sudan's location possesses a particular importance: lying between the Red Sea, the Sahel, and the Horn of Africa, there is threat of conflict and instability spilling across these borders. The United States Institute of Peace also foresees that "vested interests in Sudan may be tempted to throw their weight behind [either the SAF or the RSF]" and with Russia's interest in a potential base on the Red Sea, the situation is all the more precarious. 

While America takes on strong foundations of democracy, it is important to acknowledge the vastly different forms of government and policy of other countries. Though Sudan has been pushed by three presidents as a foreign policy priority, after decades of conflict and with the current ongoing power struggle with no means of compromise in sight, a democratic transition grows increasingly difficult and proves the futility of following political over constitutional interests.

https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2023/0428/Fleeing-Sudan-Evacuation-challenge-tests-nations-values?icid=rss

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/27/1172123699/sudan-conflict-explained

https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/04/whats-behind-fighting-sudan

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/u-s-carries-out-1st-evacuation-of-american-citizens-from-sudan-conflict

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2023-04-28/explainer-what-is-happening-in-sudan-and-how-does-it-affect-global-politics

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/25/a-tinderbox-with-no-easy-off-ramps-what-the-sudan-conflict-means-for-the-world.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-34083964

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/sudan-violence-explainer-1.6812990

https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/feb-16-2023-united-states-provides-more-288-million-additional-humanitarian-assistance-south-sudan#:~:text=The%20United%20States%2C%20through%20the,malnutrition%20since%20independence%20in%202011.

https://www.state.gov/evacuation-efforts-of-u-s-citizens-from-sudan/

Fox News Severs Ties With Tucker Carlson

 

Tucker Carlson Tonight

In the fourteen years of Tucker Carlson's career with Fox News, he had emerged to host a top-rated cable program, Tucker Carlson Tonight, and established an influential role for himself as a figurehead within the conservative party. However, on Monday, April 24, following a major defamation case last week in which Fox News settled with Dominion for $787.5 million, Fox News fired Tucker Carlson. 

This news came as a bit of a surprise considering the success Carlson garnered through his years at Fox News. He had consistently attracted a viewership of three million: popularity that propelled him to greater political heights. While his absence may leave the Fox audience shaken, many perspectives see this end in a different light, as, in 2022, the New York Times had been critical of "what may be the most racist show in the history of cable news." 

At the beginnings of Tucker Carlson Tonight, Carlson had latched onto populist ideals and the rising era of Trumpism. Throughout his time as anchorman, his rhetoric brought viewers into Fox News, in which can be described, as in an interview between Amna Nawaz from PBS and Nick Confessore of The New York Times put it: "weaponizing fears and grievances of his audience...taking a white nationalist conspiracy theory and putting it on the air on TV's top rated cable show." While Carlson had always considered himself a voice of clarity and truth, his populist topics targeted "immigrants, political correctness, the Black Lives Matter movement, Democrats, Hollywood, an amorphous elite class, and LGBT people," through such comments as "call[ing] it 'soulless' and 'craven' to support Black Lives Matter movement" according to Kayla Epstein and Madeline Halpert of BBC News. Eventually this behavior, that had once led to success, became his downfall. After spreading false theories about the attack on the U.S. Capitol in which he targeted Trump supporter, Ray Epps, as an FBI agent who started the riot, a legal demand was sent to Fox News demanding a retraction of the statements. Through text messages it was uncovered that Carlson hated Donald Trump "passionately," despite his hypocritical amplification of misinformation and false conspiracy theories during the 2020 election, which had reigned in Pro-Trump viewers. Though he cites his First Amendment rights as a means to express his ideals, his excuses only seem to further diminish his lack of credibility and sensibility. This incriminating evidence and his overall disillusioned behavior most likely led to the loss within the defamation case and eventual loss of his position at Fox News. 

In this way, Fox News demonstrates the state of political polarization in the U.S. today, which grows increasingly divided due to extreme media presences such as Tucker Carlson. While Carlson represented a further shift towards more extreme right-wing ideals promoted by Fox News, it is obvious that he pushed too far, becoming too problematic even following the success he brought to Fox News. Firing Tucker Carlson can be seen, thusly, as a means of reparations and an attempt to deviate the perception of media today from political extremes. However, the elimination of one important figurehead from reaching a media platform is far from shifting the two party dynamic of this country; the U.S. may already be driven too far to different political extremes and one has to question: why did Fox News truly decide to oust Tucker Carlson? Or, more so, why had it taken so long? 

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/24/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/26/1172113895/with-carlsons-departure-will-fox-tone-down-some-of-its-far-right-rhetoric#:~:text=Carlson's%20rhetoric%20has%20been%20one,that%20makes%20him%20pretty%20powerful.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/30/us/tucker-carlson-gop-republican-party.html

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/tucker-carlsons-influence-and-his-increasingly-extreme-views

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65381815

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/25/politics/tucker-carlson-what-matters/index.html

https://www.inquirer.com/entertainment/tv/tucker-carlson-fox-news-fired-replacement-host-20230424.html