Showing posts with label values. Show all posts
Showing posts with label values. Show all posts

Thursday, June 4, 2026

Who Is a Library Leader? | Editorial; Library Journal, May 4, 2026

 Hallie Rich, Library Journal; Who Is a Library Leader? | Editorial

"Lessons from 25 years of Movers & Shakers

In Library Journal’s 150th year, I find myself stepping back in time to reflect on the wisdom of many “library greats” who advanced the profession to where it stands today. Sometimes their work was highly visible, other times it was a quieter continuation of learning, iteration, and innovation.

In Library Journal’s 150th year, I find myself stepping back in time to reflect on the wisdom of many “library greats” who advanced the profession to where it stands today. Sometimes their work was highly visible, other times it was a quieter continuation of learning, iteration, and innovation.

I’m inspired both by lessons from past library leaders and those who excel at different levels today. This month we celebrate LJ’s 2026 Movers & Shakers, our 25th class. Many who were previously recognized have gone on to lead in the traditional sense of the word. Among our cohorts, we have Movers who became major library system directors, state librarians, school library district administrators, respected academics, ALA presidents, and a few SLJ and LJ Librarians of the Year.

Others have delivered excellent work, charting a path within librarianship that aligns with their individual interests and local, sometimes urgent, needs. Their efforts reflect a form of leadership that emerges while performing their duties with passion.

In his editorial announcing the first class of Movers & Shakers, the late John N. Berry III celebrated the librarians who lead through practical action and a dedication to professional values. He believed that leadership isn’t a skill to be taught nor guaranteed by fancy accolades. Rather, he wrote, “the best of us achieve leadership or have it thrust upon us.” I share his words from March, 2002:

Currently the library field is afflicted with yet another rash of initiatives devised to discover, identify, educate, and/or train leaders. When self-anointed leaders design such efforts, they usually mean ‘we need more librarians like us.’ When those who are not leaders do it, they usually mean ‘more people like us should be leaders.’ That’s why I’m suspicious when some library organization or group sets out, again, to identify ‘up-and-coming leaders,’ or claims it will train or educate the next generation of library leaders. My suspicions deepen when any group refers to itself as ‘the leadership.’

The activities and exercises they invent for developing leaders make me suspicious, too. They have all the earmarks of elites aborning or being strengthened. When they set up ‘retreats’ in the desert of Arizona, or climb to a leadership ‘institute’ on some mountainside in Utah, or gather for a ‘leadership weekend’ at some prestigious campus, I watch the results and wonder where the ‘leaders’ they found went afterwards. I notice that too often what is taught at these gatherings frequently mistakes management and/or administration for leadership. That is probably the most common mistake in leadership education, and it leaves me questioning if it is really possible to ‘educate’ or ‘train’ people to be leaders....

Of course, you can identify the smart, the just, and the articulate. Sure, you can teach the techniques of public speaking. You can explain the fundaments of fairness and justice. You can run courses and offer degrees in management and administration. None of these guarantees leadership or greatness. Indeed, if recent events are any indication, going to the best schools, earning the most money, and holding the top jobs don’t ensure legitimate or legal leadership....

So, when you receive the Movers & Shakers supplement with the March 15 [2002] issue of LJ, look only for ‘potential’ leaders and possible greatness. We have profiled more than 50 library staffers and library-industry workers who surely possess that potential. We’ve noticed them in action, heard about them from colleagues, or seen the results of their efforts. We think many of them are already library leaders, and more will become leaders....

What distinguishes them and what distinguishes leaders from the rest of us is that not only do they have strong convictions, they pursue them on the job. They have the potential for library greatness because they hold passionately strong beliefs about libraries and library service. They are driven by their professional concern that no one should be denied information because of his or her point of view, age, or the nature of the information. In short, their work is defined by our professional core values and our ideology. That is what will make them leaders and great librarians."

Thursday, May 7, 2026

KASH PATEL’S PERSONALIZED BOURBON STASH; The Atlantic, May 6, 2026

Sarah Fitzpatrick, The Atlantic; KASH PATEL’S PERSONALIZED BOURBON STASH

"George Hill, a former FBI supervisory intelligence analyst, told me that Patel’s conduct represented a fundamental misunderstanding of the bureau’s history and of the culture of quiet professionalism that he had observed working under previous FBI directors. “Handing out bottles of liquor at the premier law-enforcement agency—it makes me frightened for the country,” he said. “Standards apply to everything and everyone—especially the boss.”

Hill and others described an organization struggling to uphold its mission amid purges of experienced staff and under a distracted leadership. “When you degrade the office like that, you degrade the impact,” Hill said, adding that he was particularly concerned about what would happen in a time of crisis. “It’s a failure to lead.”

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

‘Alpha’ troops and more ships: Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao outlines vision for service; Navy Times, April 28, 2026

, Navy Times; ‘Alpha’ troops and more ships: Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao outlines vision for service

"Recently appointed Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao delivered brief remarks Tuesday about his plans for the Navy during one of his first public appearances as the head civilian leader of the service.

Cao touched on his vision for the Golden Fleet, modernization efforts for the Navy and Marine Corps and the type of values and military ethos he is looking for in future service members while speaking at the Modern Day Marine exposition in Washington.

Cao took over as the acting secretary Wednesday after previous Navy Secretary John Phelan was fired by the Trump administration.

Cao, who previously criticized a sailor who performed as a drag queen, described what he viewed as ideal qualifications for future service members.

“I don’t need cross-dressers in the military,” Cao said. “I need alpha males and alpha females.”

Cao also said the military didn’t need “leaf eaters,” likely referring to vegetarians, and he wanted meat eaters instead."

Tuesday, March 3, 2026

Fans value ethics over innovation at AI hologram concerts, new study finds; Phys.org, March 3, 2026

 , Phys.org; Fans value ethics over innovation at AI hologram concerts, new study finds

"The recent success of the ABBA Voyage virtual reunion tour and the Tupac hologram at Coachella show how audiences embrace these performances as opportunities to relive shared cultural milestones.

However, little is known about how consumers perceive the uniqueness, nostalgia and ethicality of holographic AI concerts, and how these perceptions translate into emotional and social values.

"Ethics is not optional—it's definitely strategic," said researcher Seden Dogan, assistant professor of instruction in the USF School of Hospitality and Sport Management. "When using technologies like holograms or AI to recreate past artists, ethical responsibility matters more than novelty alone."

Dogan is the lead author of the paper, "Reviving legends through holographic AI event experiences: Consumer acceptance and value insights," recently published in the International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.

"Audiences care more about whether the holographic performance felt respectful and morally appropriate than about how innovative or memory-evoking it was," Dogan said."

Tuesday, February 3, 2026

NFL looking into messages between Giants co-owner Steve Tisch and Jeffrey Epstein; The Guardian, February 2, 2026

 and agencies, The Guardian; NFL looking into messages between Giants co-owner Steve Tisch and Jeffrey Epstein

"The NFL says it is looking into links between New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Tisch’s name was mentioned more than 400 times in emails relating to Epstein that were released by the US justice department last week. Tisch has never been charged with any crime connected to the investigation into Epstein.

“The league is aware of the reports and Steve’s response. Our office will look into the matter to understand the facts,” the NFL said in a statement on Monday.

The emails, which were sent in 2013, include messages in which Epstein arranged for Tisch to meet various women...

The NFL could punish Tisch under its personal conduct policy, even if there is no evidence of any criminal wrongdoing on his part.

“Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from ‘conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in’ the NFL,” the policy reads. “It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime in a court of law. We are all held to a higher standard and must conduct ourselves in a way that is responsible, promotes the values of the NFL, and is lawful.”"

Tuesday, December 30, 2025

New Year’s Eve Concerts at Kennedy Center Are Canceled; The New York Times, December 29, 2025

Adam Nagourney and , The New York Times ; New Year’s Eve Concerts at Kennedy Center Are Canceled


[Kip Currier: The principles of integrity and character are unsurprisingly alien to Richard Grenell. Artists are likely canceling Kennedy Center engagements because they don't want to be associated with an administration that has attacked free expression and the diversity of human experience, financially diminished the arts, as well as science, and that has violated federal law by adding Donald Trump's name to an arts organization memorializing our slain 35th President, John F. Kennedy Jr.

Standing up for values one believes in -- values that are bigger than oneself -- is an example of moral courage, not "derangement".]


[Excerpt]

"A veteran jazz ensemble and a New York dance company have canceled events at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, intensifying the fallout at one of the nation’s pre-eminent arts centers after it was renamed to include President Trump...

The Cookers did not give a reason for the decision in a statement on Monday that said, “Jazz was born from struggle and from a relentless insistence on freedom: freedom of thought, of expression, and of the full human voice."...

Doug Varone and Dancers, a New York dance company, also said on Monday that it was canceling two performances in April that had been intended to celebrate its 40th anniversary. Mr. Varone, the head of the company, said it would lose $40,000 by pulling out.

“It is financially devastating but morally exhilarating,” he said in an email.

Richard Grenell, the Kennedy Center’s chairman, said in a statement on Monday night that the artists canceling shows were “far-left political activists” and that they had been booked by previous leadership. “Boycotting the arts to show you support the arts is a form of derangement syndrome,” he said."

Sunday, December 28, 2025

MAGA Official Slammed for Clobbering the Living Christmas Lights Out of AI Santa Claus; The Daily Beast, December 28, 2025

, The Daily Beast; MAGA Official Slammed for Clobbering the Living Christmas Lights Out of AI Santa Claus


[Kip Currier: I was curious about Indiana State Sen. Chris Garten's values and background when I saw this story. So it's eye-opening to see his own descriptor of himself on his Facebook page:

"My name is Chris Garten. I am a Christian, husband, father, Marine Corps veteran..."

https://www.facebook.com/GartenforSenate/

Though Garten's military service is commendable, nowhere in the Bible would the Christian Jesus condone the kinds of actions that Garten portrays himself performing in these AI-generated images of himself brutalizing Santa Claus. How do such images advance one of Jesus's greatest Commandments to "love thy neighbor as thyself" (Matthew 22:39, Mark 12:31)?

How does a person who self-identifies as a Christian justify such depictions to others, as well as when he prays? Especially when Jesus stands for helping the "least among us" (Matthew 25:40) and says that "the last shall be first" (Matthew 20:16).

Even in jest, do these images convey a sense of good judgment or an elected official who is a positive role model in a free and democratic society?]


[Excerpt]

"A MAGA official has branded his critics “snowflakes” after marking this year’s holiday season by sharing his apparent fantasy of whaling on a defenseless Saint Nick on the steps of Indiana’s State Capitol building.

State Senator Chris Garten shared the AI-generated images on X on Christmas Day. One of the four pictures features the two-term Republican state senator, decked in a sleeveless suit à la WWE, kicking a bewildered Santa Claus squarely on the chin to send the beloved, age-old children’s folk character sailing backwards through the air.

A second shows the MAGA official launching himself forward with the apparent intention of following up with a flying punch to the jaw. A third shows him further brutalizing the trembling, mythic gift-giver as he writhes in agony on the floor...

“Lots of intolerance, swearing, and outrage on display over a few AI pics I had a blast designing with my kids,” he wrote in a subsequent post. “Some of you clowns are just insufferable. Hopefully your negativity stays in the comments and not directed at your families.” 

“Merry Christmas, snowflakes,” Garten added, accompanied by another AI-generated photo of himself in a Santa suit, pointing at an oversized snowflake."

Tuesday, August 19, 2025

Marines investigating social media post that appears to mock potential recruit; Task & Purpose, August 18, 2025

  , Task & Purpose; Marines investigating social media post that appears to mock potential recruit


[Kip Currier: This is a really interesting story on several levels. I wouldn't have necessarily expected the Marine Corps to take such a strong stance against what is clearly an example of cyberbullying, given the Corps' reputation as the nation's elite fighting force. It's encouraging to see such an unequivocal response against bullying. When you consider the challenges that most military branches have had with meeting recruitment goals in recent years (see here and here), though, it makes practical sense that this kind of social media bullying would be viewed as counter-productive, as well as unethical.

Given Pete Hegseth's stated intent to instill "warrior culture" and both Hegseth and Trump 2.0's "war on wokeness", which I can imagine them arguing this stance against bullying would exemplify, it will be interesting to see if Hegseth comments on this incident or overrides the statement by Captain Hardin (see below).]

[Excerpt]

"Marine Corps officials are investigating whether a Marine derided a poolee on social media for not completing the Corps’ Delayed Entry Program, which allows potential recruits to prepare to ship out to boot camp. (Civilians in the Delayed Entry Program for the Marine Corps are colloquially referred to as “poolees.”)

An image shared on the unofficial Marine subreddit page appears to be a screenshot of an Instagram post showing a picture of a young man standing in front of a wall with the Marine Corps’ Eagle, Globe and Anchor emblem with the word “Quitter” superimposed over him.

Underneath the picture is a description about how the Marine Corps is not for the “weak minded,” and how the Delayed Entry Program is meant to “get rid of the weak and to help others who want it grow to their full potential.”

The post, which appeared over the weekend, “did not reflect the values and standards” of the Marine Corps and included language that “was inconsistent with the supportive and professional environment we strive to maintain,” said Capt. John Hardin, director of the Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island Communication Strategy and Operations Office.

“We are investigating the incident thoroughly and taking appropriate action to ensure that our recruiting personnel uphold the highest standards of conduct,” Hardin said in a statement to Task & Purpose."

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

Female vets in Congress slam Hegseth’s repost of Christian Nationalist; Military Times, August 13, 2025

 Carla Babb, Military Times; Female vets in Congress slam Hegseth’s repost of Christian Nationalist


[Kip Currier: Pete Hegseth's views are antithetical to the fundamental American values of equality, liberty, and the inherent dignity of every human being.]


[Excerpt]

"Democratic congresswomen, including several military veterans, are demanding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth apologize and resign after reposting a video about a Christian nationalist church with pastors who advocate for the repeal of the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, and feel women should not serve in certain combat and leadership positions.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), an Army helicopter pilot who lost both of her legs during combat in Iraq, told Military Times, “these views are antiquated, flat out wrong and — more dangerously — designed to justify discrimination and mistreatment of women, including those who sacrifice in uniform to defend Americans.”

“He is the least qualified secretary of defense in our nation’s history — despite commanding tens of thousands of women who actually are qualified and earned their jobs, unlike him," she added. “Hegseth’s incompetence and outright idiocy continue to put our troops and national security at greater risk every day he remains in office, and he should resign in disgrace immediately.” 

In the CNN video, the pastors also said they want the United States to be a Christian republic. They call for the criminalization of homosexuality and expect women to submit to their husbands. 

“Women are the kind of people that people come out of … it doesn’t take any talent to simply reproduce biologically,” Pastor Doug Wilson says in the video...

Military Times reached out to Republican female military veterans in Congress for comment but did not receive a response as of this publication."

Wednesday, July 2, 2025

Bill Moyers, a Face of Public TV and Once a White House Voice, Dies at 91; The New York Times, June 26, 2025

, The New York Times; Bill Moyers, a Face of Public TV and Once a White House Voice, Dies at 91

"In an age of broadcast blowhards, the soft-spoken Mr. Moyers applied his earnest, deferential style to interviews with poets, philosophers and educators, often on the subject of values and ideas. His 1988 PBS series, “Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth,” drew 30 million viewers, posthumously turned Mr. Campbell — at the time a little-known mythologist — into a public broadcasting star, and popularized the Campbell dictum “Follow your bliss.” 

A Sense of Moral Urgency’

To admirers, many of them liberals, Mr. Moyers was the nation’s conscience, bringing to his work what one television critic called “a sense of moral urgency and decency.” Others, mostly conservatives, found him sanctimonious and accused him of bias. In a 2004 retrospective, the conservative website FrontPageMag.com called him a “sweater-wearing pundit who delivered socialist and neo-Marxist propaganda with a soft Texas accent.”...

PBS to CBS and Back

Mr. Moyers turned down offers to edit newspapers, run colleges and co-host the “Today” show on NBC. (“I just didn’t like the idea of selling dog food in a world where so many people were eating it,” he told People magazine.) Instead, he began producing a weekly public affairs program on PBS, devoting entire shows to topics like the Watergate scandal and public education. John J. O’Connor of The Times called his show, “Bill Moyers Journal,” “one of the most outstanding series on television.”

Monday, June 2, 2025

Where is the moral courage in the decision to eliminate DEI at UMich?; The Michigan Daily, April 10, 2025

 Kevin Cokley, Ph.D., is the University Diversity and Social Transformation Professor of Psychology and Associate Chair for Diversity Initiatives at the University of Michigan, The Michigan Daily; Where is the moral courage in the decision to eliminate DEI at UMich?

"There appears to have been no resistance by the administration to the factually inaccurate criticisms of DEI by the regents, resulting in a pivot on the University’s supposed core values. Perhaps my understanding of values differs from the administration’s. Values are what people or institutions believe are fundamentally right or wrong and what are most important in life. Institutional core values are not supposed to be easily changeable, and if University leadership is so quick to abandon its core values of DEI, one may wonder if they were ever really core values to begin with.

I’m reminded of the proverb, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.” This proverb means that in difficult times, individuals with strong character are even more determined to succeed. As the University and higher education at large are being threatened with, what are likely, unconstitutional executive orders, it is more important than ever to have leaders who defend the University’s core values rather than acquiesce...

Martin Luther King Jr. once addressed the moral courage that one needs to stand up for what is right. He said, “Cowardice asks the question — is it safe? Expediency asks the question — is it politic? Vanity asks the question — is it popular? But conscience asks the question — is it right? There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because one’s conscience tells one that it is right.”"

Thursday, May 1, 2025

In Suits and Ties, Lawyers Protest Trump’s Attacks on the Legal System; The New York Times, May 1, 2025

 , The New York Times; In Suits and Ties, Lawyers Protest Trump’s Attacks on the Legal System The National Law Day of Action, which drew roughly 1,500 people in New York City, was organized to resist the president’s threats against judges and the nation’s jurisprudence.

"About 1,500 demonstrators, many of them lawyers sporting business attire, jammed the plaza outside Manhattan’s federal courthouse as part of the National Law Day of Action, chanting in favor of the rule of law and hoisting pocket Constitutions to the sky.

It was one of around 50 similar actions around the nation on Thursday, led by lawyers who said President Trump was threatening the foundation of America’s legal system.

“The rule of law protects us all. Without it we will surely fall,” the crowd chanted.

In his second term, Mr. Trump has aimed to hobble elite law firms, threatened to impeach judges and ignored their orders. For many in the profession, his actions have presented an unpalatable choice between compromising their values by staying silent and facing professional risk by speaking out."

Monday, March 3, 2025

The ABA rejects efforts to undermine the courts and the legal profession; American Bar Association (ABA), March 3, 2025

American Bar Association (ABA) ; The ABA rejects efforts to undermine the courts and the legal profession

"Three weeks ago, the American Bar Association spoke to you about values that guide us. We called upon every lawyer to insist that the government adhere to four major principles of law that have guided our country for over 200 years: Defending Judges and Courts, Acknowledging the Role of the Courts, Adhering to the Rule of Law, and Respecting the Separation of Powers and the three co-equal branches of government with distinct duties and responsibilities. These principles have been bedrocks of American democracy. The ABA does not shrink from standing in support of each of them.

Since that time, government actions evidence a clear and disconcerting pattern. If a court issues a decision this administration does not agree with, the judge is targeted. If a lawyer represents parties in a dispute with the administration, or if a lawyer represents parties the administration does not like, lawyers are targeted. We issued statements standing up for these four key principles, and a government official targeted us by instructing some of its lawyers not to attend ABA meetings or participate as speakers. These actions highlight escalating governmental efforts to interfere with fair and impartial courts, the right to counsel and due process, and the freedoms of speech and association in our country.

Consider the facts about our courts:

High-ranking government officials (appointed and elected) have made repeated calls for the impeachment of judges who issue opinions with which the government does not agree. There have been calls to impeach “corrupt judges” with no effort to produce evidence of the so called “corruption.” These have been directed only at judges who have ruled against the government position.

There have now been statements by officials criticizing judges for not following the will of the people. Judges swear oaths to follow the law, not public opinion polling or political chatter or what someone contends is the will of the people. The chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court wrote in his 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary, “[w]ithin the past year we have also seen the need for state and federal bar associations to come to the defense of a federal district judge whose decisions in a high-profile case prompted an elected official to call for her impeachment. Attempts to intimidate judges for their rulings in cases are inappropriate and should be vigorously opposed.”

We may disagree with interpretation of case law, but it is unacceptable to personally target judges just because we disagree with their ruling. We cannot have a judicial system where the government seeks to remove judges simply because they do not rule as the government desires. Considering the increasing physical threats to judges, these are clearly efforts to intimidate judges and our courts.

The courts are a co-equal branch of our government, and they must be treated that way. We call upon the government and our elected officials to cease making these statements. Government officials know they can appeal decisions they do not like. That is the appropriate way to disagree with a decision of a court.

Despite these efforts to intimidate, our courts are doing their job of reviewing disputes and applying the law. The ABA will defend our courts because we support the rule of law. We encourage every lawyer to do the same and demand these attacks on our judiciary stop immediately.

The efforts to intimidate have now expanded to include the legal profession. Consider the facts:

An executive order has targeted legal and medical organizations because of their DEI advocacy. Just a few days ago, a high-ranking government official indicated that law firms that represent parties against the government should be identified even though this information is already public.

Justice Department lawyers and assistant U.S. attorneys have been the subject of personal attacks, intimidation, firings and demotions for simply fulfilling their professional responsibilities. It is especially disturbing because the government has espoused publicly that it will not weaponize or politicize the Justice Department. The actions against Department of Justice employees belie these assertions.

Now the government has decided to punish a prominent Washington, D.C., law firm because it represents a party that the administration does not like. There are also reports that actions may be taken against more law firms. Clients have the right to have access to their lawyer without interference by the government. Lawyers must be free to represent clients and perform their ethical duty without fear of retribution. These government actions deny clients access to justice and betray our fundamental values.

We support the rights of people to advance their interests in courts of law when they have been wronged. We reject the notion that the government can punish lawyers who represent certain clients or punish judges who rule certain ways. We cannot accept government actions that seek to tip the scales of justice in this manner.

We speak today on behalf of the legal profession and its members who seek to live by the oath each took upon admission to the bar. This is not something we do lightly nor is it the first time we have spoken in opposition to actions against an administration, regardless of political party.  We sued or opposed policy proposals of the last few administrations when they failed to adhere to the rule of law or interfered with access to justice, and we are doing the same with the current administration. We are nonpartisan. We stand for the rule of law. We stand for the vital role of our courts and the essential job that lawyers do every day throughout our country. We have stood on this ground for many years.

We reject efforts to undermine the courts and the profession. We will not stay silent in the face of efforts to remake the legal profession into something that rewards those who agree with the government and punishes those who do not. Words and actions matter. And the intimidating words and actions we have heard must end. They are designed to cow our country’s judges, our country’s courts and our legal profession. Consistent with the chief justice’s report, these efforts cannot be sanctioned or normalized.

There are clear choices facing our profession. We can choose to remain silent and allow these acts to continue or we can stand for the rule of law and the values we hold dear. We call upon the entire profession, including lawyers who serve in elected positions, to speak out against intimidation. We acknowledge that there are risks to standing up and addressing these important issues. But if the ABA and lawyers do not speak, who will speak for the organized bar? Who will speak for the judiciary? Who will protect our system of justice? If we don’t speak now, when will we speak?

The American Bar Association has chosen to stand and speak. Now is the time for all of us to speak with one voice. We invite you to stand with us.

– William R. Bay, president of the American Bar Association"

Wednesday, November 6, 2024

America Makes a Perilous Choice; The New York Times, November 6, 2024

THE EDITORIAL BOARD, The New York Times; America Makes a Perilous Choice

"Benjamin Franklin famously admonished the American people that the nation was “a republic, if you can keep it.” Mr. Trump’s election poses a grave threat to that republic, but he will not determine the long-term fate of American democracy. That outcome remains in the hands of the American people. It is the work of the next four years."

Thursday, October 17, 2024

Californians want controls on AI. Why did Gavin Newsom veto an AI safety bill?; The Guardian, October 16, 2024

Garrison Lovely, The Guardian; Californians want controls on AI. Why did Gavin Newsom veto an AI safety bill? 

"I’m writing a book on the economics and politics of AI and have analyzed years of nationwide polling on the topic. The findings are pretty consistent: people worry about risks from AI, favor regulations, and don’t trust companies to police themselves. Incredibly, these findings tend to hold true for both Republicans and Democrats.

So why would Newsom buck the popular bill?

Well, the bill was fiercely resisted by most of the AI industry, including GoogleMeta and OpenAI. The US has let the industry self-regulate, and these companies desperately don’t want that to change – whatever sounds their leaders make to the contrary...

The top three names on the congressional letter – Zoe Lofgren, Anna Eshoo, and Ro Khanna – have collectively taken more than $4m in political contributions from the industry, accounting for nearly half of their lifetime top-20 contributors. Google was their biggest donor by far, with nearly $1m in total.

The death knell probably came from the former House speaker Nancy Pelosi, who published her own statement against the bill, citing the congressional letter and Li’s Fortune op-ed.

In 2021, reporters discovered that Lofgren’s daughter is a lawyer for Google, which prompted a watchdog to ask Pelosi to negotiate her recusal from antitrust oversight roles.

Who came to Lofgren’s defense? Eshoo and Khanna.

Three years later, Lofgren remains in these roles, which have helped her block efforts to rein in big tech – against the will of even her Silicon Valley constituents.

Pelosi’s 2023 financial disclosure shows that her husband owned between $16m and $80m in stocks and options in Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Nvidia...

Sunny Gandhi of the youth tech advocacy group Encode Justice, which co-sponsored the bill, told me: “When you tell the average person that tech giants are creating the most powerful tools in human history but resist simple measures to prevent catastrophic harm, their reaction isn’t just disbelief – it’s outrage. This isn’t just a policy disagreement; it’s a moral chasm between Silicon Valley and Main Street.”

Newsom just told us which of these he values more."