Minor league pitchers Luis Moreno, Alejandro Crisostomo suspended after positive drug tests
Popular Science Announces the Best Innovations of 2024Missing Persons: The Characters of “Nightbitch” Are Left Blank
Arguments over whether Luigi Mangione is a 'hero' offer glimpse into unusual American momentIf you’ve been wondering when you’d hear the name Thom E. Gemcity again on NCIS , you’re in luck! McGee’s ( Sean Murray ) pen name will be “resurrected” in the December 16 Christmas episode. “We’re going to tease a forthcoming third Deep Six novel from McGee,” executive producer Steven D. Binder tells TV Insider. In “Humbug,” when a shocking tell-all threatens to ruin Christmas for a decorated Marine, the team must uncover the truth and deliver a holiday miracle—before the book hits shelves and turns a hero’s legacy into a holiday disaster. “It’s going to be a pretty heartfelt holiday story involving wounded veterans,” says the EP. LaRoche ( Seamus Dever ), the man who took the job McGee wanted in the Season 22 premiere (Deputy Director), is back for this episode. McGee has thought something’s been off about the guy since. “This is where McGee really becomes suspicious of LaRoche’s motives. He’s going to be assigned to the team to work with them for a little while,” teases Binder. Brian Dietzen previously told us of this next episode , “Like our [previous] Christmas episodes, it is holiday-themed, it’s wrapped up. This is one where you can watch it and go, ‘Oh, that’s kind of the NCIS Christmas tradition is that you get to watch a show that has a beginning, middle, and end, and then you’re off to your holidays after that.'” He also confirmed there won’t be any mistletoe lying around to make things awkward for Dr. Palmer and his ex-girlfriend Knight ( Katrina Law ). “No, not in this one. I don’t think so,” he said with a laugh. What are you hoping to see in the Christmas episode this season? Let us know in the comments section below. NCIS , Mondays, 9/8c, CBS More Headlines: ‘NCIS’ Preview: Christmas Episode Raises McGee’s Suspicions About LaRoche ‘What We Do in the Shadows’ Stars & Creatives Tease Series Finale ‘Sticks the Landing’ (VIDEO) New Year’s Eve: How to Ring in 2025 With Your Favorite TV Hosts Christian Slater Reacts to That ‘Dexter: Original Sin’ Death & Creator Explains New Intro College Football Playoff & Bowl Game TV Schedule 2024
The House subcommittee investigating former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) partisan January 6 Special Committee “interviewed hundreds of witnesses,” but testimony from the most notorious star of Pelosi’s hearings is conspicuously absent from its report. The subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), issued an interim report December 17, 2024, calling former White House employee Cassidy Hutchison the Pelosi “Select Committee’s star witness.” But despite the subcommittee “interview[ing] hundreds of witnesses,” the committee’s report makes no reference to bringing in Hutchinson for questioning – despite mentioning her by name 268 times. According to a source, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) personally intervened to block the subcommittee from issuing a subpoena to Hutchinson. Johnson, in a statement to Breitbart News, called that claim “clearly false.” Breitbart asked the subcommittee and Loudermilk’s personal office why the subcommittee did not question Hutchinson despite her prominence throughout the report and the subcommittee’s otherwise thorough, exhaustive work. Breitbart also asked about any alleged interference from Johnson in the subcommittee’s work, particularly if Johnson interfered in any efforts to subpoena Hutchinson. The subcommittee and Loudermilk’s office did not respond. Johnson’s full statement to Breitbart, in which he denies blocking the subpoena, also broke the news that he will be continuing the subcommittee’s work into the next Congress, but that it will be “elevated” to the full committee level. Johnson’s statement regarding Breitbart’s source’s claim reads in full: This is clearly false. I have never blocked any subpoena and don’t even have the authority to do so. As Speaker, I have pressed for full transparency regarding the events of January 6 and the Democrats’ sham J6 Committee. I directed our House Oversight subcommittee to release the J6 video footage for the American people to see, and I allocated almost two million additional dollars to hire additional staff to conduct the crucial investigative work. We are proud of the subcommittee’s important work in exposing the false narratives and lies peddled by the Democrats’ J6 committee. But there is much work still to be done, so I am elevating the investigation from the subcommittee level to the full committee level — thereby giving it full subpoena authority. We look forward to House Republicans continuing this investigation and working with the incoming Trump Administration, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, to fully expose the phony and politically-motivated J6 Committee. The statement does not make clear what role Loudermilk will play after the investigation is elevated out of the Oversight Subcommittee. Breitbart shared Johnson’s statement via email with a spokesperson for the subcommittee and asked for a comment, including if the subcommittee was made aware by Johnson that its work would be continued by the committee. The spokesperson did not respond. As Johnson’s statement alludes, the subcommittee does not have unilateral authority to issue subpoenas. Generally in the House, subcommittees must issue subpoenas through the cooperation of the full committee. Loudermilk has said he would relish the independent subpoena power afforded by a select committee. The subcommittee spokesperson did not respond when asked if the House Administration Committee or its chairman, Rep. Bryan Steil (R-WI), ever interfered with an attempt to issue a subpoena to Ms. Hutchinson, although Breitbart is unaware of any attempt from Steil to do so. In his report , Loudermilk writes that one of the two conditions he needed before accepting the subcommittee assignment from then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) was “that I have the autonomy and resources needed to effectively pursue the facts without political bias or outside influence.” “McCarthy assured me that I would be given what I needed to conduct a real investigation and proper oversight,” Loudermilk said. He continued: At one point, the work of the subcommittee was completely halted due to the removal of Kevin McCarthy as Speaker, and subsequently faced internal efforts to derail the investigation. However, our team persevered through the delays; and, when Mike Johnson took the gavel as Speaker of the House, he allocated even more resources to our investigation and committed to more transparency for the American people. The Oversight Subcommittee possesses more resources than most similarly constituted subcommittees, enabling it to beef up its staff, although the subcommittee has remained confined by the constraints of serving under a full committee. Loudermilk’s work chairing the subcommittee has been widely praised by Republicans, even by Donald Trump himself. Trump heaped praise Sunday on Loudermilk for his “great work” as chairman. “Congratulations to Congressman Barry Loudermilk on the great work he has done in exposing the massive corruption of the J6 Unselect Committee of Political Thugs!” he posted on Truth Social, also thanking Mark Levin for elevating much of Loudermilk’s work. “We need more Warriors like Barry and Mark to expose the massive corruption taking place in our Country!” Hutchinson worked on Capitol Hill for then-Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) and followed him to the White House when he became Trump’s Chief of Staff. She served in several relatively low-level capacities which included acting as a gatekeeper to Meadows – a role through which Hutchinson would have interacted with numerous lawmakers seeking time with Meadows. Loudermilk’s subcommittee has blasted Hutchinson for communicating with disgraced Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) without her own attorney’s knowledge. Those communications began after Hutchinson had sat before the committee twice. After Hutchinson and Cheney began communicating, Hutchinson went back to the committee and began introducing multiple new claims, many of them secondhand, which were subsequently denied by those present. In his report, Loudermilk says “Cassidy Hutchinson’s most outrageous claims lacked any evidence, and the Select Committee had knowledge that her claims were false when they publicly promoted her.” “[T]he Select Committee chose to focus the conclusions of its nearly one-thousand-page report largely on the uncorroborated and inconsistent testimony of one witness—Cassidy Hutchinson,” the report points out. “Hutchinson gave Representative Cheney and the other Members of the Select Committee exactly what they were looking for.” Bradley Jaye is a Capitol Hill Correspondent for Breitbart News. Follow him on X/Twitter at @BradleyAJaye .Timeline: Jimmy Carter, 1924-2024Christmas: Ndume Gives 25 Bulls To Army formations In Southern Borno
( ) is a Canada-based company that went public in late 2021. Over the last three years, the has returned over 250% to shareholders, crushing broader market returns by a significant margin. However, PRL stock also trades 8% below all-time highs and remains a top investment choice at current multiples. Here’s why I’m bullish on Propel Holdings stock right now. Propel Holdings is a fintech company that facilitates access to credit products such as installment loans and lines of credit to customers in Canada and the United States. It has increased sales from $60.2 million in 2018 to $416.4 million in the last 12 months. Despite elevated interest rates, Propel increased its sales by 41% year over year to $117.2 million, while adjusted net income growth was higher at 66%. It ended the third quarter (Q3) with a combined loan and advances balance of $432 million, up 44% year over year. While most Canadian banks have a return on equity of less than 20%, Propel reported an ROE of 34% in Q3, up from 27% in the year-ago period. Its adjusted ROE rose from 37% to 45% over the last 12 months. Propel completed the acquisition of QuickMarket for a purchase price of $71 million in Q3, allowing it to enter the U.K. market. The acquisition was funded by an equity offering of $115 million and should be immediately accretive to revenue and earnings. A strong U.S. economy, coupled with low unemployment rates and steady GDP growth, should help Propel increase its revenue over the next 12 months. Unlike several other growth stocks, Propel reports a consistent profit and even pays shareholders a growing dividend. Propel recently raised its annual dividend by 7% year over year to $0.60 per share, which translates to a forward yield of 1.6%. In fact, the company has raised its dividends six times since the start of 2023. Investors should expect the dividend payout to keep growing as revenue is forecast to touch $450 million in 2024 and $629 million in 2025, given consensus estimates. Analysts project adjusted earnings to expand from $0.98 per share in 2023 to $2.57 per share in 2025. So, priced at 14.6 times , PRL stock trades at a reasonable valuation. During the recent earnings call, Propel emphasized leveraging artificial intelligence capabilities to support its credit disbursement process and maintain credit quality. Moreover, its partnership with Coho should expand distribution channels and create a scalable growth avenue by gaining traction in multiple underserved markets. Further, investors are bullish on Propel because of its lending-as-a-service business, which is experiencing ongoing geographic expansion, a widening purchaser base, and an increase in commitments from existing clients. Propel appears to be executing well on multiple fronts while maintaining strong credit quality and operational efficiency. The company’s investment in AI and technology infrastructure seems to be paying off through improved metrics across the board. Analysts tracking the stock remain bullish and expect it to gain over 20% from current levels, given consensus price target estimates.
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — New Jersey gambling regulators have handed out $40,000 in fines to two sportsbooks and a tech company for violations that included taking bets on unauthorized events, and on games that had already ended. In information made public Monday, the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement fined DraftKings $20,000. It also levied $10,000 fines on Rush Street Interactive NJ and the sports betting technology company Kambi. According to documents released by the state, Rush Street accepted 16 bets worth $1,523 in Nov. 2021 on a college basketball game between the University of North Carolina-Asheville and Tennessee Tech University after the game had already concluded with a UNC victory. Kambi told the enforcement division that a trader had failed to manually remove that game from its betting markets, saying it had stopped receiving messages from its own sports data provider due to a network connectivity error. Kambi said it has updated its guidelines and retrained its traders to prevent a recurrence. Kambi, which is based in Malta, did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Monday. Rush Street declined comment, and DraftKings had no immediate comment Monday. DraftKings stopped using Kambi in 2021. In March 2022 Rush Street took seven bets totaling just under $2,900 on three Magic City Jai Alai games after the results were already known. Kambi told the division it experienced a connectivity issue that allowed the bets to be accepted after the games were over. An explanation of what Kambi did to address the situation was blacked out in documents released by the division. A month earlier Rush Street took 13 wagers worth $8,150 with pre-match odds on a Professional Golf Association match after the event had already begun. In this case, Kambi told the division a newly hired trader failed to enter the correct closing time time for bets on the event. The trader and a supervisor underwent retraining. DraftKings was fined for taking bets on unapproved events including Russian basketball for nine months in 2020 and 2021. It eventually voided over $61,000 in bets and returned the money to customers after being directed to do so by the state. In this case, Kambi told the division it misidentified this particular Russian basketball league as one that was approved for wagering in New Jersey. DraftKings told the state it did not catch the error, either. In 2020, DraftKings accepted 484 wagers on unapproved table tennis matches. Kambi incorrectly enabled the events for wagering without conditions required by the state, the division said. In Feb. 2022, the division said DraftKings took pre-season NFL bets involving specific players but did not give the state specific information on what information was to be included in the bets, drawing 182 wagers worth nearly $7,000 that were later voided and refunded to customers. Follow Wayne Parry on X at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC
No Country For Old MacroAP News Summary at 3:53 p.m. EST
This article was originally published on March 2, 2021, ahead of Brooklyn Museum’s retrospective exhibition “Lorraine O’Grady: Both/And.” O’Grady died at the age of 90 on December 13, 2024. On a very hot day in September 1983, the artist Lorraine O’Grady dressed in all white, pinned a pair of white gloves to her shirt, and joined the annual African American Day Parade in Harlem. The other participants were marching bands, Black community groups, and brands; O’Grady had entered her own float, an empty nine-by-15-foot gold-painted wooden picture frame that she’d built with friends and mounted upright on a flatbed. As it made its way along Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Boulevard, the frame captured the people and sights on both sides of the street within its gilded bounds. O’Grady had hired 15 young Black performers who walked and danced alongside it, carrying smaller golden frames that they held up before members of the crowd. Big black letters on either side of the flatbed proclaimed ART IS ... O’Grady, then 48, had decided to become an artist just six years before, after two marriages, an attempt at a novel, and stints as a translator and rock critic. She was still finding her footing, running up against both a white art world that ignored and dismissed Black artists and a Black one that, she felt, was sometimes too eager to play it safe. The float was a conceptual statement, a rebuttal to a Black social-worker acquaintance who’d told her, “Avant-garde art doesn’t have anything to do with Black people!” As Art Is ... rolled by, Black paradegoers smiled and posed and mugged for the frames held up by O’Grady’s performers, shouting, “That’s right! That’s what art is. We’re the art!” “I’ve never had a more exhilarating and completely undigested experience in my life,” she later wrote. O’Grady hadn’t publicized Art Is ... , telling just a handful of peers about it; there was no review, no public feedback aside from what she got from participants. “I thought no one had noticed,” she told an art historian many years later. It wasn’t until the late aughts that she would pull out of storage hundreds of slides taken by friends and onlookers at the parade and turn 40 of them into an installation. Once it caught curators’ attention, Art Is ... would become one of her best-known works, helping to cement her belated status as a trailblazer. It only took decades. O’Grady is now 86, a warm and intellectually formidable presence. Dressing almost exclusively in black — often in a leather jacket and tight pants or leggings that hug her thin form — she wears chunky silver jewelry and favors red lipstick. She usually styles her dark curly hair up and forward in a kind of punk-inflected Afro (although the pandemic has forced it into a gray-and-white ponytail). She tends to lean toward you when she speaks, sliding smoothly between two levels of conversation: an accessible one, punctuated by her infectious laugh, and a more rarefied zone. She’s equally given to long, sometimes meandering stories and profoundly succinct expressions of complex ideas. This is as true in public conversations as in private ones. Speaking at a 2015 conference at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, wearing a rubber gorilla mask as part of the anonymous feminist activist group the Guerrilla Girls, she delivered an earnest seven-minute dissection of the phrase “women and artists of color” and the way it leaves out people who are both. At the end, she quipped: “This problem is defeating us, and, I mean, it defeats me, because any time I try to get a language, it just doesn’t work on a poster!” O’Grady has made art using collage, performance, photo installation, and video. She has written criticism and curated shows. She has studied Egyptology and European modernism. Through every medium and subject, she has built a body of work that asserts two key ideas: the centrality of Black women and their stories and the ways in which hybridity — of people, cultures, ideas — has shaped the modern Western world. These are also the central themes of her life, as a Black middle-class Caribbean American woman who has never fit neatly into prescribed categories. “I always felt that nobody knew my story, but if there wasn’t room for my story, then it wasn’t my problem,” she said. “It was theirs.” Now the artist is the most visible she’s ever been — a situation that she’s still getting used to. In November, Duke University Press published a collection of her texts, Writing in Space, 1973–2019 , and the Brooklyn Museum is set to open her first-ever retrospective, “Lorraine O’Grady: Both/And,” on March 5. It not only gathers art from her entire career but also marks the debut of her first new performance persona since the early ’80s. O’Grady and I have known each other since 2014, when she reached out to thank me for a blog post I’d written about her. When we logged on to Zoom on a recent Friday night, she was sitting at a desk in her apartment in Westbeth — a Manhattan artists’-housing complex where she has lived since 1976 — that currently doubles as her home and office. She was in a narrow hallway between her tiny kitchen — I spotted an abundance of books, vitamin bottles, and Tupperware — and her “bedroom,” a makeshift nook with a bed wedged between a filing cabinet and two bookcases. (“This is terrible, isn’t it?” she joked.) She was more subdued than the last time I’d seen her, a few years ago. She’d been pulling a lot of all-nighters lately in order to work on the new performance, the book, and the retrospective. Still, her lower energy appeared to be about more than just exhaustion; she seemed circumspect about “making it” at 86. “The current moment is a strange one, because you can’t say nothing has changed, but you can’t say that anything significant has changed,” she said. “ ‘The Other’ has remained safely bracketed as ‘the Other.’ ” If more Black artists — and, crucially, Black women artists — are showing and selling their work now than ever before, they’re still mostly working within systems that were originally designed to exclude them. The new recognition is exciting. It also throws into relief the decades spent without it. What does it mean for an artist like O’Grady, who has spent her career as a gate-crasher, to finally be welcomed in? Lorraine’s parents, Lena and Edwin O’Grady, were both born in Jamaica, but they met at a cricket match in Boston in the 1920s. Lorraine was born on September 21, 1934, 11 years after her older sister, Devonia. The girls grew up first on an Irish immigrant block, then a Jewish one; the little West Indian community they were part of was centered on an Episcopal church. Lena and Edwin had both come from well-educated upper- and middle-class families in Jamaica, but upon arrival in the U.S., they’d been forced into working-class jobs. Boston was a heavily white city at the time, and O’Grady said her class-conscious parents didn’t relate to many of the African Americans there, including upper-class Black Bostonians. “They felt that they were looked down on,” she said. “They had different styles, different tastes, different everything. They couldn’t bridge the gap, and they didn’t want to, actually — I think it was self-defense.” Still, she remembers that when her mother spoke to other members of the exclusive Black women’s social club she’d joined, she tried to disguise her Jamaican accent. “It would drive me nuts,” O’Grady said, “to see her contorting herself. I liked the way she talked.” O’Grady has said her parents adhered to “British colonial values.” This meant, in part, that she received a rigorous education that would lead her to Wellesley College, which she attended on scholarship and where she was one of only a few Black women to enroll. Her studies were briefly interrupted when, in 1953, near the end of her sophomore year, she married a man she’d met through one of her former classmates — a star athlete at Tufts — and had a son with him. O’Grady managed to finish school, deciding to “get practical” and switch her major from Spanish literature to economics. She went to work as a research economist and intelligence analyst for the federal government, but the stability she’d been seeking never came. “I had several days when I woke up and said to myself, Nobody here is ever gonna know who I am, and I have to find a way to say who I am, ” she said. So she quit her job. Her marriage had recently ended. Then her sister, Devonia, died, at the age of 38. It was the early ’60s, and O’Grady was in a moment of deep personal crisis. She left her young son with his father — a decision she still struggles with today, although they have since worked on their relationship and become closer — cashed in her retirement savings, and went to Europe, looking for a way to say who she was. She wouldn’t find the right way to do it for years. By the late ’70s, she’d started (then abandoned) a novel, started (but not finished) studies at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, married (and then separated from) a filmmaker she met at Iowa, took over a successful translation business in Chicago, and moved to New York, where she kept writing, this time rock criticism for The Village Voice and Rolling Stone. Then she got a job as an adjunct instructor at the School of Visual Arts. The art world, she realized, was one she didn’t know anything about. She went looking for books to learn more. She picked up one by the critic Lucy Lippard about conceptual art. “I had read art books before, but they hadn’t hit me,” she said. This one she read cover to cover. “I knew at the end of reading it that this was something I could do and be good at.” Not long after that, she had a breast-cancer scare; when her biopsy came back negative, she decided to make a newspaper collage as a present for her doctor, on whom she had a crush (taking inspiration from the Surrealist André Breton, whose work she taught at SVA). She began looking through the Sunday New York Times and found herself cutting out phrases for a poem instead. When she completed it, she thought it was too good to part with. For nearly six months thereafter, she created a work every Sunday, calling the project “Cutting Out the New York Times.” By the time she was done, she had become an artist. “The problem I always had was that no matter who I was with or what I did, I got bored pretty quickly,” said O’Grady. “This was something I knew I would never get bored with, because how can I get bored? I would always be learning, and I would never, ever master it. That was part of the appeal.” Within a few years, she started hanging out at Just Above Midtown, a nonprofit gallery devoted to avant-garde African American art that Linda Goode Bryant had opened in 1974. O’Grady found her way in by volunteering there, which she now calls a “bougie thing to do — ‘Oh, I’ll lick stamps! I’ll lick envelopes if you want!’ ” She got to know Black artists for the first time in her life, people like David Hammons, Senga Nengudi, Maren Hassinger, and Dawoud Bey. It was a community of support and possibility. “The condition of my life until I came to New York and joined Just Above Midtown was that no matter where I went, I was always going to be the only Black person in the room,” O’Grady said. Still, even among the JAM artists, she didn’t feel entirely seen; her life experience wasn’t considered a “typical” Black American narrative. Her family didn’t come from the South and hadn’t experienced American slavery; she’d grown up more class than race conscious. O’Grady has said that before she entered the art world, she considered herself “post-Black.” Coming face-to-face with racial discrimination, she embraced her Blackness — but she still identified, and continues to, as a Caribbean American, rather than as African American. “It was difficult, even in the New York art world, to mention a connection to the Caribbean without feeling as if I were somehow claiming superiority,” she told an interviewer for her Brooklyn Museum catalogue. “But what if those are the problems you are dealing with?” Rather than shrinking from this difference, O’Grady mined it for her work. In 1980, she had originally planned to attend her 25th reunion at Wellesley. Instead, she debuted a performance persona that would allow her to both enter and critique the art world at the same time: Mlle Bourgeoise Noire, otherwise known as Miss Black Middle-Class, of Boston. This avatar came to O’Grady one day as she was walking through Union Square. The artist imagined her as the winner of an international beauty pageant held in Cayenne, French Guiana, in 1955. She was, perhaps, a version of O’Grady that might have existed in an alternate reality. One night in June, when JAM had an opening, O’Grady showed up unannounced (to everyone except Goode Bryant) wearing a crown, sash, and gown and cape she had made out of 180 pairs of white gloves, acquired from thrift stores around the city. Accompanied by her brother-in-law playing her master of ceremonies, O’Grady as Mlle Bourgeoise Noire circulated among the guests, smiling as she passed out white chrysanthemums. When she’d given them all away, she donned a pair of above-the-elbow white gloves and began to whip herself with a white cat-o’-nine-tails, before shouting a short poem that ended with the line “Black art must take more risks!!!” Then she left. “When she told me about Mlle Bourgeoise Noire and that she wanted to do this, I wondered to myself, Will she take creative risk? ” recalled Goode Bryant. “That night answered it. That took so much courage.” Goode Bryant explained that although people in the crowd knew O’Grady, they’d never seen her art and didn’t necessarily anticipate something so radical from the woman who’d been writing the gallery’s press releases. “I don’t know that I expected she would be so stark in her reveal of the layers and contradictions,” Goode Bryant said. “I knew she was on her way at that point.” The following year, O’Grady crashed another opening in the same fashion, this time for a New Museum show that featured nine white contemporary artists who adopted personae in their work. The museum had invited O’Grady to participate in an education program but not to show her own art. (Even that offer was rescinded after her guerrilla performance.) “I was furious at the segregation and the assumptions that the white art world made every day without even thinking about it,” O’Grady said. “But nobody was really saying anything. Everybody was still trying to play nice. I hadn’t been established — I had nothing to lose.” Mlle Bourgeoise Noire became her instrument for calling out the segregation of the New York art scene. Within the next two years, she organized an exhibition that featured 14 white and 14 Black artists, as well as the Art Is ... performance, under the guise of the character. “The thing that feels so distinctive about Lorraine is she confounds so many different people’s expectations,” said Zoé Whitley, who has curated the artist’s work and is now the director of London’s Chisenhale Gallery. When O’Grady was starting out, Whitley said, she faced a dearth of models and options — especially as a Black woman making performance art, which was relatively new and considered by many to be a white genre. She “was really pushing boundaries in terms of gender and race and class or even what art mediums she should adopt,” Whitley said. “She didn’t ask anyone for permission or wait for that to be granted; she accorded that power to herself.” Not all of O’Grady’s early work was so confrontational. In 1982, she staged Rivers, First Draft, or The Woman in Red, an ensemble piece with 17 participants, in Central Park. Starring O’Grady as the titular character, the performance loosely told the story of her navigating the antagonisms of the art world to find her voice as an artist against the backdrop of her Caribbean and New England roots. It was less of a straightforward narrative than what O’Grady called “a collage in space”: Three versions of her at different ages appeared separately and simultaneously, moving through different sequences and actions until, at the end, they united and walked together through a stream. “I would say that the Mlle Bourgeoise Noire project, those pieces were not the core of my work,” she told me. “The core was this other work that combined self-exploration with cultural critique.” That quality grew more pronounced over time as she abandoned performance and moved her work to the wall. Her first solo show, at INTAR gallery in midtown in 1991, featured a group of photomontages now collectively titled “Body Is the Ground of My Experience.” These surreal, playful, and sometimes dark pieces, such as The Fir-Palm, which shows a composite tree springing from a Black woman’s navel, posit Black women’s bodies as a kind of ground zero for Western culture — a subject O’Grady continued to investigate the following year with “Olympia’s Maid.” Referencing the Black woman in Manet’s 1863 painting Olympia, this groundbreaking essay asserted the need for Black women to reclaim their subjectivity. One line perfectly sums up her ethos: “Critiquing them does not show who you are: it cannot turn you from an object into a subject of history.” Soon after, O’Grady would add a postscript: Western culture is structured by binaries and a logic of either-or — good versus evil, black versus white — that create supremacies. The solution is to embrace the concept of “both/and,” the coexistence of supposed opposites. Plurality and hybridity as the norm. “Look, I’m not somebody who tries to say we’re all the same. The differences are real,” O’Grady told me. “The problem isn’t the differences. The problem is the hierarchization of the differences.” The idea of “both/and” has manifested most clearly in her use of diptychs — for instance, placing images of the ancient Egyptian queen Nefertiti next to photographs of her sister in the work Miscegenated Family Album ; between them, there is an implied connection, a gap, and a tension. It’s also there in the multiplicity of a piece like Rivers, the duality of both gazing outward and in, and in O’Grady herself, a product of several heritages, “living on a hyphen,” as she put it. It informs her overall approach, which is to treat everything as unfixed. O’Grady was constantly refining her ideas, but she still wasn’t finding the audience she wanted. Even her solo exhibition hadn’t been received as she’d hoped: Operation Desert Storm started the week before it opened, gluing New Yorkers to their TVs. The show was important to her, said O’Grady, “but it was like a stone dropping into the middle of the ocean.” 1977/2017: Lorraine O’Grady, Cutting Out CONYT 12, 1977/2017 . O’Grady’s first act as an artist was a series of collages called “Cutting Out the New York Times,” which she made by cutting up the paper’s Sunday editions. Forty years later, she reprinted and reshuffled her earlier work, creating a new series of tense, poetic diptychs. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York 1980/1994: Lorraine O’Grady Miscegenated Family Album (Cross Generational), L: Nefertiti, the last image; R: Devonia’s youngest daughter, Kimberley, 1980/1994. A series of diptychs pairing depictions of the Egyptian queen Nefertiti with photos of O’Grady’s late sister, Devonia, and Devonia’s family. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York 1980–83/2009: Lorraine O’Grady, Untitled (Mlle Bourgeoise Noire and her Master of Ceremonies enter the New Museum), 1980-83/2009. O’Grady’s first performance persona, whom she imagined as a 1950s Caribbean Bostonian beauty queen. She crashed exhibitions at Just Above Midtown gallery and the New Museum, with her brother-in-law playing her master of ceremonies. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York 1982/2015: Rivers, First Draft. Staged at the Loch in Central Park, this group performance rolled out as a dreamlike autobiography for O’Grady, in which versions of herself from disparate points in her life coexisted simultaneously. Here, Lorraine O’Grady, Rivers, First Draft: A Little Girl with Pink Sash memorizes her Latin lesson, 1982/2015. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York Lorraine O’Grady, Rivers, First Draft: Their flirtation begins, 1982/2015. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York Lorraine O’Grady, Rivers, First Draft: The Woman in White eats coconut and looks away from the action, 1982/2015. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York Lorraine O’Grady, Rivers, First Draft: The Debauchees dance in place, and the Woman in Red catches up to them, 1982/2015. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York Lorraine O’Grady, Rivers, First Draft: The Woman in Red hesitates outside after the Black Male Artists in Yellow eject her, 1982/2015. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York Lorraine O’Grady, Rivers, First Draft: The Nantucket Memorial guides the Woman in Red to the other side of the stream, 1982/2015. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York 1991/2019: The Fir-Palm , 1991/2012. A photomontage series that positions Black women’s bodies as the foundation of Western culture. In this image, a woman’s navel sprouts a composite fir-palm tree, a visual of O’Grady’s relationship to both New England and the Caribbean. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York 1983/2009: Art Is ... (Man With a Camera), 1983/2009. O’Grady’s intervention at the annual African American Day Parade in Harlem, in which crowd members were celebrated with golden picture frames. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York 2020: Family Portrait 2 (Getting Dressed), 2020. O’Grady as her new performance persona, Lancela, with an assisting performer. Art: Courtesy Alexander Gray Associates, New York © Lorraine O’Grady/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York By the early aughts, O’Grady was living in California, where she’d moved for a full-time position at UC Irvine. Things had been quiet for her; she was still making work, but she wasn’t showing much. Then, around 2005, Connie Butler, a curator at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles, got in touch and told O’Grady she wanted to include Mlle Bourgeoise Noire in a major exhibition of feminist art called “ WACK! ” The invitation was a catalyst. “I knew it would be the one opportunity I had to be visible,” O’Grady said, “because I had been invisible, let’s face it.” She also knew the show alone wouldn’t cut it — there had to be a place where people could go to learn more about her work. She made a website and started cataloguing her career, posting images of her work online along with her own descriptions and texts by others. It was a digital showcase as well as an archive. She was building the architecture of her own recuperation. One of the works she returned to around this time was Art Is ... She started by making a slideshow for her website, which led to a wall installation; her new gallery, Alexander Gray Associates, showed it at an art fair, where it attracted the attention of curators. (The piece has become so popular that, last fall, the Biden-Harris campaign used it, with O’Grady’s permission, as the inspiration for a victory video; O’Grady was thrilled and humbled.) After decades of being sidelined by New York’s biggest institutions, she was included in the 2010 Whitney Biennial. The ground was shifting. The art world had become a much more diverse and integrated place than the one O’Grady had entered in the ’80s, and Black feminist artists and curators were looking for their predecessors. “It’s one of those things where you find your foremothers after the fact,” said the artist Simone Leigh, who has included O’Grady in several projects, helping to raise her profile. Leigh, who is also the child of Jamaican immigrants, considers O’Grady a mentor; the two grew close over dinners at a Jamaican restaurant in Brooklyn. “She created a way of seeing that was very supportive to everything I was trying to do.” The Brooklyn Museum show is the apex of a slow-moving process as well as an opportunity to expand the frame of reference beyond Mlle Bourgeoise Noire and Art Is ... , which have become O’Grady’s best-known pieces. “She’s been allowed in in these two kinds of ways, which has been at the expense of the entire career, ultimately,” said Catherine Morris, the senior curator of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum. Morris and the writer Aruna D’Souza organized the show with curatorial assistant Jenée-Daria Strand. (D’Souza also edited O’Grady’s book, Writing in Space .) O’Grady hopes a return to performance — with a new character, a knight named Lancela — will help illuminate her previous work. Inspired by the books about King Arthur she read as a girl at the Boston Public Library, O’Grady had her own suit of armor forged for the part, one that weighs 40 pounds and is so well crafted that she can run and dance in it. Palm trees sometimes sprout from the helmet — a Caribbean signifier atop a Western trunk. Part of the appeal, too, is that the armor gives her a chance to perform without showing any markers of her identity. “When you take away age, race, color, everything, what’s left?” she asked. “What never goes away?” It may seem strange that an artist whose work emerged from her unshakable sense of self would want to obscure those things. But there’s a logic to it, when you consider that the white Establishment shut out not just O’Grady but an entire generation of Black artists because of who they were. “I thought that when I had the retrospective, there would be this great big moment when I would go into the galleries and see all of my work at the same time, in the same place, and have this big Aha! ” she said. “But it’s already happening with the questions that I’m receiving.” She meant the questions that I and other interviewers had been sending to her ahead of the show. “They have made me understand how much all of us who did not have that attention lost in the ability to grow. The engagement of the audience, which involves a back-and-forth of question-and-answer, is the thing that was missing.” O’Grady was frank early in her career that she felt the true audience for her art hadn’t arrived yet, that she was making work for viewers still to come. She now recognizes that her audience is here, and after decades spent contextualizing and cataloguing her own art, of finding and strengthening her own voice, she’s eager to hear what others have to say — how they interpret the creations of a woman who has found so many different ways to tell her story, casting it in the harsh light of reality or the hazy glow of dreams. “The whole point of my wanting to be an artist was to find out who I was,” she said, “and to make it clear to everybody else what that meant.” *This article appears in the March 1, 2021, issue of New York Magazine. Subscribe Now!Minor league pitchers Luis Moreno, Alejandro Crisostomo suspended after positive drug tests
Monday’s media chat by President Bola Tinubu has come under strong criticism from 2023 presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar, and his New Nigeria Peoples Party counterpart, Senator Rabiu Kwankwaso, among other members of the opposition. In their reactions on Tuesday, Atiku and Kwankwaso particularly flayed the President for announcing plans to continue borrowing loans to execute infrastructural projects as well as his ‘no going back on fuel subsidy removal’ statement. Speaking through his media adviser, Paul Ibe, on Tuesday, former Vice President Atiku criticised the All Progressives Congress-led government for “borrowing without purpose.” He stated, “Which financial discipline have you seen? Nothing has changed ever since he became President. It is just the same Tinubu that we know. The economy and security are not better. They are being reckless with the nation’s resources. “All he claims he’s doing is not visible to Nigerians. This Christmas is going to be the hardest for most Nigerians due to the economic hardship and hunger in the land. If he says he’s borrowing to improve infrastructure, where are they? You can’t borrow to pay salaries but specific purposes and targeted projects. “Tinubu has failed to demonstrate that over time. The government has been borrowing and imposing taxes on ordinary Nigerians, who are suffering. They are borrowing for no reason. He hasn’t done enough as expected of him to reposition the country.” In the same vein, Kwankwaso, through his party’s National Publicity Secretary, Ladipo Johnson, stated, “We believe that the budget sent to the National Assembly about a week ago shows that this administration has failed to acknowledge the pains and sufferings of Nigerians. They do not seem to comprehend the gravity of the situation we are in at the moment. “From that budget, you can still see the loans and see the vehicles being acquired. Some of these things are not necessities. So, this government has to show seriousness in cutting costs. “You cannot keep telling Nigerians to tighten their belts while you are not tightening yours. The legislators are not tightening theirs. It’s not fair to the people of Nigeria. It isn’t.” In a similar vein, major opposition parties in the country expressed disappointment at the media chat. The National Legal Adviser of the Labour Party, Kehinde Edun, condemned Tinubu’s plan to secure additional loans for infrastructure as a faux pas. Edun further described the President’s refusal to cut down on his bloated cabinet as “bravado”, saying he would be forced to do so at the appropriate time. He said, “As to retaining his cabinet, the man may not want to cause unnecessary panic. I don’t think he will retain all of the ministers. The man is still going to make changes. On not going back on fuel subsidy removal, the man is just using bravado. He believes that we are already neck deep hence the need to continue. “The truth is that the thing has brought so much misery and it is glaring for everybody to see. All he is doing now is bravado. There is so much misery on the land. Again, people are right in blaming hunger and misery for the tragic food stampedes. On his decision to continue borrowing for infrastructure, it should be condemned. “They have borrowed so much and we are still not out of the wood yet. This idea of securing loans started a long time ago. Buhari kept on borrowing, and throughout his tenure, nothing changed. Our roads and light are getting worse; there is no infrastructure improvement.” The Coalition of United Political Parties equally frowned at the continued borrowing, saying Nigerians are aware that the APC administration lacked financial discipline. Speaking with The PUNCH, the National Publicity Secretary of CUPP, Mark Adebayo, said, “Of course, every Nigerian knows there is no sign of financial discipline anywhere in this government. If there were, the President would not remove almost N200bn to buy a presidential jet. The President would not spend huge amounts of money to buy a single car for the presidential convoy. “If there were financial discipline, nothing like that would happen. In a nation where the President reflects on the economic woes of the country, he would not even consider that. There are Presidents, heads of state, and governments in even more advanced economies of the world that don’t have presidential jets, who travel on commercial flights and the like. “So, from the perspective of the CUPP, there is no financial discipline reflected in the current downturn of Nigeria’s economy. The President is not telling the truth.” Related News Yuletide: Lagos CAN chair urges Nigerians to embrace optimism, love Let us renew our hope, belief in Nigeria, Tinubu preaches at Christmas Northern group lauds Tinubu's move to end banditry in 2025 In its reaction, the Peoples Democratic Party stated that Tinubu’s media chat showed the All Progressives Congress’s insensitivity and disconnection from the Nigerian people. In a statement on Tuesday, PDP National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba, expressed concern that the APC failed to explain the savings from the removal of subsidies while Nigerians were enduring severe economic hardship. “The Peoples Democratic Party asserts that Monday’s presidential media chat further confirms the All Progressives Congress administration’s insensitivity to the current widespread hardship and suffering being faced by Nigerians resulting from the ill-implemented and anti-people policies of the APC. “The declaration by President Tinubu that he has no regrets for the sudden removal of fuel subsidy without any cushioning measures to mitigate the resultant crippling effect on the productive sector, high cost of living and associated hardship, which is now driving citizens to extreme poverty and early death, also confirms APC’s disconnection from the primary purpose of government, which is the welfare and security of the citizens. “It is instructive that President Tinubu, in the chat, admitted that Nigerians were bearing the brunt of the failure and inability of the APC administration under his watch to effectively police and secure our nation’s borders to prevent the smuggling of petroleum products to neighbouring countries. “The PDP is disturbed that while the APC has failed to account for the proceeds saved from the removal of subsidy, Nigerians are subjected to crushing economic hardship because the APC administration has failed in its fundamental duty of ensuring the territorial integrity of our nation,” the statement read. Tough Christmas As Nigerians celebrate Christmas, the PDP, CUPP, and the Young Progressives Party claimed that the citizens were in for their toughest Christmas ever. PDP Deputy National Youth Leader, Timothy Osadolor, held that the Tinubu government, rather than focus on policies that would improve the well-being of Nigerians, has instead made life more difficult for the people. “There is widespread hunger and frustration across the country, compounded by growing insecurity. Nigerians are enduring severe hardship, while the administration seems solely concerned with enriching itself, rather than addressing the needs of the people. “Currently, millions of Nigerians are struggling to afford necessities. The cost of food and transportation has reached unprecedented levels. As a result, this Christmas will be an especially difficult time for many households, as they face the compounded challenges of economic hardship and insecurity,” Osadolor said. On his part, the NNPP National Publicity Secretary, Ladipo Johnson, tasked the Tinubu administration to reconsider some of its policies. He stated, “We have seen the state of the economy and insecurity in the country. People have made their concerns known. We have witnessed the unfortunate incidents of people queuing up for food in various parts of the country. These are not good signs. “We’ve seen inflation at 34 per cent, with food inflation probably higher. We’ve seen the value of the naira continue to drop. The standard of living has decreased, and the cost of living has risen for the average person. It’s been tough, it’s hard, it’s difficult. So, this Christmas will be hard for most homes. “But we pray that as we move forward, things will turn around. We hope that next year will be a better, more prosperous year for Nigeria. To achieve this, the APC administration must review its policies.” Also speaking, the CUPP National Publicity Secretary, Mark Adebayo, criticised President Tinubu for failing to address the suffering of Nigerians. He said, “Nigerians will celebrate Christmas amid hunger, rising costs of food, and transportation. Well, Tinubu actually isn’t addressing the economic challenges being faced by Nigerians, with regard to either the rising costs of food, transportation costs, airfares, or anything. “He is not the President who behaves as if he is concerned about the pains inflicted on the people by his atrocious economic policies. He is not behaving as if he is concerned, and he is not behaving as if he cares at all about the socio-economic challenges being faced by Nigerians. “They are dismissive. The President doesn’t have any robust policies to tackle the socio-economic challenges that his party and his administration have brought upon this country.”Being targeted for acting against illegal construction: Civic official
Is he a hero? A killer? Both? About the same time the #FreeLuigi memes featuring the mustachioed plumber from “Super Mario Brothers” mushroomed online, commenters shared memes showing Tony Soprano pronouncing Luigi Mangione , the man charged with murdering the UnitedHealthcare CEO in Manhattan , a hero. There were posts lionizing Mangione’s physique and appearance, the ones speculating about who could play him on “Saturday Night Live,” and the ones denouncing and even threatening people at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s for spotting him and calling police. It was all too much for Pennsylvania's governor, a rising Democrat who was nearly the vice presidential nominee this year. Josh Shapiro — dealing with a case somewhere else that happened to land in his lap — decried what he saw as growing support for “vigilante justice.” People are also reading... The curious case of Brian Thompson and Luigi Mangione captivated and polarized a media-saturated nation. It also offers a glimpse into how, in a connected world, so many different aspects of modern American life can be surreally linked — from public violence to politics, from health care to humor (or attempts at it) . It summons a question, too: How can so many people consider someone a hero when the rules that govern American society — the laws — are treating him as the complete opposite? Luigi Mangione, a suspect in the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, on Monday at the police station in Altoona, Pa. Writings found in Mangione's possession hinted at a vague hatred of corporate greed and an expression of anger toward “parasitic” health insurance companies. Bullets recovered from the crime scene had the words “deny,” “defend” and “depose,” reflecting words used by insurance industry critics, written on them. A number of online posts combine an apparent disdain for health insurers — with no mention of the loss of life. “He took action against private health insurance corporations is what he did. he was a brave italian martyr. in this house, luigi mangione is a hero, end of story!” one anonymous person said in a post on X that has nearly 2 million views. On Monday, Shapiro took issue with comments like those. It was an extraordinary moment that he tumbled into simply because Mangione was apprehended in Pennsylvania. Shapiro's comments — pointed, impassioned and, inevitably, political — yanked the conversation unfolding on so many people's phone screens into real life. “We do not kill people in cold blood to resolve policy differences or express a viewpoint,” the governor said. “In a civil society, we are all less safe when ideologues engage in vigilante justice.” But to hear some of his fellow citizens tell it, that's not the case at all. Like Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger, D.B. Cooper and other notorious names from the American past, Mangione is being cast as someone to admire. Luigi Nicholas Mangione is escorted into Blair County Courthouse on Tuesday in Hollidaysburg, Pa. Regina Bateson, an assistant political science professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has studied vigilantism, the term to which Shapiro alluded. She doesn’t see this case as a good fit for the word, she says, because the victim wasn’t linked to any specific crime or offense. As she sees it, it's more akin to domestic terrorism. But Bateson views the threats against election workers , prosecutors and judges ticking up — plus the assassination attempts against President-elect Donald Trump this past summer — as possible signs that personal grievances or political agendas could erupt. “Americans are voicing more support for — or at least understanding of — political violence,” she said. Shapiro praised the police and the people of Blair County, who abided by a 9/11-era dictum of seeing something and saying something. The commenters have Mangione wrong, the governor said: “Hear me on this: He is no hero. The real hero in this story is the person who called 911 at McDonald’s this morning." A person demonstrates Monday near the McDonald's restaurant in Altoona, Pennsylvania, where police earlier in the day arrested Luigi Nicholas Mangione, 26, in the Dec. 4 killing of UnitedHealthcare's CEO in Manhattan. Even shy of supporting violence, there are many instances of people who vent over how health insurers deny claims. Tim Anderson's wife, Mary, dealt with UnitedHealthcare coverage denials before she died from Lou Gehrig’s disease in 2022. “The business model for insurance is don’t pay,” Anderson, 67, of Centerville, Ohio, told The Associated Press . The discourse around the killing and Mangione is more than just memes. Conversations about the interconnectedness of various parts of American life are unfolding online as well. One Reddit user said he was banned for three days for supporting Kyle Rittenhouse, who was acquitted after testifying he acted in self-defense when he fatally shot two people in 2020 during protests. “Do you think people are getting banned for supporting Luigi?” the poster wondered. The comments cover a lot of ground. They include people saying the UnitedHealthcare slaying isn't a “right or left issue" and wondering what it would take to get knocked off the platform. “You probably just have to cross the line over into promoting violence,” one commenter wrote. “Not just laughing about how you don’t care about this guy.” Luigi Mangione is taken into the Blair County Courthouse on Tuesday in Hollidaysburg, Pa. Memes and online posts in support of the 26-year-old man, who's charged with killing UnitedHealthcare's CEO, have mushroomed online. Sign up for our Crime & Courts newsletter Get the latest in local public safety news with this weekly email.The annual "Best of What's New" Honors 50 groundbreaking products across 10 categories NEW YORK , Dec. 9, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Popular Science is proud to announce its annual Best of What's New Awards , the most innovative and groundbreaking products that debuted the past year. Now in its 37th year, the Best of What's New Awards spans 10 essential categories: Gadgets , Entertainment , Aerospace , Personal Care , Auto , Engineering , Sports & Outdoors , Home , Emergency Services , and Health . "Since 1988, Popular Science has honored the innovations changing our world with the Best of What's New Awards. We're thrilled to celebrate the year's groundbreaking ideas that are improving our everyday lives and shaping our futures. From pioneering medical procedures to sustainable engineering solutions, and from advancements in space exploration to jaw-dropping gadgets, this year's list truly represents the Best of What's New in 2024." Each winner represents a significant technological advancement in its field and provides a service that makes our lives safer, better, or more accessible. From mosquito protection technology to the first spacewalk by a private agency and a smart hairdryer that optimizes scalp and hair health to a transparent OLED TV, this year's list highlights a dynamic and exciting collection of products and services. CATEGORY WINNERS Aerospace : Joby Aviation's Hydrogen-powered VTOL taxi Auto : Lincoln's Nautilus Emergency Services & Defense : Google Research's FireSat wildfire detection system Engineering : Electrified Thermal Solutions Joule Hive Entertainment : Zildjian Alchem-E Electronic drums Gadgets : Apple's Vision Pro (Innovation of the Year) Health : Guardant Health's Shield Home : General Electric's Indoor Smoker Personal Care : Oura Ring 4 Sports & Outdoors : Saga's HoloBike Other winners include : Olaplex's Bond ShaperTM Curl Rebuilding Treatment; Sony's A9 Mark III, Weber's Slate griddle; Ecoflow's Delta Pro 3; New York University and FDNY's C2SMARTER Digital Twin AI model; Samsung's Glare-free OLED; Limelight Steele's Limelight laser furnace; NASA/Lockheed Martin's X-59 Quiet Supersonic Jet; Ford's Superbelt; and Patagonia's M10 Collection. More information about the 2024 Best of What's New Awards can be found on popsci.com . ABOUT POPULAR SCIENCE Established in 1872, Popular Science is one of America's oldest and most trusted science brands. Popular Science has a legacy of bringing readers groundbreaking innovations and discoveries, demystifying the world, and examining everything from the marvels of deep space to the secret lives of everyday staples. Popular Science makes science and tech engaging, approachable, and inclusive to keep readers, listeners, and viewers plugged into and excited about the world around them. Popular Science is part of Recurrent Ventures, a privately held media company that includes brands such as Futurism , The Drive , Outdoor Life , and Task & Purpose . ABOUT BEST OF WHAT'S NEW Every year since 1988, the editors of Popular Science have reviewed thousands of products in search of the top innovations—breakthrough products and technologies that represent significant advancements in their categories. Best of What's New Awards are presented to five products and technologies in 10 categories: Aerospace, Automotive, Engineering, Entertainment, Gadgets, Health, Home, Personal Care, Sports & Outdoors, and Emergency Services. View original content: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/popular-science-announces-the-best-innovations-of-2024-302326601.html SOURCE Popular ScienceAP News Summary at 3:53 p.m. EST
Longest-lived US president was always happy to speak his mind