Public debate about artificial intelligence in higher education has largely orbited a familiar worry: cheating. Will students use chatbots to write essays? Can instructors tell? Should universities ban the tech? Embrace it?
These concerns are understandable. But focusing so much on cheating misses the larger transformation already underway, one that extends far beyond student misconduct and even the classroom.
Universities are adopting AI across many areas of institutional life. Some uses are largely invisible, like systems that help allocate resources, flag at-risk students, optimize course scheduling, or automate routine administrative decisions. Other uses are more noticeable. Students use AI tools to summarize and study, instructors use them to build assignments and syllabuses, and researchers use them to write code, scan literature, and compress hours of tedious work into minutes.
People may use AI to cheat or skip out on work assignments. But the many uses of AI in higher education, and the changes they portend, beg a much deeper question: As machines become more capable of doing the labor of research and learning, what happens to higher education? What purpose does the university serve?
Over the past eight years, weve been studying the moral implications of pervasive engagement with AI as part of a joint research project between the Applied Ethics Center at UMass Boston and the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies. In a recent white paper, we argue that as AI systems become more autonomous, the ethical stakes of AI use in higher ed rise, as do its potential consequences.
As these technologies become better at producing knowledge workdesigning classes, writing papers, suggesting experiments, and summarizing difficult textsthey dont just make universities more productive. They risk hollowing out the ecosystem of learning and mentorship upon which these institutions are built, and on which they depend.
Nonautonomous AI
Consider three kinds of AI systems and their respective impacts on university life:
AI-powered software is already being used throughout higher education in admissions review, purchasing, academic advising, and institutional risk assessment. These are considered nonautonomous systems because they automate tasks, but a person is in the loop and using these systems as tools.
These technologies can pose a risk to students privacy and data security. They also can be biased. And they often lack sufficient transparency to determine the sources of these problems. Who has access to student data? How are risk scores generated? How do we prevent systems from reproducing inequities or treating certain students as problems to be managed?
These questions are serious, but they are not conceptually new, at least within the field of computer science. Universities typically have compliance offices, institutional review boards, and governance mechanisms that are designed to help address or mitigate these risks, even if they sometimes fall short of these objectives.
Hybrid AI
Hybrid systems encompass a range of tools, including AI-assisted tutoring chatbots, personalized feedback tools, and automated writing support. They often rely on generative AI technologies, especially large language models. While human users set the overall goals, the intermediate steps the system takes to meet them are often not specified.
Hybrid systems are increasingly shaping day-to-day academic work. Students use them as writing companions, tutors, brainstorming partners, and on-demand explainers. Faculty use them to generate rubrics, draft lectures, and design syllabuses. Researchers use them to summarize papers, comment on drafts, design experiments, and generate code.
This is where the cheating conversation belongs. With students and faculty alike increasingly leaning on technology for help, it is reasonable to wonder what kinds of learning might get lost along the way. But hybrid systems also raise more complex ethical questions.
One has to do with transparency. AI chatbots offer natural-language interfaces that make it hard to tell when youre interacting with a human and when youre interacting with an automated agent. That can be alienating and distracting for those who interact with them. A student reviewing material for a test should be able to tell if they are talking with their teaching assistant or with a robot. A student reading feedback on a term paper needs to know whether it was written by their instructor. Anything less than complete transparency in such cases will be alienating to everyone involved and will shift the focus of academic interactions from learning to the means or the technology of learning. University of Pittsburgh researchers have shown that these dynamics bring forth feelings of uncertainty, anxiety, and distrust for students. These are problematic outcomes.
A second ethical question relates to accountability and intellectual credit. If an instructor uses AI to draft an assignment and a student uses AI to draft a response, who is doing the evaluating, and what exactly is being evaluated? If feedback is partly machine-generated, who is responsible when it misleads, discourages, or embeds hidden assumptions? And when AI contributes substantially to research synthesis or writing, universities will need clearer norms around authorship and responsibilitynot only for students, but also for faculty.
Finally, there is the critical question of cognitive offloading. AI can reduce drudgery, and thats not inherently bad. But it can also shift users away from the parts of learning that build competence, such as generating ideas, struggling through confusion, revising a clumsy draft, and learning to spot ones own mistakes.
Autonomous agents
The most consequential changes may come with systems that look less like assistants and more like agents. While truly autonomous technologies remain aspirational, the dream of a researcher in a boxan agentic AI system that can performstudies on its ownis becoming increasingly realistic.
Agentic tools are anticipated to free up time for work that focuses on more human capacities like empathy and problem-solving. In teaching, this may mean that faculty may still teach in the headline sense, but more of the day-to-day labor of instruction can be handed off to systems optimized for efficiency and scale. Similarly, in research, the trajectory points toward systems that can increasingly automate the research cycle. In some domains, that already looks like robotic laboratories that run continuously, automate large portions of experimentation, and even select new tests based on prior results.
At first glance, this may sound like a welcome boost to productivity. But universities are not information factories; they are systems of practice. They rely on a pipeline of graduate students and early-career academics who learn to teach and research by participating in that same work. If autonomous agents absorb more of the routine responsibilities that historically served as on-ramps into academic life, the university may keep producing courses and publications while quietly thinning the opportunity structures that sustain expertise over time.
The same dynamic applies to undergraduates, albeit in a different register. When AI systems can supply explanations, drafts, solutions, and study plans on demand, the temptation is to offload the most challenging parts of learning. To the industry that is pushing AI into universities, it may seem as if this type of work is inefficient and that students will be better off letting a machine handle it. But it is the very nature of that struggle that builds durable understanding. Cognitive psychology has shown that students grow intellectually through doing the work of drafting, revising, failing, trying again, grappling with confusion, and revising weak arguments. This is the work of learning how to learn.
Taken together, these developments suggest that the greatest risk posed by automation in higher education is not simply the replacement of particular tasks by machines, but the erosion of the broader ecosystem of practice that has long sustained teaching, research, and learning.
An uncomfortable inflection point
So what purpose do universities serve in a world in which knowledge work is increasingly automated?
One possible answer treats the university primarily as an engine for producing credentials and knowledge. There, the core question is output: Are students graduating with degrees? Are papers and discoveries being generated? If autonomous systems can deliver those outputs more efficiently, then the institution has every reason to adopt them.
But another answer treats the university as something more than an output machine, acknowledging that the value of higher education lies partly in the ecosystem itself. This model assigns intrinsic value to the pipeline of opportunities through which novices become experts, the mentorship structures through which judgment and responsibility are cultivated, and the educational design that encourages productive struggle rather than optimizing it away. Here, what matters is not only whether knowledge and degrees are produced, but how they are produced and what kinds of people, capacities, and communities are formed in the process. In this version, the university is meant to serve as no less than an ecosystem that reliably forms human expertise and judgment.
In a world where knowledge work itself is increasingly automated, we think universities must ask what higher education owes its students, its early-career scholars, and the society it serves. The answers will determine not only how AI is adopted, but also what the modern university becomes.
Nir Eisikovits is a professor of philosophy and the director of the Applied Ethics Center at UMass Boston.
Jacob Burley is a junior research fellow at the Applied Ethics Center at UMass Boston.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Ive been using ChatGPT and other AI tools recently for quite a few things. A few examples:
Working on strategy and operations for my latest business venture, Life Story Magic.
Planning how to get the most value out of the Epic ski pass I bought for the year, while balancing everything else.
Putting together a stretching and DIY physical therapy plan to get my shoulders feeling better during gym workouts.
Along the way, Ive done what I think a lot of AI power users eventually wind up doing: Ive gone into the personalization and settings and told the chatbot to be neutral, direct, and just-the-facts.
I dont want a chatbot that tells me That is a brilliant idea! every time I explore a tweak to my business strategy. Theyre not all brilliant, I assure you.
And I dont want a lecture about how if I truly have shoulder issues I should see a real physical therapist. Im an adult. Im not outsourcing my judgment to a robot.
Stop. I didnt ask you that
The result of all this is that Ive developed an alpha relationship with AI.
I tell it what to do. If it goes on too long, if it assumes I agree with its suggestions, or starts padding its answers with unnecessary niceties, I shut it down.
Stop. I didnt ask you that.
No. Wrong. Listen to what Im saying before replying.
All I need from you are the following three things. Nothing else.
As ChatGPT itself repeatedly reminds me, it has no feelings. HereI even asked it to confirm while writing this article:
I dont have feelings, and I cant be offended. You can be blunt, curt, or even rude to a chatbot and nothing is harmed.The awkwardness youre describing is entirely on the human side of the interaction.
All good, right? Until I caught myself dealing with customer service.
$800 worth of Warby Parker
Recently, I was returning most of a large Warby Parker orderprobably close to $600 out of $800 that Id spent on glasses, spread across multiple orders placed on different days last month.
I always try to remember that customer service workers are real people, often working on the opposite schedule so they can be available during American waking hours, dealing with one unhappy customer after another all day long.
I keep that image in mind, so I remember that whatever small problem Im having probably isnt a big deal.
I guess Im trying to be a decent human. I also avoid the remote possibility of becoming the star of some viral customer-service-gone-wrong video.
11 minutes of learning
But this call dragged on: 11 minutes in all. Writing that now, it doesnt seem super long, but at the time it felt like an eternity for something that should have been simple.
There was a noticeable delay on the line, and not the best connection, and the customer service rep interrupted me several times, assuming that he understood what I was asking and launching into long, off-topic explanations before I could finish.
Reflexively, I started talking to him the same way I talk to ChatGPT:
Stop. I didnt ask you that.
No. Listen to what Im saying before replying.
All I need from you are the following three things.
Entire life stories
To be fair, I caught myself pretty quickly. Also, I probably overcompensated for the rest of the call.
In real life, its almost a cliché among people who know me that I talk with everyone and often walk away knowing their entire life story, simply because I find almost everyone interesting.
My wife, sitting next to me, as I read this part aloud to her: Mmmm-hmmm.
But in that moment, I had slipped into the mode I use with machines: efficient, blunt, and completely unconcerned with the other sides experience.
Machines are not human; humans are
Ive stripped empathy out of my interactions with AI on purpose. I think that makes sense. I want speed and clarity, not emotional intelligence.
Also, Im uneasy with the idea of blurring the lines between humans and machines.
But without thinking, I carried that same way of communicating into a conversation with a real, live, fellow human being.
When you train yourself to communicate efficiently with something artificialsomething that never needs patience, kindness, or to be treated with dignity, its easy to forget that most of the world still does.
And frankly, so do you.
Bill Murphy Jr.
This article originally appeared on Fast Companys sister site, Inc.com.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
Inc.com columnist Alison Green answers questions about workplace and management issueseverything from how to deal with a micromanaging boss to how to talk to someone on your team about body odor.
Heres a roundup of answers to three questions from readers.
1. A new employee missed the fourth day of work, saying something came up
I had a new employee start on a Tuesday. That Friday, I woke up to a text from my new hire from the night before, saying that she would not be in on Friday, that something had come up and she would see me on Monday.
This is an in-person job in a corporate environment. I fully respect a persons right to take a sick day and I feel nobody is obligated to share personal details, but I also dont feel like something came up quite cuts it, especially on what would be your fourth day on the job.
Im looking for some guidance on where to set my expectations (regardless of this person working out or not). Am I out of line to feel something came up is inadequate when calling out as a brand-new hire?
Green responds:
Youre not wrong! Something came up is strangely cavalier. Im sick or I have a family emergency (without giving details beyond that) would both be fine, but something came up sounds like it could be my sister called and I feel like talking to her or someone invited me to play tetherball. It also sounds like she doesnt think calling out on her fourth day of work is a big deal, when thats normally something people would really try to avoid unless they truly couldnt.
Something came up might be fine from a longer-time employee who had a track record of reliability (although it would still be kind of weird), but its pretty alarming from someone in their first week.
2. Scheduling a Zoom call to reject a job candidate
My friend has been applying for jobs and made it to the final round for one position. She didnt hear back on the timeline they had mentioned on the last interview, so she assumed they passed on her and moved on. But she got an email from them recently asking to schedule a Zoom the next day. Feels promising, right? Wrong. She hops on the Zoom (with video) and they immediately tell her, You are great, but we went with another candidate and they accepted. End of meeting.
Is it appropriate to schedule a Zoom call just to reject someone? I feel like thats really overkill and sort of the equivalent of asking someone to come into the office just to reject them. At the most, I felt like this could have been a quick phone call instead of going through the rigamarole of being on video. I also felt like scheduling the Zoom gave her the impression they would be making a formal offer, so it was doubly painful to get rejected in this manner because she got her hopes up.
Green responds:
Yes, this is not good! Im sure they didnt intend it to be awful for her, but this takes all the problems with phone call rejections (the person gets their hopes up, and then has to respond graciously on the spot to what might be crushing disappointment) and adds a horrible video twist (the person probably took time beforehand to ensure they looked professional, maybe put on makeup, all to get a rejection that could have been delivered over email).
When companies do this, they think theyre being courteous and respectful. She invested the time, the thinking goes, and we owe her the courtesy of a real conversation. Some candidates really do prefer rejections that way but so many people find it upsetting that its really better to stick to email. You can send a very gracious, personalized email rejection. You can even add a note that youd be happy to talk on the phone if the person would like feedback, if thats something youre willing to offer. But making someone get rejected face-to-face on video is not kind, no matter what the intentions.
3. How to tell my network about a job opening
My company is trying to overcome some issues weve had in the past with hiring gaps too many people promoted from within into roles that needed more experience. Ive been asked to reach out to people Ive worked with previously whom I would recommend in this role.
Its a public posting and Im happy to do that since so many people are un- or underemployed. But Im hung up on the awkwardness of it. Hi! We havent talked in literally five years, but I wondered if youd be interested in this job thats far below your skill set since its better than where you are now? Look at this posting, let me know if you or these other guys Im not in touch with but you are might be interested? Could you please suggest a better script for cold-calling a request to apply?
Green responds:
The easiest way to do it is to just say, Im trying to circulate the job posting to people who might be interested themselves or might know people who would be. (This is also the best way to do it when youre hoping the recipient themselves will apply, but you want plausible deniability with their manager that you didnt try to recruit them away, if there otherwise would be potentially awkward relationship ramifications.)
And as for not having talked in five years: It doesnt really matter! Professional relationships dont have the same rules as social relationships. In a professional context, its perfectly fine to contact someone you havent talked to in years because you need a reference, think they might be interested in a job, or so forth. Its not considered rude just because you havent stayed in touch in the interim.
Want to submit a question of your own? Send it to alison@askamanager.org.
Alison Green
This article originally appeared on Fast Companys sister site, Inc.com.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
The highlight reel of the Milan Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics was defined by extreme trickscorkscrews, twists, and flips performed by snowboarders and freestyle skiers.
These aerial feats are complex, but in many cases, they can be traced back to a simple tool: hours spent spinning and flopping into oversize plastic bags.
Over the last 20 years, a handful of manufacturerssuch as Bagjump, Progression Airbags, and BigAirBaghave perfected the art of making massive plastic landing pads, ideal for aspiring extreme sports athletes to push the boundaries of their skills and test out new tricks year-round. Beginning with the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, athletes like Shaun White, Kevin Pearce, Danny Davis, and Sage Kotsenburg began making extensive use of this kind of training, similar to the way gymnasts would use foam pits.
[Photo: Bagjump]
The extreme levels the sports are being performed at are much safer due to Bagjump training, says Martin Rasinger, a former pro snowboarder and the inventor of the device.
Sites that have these systems, relatively few and far between, have become destinations for advanced training. WyEast Mountain Academy, an extreme sports-focused secondary school in Sandy, Oregon, installed a $4 million bag on its slopes last year thats open year-round. The 80-by-200-foot airbag, contoured to the curve of the mountain and installed using snowcat vehicles, is the largest in North America, and something that is relatively rare in the U.S. Smaller versions can be found at the U.S. Ski & Snowboard headquarters in Park City, Utah, and temporarily on Californias Mammoth Mountain.
Mt. Hood, Oregon. [Photo: Bagjump]
Troy Podmilsak, a U.S. freestyle ski jump competitor who landed a “Triple 18” in Milan during competitionthree off-axis flips combined with five full rotationstrained on the WyEast bag before the Games.
Bagjump says there are around 20 locations around the world decked out with their landing pads, including their own Banger Park facility in Scharnitz, Austria.
As soon as those bags come out, youre working on doing doubles, says Elijah Teter, athletic director at WyEast and a former Olympic coach and professional snowboarder. Now youre seeing triples and even quads.
Mt. Hood, Oregon. [Photo: Bagjump]
Designing a stronger airbag
The history of these bags is a Venn diagram of entrepreneurship, extreme sports and, in some cases, stunt crews. Before they became a key part of training, learning advanced tricks either meant experimenting during the relatively rare days with extensive fresh powderwhich acted as a natural shock absorber for adventurous athletesor putting up with the pain of repeated hard landings. And after a few jumps into the powder, the impressions left by skiers and snowboarders meant that trainees needed to find a new spot.
Rasinger tells Fast Company he got the idea for an oversize training bag after watching the airbag stunt fall during the ending of the 1997 movie The Game, starring Michael Douglas, too many times. He was so inspired, in fact, that he flew to Los Angeles, tracked down the stunt crew, and performed some 30-foot drop tests with a snowboard. He realized that to work for extreme athletes, such a bag would need to be larger, softer, and much stronger to hold up to metal snowboard edges.
Rasinger went home to Austria and built a test bag in Innsbruck in 2007; a clip of an early jump was posted to YouTube. Eventually, his company, Bagjump, would settle on a formula: a fiberglass structure with a specific PVC coating to withstand the force and cuts from boards and boarders. The company has since sold a few thousand such bags, mostly to trampoline parks or gymnastics facilities.
[Photo: Bagjump]
Users can get the bags in a variety of sizes, for sports including BMX biking and even climbing. Olympic training bags, specially designed for different snowboarding disciplines such as halfpipe and slopestyle, range from 50-by-50 feet to 120-by-230 feet. The stiffness of the bags can be adjusted to provide more give when learning a trick, and also to feel more like snow to mimic a real landing.
It’s softer and therefore also safer,because it is impact-absorbing and it does not bounce you away like netting or car tires or foam, Rasinger told ESPN in 2012. You still get a bounce from it. It’s better than hitting a concrete wallthat’s for sure.
[Photo: Bagjump]
These bags and ramp systems also have whats called a dry slope in-run, which simulates the feelingand gripof snow, giving those attempting a trick a much more realistic feeling during a practice session. That ability to train safely and consistently has made them a fixture of elite training, and one of many things pushing performances forward at events such as the Olympics.
Bagjump has had a significant impact on not just the safety aspect, but also the way the sports have progressed over the years, Rasinger says.
I called Burger King president Tom Curtis a few times this week, but it went straight to voicemail. You can try too, his number is (305) 874-0520.
Okay, so maybe its not his personal cell number, but Curtis is still taking calls and texts from anyone and everyone. On February 17, Burger King announced he would be spending at least four hours a day over the next two weeksincluding nights and weekendstaking unfiltered calls and texts from customers, hoping to hear their input about all things Burger King. Want a new Whopper variation? Call him. Have a complaint about your local BK? Call him. Come up with a fun marketing idea? Call him. Want to propose marriage? Maybe think twice.
Ive had a couple of those, but Im married, Curtis tells me after I eventually tracked him down.
View this post on Instagram
It all feels like an elaborate bit, doesnt it? This is the same brand that offered free Whoppers to clowns, hacked Google Home devices, offeed a free hamburger to anyone who deleted 10 Facebook friends, and tried to usurp the Belgian monarchy.
What corporate executive speaks outside carefully curated remarks, PR photo ops, and earnings calls, let alone mix with the hoi polloi?
The biggest challenge here for Curtis isnt answering all those phone calls, but convincing everyone that its a genuine effort to permanently embed customer opinions into the companys culture and operations, and not just another stunt for the marketing hype cycle.
People need to see action, says Curtis.
These first two weeks of Curtis taking calls is the latest move in the companys broader Reclaim the Flame project, a $400 million multi-year turnaround plan launched in 2022 for the then-struggling brand. That year was marked with restaurant closures and declining market share as Wendys overtook it as Americas no. 2 burger chain. Now, its heading in the right direction. Fourth quarter revenues were up 2.1% to $383 million. (Meanwhile, Wendy’s? Don’t ask.)
This is a compelling example of what too few brandsand company executivestake to heart. Despite all the technology, social media, and always-on mentality, so many companies still find themselves out of touch with what their brand is in culture and to the people they are serving.
Witness the seven circles of Super Bowl hell Ring found itself in after what it saw as an ode to lost dogs, turned into public fury around mass surveillance. On the other hand, Lays is hyping a recent price drop across PepsiCo Foods brands on social and giving credit to customer feedback.
View this post on Instagram
Have it your way
In 1974, Burger Kings slogan was Have it your way, putting a focus on customer menu customization. So the idea of rooting the brand in customer feedback isnt completely out of left field.
This idea of Curtis, and the brand more broadly, taking direct calls from customers started small. When he first joined Burger King in 2021, Curtis got the ball rolling by asking everyone on the leadership team to wear a brand logo of some kind as much as possible whenever theyre traveling, or even at the grocery store. The idea was that the logo would be a magnet for real people to talk about the brand unfiltered. Sure enough, at every weekly leadership meeting, stories began piling up.
About four months ago, we said, Hey, what if we took this to a whole new place and just wide open, let everybody in as much as we could, just to get as much feedback as possible? says Curtis. That was the spirit behind this.
Utilizing customer feedback is something Curtis has some experience with. He was at Dominos when that chain launched its Pizza Turnaround that used direct customer comments to spark that brands resurgence. Curtis also points to Dominos famed Pizza Tracker, launched in 2008, as a result of listening to customer feedback.
It was an answer to an insight, he says (that insight being customers wondering, Hey, where’s my pizza?). And I think what we’re doing here is similar. We’re going to get a variety of insights from this process, but I want to emphasize it won’t be a two-week process. This is a kickoff to a permanent process.
Burger King has spent the better part of a decade building a cheeky challenger brand image, through irreverent work of varying success. The creepy King mascot that began popping up in 2004, was permanently retired in 2015. The brand phased him out because, frankly, even if he was making the stoners giggle, he was scaring the kids.
Whopper Detour in 2019, which used geo-fencing and its app to offer anyone within 600 feet of a McDonald’s a one-cent Whopper, was a legitimate hit, driving app downloads and enthusiasm. But Moldy Whopper (2020), which was a very artful, 34-day time-lapse video of their signature burger rotting and becoming covered in mold to make the case for its fresh ingredients, was more a marketers darling than a wide success.
Curtis says the goal now is to make sure the brand image is genuine and likeable, which can still include fun campaigns, but must be rooted in that customer connection. He credits CMO Joel Yashinsky and the brands agency partners like BarkleyOKPR for its new positioning. Let’s be a brand by consumers, and let them define where it goes, he says. That really is empowering people to feel like the architect of this brand.
Real humans?!
One of the first areas of AI implementation for many organizations is in customer service, where chatbots are used to process mass amounts of customer feedback into digestible reports quicker than ever. Research firm Gartner has predicted that AI will autonomously solve 80% of common customer service issues by 2029. But Curtis says that there is a risk of losing touch amid the waves of data.
There’s just a magic in human interaction that I think we’re in danger of losing if we allow those processes to completely take over how we understand the consumer, he says. So by institutionalizing and operationalizing human interaction, real human interaction, I think we can unlock a powerful force of understanding of the consumer, because they’re legitimately and genuinely being heard and reacted to.
Its a surprisingly rare approach, but not wholly unique. E.l.f. Beauty, for example, has largely built its brand around how it engages with and implements ideas from its community. CMO Kory Marchisotto has often talked about how the brands participation on platforms like TikTok, Twitch, and beyond is all about what its customers are saying about the brand and the places theyre saying it, and those signals become a guide that shapes everything that follows.
The starting point is cultivating community, Marchisotto told The Drum in December. Were able to catalyze community data into insights and once we have that we co-create. We co-create content experiences, platforms, products that are for them, by them.
Burger King has already begun that process with its Whopper By You work launched last summer, which solicits ideas for new Whopper variations from customers and then releases them as limited edition drops like the BBQ Brisket Whopper and Crispy Onion Whopper. According to the company, its received more than 600,000 submissions, and considers the releases so far among its most successful limited edition products.
This approach is in line with other chains looking to make personalization more fun and community-oriented by featuring fan suggestions as limited menu items. Starbucks, for example, launched its “secret menu” last summer and asked customers to submit and vote on their favorite customized beverages.
Burger King isnt abandoning utilizing complex data analysis to make sound decisions, though. After finding that its apple pie dessert was the most requested discontinued menu item at its drive-thrus, the brand brought it back in January for the first time since 2020.
Suspicion economy
Ad agency BarkleyOKRP has been Burger Kings lead ad agency since 2022, and worked closely with the brand on not only this overall idea, but how to tap into it for brand marketing campaigns. The challenge is walking the tightrope between hyping the idea that Curtis and his team want to hear from you, without making it feel disingenuous.
View this post on Instagram
The age of AI slop, media manipulation, and waves of brand BS has helped forge (or accelerate) a suspicion economy, where no one really thinks anything is sincere. BarkleyOKPR executive creative director Matt McNulty says what got Curtis and his team excited was how listening to peoplehearing the good, bad, and uglywas vulnerable. People often think vulnerability can appear as weakness, at least in the cultural lexicon of brands, says McNulty. But this is sincerely vulnerable. It’s asking someone, how can I be better? And it’s honest.
This all sounds rather obvious for brands who are constantly talking about how they want to resonate with culture. So why isnt this approach more common? McNultys fellow executive ceative director Ben Pfutzenreuter says it comes down to risk. If you look across corporate America, I think you see a position of hedging and risk mitigation, says Pfutzenreuter. But I think the answer to a culture of anxiety and risk mitigation is actual conviction.
Not a stunt man
Ultimately, the only real way to combat suspicion is with consistent action. As Curtis says, this is only the beginning.
So far there have been largely two types of feedback: The kind about peoples local restaurant, and then that about the broader brand, like menu items and marketing. The good news on the feedback about their local experiences is we’ve got those channels set up, says Curtis. We’re calling the owners of those restaurants back. Many of those restaurants we own ourselves. So they’re going to see that type of change instantly. Brand actions will take longer. If I’m going to change the french fries, I’ve got to do the right research, testing, and set up suppliers to be able to support that.
Unfortunately for Curtis, until a major product or innovation of some kind that customers can really see, touch or taste emerges, were forced to take his word for it. Thats not lost on him, either. In fact one of his biggest challenges is making sure the focus remains on the feedback and not talking about the feedback.
The agency is trying to do its job and capture amazing content, he says. But I’m trying to make sure that everybody feels heard and knows that this isnt a marketing stunt.
For now, the only way to do that is to keep putting Curtis on the phone and let him cook.
How are you feeling about the stock market these days? Depending on who you talk to, the American economy is either poised to soar into the stratosphere or fall off a cliff. As the current administration has been delighted to point out, the Dow Jones Industrial Average recently closed above 50,000 for the very first time.
However, that does not reassure the 72% of American consumers who, according to Pew Research, feel pessimistic about the economyciting concerns about the cost of healthcare, food and consumer goods, and housing. If the pessimists are correct, those high consumer costs will negatively affect the stock market sooner or later.
Even with the current good news about the market, theres a reason why it feels like were all waiting for the other shoe to drop. We are all facing a great deal of uncertainty as investors and consumers, between recent (albeit temporary) market volatility in response to political and economic news and the way AI is disrupting the market and the economy.
Its enough to make you want to cash out all your investments and bury the moolah in your backyard. But just because it feels like were ripe for a market crash doesnt mean theres one on the horizon. And if there is a correction coming, there is plenty you can do to prepare for it.
Heres what you need to know about positioning yourself and your money for a potential market crash so youre not left picking up the pieces.
Know what you have
Answer honestly: do you know where all your 401(k)s are?
If youre not sure, youre not alone. Unclaimed retirement accounts are a serious problem that the Department of Labor is working to rectify. As of 2025, there were approximately 31.9 million retirement accounts, totaling about $2.1 trillion, left behind or forgotten by employees leaving the sponsoring workplace.
The stress of watching the economic roller coaster while feeling completely powerless is bad enough. Adding the sense that you dont even know what you have, where it is, or if theres anything you can do to protect yourself is just gilding the anxiety lily. Thats why the first step in preparing for a potential market correction is to make sure you know where (and what) all your investments are.
Start by identifying all of your accounts and reclaiming any that you have lost track of. In addition to the DOL, you can also check the National Registry of Unclaimed Retirement Benefits for any missing accounts. But you can also contact the human resources department of previous employers for help.
Even if you dont have any misplaced retirement benefits, now is also a good time to review all of your accounts and investments. Do you know what you are invested in? Do you know why?
Knowing what you currently have can help you make informed decisions going forward, whether you assume a future of economic sunshine or storm clouds.
Figure out how to stay the course
Market crashes are terrifyingbut unless you cash out your investments, they can be temporary. When you see your portfolio lose a huge percentage of its value, its human nature to want to stop the bleeding. But you need to stay the course until the market bounces back, because selling your investments right after a crash means locking in the loss.
This is much easier said than done, of course. Even the most risk-loving, ice-in-their-veins investors will feel their stomachs drop when their portfolios suddenly have a lot fewer zeroes than they did the day before. Thats why its a good idea to figure out ahead of time what will keep you from panic-selling if there is a sudden market downturn.
Some strategies for staying the course include:
Invest in quality companies/stocks/indexes that are likely to survive a recession. Now is a good time to make certain you understand your investments.
Make sure you have enough liquidity. If you treat any of your investments as a potential emergency fund, set up another fund or source. If youre unable to transfer any of your investments into a more liquid asset, consider opening a HELOC as an alternative.
Look for opportunities to invest. Market downturns can be a good time to purchase under-priced assets. (Just dont be one of those jerks who crows about getting stocks on sale all over social media. Read the room, dude.)
Go on a news diet. You dont need to know every dip and drop in the market. Youll feel better when you put your phone down and youll save money on all the antacids you dont have to buy.
Rebalance your portfolio
Part of a well-balanced money diet is making sure you dont have too many eggs in one basket. You probably already diversify your portfolio by splitting your investments into long-term, higher-risk/higher-reward investments, medium-term, lower-risk investments, and short-term, low-risk investments.
While most investors think about how they want to diversify their portfolio when they start investing, it can be easy to forget to rebalance that bad boy when the ratios get out of whack.
Thats why regularly rebalancing your portfolio should be part of your semi-annual or quarterly money management plan. This financial task is when you check on where your investments are compared to your investment strategy and goals. Then you buy or sell investments to bring your portfolio back into balance.
For example, anyone currently invested in the Dow is probably over-invested compared to their investment strategy or goals. Selling off some of that investment and investing the money elsewhere will not only allow you to capture the growth that the Dow is currently enjoying, but it will also help protect you from potential future volatility in the Dow index.
Getting into the habit o rebalancing your portfolio will help ensure that you keep market growth when it occurs, which can help you keep your cool and stay invested through downturnsbecause you know you kept the gains and can wait out the losses.
Make like a hitchhiker and DONT PANIC
No politician, economist, or MBA has a crystal ball, so theres no telling what the stock market will do in the future. But if your spidey senses have been tingling about the possibility of a market downturn, there are some practical steps you can take to protect yourself and your portfolio if were headed for a fall.
Start by making sure you know what you have. If youve lost track of any of your retirement or investment accounts, take the time to hunt them down so you feel in control of your funds. Now is also the time to double check that you know what youre invested in and why.
From there, figure out what youll need to stay the course in case there is a crashsince a loss in value is temporary until you cash out. Some good strategies for staying the course include ensuring that youre invested in quality assets that you understand, providing yourself with enough liquidity to handle an emergency during a downturn, planning on purchasing underpriced assets, and putting yourself on a news diet.
Finally, regularly rebalancing your portfolio is good investment hygiene, but it will also help you feel more confident when staring down a potential market correction, since youll know youve captured the growth of the market when it went gangbusters.
Market crashes arent inevitable, even if stomach-churning fluctuations probably are. But panicking is always optional and you can opt out.
Biometric authenticationthe ability to unlock your devices by using just your face or fingerprintis one of the few smartphone features that, even today, leave me feeling like were living in the future. When I was a kid, technology like facial recognition was limited to science fiction. But as cool and useful as biometric authentication is, the technology can also leave us vulnerable. Heres whyand how to protect yourself.
Its not just journalists and activists who can have their biometrics used against them
Last month, journalists got a stark reminder that their biometrics might not keep the data they have on their devices safe from law enforcement searches. While the Fourth Amendment usually protects an individual from having to turn over a PIN code or password for a device, courts have generally ruled that the same protection doesnt apply to biometrics.
This means that in some cases, authorities can compel you to unlock your phone with your fingerprint or facial scan. Its why many press freedom and civil liberty organizations have long advised journalists and activists to disable biometric authentication like facial recognition on their devices and return to requiring a passcode to unlock them.
But its not only journalists and activists who have to worry about their phones’ biometrics making themand their datavulnerable. A phones most convenient identity verification feature can leave any one of us exposed. There have been reports of people unlocking their partners’ phones using their biometrics while they were sleeping, as well as reports of criminal gangs forcing victims to unlock their phones with their biometrics to steal cryptocurrencies.
Of course, sometimes forced biometric unlocks are less nefarious. Ive heard parents complain that their children have unlocked their phones by holding the device up to their face, or with a touch of their fingerprint, while they were sleeping, in order to disable software that restricts the internet in their house after certain hours.
If someone wants to gain access to your phone, and you happen to be physically available (unknowingly or not), all the person needs is access to your face or finger to do so.
Giving up convenience for more security
While biometric authentication is one of the most convenient features of todays smartphones, the scenarios above exemplify how the technology can leave us at risk. However, if you are in a situation where you believe that your biometrics may leave you vulnerable, there are, thankfully, some easy steps you can take to mitigate this risk.
The first is to permanently disable biometric authentication on your smartphone. Doing so means youll need to enter your passcode every time you unlock your phone. Yes, it will take a couple of seconds longer to get to your home screenbut it also means that no one can steal your face or finger and unlock your phone while youre sleeping.
To disable your iPhones biometrics (called Face ID or Touch ID, depending on your iPhone model), open the Settings app, tap Face/Touch ID and Passcode, and then toggle the iPhone Unlock switch to “off.”
For Android users, disabling the facial or fingerprint biometric feature may differ slightly, depending on your phone model. On a Pixel phone, you can disable fingerprint unlocking by going to the Settings app, tapping Security and privacy and then Device unlock, and then deleting your registered fingerprints.
When in doubt, restart
Of course, biometric authentication like facial recognition is one of the great conveniences of modern lifeone that many of us would have a hard time giving up for good. If you fall into this camp but still want the extra security that disabling biometric authentication provides, you can quickly deactivate the biometric unlock feature on your iPhone or Android device by restarting it.
When your phone shuts down and restarts, your biometrics will not unlock the device until after you enter your passcode. Many activists use this trick when crossing borders or attending politically contentious events.
And its not a bad one to remember right before you turn off the nightstand light, if you think your kids might be waiting until you fall asleep to snatch your phone.
Olympians arent just physically exceptionaltheyre masters at managing where their attention and energy go.
Cognitive research finds a key link between working memory and performance: elite athletes are better able to regulate their memory and attention than their less-trained peers, and this ability predicts better performance under pressure.
What separates peak performers isnt just effort, but also the discipline to balance their mental load. In other words: their thoughtload.
Consider thoughtload the invisible tax on your ability to perform. It consists of three problems that erode your effectiveness:
The cognitive demands of competing priorities
The emotional burdens of uncertain times
The depleted energy reserves that make everything feel more difficult
When thoughtload is high, even talented, motivated people underperform. But Olympians succeed because they refuse to carry unnecessary thoughtload. So how do you begin to reduce your own load? Four strategies can help.
1. Flip your focus
Olympians know that keeping their attention focused on performance is critical to achievement. Take the U.S. figure skating team, who had more than a few members skip this years opening ceremonies to stay locked in.
At work, we tend to do the opposite. Instead of starting the day with our eyes on the prize, we let our inbox and calendar dictate our priorities, hoping that enough activity will lead to success.
Lowering your thoughtload means flipping that logic. Begin with the outcome youre being rewarded for: more paid users, lower churn, a better accounts receivable balance. Then identify the few outputs that will move the needle and the activities that will get you there.
2. Budget your attention
Elite athletes also dedicate consistent hours to training, no matter how assured their place is as a champion: practice is always on the calendar. But at work, we frequently allow ourselves to switch priorities or allocate our time in the wrong places.
Think of your time as a finite resource to spend. Pick one critical outcome and decide how much of your attention it deserves; only after that, allocate your remaining time for other important outputs and even a few side pursuits. Defer, decline, or delegate everything else that doesnt fit in your attention budget.
3. Use an emotion track
Even with your gaze locked in, emotional distractions can come from within. For an athlete, it might be a fall in practice or a menacing new competitor. For you, its a missed target, a tense exchange, or an unwelcome piece of feedback. Emotions are unavoidable, but unprocessed emotions slow you down.
Olympians understand that emotional baggage from yesterdays disappointment can sabotage todays performance; take the many that use sports psychologists to work through poor performances and devastating crashes.
You can reduce the hold of your feelings with an emotion track, which helps pinpoint and reroute distracting emotions. It consists of four simple steps: place, name, question, act.
Notice the place youre experiencing the feeling, like sweaty palms or a racing heart.
Name the feeling youre experiencing precisely, like frustration or anxiety.
Question the story youre telling yourself about why youre feeling that way, and if its rational.
Choose one action that helps you move forward, whether it addresses the issue directly or just helps you get in a better headspace.
4. Hold an energy audit
Energy management isnt about indulgence or self-care. Its about making the right investments, so you have the physical, mental, and emotional energy when you need it most.
Olympians plan exertion and recovery with rigor. But at work, we often treat energy as unlimited until it suddenly runs out. There are back-to-back meetings, deadlines strung one after the next, new change initiatives starting before youve had the chance to embed the previous ones. All that adds up to fatigue that leads to poor decisions.
Instead, try an energy audit. List three activities that reliably energize you and three that inevitably drain you. Then make small shifts to increase your investment in the first group and reduce your exposure to the second. Even minor changes can make your thoughtload feel much lighter over time.
Elite performance isnt reserved for elite athletes. Its available to anyone willing to carry less so they can accomplish more.
In November 2025, the Trump administration announced a special park pass commemorating the nations 250th anniversary that featured images of two presidents: George Washington and Donald Trump.
Featuring the current presidentin place of the National Park Services usual landscape picturestriggered both a lawsuit and a social media movement to put stickers over Trumps face.
As a businessman, Trump has frequently emblazoned buildings and consumer productsshoelaces, an airline, an edition of the Bible, among many otherswith his own name.
During his current presidential term, his administration has put his name on numerous government propertiesperhaps most famously the Kennedy Center, but also money, monuments, and military equipment. In January 2026, Trump floated the idea Congress would rename both New Yorks Penn Station and Washingtons Dulles International Airport after him.
With Florida lawmakers considering renaming the airport near Mar-a-Lago after the president, the Trump Organization has filed an application to trademark his name for use in airports and ancillary activities, although the company said it would not charge a fee in the case of the Palm Beach airport.
As a communication professor who studies the First Amendment, I was intrigued by the federal actions and the protests theyve triggered.
Citizens certainly have the right to protest these decisions, like any government action. The First Amendment prevents the government from making laws that abridge freedom of speech.
But does the federal government itself have freedom of speech? And can a president put his name and image wherever he wants?
Free speech for government
The answer to the first question has already been answered. In a series of rulings, the Supreme Court has upheld the government speech doctrine, which allows the government as speaker to say whatever it wants.
Moreover, if the forum is governmental, the government may even be able to compel people to express its messagesfor example, with public employee speech that is part of job duties. The 2006 Supreme Court decision establishing that principle involved a deputy district attorney whod questioned the validity of a warrant, but the rule applies to other employees, such as teachers who have to offer instruction in state-mandated curricula.
The courts decisions in government speech cases imply that if people do not like the government speech, they should change the government with their votes.
However, some scholars and advocates argue that this relatively new constitutional doctrine gives the government too much power to drown out other viewpoints in the marketplace of ideas.
In most instances, the government cannot compel speech or force citizens to express a certain message. Compelled speech is not allowed when the government is forcing a citizen to endorse an ideological message.
For example, the Supreme Court allowed a Jehovahs Witness to cover the words or Die on his license plate, which included the New Hampshire state motto, Live Free or Die.
The First Amendment is not absolute, and some government regulations will infringe on speech.
The federal government has strict regulations on how the American flag should be disposed of, but it cannot punish someone who is burning a flag as a form of political protest.
Government control of its own products
What happens when the government itself hosts forums for citizen speech, such as placing monuments in a park or flying flags on government property? Can the government deny certain speech based on the speaker or message?
In such cases, courts have had to decipher whether the forum was purely governmental. To do so, they examine the history of the forum in which the contested speech takes place, who controls the forum, and the public perception of who controls it.
This brings us back to the question of Trumps name and likeness. As a constitutional matter, the Trump administration can express itself as it sees fit under the government speech doctrine. But in some cases, the administration may be bound by statute or formal contracts, as with the legal battle over the naming of the Kennedy Center, which was named by an act of Congress. The awsuit over the National Park passes claims that the administration is violating a federal law requiring that the winning entry in a public lands photo contest be used for the passes.
Still, I believe it would be difficult to win a lawsuit claiming that the new passes are a form of compelled speech, with bearers of the pass arguing they are being forced, in effect, to endorse Trump. Most people would likely see the park passes artwork as being controlled by the government and therefore a form of government expression, not a form of private expression.
Can people cover up Trump?
But the Trump administration may not be able to defend its policy of declaring passes null and void if the presidents image is covered by a sticker. Citizens protesting Trumps appearance by covering up the presidents image is protected speech, in my view. The governments action to void the passes is likely a violation of the First Amendment.
On the face of it, placing stickers on passes would appear to violate the long-standing Interior Department rule that passes are void if altered. Those regulations were content neutral and incidental to any particular message or cardholder.
However, the updated policy, voiding the pass if Trumps image is covered or marred, is more suspect. The new rules seem to be a direct response to the protesters political speech and, as applied, primarily aim to affect these stickers and speakers.
With an administration known for its social media savviness, it may not be convincing for officials to argue they did not know about the protest or that the policy was not a direct attempt to chill such speech.
The government will have the right to put Trumps name and images on more government property in many cases, but most resulting political protests, in my view, will also be protected speech.
Jason Zenor is an associate professor of mass communication at the State University of New York Oswego.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Milan Cortina Winter Olympics may be winding down, but the memories will linger for years to come.
The competition began on Wednesday, February 4, with the official opening ceremony on Friday, February 6. A little more than two weeks later, the Games will conclude with an epic closing ceremony on Sunday, February 22.
So much action was packed into the event that it was a full-time job keeping up. Since a lot of people have actual full-time jobs, heres a look back at the highlights, endearing moments, and heartbreaks of the XXV Olympic Winter Games.
How can I track 2026 Winter Olympics medals?
First things first. You can stay up to date with all of the medals and medalists who have emerged victorious this winter with this handy medal count tracker on Olympics.com. Now for the highlights.
The first gold medal of the Games
While it is quite an impressive accomplishment to even qualify for the Olympic Games, lets be realmost athletes want to win it all.
Franjo von Allmen got to live out his wildest dreams when he took home the first medal of the Games for Switzerland in the mens downhill alpine skiing event. He liked winning gold so much that he did it again two more times.
His story off the slopes highlights the power of community.
When von Allmen lost his father when he was just 17 years old, it appeared that his skiing aspirations might have to be put on hold because of finances. Instead, those around him crowdfunded so the young athlete could continue to pursue his dreams.
Team USAs first gold medal
The first gold medal for Team USA came in the women’s alpine skiing downhill event. Breezy Johnsons time of 1 minute, 36.10 seconds, bested Germanys Emma Aicher by a mere 0.04 seconds.
Johnson is now one of only two American women to win the Olympic downhill. Her gold medal? Well, it broke shortly after Johnson was presented it. Thankfully, she eventually got a replacement.
Lindsey Vonns Crash
The other American woman to win a gold medal in alpine downhill skiing is Lindsey Vonnshe won it in 2010. She also has two bronze medals, one for the Super-G (2010) and the other for alpine downhill (2018).
On the same day of Johnsons win (February 8), Vonns 2026 Olympic medal dreams came to an unfortunate end when she crashed and fractured her left leg.
Curling baby
A happier Olympic moment involves the 1-1/2-year-old son of Swiss curlers Briar Schwaller-Huerlimann and Yannick Schwaller.
After his parents won their opening game in overtime, River took to the ice to get in on the action. Fans thought he looked adorable with the curling broom. Its never too early to begin your Olympic dreams.
A shirtless celebration
On the opposite side of the age spectrum, Austrian Benjamin Karl could not contain his excitement after winning gold in the men’s parallel giant slalom snowboard event.
After the medal ceremony, he ripped off his shirt to celebrate the achievement. It was his second consecutive win in the event, having also taken home gold in 2022. Karl proves that age is just a number, as his latest victory makes him the oldest individual gold medalist in Winter Olympic history, at 40 years and 115 days old.
This title was short-lived, as Elana Meyers Taylors life experience uncrowned Karl shortly after (see below).
Favorite foods of Olympic athletes
No matter how old they are, competitors have to fuel their bodies to compete. Communal meals in the athlete villages are there to help. In Paris, chocolate muffins were all the rage.
Meanwhile, several social media posts have celebrated different cuisines in Milan and Cortina.
Lava cake and tiramisu seem to be the sweet-treat favorites of the 2026 Games. For carb-loading purposes, pasta was served in the shape of the Olympic rings. This meal was a triple threat: delicious, pretty, and practical.
Ilia Malinins backflip
Backflips were once a no-no in the figure skating world. American Terry Kubicka made history at the 1976 Olympics in Innsbruck, Austria, when he successfully landed the move in competition for the first time.
The next year, the International Skating Union banned it, citing safety and technical reasons. Backflips involve taking off and landing on two feet, whereas other jumps only utilize one foot.
The move didnt disappear from figure skating completely, even though it was outlawed. Many athletes chose to execute the move in exhibition skates. In the 1998 Nagano Games, French skater Surya Bonaly added it to her routine.
Last year, the International Skating Union reversed the ban, paving the way for American skater Ilia Malinin to do his thing in 2026. Malinin was dubbed the “Quad God” because of his ability to land a quadruple axel in competitions while continuing to raise the technical stakes even higher.
He was the clear favorite to win gold in mens singles figure skating. After the short program, he was even five points ahead of the pack. But he fell twice during the long program, resulting in an eighth-place finish.
Despite his heartbreak, he immediately congratulated gold medalist Mikhail Shaidorovteaching the world how to lose with grace. However, Malinin did take home a gold medal from the earlier team skating event, and it’s doubtful the Olympics have seen the last of him.
American womens hockey takes home gold
Things have long been tense between the United States and Canada, and we are not talking tariffs. The long-lasting rivalry between the womens hockey teams was on full display in the 2026 Winter Games.
This time around, Team USA took home the gold after a nail-biting final matchup. Amercan captain Hilary Knight scored the goal that tied the game, forcing an overtime battle. This set up Megan Keller to net the final nail in Canadas defeat. The crowd went wild.
Among the loudest supporters of the women were Haley Winns older brothers: Casey, Ryan, and Tommy Winn.
This trio went viral for wearing over-the-top matching outfits and posting their support on social media. The Winn familys home videos also show how Haleys brothers were instrumental in teaching her the love of the game.
Figure skating gold medal
More good news on the ice: Team USAs 24-year gold medal drought in womens figure skating was put to an end by Alysa Liu.
The 20-year-old had walked away from the sport when she was 16 because she was burned out.
After the short program, she was in third place. Her impressive performance to Donna Summers “MacArthur Park” focused on joy. This propelled her to win that gold medal.
A Canadian curling scandal
A less joyous occasion occurred when two Canadian curlers were accused of cheating.
The first incident took place on Friday, February 13, when Canada was up against Sweden. Canadian Marc Kennedy was accused of double-touching the stone, which is against the rules. He had some heated words for his opponent Oskar Eriksson.
The following day, a similar incident happened when Canadian women’s captain Rachel Homan faced more cheating accusations. These events caused the World Curling governing body to further explain the rules of the game.
The sport does not use video playback, so no retroactive penalties are added, as on-ice calls are considered final.
A wolfdog gets in on the action
Who said humans get to have all the fun at the Winter Olympics? Not this four-legged friend.
During the women’s cross-country skiing team sprint, Nazgul wanted to play. This 2-year-old Czechoslovakian wolfdog may not have won a gold medal, but he sure stole everyones hearts.
Sturla Holm Lgreids confession
They say cheaters never prosper, but Sturla Holm Lgreid has won five medals at the time of this writingthree silver and two bronze in the various individual and relay biathlon events (cross-country skiing and rifle shooting).
While Lgreids athletic feats are impressive, he went viral for another dramatic reason instead. During a live on-camera interview, he admitted to cheating on his ex-girlfriendin an attempt to get her back.
While this could be considered a grand romantic gesture, his ex does not appear to think so and issued a statement saying she wishes she wasnt in the spotlight.
Elana Meyers Taylors bobsled victory
Elana Meyers Taylor, 41, is no stranger to Olympic competition. She debuted in 2010 and has medaled in all five of her appearances.
Milano Cortina was her retirement year, and boy did she go out on top, winning her first gold medal. She was victorious in the monobob, a one-person bobsled event.
Her triumph was earned by being 0.04 seconds faster than Germany’s Laura Nolte. This mother of two almost gave up feeling guilty about the time the sport took her away from her family. This makes the viral moment of her signing to her boys that she won even sweeter.
Chloe Kims sportsmanship
American Chloe Kim is the golden girl of snowboarding. She was heavily favored to win gold in this years games, defending her 2022 win.
This was not how it went down on the halfpipe. Instead, South Koreas Gaon Choi took home gold, with Kim taking home silver. In a wonderful display of sportsmanship (instead of getting angry), Kim immediately went over to celebrate with her 17-year-old rival.
The sweetness didnt start there. Even before the games, Kims family helped bring Choi to the United States to train after seeing her potential, despite playing for different countries and teams.
Kim saw herself in Choi and acted as a mentor. Perhaps thats the true meaning of the games after all.
