Flights Grounded at Boston's Logan Airport After JetBlue Plane Rolls Off Runway
The plane, JetBlue Flight 312, rolled into a grassy area off the runway, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Port Authority, Samantha Decker, said in a statement. There were no injuries, and passengers were being transported to the terminal, she said.
The runway will be closed while the aircraft is being assessed, Ms. Decker said, with a ground stop expected to be in place until 2 p.m. Eastern.
'No planes are currently taking off and aircraft coming to Boston are being held at origin airports,' she said. The stop could lift earlier 'depending on when the aircraft is removed from the airfield,' she added.
Photos of the plane shared online show the JetBlue plane parked in a grassy area, surrounded by emergency crews and trucks.
It was unclear what had caused the mishap involving the flight, which departed at 8:41 a.m. Central from Chicago O'Hare International Airport. It landed at 11:49 a.m. Eastern in Boston, according to flight trackers.
JetBlue did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
8 minutes ago
- CNET
An Expert Told Me How to Find Good Wine at a Grocery Store
Nothing beats perusing the shelves of a good, local wine shop, but when you're racing through errands, grabbing a few good bottles at the grocery store can help knock a stop off your list. Not all states allow wine sales in supermarkets, but for those that do, there's better vino hiding near the deli counter than you might think. To find out what's worth tossing in the cart, we asked Jade Palmer, wine manager at Hop City Craft Beer and Wine in Atlanta. "You can absolutely find good wine at the grocery store," Palmer says. Many large producers offer wallet-friendly options without compromising on quality. "Their production is big, but it's often done well," she adds. The key here is knowing what to look for in "over-delivery," that is, wines that punch above their price class in terms of quality. Palmer offers several tips and tricks for finding wines at the grocery store that are more than worthy of your dinner table. (Oh, and if you're wondering if you should pop that open red wine in the fridge to keep it fresh, we asked an expert to weigh in.) 1. Know which wines to avoid Knowing what to avoid is as important as knowing what to look for. Sutter Home While grocery stores and supermarket chains typically have plenty of good wines stocked on their shelves, half the battle can be separating the wheat from the chaff (the grapes from the pits?) where wines are concerned. Palmer suggests a few keywords to avoid when bottle shopping. "I would avoid any wine that has the word 'sweet' in the title," she says, "which typically means the wine is artificially sweetened to make it more palatable." If you prefer a wine with a little sweetness to it, look for the words "off-dry" instead, which better reveals a classically made wine that intentionally has a little residual sugar left following fermentation. Also, wines with other "natural flavors" or those that have been bourbon-barrel aged are sometimes just tricks that mask the wine's honest flavor. "That's why we drink wine," says Palmer, "because we want to taste the flavor of the grapes." (Leave the bourbon barrels for the bourbon.) 2. Skip the mass-market brands Brands with big marketing budgets tend to put their money there rather than in winemaking. Barefoot Wines Sorry, Barefoot, Yellowtail and, yes, even Josh. They may claim the most shelf space in grocery retailers, but you're going to want to dig deeper for better wines. "The production on those has gotten so big that I don't think that the quality is there," says Palmer. "I understand the price point is attractive, but when we're looking for value wine, we're also looking for quality, too," she says. In general, be dubious of any wine that has been excessively marketed to you. (Throwing Whispering Angel under the bus here, too, while we're at it.) Read more: Budget Bottles: An Expert Reveals How to Find the Best Value Wine Brands that have big marketing budgets tend to put their money there rather than in winemaking. Here's where you're likely to find wines with a pronounced oak flavor that comes not from oak aging, but from oak chips stirred into the wine to shortcut the process. (Yes, that's a thing.) 3. Certain regions are known for value: Portugal, Chile, Washington Keep some value-driven wine regions such as Portugal, Spain and Washington state in your back pocket. Seven Hills Among wine pros, certain regions are well known for keeping quality up and prices down, such as the Iberian peninsula. "Portugal is huge for that," says Palmer. "Vinho Verde is such an approachable style of wine and you can find it easily for under $15." Spain also has some great finds: "You can find some really good Tempranillo-based blends that aren't necessarily Rioja. You can find some good Garnacha-based blends as well," she says. Spain also offers a less expensive alternative to Champagne. "Cava is just a good, traditional-method sparkling wine that you can frequently get for under $25." Read more: Best Wine Apps to Help You Pick a Perfect Bottle Stateside, Washington state wines, red and whites both, are gaining traction for their value, according to Palmer. And if you love Napa Cab but hate the sticker shock, "Paso Robles is a great place for Cab," says Palmer. "You can still get the richness, the fullness, and all of the layers of flavor that you could get from Napa and Sonoma, but at a more value-driven price point." These are US regions that are distributing widely enough that at least a few should land in your local grocery store. Also, consider South America. "Argentina and Chile are also great places to find value," says Palmer. "You can find incredible Malbec for under 20 bucks -- a grocery store hero -- and you can find really good Sauvignon Blanc, especially from Chile, and they deliver great value." 4. New Zealand Sauvignon blanc is a safe bet Every supermarket that carries wine should have at least a few New Zealand Sauvignon blancs to choose from. FoxTrot Speaking of Sauvignon blanc, if you haven't already hopped on the New Zealand Sauvignon blanc bandwagon, hop on. If you're already there, stay on. It's one of the most popular wine styles sold in the US, grocery stores and bottle shops both, and for good reason. "It's a safe bet," says Palmer. "It's pretty straightforward. I know what I'm getting when I pick up a $15 bottle, and you can get all of the great fruity, grassy aromas that you expect." 5. Don't be afraid to take a chance Finding great new wine requires taking chances. IL21/Getty On the opposite score, however, there are so many grapes worldwide, and we are collectively drinking so few of them, and you might find a great deal if you're willing to try something new. Even the largest grocery retailers have some deep cuts in their selection. "I have bottles at my shop, where people are like, 'OK, why is this wine $12? I've never heard of this before,'" says Palmer. "I think it's a low-risk, high-reward situation," she says. "People should venture out a little bit and try something different, like a Picpoul, or a Bonarda." Plus, when you find something unusual and love it, you get to play the tastemaker among your friends or family. The same goes for countries or states you maybe didn't know made wine. Uruguay, for example, has started to export more and more wine to the US in the past 10 years, and there are killer, Tannat-based reds and refreshing Albariños available for less than $15. Look for them tucked among the more famous South American wines. 6. Two big names to look for: Louis Jadot and Mary Taylor Louis Jadot's signature old-world labels should be easy to spot on a grocery store shelf. Louis Jadot Louis Jadot wines have a French, classic-looking label you can find in many large retailers, but it's not quite the same as the mass-market brands you should be avoiding, and that has to do with what's called the negociant system. "Negociants such as Louis Jadot buy grapes and make wine, so they are not a grower, necessarily," says Palmer. "It's a class of producer that allows people to enter the market without having vineyard land," she says, a much more common practice in winemaking than people realize. Not needing to own real estate is one way for winemakers to keep their costs down, and pass savings to the consumer. Mary Taylor wines can be found easily and punch above their price. Mary Taylor Similarly, Mary Taylor's line of wines, available in many retailers, is a hand-picked collection of European wines that offer great value. "Her wines are so accessible, and she does a great job of highlighting producers that are using some relatively unknown grape varieties," says Palmer, another vote for unfamiliar grapes. "The price is crazy, because they're all under $20, and the brand exposes consumers to a region that they would have never tried wine from."
Fast Company
8 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Why sparing someone's feelings can undermine trust
07-30-2025 WORK LIFE The surprising power of being direct BY Jessica Wilen, Ph.D is an executive coach and the founder of A Cup of Ambition, a popular newsletter about working parenthood, the psychology of work, and women in leadership. Leaders known for their emotional intelligence often pride themselves on cultivating trust, psychological safety, and genuine connection with their teams. These are essential assets in any leadership toolkit, particularly in environments that rely on collaboration, creativity, or mission alignment. But inevitably, there are moments when these strengths—empathy, warmth, patience—need to be supplemented with something sharper: clarity, candor, and the ability to speak directly when the situation calls for it. If you lead with empathy, you may already be adept at sensing how people are feeling and anticipating the downstream consequences of your words. But in certain moments, the harder leadership move isn't to hold space. It's to draw a line and provide someone a necessary reality check. Conversations like these often feel uncomfortable, but they ultimately serve the integrity of your team, your organization, or the individual themselves. Confusing directness with harm Many conscientious leaders hesitate to be fully direct because they conflate honesty with harshness. The fear is understandable: no one wants to be perceived as punitive, cold, or unfeeling. So we delay giving feedback—hedging our language and prioritizing emotional comfort over organizational clarity. But avoiding the truth rarely protects people—it usually disorients them. What erodes trust over time isn't directness; it's the absence of it. It's the vague feedback that leaves a team member guessing. The unspoken performance concern that festers behind the scenes. The dissonance between what's said in public and what's whispered in private. Said differently: kindness without clarity is often just misplaced anxiety. Directness as a form of respect When a performance issue arises or a behavioral pattern needs to shift, it's worth asking: What does this person deserve to know? Assuming your intent is constructive—not punitive—being direct is a sign of respect. It assumes the person is capable of hearing hard truths and of responding thoughtfully. It also models the type of culture most high-performing teams want: one where feedback is not weaponized, but neither is it avoided. A few ways to ground a direct conversation in professionalism and respect: 'I want to have a conversation that's candid, because I take your role and your contribution seriously.' 'This might be hard to hear, but I trust your ability to receive it—and respond in a way that reflects your strengths.' 'I'm raising this because I value your place on the team and I want to make sure we're aligned moving forward.' This kind of framing can't mask a poorly handled message—but it can open the door to a conversation grounded in mutual respect, rather than defensiveness. Delivering clarity without cruelty A direct conversation should be just that—direct. That means no extended preamble, no hedging language, no passive-aggressive tone. Say what you need to say plainly, and without dramatizing or editorializing. Consider this structure: Signal the conversation's purpose: 'I want to give you some candid feedback about how you're showing up on the team.' Name the issue specifically: 'You've missed several key deadlines this quarter, and it's created ripple effects for others.' Explain the impact: 'People are waiting on your contributions, and timelines are slipping. It's affecting morale.' Invite dialogue: 'I'm curious how you're seeing this—do you agree with that assessment?' Identify a clear next step or standard: 'We need to see improvement over the next month, and I'm happy to support you—but the expectations are non-negotiable.' This approach allows you to balance accountability with collaboration. It removes ambiguity while still inviting the other person into the solution. Anticipate discomfort—but don't personalize it Even a well-structured conversation may evoke a strong emotional response: frustration, embarrassment, disappointment, defensiveness. This is part of the process—not an indication you've mishandled the exchange. Resist the urge to over-explain, soften your message mid-stream, or rush in to repair the other person's reaction. If the message is true and necessary, the short-term discomfort is a feature of the process, not a bug. One helpful internal reframe: This may feel hard, but that doesn't mean it's harmful. It means it matters. Of course, how you follow up also matters. If the person is emotionally reactive or distressed, you can acknowledge the emotion without retreating from the content. A simple 'I know that was a lot to take in—let's revisit this in a few days after you've had a chance to reflect' can provide space for integration while still maintaining accountability. Clarity shapes culture Handled well, these conversations aren't just about individual performance—they shape your organizational culture. When feedback is delayed, filtered, or inconsistently delivered, teams become unclear about what's expected, what's tolerated, and what success actually looks like. Conversely, when leaders are willing to say the hard thing—with steadiness and respect—it signals that performance standards matter, and that team dynamics are worth protecting. Direct communication becomes an act of stewardship: protecting the integrity of the organization, safeguarding the cohesion of the team, and supporting the growth of the individuals within it. Final thought Some people are naturally more direct; others more sensitive to tone and relationship dynamics. But having hard conversations isn't about personality—it's about discipline. It's a practice. And like any other leadership muscle, it gets stronger with use. For the empathic leader, the goal isn't to stop caring or to suppress emotional intelligence. It's to channel those qualities into a leadership style that's both principled and effective. The best leaders don't choose between empathy and clarity. They hold both. And they have the courage to speak candidly—even when it's uncomfortable—because they understand that clarity is what allows empathy to be sustainable over time. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Jessica Wilen, Ph.D., is a trusted partner to top-tier leaders and organizations looking to elevate their leadership, strengthen teams and cultivate sustainable, high-performing cultures. As a member of the Fast Company Creator Network and author of the popular newsletter, A Cup of Ambition, Jessica writes about working parenthood, the psychology of work, and women in leadership. More
New York Times
9 minutes ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Federal Investigators Set to Begin Hearings On D.C. Plane Crash
Pinned Federal investigators on Wednesday are expected to begin providing the clearest picture yet of what went wrong earlier this year when an Army Black Hawk helicopter crashed into an American Airlines regional jet outside Washington, D.C., killing 67 people and touching off a crisis of confidence in air travel safety. The National Transportation Safety Board, which has spent the last six months investigating the accident, is set to convene the first of three days of public hearings at 9 a.m. Eastern. Federal aviation safety officials, military brass and other parties involved in the crash are scheduled to testify about the events leading up to the midair collision near Ronald Reagan National Airport on the evening of Jan. 29. The board is also expected to release approximately 10,000 pages of new documents related to the crash at the same time the hearing begins, including transcripts of the cockpit recordings from both American Airlines Flight 5342 and the Army Black Hawk and of the air traffic control transmissions to all aircraft in the area. The documents are also expected to include a combined transcript illustrating how all of those communications overlapped in real time, as well as factual reports about the air control tower, aircraft and the people involved in operating them that night. Though the board already issued a preliminary report and urgent recommendations, and the Federal Aviation Administration has already implemented safety measures to reduce the risk of a similar episode in the nation's capital, there are still a number of unanswered questions. They include why an Army helicopter on a pilot evaluation mission flew higher than was allowed in the vicinity of one of the nation's most congested airports, what led to the air traffic control tower being understaffed that evening, and various communication failures that might have contributed to the fatal collision. N.T.S.B. investigators are not expected to reach any conclusions about the cause of the accident, though the board's chairwoman, Jennifer Homendy, has promised that those, and final safety recommendations, will be issued by next January. Yet the hearings are expected to present revealing insights into the circumstances surrounding the collision, as aviation safety officials face increasing pressure to implement policy changes to ensure that no such accident can take place in the future. The marathon hearings have been organized as a series of five panels, each of which will highlight a facet of the circumstances that contributed to the accident. The first will focus on the helicopter's data systems and altimeters, devices that measure altitude. Subsequent panels will address helicopter routes through the airspace surrounding the airport, procedures governing air traffic control training and staffing, technology to help avoid collisions, and how the stakeholders collect and assess safety data. Some of those issues have already been the subject of considerable federal scrutiny. In March, the N.T.S.B. released urgent recommendations, calling on the Federal Aviation Administration to permanently prohibit helicopter operations in the airspace around Reagan National Airport when certain runways were in use, and to design alternate flight routes for rotor aircraft. The F.A.A. took the recommendations a step further, permanently closing the helicopter corridor known as Route 4 at all times, and making the zones where helicopters can operate around the airport smaller and farther away. The F.A.A. has also limited when helicopters on special government missions may fly in the vicinity of the airport without real-time tracking technology turned on, ordering that such flights may take place only if the area is cleared of commercial aircraft. The Army Black Hawk involved in the Jan. 29 crash had that technology, known as ADS-B Out, turned off. Lawmakers have also seized on real-time tracking technology as an area ripe for legislation. In the last two months, senators have introduced at least three bills that would require nearly all aircraft to have and use technology that allows them to be seen by air traffic controllers in real time, as well as similar technology to allow pilots to receive similarly fast communications from other aircraft and ground operations regarding traffic, weather and other considerations important for safe flying. The most recent bill, from Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas and the chairman of the panel overseeing aviation safety, was unveiled on the eve of the N.T.S.B. hearings, with the endorsement of Ms. Homendy, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Bryan Bedford, the F.A.A. administrator. The authors of those bills hope that requiring aircraft to operate with improved tracking technology will improve the chances of avoiding accidents and other near misses, which are a frequent occurrence at congested airports like Reagan National. In its preliminary investigative report on the crash, the N.T.S.B. noted that there had been 85 incidents between October 2021 and December 2024 in which planes had been less than 200 feet apart vertically. Details of those episodes are unclear, though the hearing may provide additional insight. But there is near universal agreement that a national shortage of air traffic controllers — along with an outdated air traffic control system — has also put aircraft in greater danger, especially in congested areas. Earlier this month, Congress approved $12.5 billion to modernize the country's air traffic control system — money that lawmakers and agency officials see as a down payment on what must be a wider overhaul. Greg Jaffe contributed reporting.
