Latest news with #polarization
Yahoo
23-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Autodesk CMO Dara Treseder on how brands are navigating attention and polarization at Cannes Lions
At the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, top agencies and brands vie for awards and hustle to close deals. As this year's event wraps up, Autodesk CMO Dara Treseder shares the insider buzz—from the continued rise of creator-led content to how brands navigate getting the right kind of attention in a polarized market. Housing market map: Zillow just released its updated home price forecast for 400-plus housing markets Perplexity's new AI features are a game changer. Here's how to make the most of them 5 signals that make you instantly more trustworthy at work This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by Robert Safian, former editor-in-chief of Fast Company. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with today's top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. What are you hearing people talk about here at the festival? A lot is going on. There's a recurring theme. I think . . . everyone is trying to figure out, How can I cut through without being cut out? How can I cut through without alienating a core part of my audience? Because we're living in such a polarized time, where there are very few things people can align on. And so there is really that, but we are also in an attention recession, where it's so difficult to get attention, and getting attention is not enough, because you have to convert that attention into intention, right? To get people to actually go into discovery, consideration, and ultimately purchase. So, it's not just getting the attention, but the attention in the way that's right for your brand. Exactly. Getting attention in a way that's right for your brand and drives action, drives engagement. And now, there's just so much that grabs people's attention, so grabbing attention isn't enough. It's actually converting the attention into intention, into buyer intent. Are there any rules about it, or is it that each brand has to do it in its own way? I think that there are some themes that we're seeing about how brands in general are doing this, across all industries, B2B, B2C, healthcare, technology, beauty, retail. We're seeing some recurring themes. And I think one of the big themes is leaning into creators and community, because people show up for people. They might not necessarily show up for brands in the same way as we've seen in the past. So a lot of brands are leaning into [that]. I mean, creators are all over the place. Creators and athletes. Because creators and athletes come with a more dedicated and a more engaged and a more, I'm going to use the word rabid, a little bit, fan base. Yes, real fans. Real fans, rather than just celebrities that you see. I mean, we've been talking for a few years about influencers and how that has sort of changed the marketplace. It sounds a little bit like we've broken through to a new layer with that? We've certainly broken through to a new layer. And in fact, they don't want to be called influencers. They want to be called creators. Because they're saying, 'Hey, I'm not here to just influence. I'm here to co-create with you to drive a certain outcome.' So we're seeing that happen more now. And does that change the relationship that a brand like yours has with a traditional advertising firm? Are you going to creators in a different way? It definitely changes, because creators have, I think, a lot more say and a lot more power, and they're taking a bigger space at the table. So, gone are the days, I think, where it's just you find a creator, you tell them exactly what you want to do. If you're actually trying to drive real results and you want their fans to show up, they're taking an audience-first approach. So first of all, you've got to find that creator that aligns with your values. So you have to know they agree with you or they're simpatico in that way before they start. There's got to be trust. . . . And the trust goes both ways. You have got to trust that they are aligned to your brand values, they are aligned to your customer base, because remember, you want to cut through, you want to break through, but you are not trying to cut out a big portion of your customer base. So you need to make sure that you have that trust that yes, they are aligned to your brand values, they're aligned to your purpose, they're aligned to the outcomes, but then you also have to trust them to give them the space to do what they do. Because it can't come across as an ad. It has to come across as something more organic, something that they would truly want to do on their own, because that's when their audience shows up, and that's what determines the result. Are you, in your conversations with your peers, with other CMOs, are you hearing them privately acknowledge like, 'Oh, we didn't do that quite right? We alienated a group we didn't want to.' One hundred percent, especially in today's world. . . . As we're having these private CMO roundtables, we're all sharing, here's what went wrong, here's what went right, here's what I learned. And a lot of it is just, the margin for error is a lot slimmer than it ever was. There is a very thin line between cutting through and cutting out. It's like walking on high heels on a teeny-tiny thread. There is no margin for error. And so . . . a lot of CMOs are thinking about, How do I do this and how do I do this well? . . . And I think one of the things that's really important is making sure that you have a broad pull at the table as these decisions are being made, and that you are also able to pivot and adjust very quickly. I mean, you talked to me previously about this idea of opine with a spine, right? Yes. The idea that to break through, you have to say something sharp, but you're also saying that the risk is higher than ever, but you have to take that risk. There's no way out of this bind. There's no way out. Let me tell you. We've got to give CMOs and marketers, all marketers at all levels, we've got to give [them] a break. It is a tough world out there. And so, yes, you have to opine with a spine, but you got to be careful what you opine on. So you need to pick the thing that truly makes sense for your brand and business. You cannot opine on everything. If you speak about everything, you're speaking about nothing. And if you end up speaking about things that you have not earned the right to speak about, you don't have the credibility to speak about, you could end up in some real hot water that you don't want to be on. Not the good kind of bath, the scalding kind of bath. So there really is that thoughtfulness that has to go into it. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter: Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Guardian
21-06-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Recent US political violence aided by DIY murder tradecraft available on internet
A rash of recent assassinations have brought on congressional scrutiny and concern among law enforcement agencies who are wary of an age of political polarization turning deadly. But experts say the violence is as much a byproduct of the times as it is the easy accessibility to DIY murder tradecraft, evident in some high-profile slayings of late. So while the willingness to commit these acts has certainly increased, the tradecraft to pull them off has never been more obtainable. 'Political polarization, combined with the idea that one's opponents are irredeemably evil and that there are no other legal avenues to create change, can lead to violence,' said Joshua Fisher-Birch, a terrorism analyst who closely tracks extremists across the political spectrum. 'There are several guides online for assassination, guerrilla warfare or similar violent acts, as well as counter-surveillance manuals shared by individuals in communication apps such as Telegram and online libraries.' The proliferation of those kinds of resources have spilled into the mainstream and have given the average person the knowhow to access the types of instructions on popular apps that were once only available on dark web archives. Whether it's downloading blueprints for and creating a 3D-printed gun, professionally tracking down targets, cooking up a bomb recipe or looking up ways to evade law enforcement once an act has been committed, a number of public attacks show so-called 'lone wolves' using internet resources to plot their crimes. For example, police say Vance Boelter, 57, charged with killing Democratic state representative Melissa Hortman and her husband at their home in Minnesota earlier this month, used a number of data brokering websites to amass not only a hitlist of 'mostly or all Democrats' but their home addresses, too. Court documents say Boelter was caught with 'lists of internet-based people search engines including Truepeoplesearch, Spokeo, Pipl, Peoplefinders, Beenverified, Whitepages, Truthfinder, Intelius, Ownerly, USsearch and Peoplelooker' which can 'aggregate data from various online and offline sources to provide the querying user details about the searched-for person, such as home addresses, phone numbers and information about family members'. Extremists on the far right have also used similar resources to create kill lists of their enemies, and Fisher-Birch said some have become more 'adept at doxing in recent years'. He noted that terrorist groups have gone about producing easily digestible manuals in pdf form then spreading them on Telegram, while other instructional materials are 'commercially available books written by former members of militaries or intelligence services' they suggest reading. Available online materials can also extend to sourcing weaponry. Fisher-Birch continued: 'According to police, Luigi Mangione used a partially 3D-printed pistol to kill UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.' Mangione, who has amassed a cult-like following among anti-corporatists after the Manhattan assassination of Thompson in December, also allegedly managed to evade a manhunt for days with a stunning amount of counter-surveillance tradecraft – something other known attackers have achieved. Still, to this day, the masked and hooded suspect seen planting pipe bombs at the RNC and DNC offices in Washington DC the night before the 6 January 2021 insurrection on Capitol Hill has yet to be caught. In the past, multiple law enforcement sources remarked how the surveillance footage shows the would-be bomber wearing the same prescribed disguise and gloves featured in terrorism manuals circulated on the far right. Incidents like that suggest the ecosystem of DIY manualling has partly been seeded by extremist organizations on social media, which have then spread elsewhere. As early as 2018, the internationally designated neo-Nazi terrorist group the Base posted military tradecraft gleaned from US Marine Corps manuals and other sources instructing how to make a covert exit if you're pursued by authorities. Other jihadists groups, such as the Islamic State, have uploaded similar literature on encrypted forums they use to communicate with recruits. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion 'More generally, violent extremists groups put considerable time and effort into inciting followers to plot attacks and building robust online communities for information sharing and advice,' said Lucas Webber, a senior threat intelligence analyst at Tech Against Terrorism and a research fellow at the Soufan Center. '[IS] and al-Qaida produce and disseminate manuals and videos teaching followers to construct explosive devices, detonators, suppressors and more.' Coinciding with this surge in political violence is the growing willingness of nation-states to increase covert assassination operations on foreign soil, taking advantage of the moment. Iranian agents sponsored the attempted assassination of a dissident in New York by tapping criminal networks to carry it out, while Indian diplomats tried to disguise the murder of a Sikh activist in Canada as a gangland killing. Of course, political assassinations and their attempts, without the clear aid of online tools, have also come to pass: a man stalked an event at a Jewish museum in DC to gun down Israeli diplomats in May, while then presidential candidate Donald Trump faced an attempted assassination last summer in the lead-up to the November vote – both attackers using over-the-counter firearms and limited tradecraft. One thing does seem clear: authorities appear unable or unsure on how to counter the rising threat of lethal political violence. The FBI declined to comment on the broad string of recent political assassinations and how the agency plans to handle them in the future. 'We have nothing to add to previous statements about the events you mention,' said a spokesperson in an email. After Boelter was caught, a federal agent in Minnesota called his alleged murders 'an appalling act of political violence that has no place in our country'.
Forbes
16-06-2025
- Forbes
How Deep Listening Is A Radical Act
In a time marked by distrust, polarization, and profound disconnection, Emily Kasriel, the author of Deep Listening (HarperCollins, 2025), believes that really listening to each other can help us repair the social fabric that has frayed. In her new book, she draws from her work as a journalist, executive coach, editor, and mediator to provide practical insights for readers. She also presents a concept called social technology, which is a way of being that can shift individual conversations, communities, and institutions. I interviewed Kasriel after reading her book. My first question focused on what prompted her to write Deep Listening at this time. Kasriel shared, 'The increasing polarization we're witnessing globally served as a powerful catalyst for me writing this book. As I explore in the polarization chapter in Part One, we're living in a time when many societies are fragmenting into distinct tribes, with people increasingly unwilling to engage with different perspectives, and the research we carried out for the book, with YouGov and the NGO More in Common, indicates this is a particular challenge for Gen Z, who are far more likely to avoid listening to people whose views they don't like." The growing divide Kasriel discusses is more than theoretical; it is measurable, and people are living through it. She explained, "This troubling trend isn't just about disagreement – it's about fundamental disconnection, where we stop seeing the humanity in those with differing viewpoints.' Kasriel helps readers understand how the digital landscape has accelerated divisions, with 'algorithms that reward outrage and confirmation bias rather than nuanced understanding.' For her, the urgency to write came from realizing how Deep Listening might 'help counteract some of these forces and perhaps restore a sense of shared humanity.' She explained, 'Deep Listening offers a radical alternative to this pattern by creating conversations where genuine connection can occur across divides.' Kasriel emphasized that Deep Listening is not just about changing personal habits but also about confronting a broader societal turning point. She shared, 'I believe we're at an inflection point where we must choose between further fragmentation or renewed connection. The practice of Deep Listening isn't just a nice communication skill – it's a necessary foundation for addressing complex challenges, in a business or society, from climate change to adapting to AI.' Kasriel hopes that by creating a comprehensive guide 'to equip readers with practical tools to bridge divides in their personal lives, professional settings, and communities,' she will ultimately contribute to a less polarized, more connected world. Screaming man in a time of polarization getty Kasriel's reflections on polarization and the urgency of reconnection made me think about how her professional background might have positioned her to understand and teach about the power of listening. I asked her how her experiences shaped her thinking in the book. She shared, 'As a broadcaster, I spent years interviewing people from presidents to market traders to musicians, but it took me time to learn that the most compelling stories emerge when you create a space where people feel deeply heard.' She admitted that, early on, she made the mistake many interviewers make – planning the next move or question instead of being fully present. Kasriel explained, 'For too long, I squandered my attention thinking of the next brilliant question to ask, the best way to challenge my speaker, rather than being fully present with what was unfolding right in front of me. In the book, I tell the story of an interview I conducted with the Ethiopian president, Meles Zenawi. He was a complex and contradictory character, but my desire to hold him to account about human rights abuses stopped me from broadcasting what could have been a truly illuminating interview – he cut it off early.' The experience stuck with Kasriel, as did another more recent experience. She shared, 'I interviewed a climate denying dairy farmer, and here I was able to use Deep Listening to uncover his deeper narrative, to make sense of his story, so that when I published it on the BBC website, though it was framed with substantial climate science, he still felt heard.' Kasriel adheres to this commitment to listening in her work beyond journalism and broadcasting. She explained, 'In my work as an executive coach and mediator, Deep Listening plays a central, indeed indispensable, role. I've discovered here how rare it is for someone to feel completely listened to – how people open up and share authentic perspectives when they sense you're genuinely interested rather than just waiting for your turn to speak.' She added, 'In my mediating, I witnessed how transformative it can be when people who see each other as enemies have the experience of being genuinely heard by the 'other side.' In these settings, I refined techniques for creating safety and holding space during difficult conversations-skills that directly informed several of the eight steps in my methodology.' Given her extensive experience, Kasriel realized that listening is not a passive act but a deliberate practice. She noted that both meditation and academic research demonstrate that Deep Listening 'isn't passive but requires active engagement and careful attention to what's beneath surface-level communication. Through listening differently, you transform what your speaker shares or even thinks.' Kasriel's stories throughout her book reminded me how often we underestimate the impact of being deeply heard by others. I asked her if a pivotal moment or experience convinced her that Deep Listening could be transformational. She explained, 'The global study I outline in Part One of my book, in the chapter 'How Deep Listening Will Enrich Your Life' – represented a defining moment in demonstrating to me Deep Listening's power.' Listening to each other, deeply. getty She had 1000 participants from 119 countries engage in the project, and the results are powerful. Kasriel noted, 'The academic researchers were struck by a consistent pattern: regardless of background, when people experienced being truly heard, they a greater degree of connection with their conversation partners, felt safer to express themselves and genuinely understood, and gained insight about themselves, linking to an openness to re-examine their own attitudes.' The conversations took on difficult issues, yet people could engage meaningfully. Kasriel explained, 'They also demonstrated better listening behaviours even as they discussed topics about which they profoundly disagreed: Does personal success depend on social class? Should reparations be paid to the descendants of enslaved people? Social media – good or bad for humanity?' What was most striking for Kasriel was the ripple effect that Deep Listening could produce. She stated, 'What ultimately convinced me to dedicate my work to this practice was recognizing how often Deep Listening creates ripple effects that extend beyond the initial conversation. When people experience being deeply heard, they become more likely to listen deeply to others, creating a virtuous cycle that gradually transforms communication patterns. Seeing this phenomenon repeat across different settings, from corporate boardrooms to diverse communities, made it clear that Deep Listening represents not just a personal skill but a social technology with the power to, in part, address our most pressing collective challenges.' There are eight steps to Deep Listening in Kasriel's book: 1.) Create Space; 2.) Listen to Yourself; 3.) Be Present; 4.) Be Curious; 5.) Hold the Gaze; 6.) Hold the Silence; 7. Reflect Back; and 8.) Go Deeper. I asked her which steps people find most challenging and why. This was an easy answer for Kasriel; she said Step 6. As she conveyed, 'Hold the Silence consistently emerges as the most challenging aspect of Deep Listening for most people that I train. As I explore in this chapter, silence makes many of us profoundly uncomfortable – we rush to fill it, perceiving it as awkward, unproductive, or even threatening.' Kasriel further explained that a discomfort with silence is deeply ingrained in us and cultural: 'This discomfort reveals how deeply our culture conditions us to equate communication value with speech rather than receptive listening. Many participants in my workshops report feeling almost physically unable to allow silence to extend beyond a few seconds, describing an overwhelming urge to jump in with questions, commentary, or redirection.' Kasriel attributes the difficulty that people have to both internal and external pressures. She shared, 'First, there's the performance anxiety many feel in conversation – the pressure to demonstrate competence by speaking rather than listening. Second, silence creates space for emotions and vulnerabilities to surface, which can feel threatening when we're accustomed to keeping interactions at a safe, surface level. Third, particularly in professional contexts, there's often an efficiency mindset that views silence as wasted time rather than as the fertile ground from which deeper insights emerge.' And yet, when people work to push past their discomfort, they often discover something transformative. Kasriel explained it this way: As a practical person, I asked Kasriel what advice she would give to educators or leaders who hope to embed Deep Listening into their work with students or teams. She advised, 'Begin by modelling Deep Listening yourself rather than simply teaching it as a concept. Students and team members will learn more from experiencing being deeply heard by you than from any theoretical explanation of listening techniques.' Kasriel emphasized vulnerability and authenticity as well. She explained, 'This means demonstrating vulnerability by acknowledging when you don't have answers, showing genuine curiosity about diverse perspectives, and visibly incorporating what you hear into your thinking and decision-making. When educators and leaders consistently practice Deep Listening, it sends a powerful message that creates psychological safety and gradually shifts the culture toward more authentic communication and all that can unfold from that.' Kasriel also encouraged embedding Deep Listening into regular routines, not merely reserving it for special occasions. She stated, In ending our exchange, Kasriel reminded me that systems and structures often need to shift to support listening. She said, 'Directly address the systemic barriers to Deep Listening in your environment. In educational settings, this might mean examining how grading systems and participation structures can undermine attentive listening by rewarding quick responses over thoughtful consideration. In organizational contexts, examine how productivity metrics, meeting structures, and communication technologies might be inhibiting Deep Listening. Creating conditions for Deep Listening often requires challenging fundamental assumptions about efficiency, success, and knowledge creation." According to Kasriel, when naming and addressing these types of barriers, "educators and leaders can create sustainable cultures where Deep Listening becomes not just possible but natural, ultimately leading to stronger and more trusting relationships and a greater commitment to the organisation and business, gold dust for any employer.' Engaging with Kasriel made me contemplate that listening is not just a 'soft skill' or a communication tool. It is a form of leadership. It is a way of building or restoring trust, building bridges to others, and making space for emotion. Deep Listening also helps people to feel seen and heard. In her book, Kasriel invites the reader to slow down, be present, and engage with each other with intention. And most importantly, she urges us to remember that we can transform our fragile culture through Deep Listening.
Irish Times
15-06-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on the weekend events in the US: more evidence of a divided country
The shocking assassination on Saturday of senior Minnesota politician, Melissa Hortman, and her husband, and the wounding of her colleague State Senator John Hoffman, and his wife, are vivid evidence of the deep, and dangerous polarisation of US politics. Although the precise motivation for the attacks is as yet unclear, police have identified right-wing Christian activist Vance Boelter (57), a private security company owner, as chief suspect. Police found a list of 70 potential other targets, overwhelmingly Democrats, in his abandoned car. Condemnation of the killings has come from across the political spectrum, including from president Trump. But the inflammatory rhetoric of public discourse has seeded a culture which appears to legitimise gun violence by a tiny minority, as Trump discovered to his own cost last summer. The country's divisions were also vividly manifest on the streets on Saturday – in Washington DC marching troops celebrated 250 years of the US army's history (and Trump's birthday) at a cost of $45 million, supposedly stoking national pride and reminding the world of America's hard power. 'Succour to our allies', a Fox TV commentator insisted. Meanwhile, demonstrations in up to 2,000 centres in all 50 states across the US, including a dozen in Indiana alone, reflected popular anger at the president's immigration crackdown and executive overreach, not least what is seen as political abuse of the self-same US Army and National Guards in policing overwhelmingly peaceful protest. Sporadic violence in LA was easily managed by local law enforcement. READ MORE Trump has said that the 'enemy from within' is more dangerous than foreign adversaries, and has conjured up images of insurrection to justify special powers. The sheer number of political confrontations across the country, and the fact that the president, instead of being a force for reconciliation is, as one historian has put it,' fuelling the fires', makes this a dangerous time for the US. Democracy is being tested.
Associated Press
10-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Study finds little agreement between Republicans and Democrats on media sources they trust
A new survey that probes the level of trust Democrats and Republicans have for news sources finds the business-oriented publications Forbes and The Wall Street Journal share an unusual distinction: They're the only two of 30 news sources that sympathizers for both parties told the Pew Research Center they're more likely to trust than distrust. Pew's survey, released Tuesday, illustrates how the country's political polarization has members of both parties in different media silos. Democrats trust more news sources than Republicans, and rarely do their tastes intersect. Of 30 news sources tested, people who said they were Republican or leaned Republican were more likely to say they trust eight of them. Democrats had more trust than distrust for 23 different sources. Forbes and The Wall Street Journal were the only two on both lists. There were only two news sources tested that more than three in 10 Republicans said they were likely to trust — Fox News Channel, with 56%, and the Joe Rogan podcast, with 31%. Meanwhile, 13 of the sources had trust levels of more than 30% among Democrats — the three broadcast news divisions, PBS, CNN, BBC, The New York Times, The Associated Press, MSNBC, National Public Radio, USA Today, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal. Rogan's podcast illustrated some of the sharp differences between the parties and why President Donald Trump's interview there proved influential during the last election. Forty percent of Democrats said they distrust Rogan's show as a source, while only 3% of Democrats trust it as a news source. Others said they didn't know enough about the show to offer an opinion. Nearly two of three Democrats said they distrust Fox News, but 19% said they trust it. Among Republicans, 21% said they distrust Fox. The survey finds that 23% of Republicans said they trust PBS, while 26% distrust PBS. Democrats trust PBS by a 59% to 4% margin. Trump, a Republican, is trying to eliminate most government spending for PBS, arguing that its news content shows a liberal bias. Pew's survey indicates Republicans are fairly evenly divided on that question. That's not the case for NPR, which is also on Trump's chopping block. Pew finds that more than twice as many Republicans distrust NPR than trust it, while Democrats trust NPR by a 47% to 3% margin. 'It's still a very polarized media ecosystem,' said Elisa Shearer, a senior researcher at Pew. 'It's too early to tell if there will be changes in the future.' A separate Pew survey from March found that 53% of Republicans expressed at least some trust in the information they get from national news organizations, up from 40% only six months earlier. But Shearer said it was tough to tell how much of that increase simply had to do with a new Republican administration taking charge. For the survey released on Tuesday, Pew said it questioned 9,482 U.S. adults in mid-March. PBS says Trump's effort to rescind funding for public media would disrupt an essential service provided to the American people. ___ David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at and
