by tyler | Mar 27, 2023 | CNN, opinions
Utah’s Republican governor, Spencer Cox, recently signed two bills into law that sharply restrict children’s use of social media platforms. Under the legislation, which takes effect next year, social media companies have to verify the ages of all users in the state, and children under age 18 have to get permission from their parents to have accounts.
Parents will also be able to access their kids’ accounts, apps won’t be allowed to show children ads, and accounts for kids won’t be able to be used between 10:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. without parental permission.
It’s about time. Social networks in the United States have become potentially incredibly dangerous for children, and parents can no longer protect our kids without the tools and safeguards this law provides. While Cox is correct that these measures won’t be “foolproof,” and what implementing them actually looks like remains an open question, one thing is clear: Congress should follow Utah’s lead and enact a similar law to protect every child in this country.
One of the most important parts of Utah’s law is the requirement for social networks to verify the ages of users. Right now, most apps ask users their ages without requiring proof. Children can lie and say they’re older to avoid some of the features social media companies have created to protect kids — like TikTok’s new setting that asks 13- to 17-year-olds to enter their passwords after they’ve been online for an hour, as a prompt for them to consider whether they want to spend so much time on the app.
While critics argue that age verification allows tech companies to collect even more data about users, let’s be real: These companies already have a terrifying amount of intimate information about us. To solve this problem, we need a separate (and comprehensive) data privacy law. But until that happens, this concern shouldn’t stop us from protecting kids.
One of the key components of this legislation is allowing parents access to their kids’ accounts. By doing this, the law begins to help address one of the biggest dangers kids face online: toxic content. I’m talking about things like the 2,100 pieces of content about suicide, self-harm and depression that 14-year-old Molly Russell in the UK saved, shared or liked in the six months before she killed herself last year.
I’m also talking about things like the blackout challenge — also called the pass-out or choking challenge — that has gone around social networks. In 2021, four children 12 or younger in four different states all died after trying it.
“Check out their phones,” urged the father of one of these young victims. “It’s not about privacy — this is their lives.”
Of course, there are legitimate privacy concerns to worry about here, and just as kids’ use of social media can be deadly, social apps can also be used in healthy ways. LGBTQ children who aren’t accepted in their families or communities, for example, can turn online for support that is good for their mental health. Now, their parents will potentially be able to see this content on their accounts.
I hope groups that serve children who are questioning their gender and sexual identities and those that work with other vulnerable youth will adapt their online presences to try to serve as resources for educating parents about inclusivity and tolerance, too. This is also a reminder that vulnerable children need better access to mental health services like therapy — they’re way too young to be left to their own devices to seek out the support they need online.
But, despite these very real privacy concerns, it’s simply too dangerous for parents not to know what our kids are seeing on social media. Just as parents and caregivers supervise our children offline and don’t allow them to go to bars or strip clubs, we have to ensure they don’t end up in unsafe spaces on social media.
The other huge challenge the Utah law helps parents overcome is the amount of time kids are spending on social media. A 2022 survey by Common Sense Media found that the average 8- to 12-year-old is on social media for 5 hours and 33 minutes per day, while the average 13- to 18 year-old spends 8 hours and 39 minutes every day. That’s more time than a full time-job.
The American Academy of Pediatrics warns that lack of sleep is associated with serious harms in children — everything from injuries to depression, obesity and diabetes. So parents in the US need to have a way to make sure their kids aren’t up on TikTok all night (parents in China don’t have to worry about this because the Chinese version of TikTok doesn’t allow kids to stay on for more than 40 minutes and isn’t useable overnight).
Of course, Utah isn’t an authoritarian state like China, so it can’t just turn off kids’ phones. That’s where this new law comes in requiring social networks to implement these settings. The tougher part of Utah’s law for tech companies to implement will be a provision requiring social apps to ensure they’re not designed to addict kids.
Social networks are arguably addictive by nature, since they feed on our desires for connection and validation. But hopefully the threat of being sued by children who say they’ve been addicted or otherwise harmed by social networks — an outcome for which this law provides an avenue — will force tech companies to think carefully about how they build their algorithms and features like bottomless feeds that seem practically designed to keep users glued to their screens.
TikTok and Snap didn’t respond to requests for comment from CNN about Utah’s law, while a representative for Meta, Facebook’s parent company, said the company shares the goal to keep Facebook safe for kids but also wants it to be accessible.
Of course, if social networks had been more responsible, it probably wouldn’t have come to this. But in the US, tech companies have taken advantage of a lack of rules to build platforms that can be dangerous for our kids.
States are finally saying no more. In addition to Utah’s measures, California passed a sweeping online safety law last year. Connecticut, Ohio and Arkansas are also considering laws to protect kids by regulating social media. A bill introduced in Texas wouldn’t allow kids to use social media at all.
There’s nothing innocent about the experiences many kids are having on social media. This law will help Utah’s parents protect their kids. Parents in other states need the same support. Now, it’s time for the federal government to step up and ensure children throughout the country have the same protections as Utah kids.
Suicide & Crisis Lifeline: Call or text 988. The Lifeline provides 24/7, free and confidential support for people in distress, prevention and crisis resources for you and your loved ones, and best practices for professionals in the United States. En Español: Linea de Prevencion del Suidio y Crisis: 1-888-628-9454.
by tyler | Mar 27, 2023 | CNN, opinions
This weekend, we were reminded about a major reason that President Joe Biden soundly defeated Donald Trump in 2020.
At a campaign rally on Saturday, Trump demonstrated his usual egoism and selfishness, making everything about himself, while Biden put on display a full measure of the compassion and empathy that we have come to expect from our leaders when responding to a devastating disaster.
The president’s response to the devastating tornado in Mississippi that has claimed at least 26 lives was classic Biden. He released a statement Saturday expressing sympathy for those affected by the disaster, saying that he and First Lady Jill Biden “are praying for those who have lost loved ones in the devastating tornadoes in Mississippi and for those whose loved ones are missing.”
Of course, it’s not just what Biden said, it’s what he did: The President spoke by phone on Saturday to everyone from the FEMA Administrator and Mississippi officials to the Republican Gov. Tate Reeves to members of Congress from the deeply red state, almost all of whom are Republicans. They discussed the US government response to the devastation and his commitment to provide assistance, with the President offering “full federal support as communities recover from the effects of this storm.”
Reeves, while touring the destruction early Saturday, told reporters that he had already spoken to Biden that morning, adding that a federal emergency declaration to provide assistance to the state was already in the works.
“The president assured me that as soon as he got it, he would sign it,” Reeves said. And early Sunday, Biden did in fact sign an emergency disaster declaration to aid recovery and clean-up efforts, including federal funding grants for temporary housing.
Friday night’s tornado reached wind speeds estimated at 170 miles per hour, leaving behind jaw-dropping devastation. The mayor of Rolling Fork, Mississippi, which was flattened by the tornado, tragically summed up the extent of the destruction, saying that the “city is gone.”
US Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, a Republican who represents the state, on Saturday shared that Biden had called her earlier in the day, adding, “The president assured me he would expedite anything to help those in Mississippi.” Hyde-Smith added, “So we’re grateful.”
It’s hard to overlook the fact that Trump, when he was president made much less effort to be even handed about doling out aid to those in need from blue states during times of disaster.
The former president chose to hold his first 2024 presidential rally in Waco, Texas, a city which is marking 30 years since the 1993 standoff between the Branch Davidian religious extremist sect and the federal authorities. An FBI raid on the compound ultimately left 76 people dead, including 26 children.
Critics have slammed Trump’s decision to hold the event in the central Texas city: The weeks-long siege in Waco three decades ago has become a rallying cry for right wing, anti-government violence. But on Friday, while appearing on Newsmax, Trump side-stepped the criticism, instead talking about the expected crowd size at the following day’s campaign event.
The rally at the Waco Regional Airport was a return to the MAGA rallies reminiscent of Trump’s 2016 and 2020 campaigns, as the Republican field for the 2024 presidential race begins to take shape. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick of Texas, who spoke at the event, told attendees that he had urged Trump to hold the rally in Waco because it was centrally located and could attract Trump supporters from around the state – and that he had been utterly unaware of the 30th anniversary of the violent confrontation involving the Branch Davidians – an assertion that strains credulity.
Trump’s rally is what I view as the most anti-American start ever to a presidential campaign by a major party candidate.
Standing on stage, he placed his hand on his heart while the recording of a song, “Justice for All” played over the speakers. The soundtrack was performed by a choir of people imprisoned for their roles in the January 6 terrorist attack at the US Capitol, interspersed with a recording of Trump saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Footage from the insurrection was played on a giant screen behind the former president.
A few minutes into the hour-and-a-half-long speech, Trump did make brief mention of the tornado in Mississippi stating, “Before we begin, I also want to express our sadness to and send our prayers to everyone in Mississippi and Alabama who has been touched by the devastating tornadoes,” adding, that “we love you all.”
He then quickly pivoted to a rhetorical attack on the “corrupt, rotten and sinister forces trying to destroy America” and repeated the lie of “rigged” elections. As The New York Times reported: “Trump devoted long stretches of his speech to his own legal jeopardy rather than his vision for a second term, casting himself as a victim of ‘weaponization’ of the justice system.”
Obviously, Biden, as president, has an ability to help people that Trump does not. But Trump’s hands are not tied: He did find a way, after all, to visit the site of the Norfolk Southern toxic train derailment last month in East Palestine, Ohio, when it suited his political interests.
Yet, in the aftermath of a devastating storm that devastated parts of a region where he enjoys broad support, Trump was mostly focused on what he always has been since he entered the world of politics: Trump.
Shortly before the close of his speech in Waco, the former president – who faces potential criminal charges in various jurisdictions – rattled off a list of those he believes to be his political opponents from “the fake news media” to “RINOs” (Republicans in name only) to President Biden. He then vowed to his supporters, “We will liberate America from these villains and tyrants who are looking to destroy our country.”
By contrast, President’s Biden statement closed with the words, “To those impacted by these devastating storms, and to the first responders and emergency personnel working to help their fellow Americans: we will do everything we can to help,” adding, “We will be there as long as it takes. We will work together to deliver the support you need to recover.”
Again, this – if we needed it – is a reminder of why Joe Biden is in the White House, and why Donald Trump was the first president since George H. W. Bush in 1992 to lose re-election.
by tyler | Mar 26, 2023 | CNN, opinions
The Platte River flows eastward through Nebraska at depths far too shallow for shipping. “In some places it is a mile wide and three-quarters of an inch deep,” the writer Edgar Nye said in 1889, coining a phrase still in use.
Last week, as former President Donald Trump’s legal troubles continued to mount, so did a fundamental question about the 2024 Republican presidential campaign. Is Trump’s support in the GOP rock-solid, as suggested by the many party figures who rushed to his defense and the fans who attended his rally Saturday – or is it only a mile wide and an inch deep?
If prosecutors in New York City, Atlanta and Washington bring any charges against him – and there’s no assurance they will – would it strengthen his support or complicate and potentially weaken his campaign for the Republican nomination?
So far, Trump is leading the pack in early primary polling and could even see his numbers grow if he is arrested – as he predicted last weekend. That arrest has not happened.
“The danger facing Republicans is that they will either have to bind themselves even tighter to the mast of an intensely polarizing figure, or risk splitting the party by not coming out in his defense,” wrote Patrick T. Brown. “Navigating between those pitfalls will require some willingness to criticize Trump,” he added.
“The more daring Republicans may try to ding Trump for his seamy behavior even while attacking the politicized prosecution. One of Trump’s presumed rivals for the nomination, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, took a not-so-veiled shot at the former president’s behavior,” Brown noted.
“I don’t know what goes into paying hush money to a porn star to secure silence over some type of alleged affair,” DeSantis said even as he accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of “pursuing a political agenda and weaponizing the office.”
If Trump is prosecuted, he could reap short-term gains, wrote Republican strategist Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal. “An indictment would likely provoke many MAGA Republicans to rally around Mr. Trump, at least temporarily. His standing in 2024 GOP primary polls might improve as a shoddy case from a left-wing district attorney is likely to anger partisans,” but Rove added, “Mr. Trump’s strategy appears to focus exclusively on winning the votes of true believers. But many are suffering Trump fatigue and there weren’t enough of them to re-elect him last time.”
“The most probable result of his current ranting and raving will be to convince more Republicans that he’s unelectable.”
Still, Trump “thrives on media attention,” observed Julian Zelizer. “This is his major weapon in political combat. He loves to dominate the news cycle, redirect national conversations, lash out at his enemies and eclipse all other issues.”
“It doesn’t seem to matter that much of the attention is negative. As president, reality television star and real estate mogul, Trump has cast himself as a fighter who has warded off individuals and institutions that he claims are out to get him. This is an essential part of his political persona: the aggrieved public figure who is at perpetual war with the world around him.”
On Saturday, Trump held his first rally since announcing he is running for president again. The location: Waco, Texas.
As Nicole Hemmer pointed out, “the rally coincides with the 30th anniversary of a siege just outside of Waco between religious extremists, a sect known as the Branch Davidians led by David Koresh, and the federal government. The 51-day standoff began in February 1993 and ended in mid-April with a fire that killed 76 people, including 25 children … For three decades, the city’s name has been a touchstone for groups who see the federal government not just as a problem but as the central enemy in a slow-rolling civil war.”
“In choosing Waco as the kickoff site for his campaign rallies, Trump has signaled that his courtship of extremist groups will continue, and that he sees his role as a pivotal figure in the far-right mythos as central to his efforts to retake the presidency,” Hemmer observed. A spokesperson for Trump said Waco was selected because it is conveniently located “to have as many supporters from across the state and in neighboring states attend this historic rally.”
For more on politics:
Jill Filipovic: Florida Republicans’ stunning bout of misogyny and ignorance
Arick Wierson: What the rest of the world realizes about prosecuting former presidents
Geoff Duncan: Trump left Georgia’s GOP in ruins – and now faces the consequences
Dean Obeidallah: Trump’s risky call for protests
Former President Barack Obama did it 12 times. Trump did it 10 times. More than halfway through his term, President Joe Biden finally cast his first veto last week, rejecting a bill that would have banned managers of retirement funds from considering environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns in choosing investments.
Witold Henisz, who directs the ESG initiative at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in favor of considering such factors: “the logic here is straightforward and anything but political. The value of some assets depends, for instance, on the degree of global warming or our success in transitioning to clean energy.”
The problem with ESG investing, observed Sanjai Bhagat, professor of finance at the University of Colorado, is that “research has found that investor returns are generally lower from ESG investing compared to non-ESG (or traditional) investing.” The bill Biden vetoed “would have required retirement fund managers to act as true fiduciaries of middle-class American retirees — focusing solely on financial returns of their investments and not on environmental and social issues.”
Actor Jason Sudeikis not only plays the character Ted Lasso, he helped develop the quirky, feel-good show of the same name. On Monday, Sudeikis and other cast members showed up at the White House to talk about mental illness. Some Republicans criticized Biden for taking part in the public relations venture.
“The criticism feels out of touch,” wrote Sara Stewart. “Yes, Ted Lasso is a fictional character and yes, ‘Ted Lasso’ is a comedy; it’s also one of Apple’s most popular shows, with what Politico has referred to as a ‘strange bipartisan appeal’ that’s led to its being mentioned frequently by politicians from both sides of the aisle. And judging from White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre’s reaction, the cast’s appearance Monday drew a record number of reporters to the press room and yielded a ton of coverage, all of which included Sudeikis’ comments about mental health…”
“It’s not the substantive action we need to make mental health care widely accessible. Yet. But it’s still a fairly savvy way to get a wide range of Americans thinking and talking about it, which seems like a decent step forward.”
Protests are roiling France over President Emmanuel Macron’s decision to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64. “From the far-right acolytes of Marine Le Pen to the far left of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s La France Insoumise (unbowed) party,” David A. Andelman noted, “the political sharks are all smelling blood … even though the next elections aren’t for another four years.”
The impact can be seen on the streets: In addition to demonstrations against Macron, garbage collectors went on strike, and more than 7,000 tons of trash piled up in Paris.
But France, which spends almost twice as much of its GDP on pensions than the US, has a budget problem and reduced pension spending could help, Andelman wrote.
Catherine Poisson, a French native who teaches at Wesleyan University in Connecticut, wrote, “For those of us raised in French culture, work refers to a finite period of life lasting roughly 40 years. And when that work is done, you are still young enough and fit enough to enjoy the best of what life has to offer. It’s the norm that retirement years — or decades actually — are spent traveling, caring for grandchildren or picking up new hobbies.”
Shou Zi Chew, chief executive of the immensely popular social network TikTok, failed to persuade members of Congress Thursday that his platform is safe for Americans, despite the company’s ties to China.
Alex Stamos, former chief security officer of Facebook, wrote that “national security concerns about TikTok are justified. ByteDance, like any other Chinese company, is subject to laws that compel extreme compliance with the interests and dictums of the state. There is no First Amendment or independent judiciary to protect ByteDance executives if they decided to deny China’s requests. President Xi has made that clear by taking direct action against China’s richest and most powerful CEOs.’
TikTok knows “a huge amount about the demographics, interests, location, contacts and devices of its 1.5 billion users.” But Stamos argued that the problem is bigger than TikTok.
“There is no US law clearly governing the access that Beijing or Moscow-based employees of any tech or social media company have to the personal data of US citizens that use their services. And, there is currently no federal law discouraging the overcollection of critical data or personally identifiable information.
“It’s time for Congress to finally pass a comprehensive privacy law.”
Privacy isn’t the only issue posed by social media. A study released last week found that the number of Twitter posts containing antisemitic language doubled after Elon Musk took over Twitter in October.
“Researchers tried to get a comment from Twitter,” Frida Ghitis wrote, “but the response was an email showing a poop emoji. That’s the same response Musk sent after another study, back in December, found an explosion of racist tweets after he bought the platform.”
If social media feels too overwhelming, try what Tess Taylor did: “a deep social media unplug.”
“Time online was making me bored, anxious and grumpy. I was falling down attention rabbit-holes, scrolling for boots when I actually wanted to play Uno with my kids. I was buying stuff I can’t afford, didn’t need and didn’t even desire … I felt vulnerable and exposed to random fury: you might go online to like someone’s new baby and suddenly be swept up in the day’s melee, like being slammed into rush hour traffic.”
Taylor used a bit of her offline time to chat with poet Julia Guez. She “had some of the best rules for social media use of anyone I talked to,” Taylor wrote.
Guez’s rules: “Never in the morning, never in bed, never before bed, never in the bedroom. Mostly on the train, in order to find out other people’s good news, and amplify it, and sometimes to then to write a letter or actually call a friend who you’ve seen post something and check in on them.”
Lanhee Chen: The SVB collapse doesn’t have to be the first in a chain of many
Deborah Carr: Rupert Murdoch is tying the knot (again). Why the blowback is misplaced
Mitra Salasel: My father’s experience with frontotemporal dementia makes me grieve for Bruce Willis’ family
Justin Hansford and Shaq Al-Hijaz: As GOP governors obscure Black history, let’s finally tell the truth about Marcus Garvey
Scott Faber: We’ve been drinking dangerous chemicals for far too long
Revs. William J. Barber II and Liz Theoharis: America, stop grinding the faces of the poor
Mike Chinoy: The ‘golden age’ for American journalists in China is over
Chandelis Duster: My endometriosis pain caused me to make a huge decision
AND…
For 31 years, the Labrador retriever ruled the dog kingdom as America’s most popular breed. But now it has ceded that title to what Urmee Khan described as “a pint-sized, sedentary, furry gargoyle”—the French bulldog.
Khan shares her London abode with Bertie, one of the newly ennobled breed.
“It would be easy to dismiss French bulldogs, with their squidgy, cartoon faces and small squat bodies, as little more than a handbag accessory. Celebrities everywhere are photographed toting a baby Frenchie in a shoulder bag, or holding one at the end of an expensive designer leash.”
Why the new popularity? “In the post-Covid era, these more inward-looking times call for a pup that is less demanding, a pet whose company you can enjoy within the quiet and solace of your four walls.”
by tyler | Mar 25, 2023 | CNN, opinions
Like many others, I recently learned of actor Bruce Willis’ frontotemporal dementia diagnosis after his family issued a statement that circulated in the media. Unlike many others, I was clearing leftovers from my father’s memorial service when I read the news. I had buried my father, Behrooz, earlier in the week. The previous Saturday night in my childhood home, he had died with his hand in mine after losing a long battle with the very same disease. He was 64.
Thanks to Willis’ family shedding light on FTD, many are learning about this disease for the first time. But few people can comprehend its disastrous and destructive effects. The media has captured some of it: “A ‘heartbreaking’ disease.” “Devastating, prevalent and little understood … the cruelest disease you have never heard of.”
But my family has heard of it. We’ve spent the last five years living with it as we lost my father bit by bit, adapting to its many indignities, powerless as he lost first his impulse control, then his empathy, then his speech, then his mobility and, finally, the ability to swallow and the strength to keep his heart pumping. I know what’s coming for Willis – and his family. It’s something I would never wish on my worst enemy.
FTD is not Alzheimer’s. It can leave the memory intact for quite a while. In my father’s case, he never stopped recognizing his daughters’ faces, not even at the end. FTD impacts younger people, many of whom are in the prime of their lives. It introduces itself in pernicious ways. Some say the disease steals one’s very personhood and leaves behind nothing but shells of former selves in slowly deteriorating bodies.
My sister and I, my father’s main caregivers, chose to tend to him at home. In some ways we were lucky. Even in the midst of some of the more shocking periods of decline that came with his variant of FTD – such as a lack of inhibitions, paranoia, stilted speech (until language and his voice disappeared entirely) and an eerie lack of empathy or awareness if one of us was very sick – he never became violent as can happen for those with FTD. He never said an unkind word to my sister or me, never became dangerously agitated or threatening.
As an Iranian man raised as a Muslim, my father conveyed to us through his eyes and timid posture that he was painfully embarrassed and even ashamed when it came time for his two daughters to take over his bathing and hygiene alongside the revolving door of in-home aides we struggled to keep. But with gentle pleading, he let us care for him as lovingly as we could.
Because Iranians value family above all, my father had been in frequent, almost daily, contact with my sister and me throughout our adult lives. So we noticed his personality changes early enough that he never gambled away his life savings, lost his home, fell prey to a predatory scam, got into a dangerous accident, got fired from a job or put the lives of his family in danger – all things that can happen to people with FTD early on as the parts of the brain responsible for judgment atrophy.
Many families aren’t so lucky. Part of the horrifying nature of FTD is that the early symptoms can look like mental illness and addiction, or can simply alienate someone from their loved ones before they receive a diagnosis and the care they need.
An FTD diagnosis is akin to a death sentence. There is no preventing it. There is no stopping it. There is no slowing it. People with FTD typically die within six to eight years of its onset, usually from vulnerability to infections or accidents. To be given this diagnosis is to open a door into a hellish world where medical science, as well as the health and caregiving systems, seem to collectively shrug their shoulders, shake their heads and in so many words say to patients and their loved ones, “There’s nothing we can do for you.”
Neurologists can’t give a timeline. Even if they’re experienced with the family of dementias and cognitive degeneration that comprise FTD, they can’t determine which symptoms will appear next or when. Even the most well-intentioned providers end up giving patients the bewildering “diagnose and adios” treatment.
According to the Association for Frontotemporal Degeneration, there at least six known clinical trials that are active for disease-modifying drugs. There is one longitudinal study actively recruiting patients and families, the ALLFTD Study, conducted by a consortium of researchers and funded by the National Institutes of Health, including input from patient and caregiver advocates like the Remember Me podcast. But it’s currently only funded through 2025.
With the tragic announcement of a high-profile diagnosis like Willis’, this nightmarish disease is being focused on in a way it never has been before. As greater attention is paid to FTD and the havoc it wreaks on the lives of anyone it comes into contact with, the number of clinical trials and research studies should only grow. The time for greater attention – and, more important, action – is now.
It’s too late for my beloved father. On Friday, just as Iranians around the world were celebrating Nowruz (new year), my own loved ones gathered for Chehelom, the heart-wrenching traditional 40th day observance of mourning.
It’s too late for Bruce Willis – and I know all too well his family has a long, unspeakably painful road ahead of them.
But maybe there’s enough time for others. FTD is has about a 50% chance of being passed on to a child. If we are able to reach a breakthrough in treatment in the coming years, it may not be too late for my sister, for me, for Willis’ children and for the untold number of potential victims of frontotemporal dementia.
by tyler | Mar 25, 2023 | CNN, opinions
Billionaire media magnate Rupert Murdoch celebrated St. Patricks’ Day this year by proposing to his companion Ann Lesley Smith. (Spoiler alert: She said yes!) Instead of heart emojis and congratulatory wishes, though, Murdoch’s happy news sparked snide tweets and mocking memes. Why the snark? Smith will be Murdoch’s fifth wife, and his divorce from model Jerry Hall was finalized just seven months ago.
But there’s another reason for the chilly reception: ageism – those negative stereotypes that people hold about old age. Murdoch is 92 and his bride-to-be is 66. Naysayers’ posts equated Murdoch’s age with death (“Next ceremony will be a funeral”), impotence (“Hope springs eternal even when body parts don’t”) and a repulsive physique (memes of toothless ogres and wrinkled walruses). These cynical reactions raise a genuinely important question: Is it ever too late to find love?
No. As a sociologist who studies older adult relationships, I reacted to Murdoch’s engagement news by thinking: “Good for them!” Older people, generally considered to be 65-plus, are just as capable of falling in love as any other adults. Why shouldn’t they fully commit to spending the rest of their lives – however long that may be – with their new love?
Yet later-life marriages aren’t completely the same as those undertaken at earlier ages. My second reaction to their announcement was “Proceed with caution.” Older adults’ new romances raise complex legal and financial challenges – especially for those previously married – and it is foolhardy for couples to be so blinded by love they close their eyes to the difficult decisions that confront them.
Overall, however, there are so many benefits to being happily coupled in old age that it’s something to be celebrated. Murdoch’s engagement is an opportunity to understand why new romances, whether remarriages or living together without a change in legal status, are so popular with older adults and how these couples can best be supported – and protected.
The desire for companionship doesn’t fade with age; it actually grows stronger with each passing year. Older people often prefer to spend their time with a small circle of loved ones rather than a large group of casual acquaintances. Most older adults consider their romantic partner their closest confidante, companion and helpmate. And with the Covid-19 pandemic shedding new light on the dire consequences of older adults’ loneliness and social isolation, there is clear value in romantic partnerships in the golden years.
Older adults also understand the benefits of marriage. Spouses’ pooled income and savings go further in covering costs of shared purchases like food, housing and vacations. Spouses help each other to stay healthy, reminding them to take their daily medications or nudging them to forego that second dessert. And they can be a sounding board for tough decisions and a shoulder to cry on during difficult moments.
Sex is another incentive. Despite tired stereotypes that older adults are uninterested in or incapable of having sex, many enjoy satisfying sex lives. More than two-thirds of men and nearly half of women ages 65-plus say sex is an important part of life. Of course, old age brings biological changes like dips in estrogen and testosterone levels, prostate problems, arthritis and other health problems that can make sexual intercourse difficult if not impossible, so older couples are creative, swapping intercourse for foreplay, oral sex or cuddling, for instance.
While people may raise eyebrows at Murdoch’s four divorces, rates of “gray divorce” – or divorcing after age 50 – have doubled since 1990. Unhappily married people in their 50s and 60s realize they have many healthy years ahead, and may wish to spend those years with a new partner who makes them happy.
Indeed, Americans are living longer than ever (despite a slight dip in life expectancy in recent years). They’re also more physically active. Effective medications for conditions ranging from high blood pressure to erectile dysfunction, the availability of high-tech hearing aids and improved outcomes for surgeries like knee and hip replacement enable many older people to live active and engaged lives. Those fortunate enough to have received a college education, worked in white-collar jobs (like being a media magnate) rather than physical labor, have access to good health care, benefit from “White privilege” and reside in safe, walkable neighborhoods are especially likely to enjoy long, healthy lives.
Over the course of that increased lifespan, the culture changed to deemphasize playing by traditional rules. Older adults, like so many others, are seeking personal fulfillment, including through relationships. Presently, about one-third of older adults repartner within a decade of their gray divorce. So millions of US older adults are in a second (or third, or fourth) marriage or committed romantic partnership.
That doesn’t mean gray marriage is all hearts and flowers. Most older married people will be a spousal caregiver at some point, helping with bathing, dressing, toileting and more. These tasks can be overwhelming, especially for dementia caregivers. Caregiving burdens are especially heavy for women, who are typically younger than their husbands and often have life-long experience caring for others.
The financial cost of care can also be staggering And while Murdoch and Smith are fantastically wealthy and can afford to pay whatever’s needed for professional caregivers, many well-off older couples struggle to find paid support given the dire shortage of home health aides and long-term care workers.
There are other financial – and legal – considerations as well, particularly if one or both spouses have been married before. Some grown children are opposed to their aged parents’ remarriage for fear that they will be disinherited, or that the new partner will take charge of end-of-life medical decisions that would otherwise be left to the children.
In some cases, remarried older adults risk losing government benefits such as Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income. In some states, spouses also are responsible for each other’s medical debt, which can be exorbitant, and may face income and estate tax increases combined with the loss of alimony or pension payments.
That’s why rising numbers of older adults are opting for cohabitation or exclusive dating relationships called “living apart together.” These arrangements can spare them messy legal complications.
Those who are still determined to tie the knot should revisit their estate planning and advance care planning documents before signing their marriage certificates. Prenuptial agreements are essential for protecting one’s own wealth. Some elder care lawyers encourage newlyweds – especially women – to draw up caregiver agreements detailing specifics of care to protect from onerous spousal caregiving.
Late-life romantic love isn’t for everyone. Many older adults are happily single, receiving companionship, love and support from friends and other family members. Conversely, some want desperately to remarry but can’t easily find a partner. Older women are particularly likely to stay single; they outnumber men due to men’s shorter lifespans and men tend to prefer younger partners.
Love is never easy, regardless of age. But older adults who follow both their heart and head can enjoy happy marriages until death they do part.
by tyler | Mar 24, 2023 | CNN, opinions
Something started changing in the United States a few years ago. One could almost taste the air of hostility that started wafting across the country. Prejudices that in the past might have been expressed in private are regularly blasted on social media. Conspiracy theories can now be heard on major networks. Promoters of hate can now dine with the powerful. And violence is on the rise.
In keeping with an ancient pattern, the evidence that something is wrong in society can be found in a surging wave of antisemitism, now confirmed by yet another study – this one released Thursday by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) – showing record levels of antisemitic incidents, getting worse at an accelerating rate.
A separate study has found that on one particular social media platform – guess which – antisemitic posting has grown exponentially.
Antisemitism is a complex problem, but the solutions are not a mystery. And for those who feel the problem is somebody else’s – after all, Jews make up only about 2% of the US population – history shows that when the virus of antisemitism infects a society, it can turn into a pandemic.
Something is rotten in America, but where is it coming from? Is it from irresponsible social media platforms chasing profits, from partisan “news” networks with little respect for the truth or from politicians seeking to bolster their electoral chances?
There’s no need to choose. These overlapping forces are harming the country and the evidence is visible in the data.
The ADL’s recent report found that antisemitic incidents reached their highest level in the US since the organization started keeping records in 1979. The number of incidents targeting Jews – from verbal insults to physical assaults – have almost tripled in six years.
They started climbing in 2016, when the political atmosphere shifted; when extremists started feeling empowered to chant “Jews will not replace us;” when a new president defended them and conspiracy theorists started expanding their audience. The country’s polarization, already intense, went into overdrive. But that’s only part of the story.
There’s social media, often a digital vehicle for hate, which last year became turbocharged by a change of ownership: Elon Musk bought Twitter, and the platform became an even more powerful conduit for antisemitism and other forms of hate.
A study by the nonpartisan Institute for Strategic Dialogue and CASM Technology, an organization that researches online hate speech and disinformation, used machine-learning tools to sort through Twitter posts and identify those containing antisemitic language. From June 1 to October 27, 2022, the day Musk bought Twitter, it found 6,200 posts per week that qualified as antisemitic. From that day until February, the number more than doubled to 12,700.
The study also found a surge in the number of newly-created accounts posting antisemitic content just after Musk took over.
Researchers tried to get a comment from Twitter, but the response was an email showing a poop emoji. That’s the same response Musk sent after another study, back in December, found an explosion of racist tweets after he bought the platform.
In November, Musk claimed that “hate speech impressions” had dropped, congratulating the Twitter team. But there’s no independent evidence that it happened, or that the team he was congratulating still exists. He has fired many of Twitter’s former employees, including content moderation staff. That was part of his effort to slash expenses after his costly purchase, open the platform to unpopular views – according to his claim to be a “free speech absolutist” – and rid the company of employees who criticized him.
As a platform, Twitter has become easier to use for nefarious purposes. After the Ohio train derailed spilling toxic materials, pro-Russian accounts used the incident to promote anti-American propaganda. Twitter’s new account “verification” system, open to anyone who pays $8 a month, enhanced the disinformation campaign’s credibility and reach.
Adding to the flames of hate, there’s television, where some networks have become purveyors of conspiracy theories and other lies. Fox News, the network whose owners admitted it knowingly “endorsed” lies, is another platform where antisemitic conspiracy theories have also found a home.
Rantings on social media and conspiracy theories spewed on television help fuel beliefs that can produce deadly violence in the real world.
The number of Americans who believe anti-Jewish conspiracy theories is exploding, doubling in the past couple of years to reach a 30-year high, according to an ADL survey released in January.
The responsibility for stopping this lies on everyone’s shoulders, from local and national government officials to community leaders and individuals.
Students everywhere should learn about the Holocaust. Most states don’t require it, and there’s evidence that a shockingly low number of young Americans even know basic facts about it. That should change. Young people, in particular, must understand the scale of what occurred and what brought about the murder of six million Jews in the middle of Europe.
Public safety agencies need to do a better job of identifying, reporting and protecting against hate crimes, including antisemitism. To do that, they need a commonly accepted definition of antisemitism. The International Holocaust Remembrance Association, an intergovernmental association to which the US belongs, has a concise definition:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
IHRA offers examples of antisemitism, including making “dehumanizing, demonizing or stereotypical allegations about Jews,” but also noting that certain types of criticism of Israel fall under the definition. Some have claimed – falsely – that the IHRA framing bars criticism of Israel. It specifically says that criticism of Israel “cannot be regarded as antisemitic” as long as Israel is not held to a different standard from other countries.
Local legislatures should empower their law enforcement agencies with a working definition of antisemitism to couple with strong hate crimes law.
Both political parties, Republicans and Democrats, must do a more forthright job of calling out antisemitism in their midst. No party is immune from it, from the bizarre rantings about “Jewish space lasers,” to the offensive claims saying support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins.”
It’s also time for Congress to tackle the jungle of hatred that has grown on social media. Owners and leaders of these platforms have a duty to prevent them from becoming recruiting grounds for extremists and bigots. That now-largely-shirked ethical responsibility must become a legal one, with penalties attached for negligence.
Last December, President Joe Biden established an interagency group to develop a national strategy to combat antisemitism. That was an important move. But government cannot do it all.
Individuals have a duty to call out antisemitism – just as they do any other kind of prejudice. Hatred burrows deep inside the psyche, then it shows itself when it feels safe.
It is everyone’s responsibility to make sure hatred never feels safe. It is everyone’s responsibility to help remove that air of hostility that has been poisoning America and make the United States a country that forcefully rejects prejudice.
