Elections

Los políticos suelen sufrir ataques racistas y sexistas en internet. Pero Harris está siendo atacada en más plataformas, con nuevas tecnologías y ante audiencias más numerosas que Barack Obama y Hillary Clinton.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]En internet ya se hacían ataques racistas y sexistas mucho antes de que la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris iniciara su campaña presidencial este mes, incluso durante la campaña de Barack Obama y Hillary Clinton. Sin embargo, desde las últimas elecciones presidenciales, se ha vuelto aún más virulento y más central para la política estadounidense.En 2008, Obama se enfrentó a un ecosistema en el que Facebook tenía millones de usuarios, no miles de millones, y el iPhone apenas tenía un año de haber salido al mercado. En 2016, la campaña de Clinton vigilaba un puñado de plataformas de redes sociales, no decenas. En 2020, cuando Harris era la compañera de fórmula de Joe Biden, era mucho más difícil utilizar la inteligencia artificial para producir las representaciones pornográficas falsas y los videos engañosos en los que ahora se dice que aparece.En solo una semana desde que Harris —negra, de ascendencia india y mujer— se convirtió en la presunta candidata presidencial demócrata, han aparecido falsas narrativas y teorías conspirativas sobre ella por todo el panorama digital.Muchas cosas han cambiado de cara a las elecciones de 2024. Ahora, a esas afirmaciones se han incrementado, alimentadas por un tono cada vez más agresivo del discurso político respaldado por políticos de alto nivel, impulsado por la IA y otras nuevas tecnologías, y difundido a través de un paisaje en línea mucho más fragmentado y repleto de plataformas sin moderación.“La esfera política ha sido sexista y racista durante mucho tiempo. Lo que ha cambiado es el ecosistema de medios en el que crece esa retórica problemática”, afirmó Meg Heckman, profesora adjunta de Periodismo de la Universidad Northeastern. “Es casi como si hubiera varios universos mediáticos paralelos, de modo que no todos operamos con un conjunto de hechos compartidos”, agregó.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

The NewsProductivity grew at a 2.3 percent annual rate in the second quarter, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Thursday, surpassing economists’ expectations. The pickup was a major improvement upon the sluggish 0.4 percent rate in the first quarter. And on a yearly basis, productivity increased 2.7 percent. That far exceeds prepandemic averages.An assembly line at a car plant in Michigan in April.Bill Pugliano/Getty ImagesWhy It Matters: A key to prosperity.A highly productive economy generally means businesses and workers are operating efficiently, making more money in fewer hours. In the second quarter, production was up 3.3 percent, while hours worked rose 1 percent.On a less technical level, productivity is best explained by the old axiom of “doing more with less” or the folksy virtue of “getting the biggest bang for your buck.”Economists tend to sigh with relief when they see productivity gains because it offers a potential “win-win” for workers, customers and business owners: If businesses can make more money in fewer work hours, then — according to basic economic logic — they can presumably make more dollars per hour, while also reinvesting and giving workers raises, without sacrificing profits.Being able to make more with less (or with the same amount of labor and machinery) also means businesses may not feel as much pressure to set higher prices to push profits. That, too, is welcome news after a yearslong bout of inflation.Facts to Keep in Mind: A volatile indicator.Productivity, at a basic level, is calculated as a simple ratio: the total amount of output an economy produces per hour worked by its labor force. But the output side of the equation is adjusted for inflation on a quarterly basis. That can cause volatility, in both directions.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Experts who monitor global hunger rarely make an official declaration of famine, but they just sounded the alarm for more than half a million people who have fled the fighting in Sudan’s civil war.Famine has officially been declared in a city in Sudan’s Darfur region that has been under siege in the midst of the country’s 15-month long civil war, two organizations that monitor world hunger announced on Thursday.People who fled to a camp known as Zamzam near the city of El Fasher, in North Darfur state, have been facing famine since June, and no food aid is reaching them, prompting the official declaration, the agencies said. The Zamzam camp has grown recently and now holds about half a million people. An official declaration of famine is rare, and is intended to prompt a response from aid agencies and governments.This one shows how the war between rival military factions has plunged a fertile nation once considered a global breadbasket into a deepening hunger and humanitarian crisis.Two other camps in the city of El Fasher — Abu Shouk and Al Salam — were likely undergoing famine but limited evidence made it difficult to confirm, according to the two organizations — the Famine Early Warning Systems Network, a research group funded by the United States government, and the Famine Review Committee, an independent group of experts.Experts use a strict methodology to classify famine. A famine is declared when 20 percent of households, or one in five people in an area, face an extreme lack of food, 30 percent of children suffer from acute malnutrition and two adults or four children for every 10,000 are dying every day from malnutrition or starvation.Famine is expected to last in these camps, which together host between 400,000 and 600,000 people, at least through October, the organizations said.The declaration of famine is the first in Africa since South Sudan’s in 2020. The group of experts also projected famine in Somalia in 2022 and in Gaza this year, but stopped short of officially declaring those emergencies to be famines.Sudan’s Darfur region has been the site of intense conflict and even massacres since the war between the country’s army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces began on April 15 last year.But the situation in El Fasher had sharply deteriorated since April this year, when the paramilitary group laid siege to the city and ratcheted up attacks on surrounding villages. The escalating battle for the city entrapped many civilians, destroyed health care facilities and left communities without food or water. The conflict also damaged farmlands, limited the availability of food in the city’s markets and hindered access to humanitarian aid.Sudan is currently home to the world’s largest hunger crisis, according to the World Food Program. More than half of the country’s 48 million people are facing crisis levels of hunger, the U.N. agency said. Sudan is also facing the world’s worst displacement crisis, with more than 10 million people internally displaced or pushed to flee to neighboring countries. More

For more than a year, the top of The Wall Street Journal’s website has featured prominent coverage of the imprisonment of Evan Gershkovich, one of the news organization’s reporters. His image and the words #IStandWithEvan appear on a large screen in The Journal’s New York newsroom. Colleagues wear “I Stand With Evan” T-shirts and “Free Evan” pins.The machinations of the international prisoner swap on Thursday, involving Mr. Gershkovich and around two dozen others, was far outside the bounds of what The Wall Street Journal could do to help him. But since Russia imprisoned Mr. Gershkovich in March 2023, The Journal has pushed to keep his detainment top of mind.The organization has operated letter-writing campaigns, launched social media blitzes and staged a 24-hour read-a-thon of Mr. Gershkovich’s reporting. Colleagues across the world took part in runs on the first anniversary of his arrest, while employees in New York plunged into the cold waters at Brighton Beach in Brooklyn for a swim event.“After an initial flurry of attention in the weeks following Evan’s arrest, keeping the spotlight on his ordeal became a huge challenge for the newsroom amid jam-packed news cycles,” Emma Tucker, the editor in chief of The Journal, told The New York Times in an email earlier this year.An electronic sign at the News Corp headquarters in New York marks the first anniversary of the imprisonment in Russia of Evan Gershkovich, a reporter for The Wall Street Journal.Timothy A. Clary/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“We used every grim milestone as a moment to organize publicity and get Evan back into the headlines: 100 days, his birthday in October, 250 days, every one of his court appearances,” she wrote.The Journal has continuously and strenuously denied the espionage charges against Mr. Gershkovich, saying he was an accredited journalist doing his job.His arrest happened just five weeks after Ms. Tucker began her tenure as The Journal’s top editor. The Journal set up a dedicated section on its website featuring news updates on Mr. Gershkovich. It also has a counter logging the number of days since he had been arrested and it included resources for writing messages of support to Mr. Gershkovich and his family.In October, The Journal moved its Washington bureau chief, Paul Beckett, into a new role to work full time on securing Mr. Gershkovich’s release.Mr. Gershkovich’s family members, who live in the United States, are in regular contact with The Journal, which has helped to coordinate their interviews with the media.On March 29, to mark his year of detainment, The Journal wrapped its newspaper in a special section with a blank front page bearing the headline “His Story Should Be Here.” More

The actor will return to the stage this fall in a revival of Kenneth Lonergan’s “Hold On to Me Darling.”Adam Driver, a Broadway alumnus and prolific film and television actor best known for “Girls” and “Star Wars,” will return to the stage this fall to portray a narcissistic country-western singer in a limited-run Off Broadway comedy.The play, “Hold On to Me Darling,” was written by Kenneth Lonergan, an accomplished playwright (“The Waverly Gallery”), screenwriter and film director (he won an Oscar for the “Manchester by the Sea” screenplay).In “Hold On to Me Darling,” the main character decides to move home to Tennessee after his mother dies. The collision of a big star and a small town fuel the comedy of the play, which was first staged in 2016 at Atlantic Theater Company, an Off Broadway nonprofit.The new production, a commercial endeavor, is to begin previews Sept. 24 and open Oct. 16 at the Lucille Lortel Theater in the West Village. The run is scheduled to last just 13 weeks, although sometimes limited-run plays are extended.The production will be directed by Neil Pepe, who also directed the 2016 version. Pepe is the Atlantic’s artistic director.The producers of this fall’s run are Seaview, Sue Wagner, and John Johnson, who were among the producers of “Danny and the Deep Blue Sea,” which starred Aubrey Plaza and Christopher Abbott and had a run at the Lortel that began last fall. That show’s success helped draw the attention of producers to commercial Off Broadway, a sector of the theater business that had atrophied over time, but is now attracting more interest because the producing costs are far lower than on Broadway.Driver, 40, is no stranger to the stage. A graduate of Juilliard’s acting program, he has appeared on Broadway three times, most recently starring in a 2019 revival of “Burn This,” and he has also performed in several previous Off Broadway productions.Ben Brantley, then the Times’s chief theater critic, named “Hold On to Me Darling” among the best shows of 2016, and praised the play as “a tragicomic commentary on a culture ruled by the religion of fame.” More

Utah cannot enforce its near-total ban on abortion while a challenge to the law proceeds in the courts, the State Supreme Court ruled on Thursday. The Utah Supreme Court upheld on Thursday a suspension of the state’s near-total ban on abortion, meaning the procedure remains legal while a court challenge to the law proceeds. When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to overturn Roe v. Wade, it cleared the way for two Utah laws to come into force: a ban on most abortions after the 18th week of pregnancy, which was passed in 2019 and is currently in effect, and a near-total abortion ban passed in 2020 that would prohibit the procedure at any time during pregnancy, with very limited exceptions, including for cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.The near-total abortion ban took effect in 2022, but the Planned Parenthood Association of Utah almost immediately filed a lawsuit in the state seeking to block the ban. The organization argued that the ban violated several provisions in the State Constitution, including those that guarantee a right to determine family composition and a right to gender equality.A trial court issued a preliminary injunction in July 2022 blocking the state from enforcing the near-total ban while the case proceeded. Utah state officials appealed, but the State Supreme Court ruled against them on Thursday and left the injunction in place. Camila Vega, a staff attorney for Planned Parenthood Federation of America and one of the litigators on the case, said after the state’s appeal was filed last August that the organization would “once again make the case that the trigger ban violates the Utah constitution, which protects pregnant Utahns’ ability to make their own medical decisions and their right to determine when and whether to have a family.”In court filings, the state argued that the Utah constitution does not protect a right to abortion, and that the injunction imposed “severe irreparable harm on the State side of the balance, given the profound state and public interest at stake — the preservation of human life, both the mother’s and the unborn child’s.” The state challenged Planned Parenthood Association of Utah’s standing to file the lawsuit, and argued that the trial court had abused its discretion and erred in issuing the injunction. The State Supreme Court rejected those arguments on Thursday. Whether abortion up to 18 weeks will remain permanently legal in the state of Utah depends on the outcome of Planned Parenthood Association of Utah’s lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the near-total ban. The ruling on Thursday did not decide that question; rather, it said that the lower courts were right to let the case proceed and to keep the state from enforcing the ban in the meantime. More

new video loaded: More

The former CNN reporter said in a lawsuit that X had refused to pay him after a testy interview with its billionaire owner.Don Lemon, the former CNN anchor, sued Elon Musk and X on Thursday, arguing that the billionaire refused to pay him after a content deal with the social media platform fell apart.Mr. Lemon agreed in January to take his new show to X, which Mr. Musk owns, as part of the platform’s effort to create premium content to attract advertisers. Mr. Musk agreed to pay Mr. Lemon $1.5 million annually to produce videos exclusively on X, to give him a share of the advertising revenue from his videos and to award Mr. Lemon additional cash incentives as his account gained followers, according to the lawsuit, which was filed in California Superior Court in San Francisco.Mr. Musk also agreed to be Mr. Lemon’s first guest on the show. But the March interview quickly devolved as Mr. Lemon asked the billionaire about his drug use and politics. Shortly after, Mr. Musk canceled the deal.Mr. Lemon did not sign a contract cementing the agreement, which he believed would be a launchpad for his new show after CNN fired him last year, the lawsuit said. Mr. Musk told him during a phone call that there was no need to “fill out paperwork” and reassured Mr. Lemon that X would financially support the show even if he did not like the views Mr. Lemon espoused, according to the court filing.“X executives used Don to prop up their advertising sales pitch, then canceled their partnership and dragged Don’s name through the mud,” Carney Shegerian, a lawyer for Mr. Lemon, said in a statement.X and Mr. Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment.After Mr. Musk bought X in 2022, advertisers fled in droves as he posted erratic messages to the site and researchers reported a surge of misinformation and hate speech on it.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More