 |
|
|
|||||
Biotech giant Moderna announced it will lay off 10% of its workforce in a move CEO Stéphane Bancel called a difficult decision but necessary step forward, in an internal memo sent to employees today. The move sent Modernas stock price (NASDAQ: MRNA) tumbling over 5% through Thursday morning, and signals a further contraction of the once fast-growing business. I know this is a difficult moment for the company, Bancel said in the memo announcing layoffs. We all feel a range of emotions whenever we have to say goodbye to colleagues. Moderna declined to comment on which areas of the business would be most impacted by the workforce reduction. Moderna became a household name during the COVID-19 pandemic, when its mRNA vaccine became the second authorized for emergency use against COVID-19. At the time, it quickly scaled up its manufacturing capabilities and workforce to supply billions of vaccines in America and around the world. Since the pandemic, however, the biotech firm has struggled to maintain the size of its operation. In 2024, Modernas annual revenue was less than half of what it was in 2023$3.2 billion compared to $6.8 billion. This year, the company is seeing further decline. It brought in just $108 million in the first quarter, 35% less than the first quarter of 2024, as it faces mounting challenges from the federal government. Under Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and proponent of the anti-vaxxer movement, the HHS has taken aim at the mRNA vaccines Moderna specializes in. These vaccines work by introducing a piece of mRNA, a single-stranded molecule similar to DNA, that instructs cells on how to make a harmless version of a virus. The body then makes antibodies, proteins used by the immune system to annihilate harmful substances, that can fight off the real virus. Although mRNA vaccines are widely used, safe, and effective, those skeptical of the innovation have driven lawmakers to curtail the companies behind them. In May, the CDC revised its guidelines for COVID-19 vaccination and the FDA made it more difficult for vaccines to be approved. The second Trump administration also cancelled a $766 million contract with Moderna to develop a vaccine against influenza viruses, such as H5N1 bird flueven as the company announced positive early results. In response to uncertainty in the vaccine market and decreasing revenue, earlier this year, the company committed itself to reducing annual operating costs by $1.5 billion by 2027. The layoffs today are the next step in achieving that reduction, following a significant drop in R&D spending and limiting supplier and manufacturing costs. Despite slimming down the business, Bancel said the companys mission will remain unchanged and notes there are still opportunities to expand Modernas product line. The future of Moderna is bright, Bancel said in a memo to employees. We are sharpening our focus, becoming leaner, and staying ambitious in oncology, rare diseases, and latent viruses. Moderna is expected to report its Q2 financial results tomorrow.
Category:
E-Commerce
Microsoft became the second company to pass a $4 trillion market cap mark after a blowout earnings release on Wednesday afternoon. That release showed quarterly revenue up 18% year-over-year, and net income up 24%, which resulted in Microsoft shares increasing more than 4% on Thursday, bringing the companys overall value past $4 trillion. Microsoft follows Nvidia as the only two companies to have breached $4 trillion, and Microsofts stock has more than doubled over the past three years. Its also roughly six years after Microsoft passed the $1 trillion mark. Other companies are also hot on its heels. Here are five others that could become the next $4 trillion companies. Apple Apple will report earnings on Thursday after the bell, which could have an impact on its overall value. As it stands, the company has a market cap of roughly $3.1 trillionstill a ways off from $4 trillionbut is the third-largest public firm in the world, measured by market cap. It was the first company to cross the 1 trillion, $2 trillion, and $3 trillion market cap marks, too, and shares are currently trading at around $210. Notably, shares are down almost 15% year to date, but have nearly doubled in value over the past five years. Amazon Amazon is the fourth-largest public company in the world by market cap, with an overall value of around $2.5 trillion. Like Apple, Amazon will report earnings after the bell on Thursday, which could increase or decrease its value. The company does have a lot of ground to make up on Microsoft and Nvidia to reach $4 trillion, which would require some significant movement in its share price, which is currently trading at more than $230. Alphabet Alphabet, Googles parent company, is the only other public company worth more than $2 trillion as of writing, with a market cap of around $2.33 trillion. Like Amazon, that means theres quite a lot of work to do to get to $4 trillion. Alphabets shares were trading for around $192 on Thursday afternoon, which was an intraday decline of 2%. Alphabets most recent earnings report came out on July 23. Meta The only other company within spitting distance of $4 trillion is Meta, which, as of writing, has a market cap of around $2 trillion. Following its latest earnings release on Wednesday, Meta shares increased 12%, with revenues up 22% year-over-year, and net income up 36%.
Category:
E-Commerce
Did the New York Times deceive readers into needlessly despairing over the welfare of Gazas children? Or did the Paper of Record fail readers by sowing doubt into its own reporting on those children, with a needless update to an important article? For many, the answer seems contingent on which social media site they preferX or Bluesky. The precise, bizarro-world opposition of the two reactions reveals a lot about how a public narrative takes hold in 2025s wildly fractured info environment. Just over a decade ago, BuzzFeed ignited a raging debate online with a post about The Dress. Some observers were sure that the garment in question was white and gold; others swore it was actually blue and black. Both sides argued endlessly. It was the ideal introduction to an era in which everyone could look at the exact same image and see something completely different. Now, Americans are so ideologically polarized, our competing realities each have their own bespoke microblogging platforms. Both reacted strongly to an update issued by the Times on July 29. The update was to a July 25 article with the headline: Gazans Are Dying of Starvation. In its delicate approach to perhaps the worlds most divisive issue, the article soberly described the claims and counter-claims around the dearth of food and medical aid in Gaza, but it left no ambiguity around severe malnourishment in the devastated regionespecially among children. The article arrived at a critical moment, when even some of Israels fiercest advocates, including journalist Bari Weiss and President Donald Trump, have expressed concern over the starvation crisis. Then came the editors note. A controversial update The articles conclusion now carries a post-script about one of the many children depicted in it: an 18-month-old boy whose spinal column is horrifyingly visible through his back. This article has been updated to include information about Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, a child in Gaza suffering from severe malnutrition, the announcement begins. After publication of the article, The Times learned from his doctor that Mohammed also had pre-existing health problems. Those health issues are never precisely named, though the text of the article now mentions that the problems affect[ed] his brain and his muscle development. The updated version still clearly states, though, that the toddlers health deteriorated rapidly in recent months as it became increasingly difficult to find food and medical care, and that the medical clinic that treated him said he suffers from severe malnutrition. In other words, nothing about the update contradicts the thrust of the article in any way. However, the update arrived following a PR pressure campaign about the article, culminating in a July 27 item in the New York Post with this headline: Viral images of starving Gaza boy dont tell the whole story because he suffers from genetic disorders, critics say. In response to the Post tweeting that item, popular X account StopAntisemitism, known for doxxing people who express pro-Palestinian views and agitating to get them fired, posted an image of a healthier-looking child standing near the malnourished toddler in question, and accusing NYT of cropping him out. The Times editors now found themselves in a defensive position. Issuing an editors note or an update is no light matter, as either runs the risk of being conflated with a correction. While the former typically involves added context or even a mere clarification on a story, the latter is an acknowledgment that something in the story was wrong and has been corrected. Even though the purpose of a correction is to be transparent with readers about factual errors, corrections are often seen by observers as an admission of wrongdoing on the part of news organizations Whatever internal deliberations at the Times ultimately led to the update, its effects were quickly seen in two very different responses. A tale of two Twitters Although the New York Times PR account on Bluesky never posted about the update, the one on X did, and screenshots of the tweet quickly migrated to the other site, where thousands of accounts began circulating and condemning it. Mileage may vary depending on who one follows on Bluesky, but posts about the NYT update were practically inescapable among the sites politics and media contingent. False alarm, everybody! Turns out the kids theyre starving to death werent perfectly healthy to begin with so no biggie— Kevin M. Kruse (@kevinmkruse.bsky.social) 2025-07-30T12:06:21.258Z Some called out the cruelty of treating a childs pre-existing condition as some kind of gotchaas though children with health issues are more easily malnourished or that including them to indicate devastation is journalistic malpractice. They pointed out how, on the other hand, that nutrition is even more important for such children. Others drew attention to how the update’s wording mirrored those who had dismissed the severity of Covid on the basis that many who died from it had pre-existing conditions. Meanwhile, the reaction on X was a photo negative of the one on Bluesky. Although plenty of X users shared the same concerns as those on the other site, an abundance of Xs more visible residentsthe algorithm-boosted premium subscriberswere just as outraged as their counterparts, only for inverse reasons. Way too late. This correction will get 1/1000th the reachThe story was a blood libel against Jews everywhereYou should have a long hard look in the mirror and reassess whats going on at your paper— Shaun Maguire (@shaunmmaguire) July 29, 2025 The general tone among many responding to the update was fury that the Times had apparently manufactured sympathy by withholding information. Here, the editors note primarily seemed to be received as a correctionand a nefarious one at that. It was as though the omission of one childs questionably relevant medical condition had invalidated the articles description of Hollow-eyed, skeletal children languish[ing] on hospital beds or [being] cared for by parents, who gaze helplessly at protruding ribs and shoulder blades, and emaciated limbs resembling brittle sticks. Several X users demanded a retraction or firings, and parroted StopAntisemitisms claims that the Times had strategically cropped out a healthier child from the offending photo. It was a dark mirroring of the reaction on the other platform, reflecting the fullness of our co-existing realities. But which one would be absorbed into the broader narrative? The loudest voice wins The NYT article arrived at a tipping point in U.S. attitudes about the Israel-Hamas war. As of July 29, according to Gallup, only 32% of Americans support Israels military action in Gazaa new low since the company started polling the issue in November 2023. The more the focus remains on famine and starving children, the more pressure on the U.S. government to address in a meaningful way a humanitarian crisis it has helped perpetuate. By issuing an update to what may be the most significant article on the malnutrition epidemic, the Times has now given that 32% a cudgel against rising sympathy toward Gazans: the whiff of a media hoax. Because X has magnitudes more users than its competitor, its still considered closer to the mainstream, with Bluesky cast as the scrappy woke fringeMSNBC to Xs Fox News. And since the loudest voice tends to win these days, the actual Fox News is already echoing the X position that NYT deceived the world about what is happening in Gaza. Just look at this chyron— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona.bsky.social) 2025-07-30T14:54:06.367Z Its a cynical way to treat a literal matter of life and death for so manyand unlike an article in the Paper of Record, there can be no mitigating update for dying from starvation.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||