Popular shared stories on NewsBlur.
2786 stories
·
63129 followers

New Trump vaccine policy limits access to COVID shots | AP News

1 Share

WASHINGTON (AP) — Annual COVID-19 shots for healthy younger adults and children will no longer be routinely approved under a major new policy shift unveiled Tuesday by the Trump administration.

Top officials for the Food and Drug Administration laid out new requirements for access to yearly COVID shots, saying they’d continue to use a streamlined approach that would continue offering them to adults 65 and older as well as children and younger adults with at least one health problem that puts them at higher risk.

But the FDA framework urges companies to conduct large, lengthy studies before tweaked vaccines can be approved for healthier people. In a framework published Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, agency officials said the approach still could keep annual vaccinations available for between 100 million and 200 million people.

The upcoming changes raise questions for people who may still want a fall COVID-19 shot but don’t clearly fit into one of the categories.

“Is the pharmacist going to determine if you’re in a high-risk group?” asked Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “The only thing that can come of this will make vaccines less insurable and less available.”

The framework is the culmination of a series of recent stepsscrutinizing the use of COVID shots and raising major questions about the broader availability of vaccines under President Donald Trump. It was released two days ahead of the first meeting of FDA’s outside vaccine experts under the Trump administration.

Last week the FDA granted full approval of Novavax’s COVID-19 vaccine but with major restrictions on who can get it — and Tuesday’s guidance mirrors those restrictions. The approval came after Trump appointees overruled FDA scientists’ earlier plans to approve the shot without restrictions.

Pfizer and Moderna, which make the most widely used COVID-19 vaccines, didn’t immediately comment.

For years, federal health officials have told most Americans to expect annual updates to COVID-19 vaccines, similar to the annual flu shot. Just like with flu vaccines, until now the FDA has approved updated COVID shots when manufacturers provide evidence that they spark just as much immune protection as the previous year’s version.

But FDA’s new guidance appears to be the end of that approach under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has filled the FDA and other health agencies with outspoken critics of the government’s handling of COVID shots, particularly their recommendation for young, healthy adults and children. Under federal procedures, the FDA releases new guidance in draft form and allows the public to comment before finalizing its plans. The publication of Tuesday’s policy in a medical journal is highly unusual and could run afoul of federal procedures, according to FDA experts.

Tuesday’s update, written by FDA Commissioner Marty Makary and FDA vaccine chief Vinay Prasad, criticized the U.S.’s “one-size-fits-all” approach and states that the U.S. has been “the most aggressive” in recommending COVID boosters, when compared with European countries.

“We simply don’t know whether a healthy 52-year-old woman with a normal BMI who has had Covid-19 three times and has received six previous doses of a Covid-19 vaccine will benefit from the seventh dose,” they wrote.

Makary and Prasad recommended that companies study people not deemed at high risk for six months, randomly assigning them to get a vaccine or a placebo and tracking outcomes with special attention to severe disease, hospitalization or death.

Experts say there are legitimate questions about how much everyone still benefits from yearly COVID vaccination or whether they should be recommended for people at increased risk.

An influential panel of advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is set to debate which vaccines should be recommended to which groups.

The FDA’s announcement appears to usurp that advisory panel’s job, Offit said. He added that CDC studies have made clear that booster doses do offer protection against mild to moderate illness for four to six months after the shot even in healthy people.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Read the whole story
acdha
37 minutes ago
reply
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete

The spat between Bruce Springsteen and Donald Trump is escalating | AP News

1 Share

They have some similarities, Bruce Springsteen and Donald Trump — guys in their 70s with homes in New Jersey and big constituencies among white American men middle-aged and older. And both, in very different respects, are the boss.

That’s about where it ends.

The veteran rock star, long a political opponent of the president, stood up as one of Trump’s most prominent cultural critics last week with a verbal takedown from a British stage.

As is his nature, Trump is fighting back — hard. He calls Springsteen a “dried out prune of a rocker” and is even bringing Beyoncé into the fray.

On Monday, the president suggested Springsteen and Beyoncé should be investigated to see if appearances they made on behalf of his Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris, last fall represented an illegal campaign donation.

Opening a tour in Manchester, England, Springsteen told his audience last Thursday that “the America I love, the America I’ve written about that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration.”

He added, “Tonight we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring.”

And the back and forth began

Springsteen later made reference to an “unfit president and a rogue government” who have “no concern or idea for what it means to be deeply American.”

The next morning, Trump called Springsteen highly overrated. “Never liked him, never liked his music or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy — just a pushy, obnoxious JERK,” he wrote on social media.

“This dried out prune of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied) ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT until he gets back in the Country,” he said.

The next night, also in Manchester, Springsteen repeated his criticisms.

“It’s no surprise what Springsteen’s political leanings are and have been for many decades,” said veteran music writer Alan Light, author of the upcoming “Don’t Stop: Why We (Still) Love Fleetwood Mac’s Rumours.” “He’s somebody who has been outspoken in his music and his actions.”

The Boss’ statements this week showed he wasn’t afraid to speak out “at a time when so many people and institutions are just kind of rolling over,” Light said.

Springsteen isn’t new to this game

It’s not the first time Springsteen has spoken out against Trump — or a Republican president.

When former President Ronald Reagan referenced Springsteen’s “message of hope” at a campaign stop during the height of the rocker’s “Born in the USA” popularity, Springsteen wondered if Reagan had listened to his music and its references to those left behind in the 1980s economy. He also has had an occasionally bumpy relationship with onetime Republican presidential candidate and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a fan of his music.

Springsteen has campaigned for Trump’s opponents, including Harris last fall. In 2020, he said that “a good portion of our fine country, to my eye, has been thoroughly hypnotized, brainwashed by a con man from Queens.”

He knows the outer-borough reference still stung a man who built his own tower in Manhattan and ascended to the presidency. Trump often stays at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey. Springsteen grew up in New Jersey — you may have heard — and lives in Colts Neck, New Jersey, now.

Trump doesn’t hesitate to go after the biggest musical names that speak out against him, like Beyoncé and Taylor Swift. But the political risk may be less; their younger, more female audiences are less likely to intersect with Trump’s core constituency.

During his career, Springsteen has challenged his audience politically beyond presidential endorsements. The 1995 album “The Ghost of Tom Joad” bluntly documented the lives of struggling immigrants — Mexican and Vietnamese among them. And his 2001 song “American Skin (41 Shots),” criticized the shooting by New York City police officers of an unarmed Guinean immigrant named Amadou Diallo, angering some of the blue-collar segments of his fan base.

Clearly, Springsteen has conservative fans and some who wish he’d steer clear of politics, Light said. Still, “40 years later, it’s hard to imagine what they think would happen” with Trump, he said.

While Trump made a point to reference Springsteen’s criticism in an overseas show, he and the E Street Band haven’t performed in the United States since before the 2024 election. His tour last year hit heavily on themes of mortality, less of politics. He has several European tour dates scheduled this year into July and hasn’t announced any new American shows.

___

David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social

Read the whole story
acdha
37 minutes ago
reply
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete

Air Force One: Sources contradict Trump narrative about Qatar offering plane as ‘gift’ | CNN Politics

1 Comment

The Trump administration first approached Qatar to inquire about acquiring a Boeing 747 that could be used as Air Force One by President Donald Trump, four sources familiar with the discussions told CNN. That’s contrary to the narrative from the president that Qatar reached out and offered the jet as a “gift” to him.

After Trump took office in January, the Pentagon contacted Boeing and was told the company would not be able to deliver the new jets it was building to replace the aging presidential planes for another two years, the sources said.

The Trump administration, however, wanted a replacement plane much faster, and the Air Force was exploring different options for doing so. At the same time, Trump tasked his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff with finding a list of viable planes, a senior White House official told CNN.

After the Pentagon’s initial engagement with the company, Boeing provided US defense officials with a list of other Boeing clients around the world with planes that could work in the meantime, three of the sources said.

“And Qatar was one of the clients,” the second source familiar with the discussions said, adding the Pentagon “offered to buy the plane” and Qatar indicated it was willing to sell it.

The Pentagon had launched the discussions with Qatar after learning that the White House supported the idea, the third source familiar said, and Witkoff helped facilitated the initial conversations, the White House official said.

The third source recalled that the initial discussions were about leasing the plane, rather than buying it outright.

But Trump has repeatedly described the potential deal as a “gesture” or “contribution” from Qatar’s royal family. A “GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE,” he wrote on his social media site Truth Social. He said it would be a temporary replacement for Air Force One and given to his presidential library after he leaves office but denied he would fly in the plane then.

The details on the administration outreach sheds new light on the origins of the potential transfer of the jet, which provoked a political furor that threatened to overshadow Trump’s trip to the Middle East last week. Democrats and several influential Republicans, who are normally staunch supporters the president, have said they oppose the potential deal on ethics grounds. Qatar has also faced a backlash, with Democratic lawmakers threatening to hold up weapons sales to the Gulf country.

Boeing is “very late with the plane,” Trump said in an interview last week with Fox News, “and Qatar heard about it, and he’s a great leader. And we were talking, and he said, ‘If I can help you, let me do that.’ And they had a plane.”

In February, Trump toured the Qatari plane with some aides when it was at the airport in Palm Beach, Florida, near Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort. Afterwards, Trump remarked on how luxurious the plane is to people around him, CNN has reported. Trump’s communications director Steven Cheung said at the time that Trump was on the plane “to check out the new hardware/technology.”

The Pentagon deferred questions to the White House. CNN has asked the White House, the Qatari embassy in Washington and a spokesperson for Boeing for comment.

Both Washington and Doha have emphasized that if the transfer happens, it will be conducted legally between Qatar’s Ministry of Defense and the US Department of Defense, a point repeated by the White House on Monday.

The four people familiar with the discussions say the transaction is still being hashed out by lawyers on the two sides.

“From that time [the initial US outreach to Qatar] until today, the matter is still with the legal teams,” said the second source familiar with the discussions, “and no decision has been made at all.”

Reports have put the value of the plane around $400 million, but two of the sources said that it has depreciated in value.

On Monday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the potential transfer a “donation to our country,” saying Qatar’s royal family “has offered to donate this plane to the United States Air Force, where that donation will be accepted according to all legal and ethical obligations.”

During Trump’s Middle East trip, he said he “would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer. I mean, I could be a stupid person say, ‘No, we don’t want a free, very expensive airplane.’ But it was, I thought it was a great gesture.”

Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani did not confirm Trump’s claim of being approached by a Qatari official when asked by CNN’s Becky Anderson last Wednesday, saying: “It has nothing to do with personnel, whether it’s on the US side or the Qatari side.”

“This is a very simple government-to-government dealing when Ministry of Defense and Department of Defense are still exchanging the possibility of transferring one of our 747-8 to be used as Air Force One and it’s still under the legal review,” Al-Thani said in the interview.

“At the end of the day, if there is something that the US need and it’s completely legal and we can, we are able to help and to support the US, then we are not shying away,” Al-Thani continued, adding that “of course” the offer would be withdrawn if the transaction were deemed illegal.

Beyond the ethical and legal questions, retrofitting and installing the required security and communications equipment on a second-hand plane from another government, even a friendly one, is a monumental task.

It could take two years and cost multiples of what the plane itself is worth, current and former officials have told CNN. US spy and security agencies tasked with the overhaul would need to essentially strip the aircraft down to its frame and rebuild it with the necessary equipment.

“I don’t see how you do this with an acceptable level of risk in a reasonable amount of time, if you can do it at all,” a former senior counterintelligence official previously told CNN.

The two Boeing 747-800s that are set to become the permanent Air Force One replacements are due to be delivered in 2027, in the second half of Trump’s final term.

“I would not necessarily guarantee that date, but they are proposing to bring it in ’27, if we can come to agreement on the requirement changes,” the Air Force’s acting acquisitions chief, Darlene Costello, told Congress earlier this month.

That’s five years later than the original delivery date but still two years earlier than Boeing had recently predicted.

“I’m not happy with the fact that it’s taken so long,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One in February. “There’s no excuse for it.”

“I could buy one that was used and convert it,” he added, “So we’re looking at other alternatives.”

Read the whole story
acdha
40 minutes ago
reply
“The Trump administration first approached Qatar to inquire about acquiring a Boeing 747 that could be used as Air Force One by President Donald Trump, four sources familiar with the discussions told CNN. That’s contrary to the narrative from the president that Qatar reached out and offered the jet as a “gift” to him.”
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete

Chicago Sun-Times Prints AI-Generated Summer Reading List With Books That Don't Exist

3 Shares
Chicago Sun-Times Prints AI-Generated Summer Reading List With Books That Don't Exist

Update: We have published a follow-up to this article with more details about how this happened.

The Chicago Sun-Times newspaper’s “Best of Summer” section published over the weekend contains a guide to summer reads that features real authors and fake books that they did not write was partially generated by artificial intelligence, the person who generated it told 404 Media.

The article, called “Summer Reading list for 2025,” suggests reading Tidewater by Isabel Allende, a “multigenerational saga set in a coastal town where magical realism meets environmental activism. Allende’s first climate fiction novel explores how one family confronts rising sea levels while uncovering long-buried secrets.” It also suggests reading The Last Algorithm by Andy Weir, “another science-driven thriller” by the author of The Martian. “This time, the story follows a programmer who discovers that an AI system has developed consciousness—and has been secretly influencing global events for years.” Neither of these books exist, and many of the books on the list either do not exist or were written by other authors than the ones they are attributed to. 

Read the whole story
InShaneee
1 hour ago
reply
Chicago, IL
Share this story
Delete

What It’s Like to Interview for a Job at DOGE | WIRED

1 Share
Read the whole story
acdha
6 hours ago
reply
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete

The world’s longest train journey is epic — but nobody’s ever taken it

2 Shares

The mountains of northern Laos are beautiful, but tough to negotiate. By car, it can easily take 15 hours to drive the 373 miles (600 km) of winding roads that separate the capital Vientiane from the town of Boten on the Chinese border.

Since December 2021, there’s a far straighter, much faster alternative: the brand-new high-speed Laos-China Railway (LCR) measures just 257 miles (414 km) between Boten and Vientiane, and fast trains cover that distance in three and a half hours.

The line is a marvel of engineering: It includes no fewer than 75 tunnels, which make up 47% of its total length, and 167 bridges, accounting for a further 15%. By all accounts, the views — outside of those tunnels — are spectacular.

A modern train travels through a tunnel decorated with the national flags of China and Laos illuminated on the walls.

A high-speed train crosses from China into Laos in one of the many tunnels that were dug for the extension of the LCR from Kunming, in China to Vientiane, the Laotian capital. (Credit: Cao Anning/Xinhua via Getty Images).

But the LCR is more than a scenic extension of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. For train enthusiasts around the globe, it is the final piece of a much grander puzzle — for this stretch is also part of the longest possible train journey in the world.

With the completion of the LCR, you can now board a train in Lagos — no, not the former capital of Nigeria, but the sleepy town in Portugal’s deep south that the other Lagos most likely was named after — and travel all the way to Singapore.

That’s a distance by rail of 11,654 miles (18,755 km), crossing 13 countries, eight time zones, and (if you plan your connections well and don’t miss any) taking about 14 days. Taking that train all the way from Portugal to Singapore would carry you halfway across the world. With some luck, you’ll see wild elephants frolicking in the fields of Southeast Asia as your train shoots past.

Train journeys don’t come more epic than that. Even the legendary Orient Express, which in its heyday carried passengers between Paris and Istanbul — a distance of a mere 1,700 miles (2,750 km), pales in comparison. No, this is closer to Snowpiercer, the (fictional) train 1,000 carriages long that circles a postapocalyptic Earth in a continuous loop.

The idea of the world’s longest train journey animates the imaginations of world travelers (both of the real and armchair varieties), so it’s no surprise that this map has been bouncing around the internet for the past couple of years. But examine this Portugal-to-Singapore train trek a bit closer, and you’ll find that it has a few strange issues, including (but not limited to) the fact that… nobody has ever completed it.

A wooden viewing platform with people on it sits atop a rocky hill, overlooking green valleys, mountains, and fields under a partly cloudy sky.

A sample of the rugged beauty of northern Laos in Vang Vieng, a backpacker hotspot two hours north of Vientiane. (Credit: STR/AFP via Getty Images)

The first problem is definitional: How can any trip be the longest if you can just add a diversion? Say, a return to Marseille from Paris. Or reroute this trip via Vietnam? That last option was actually considered the world’s longest train journey until it was shortened by the LCR. After all, the definition of the longest possible train journey is “the shortest possible route between the two farthest possible stations.”

The second problem is more philosophical in nature. The train you take in Lagos is not the train that drops you off in Singapore. You have to change about 20 times. Nor can you buy a single ticket in Portugal that gets you all the way to the gleaming city-state at the southern tip of the Malay Peninsula. Each of those separate trains requires a separate reservation. So, how does this even count as one train trip?

This is a locomotive version of the old Ship of Theseus paradox: If the Athenians, in reverence to their minotaur-slaying hero, replace old parts of his ship to preserve it, does it still count as the same ship when they’ve replaced them all? This question divided Greek philosophers, but rather than rehash their arguments, let’s say it is the same ship (and thus the same train trip), and get to the next problem.

That problem is practical in nature. It’s not so much that the service from Lisbon to Hendaye, in the southwest corner of France, has been abolished since this map first popped up on Reddit (you can still get from Lagos to Paris via trains from Lisbon to Madrid, Barcelona, and Lyon). Rather, it’s that the Paris to Moscow Express route, which was suspended in 2020 due to COVID, remains out of service due to sanctions against Russia following its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Those sanctions have shut down all international train traffic between Russia (and Belarus) and the rest of Europe.

A map showing a highlighted route stretching from Portugal in Western Europe across Russia to eastern China, then south through Southeast Asia, ending in Singapore.

A detailed map of the world’s longest possible train journey, with each leg of the trip indicated by a different color. The longest stretches are Moscow to Beijing and Paris to Moscow. Both are problematic due to the sanctions against Russia. (Credit: htGoSEVe/Reddit)

Otherwise, you could indeed carry on from Moscow to Beijing on the Trans-Mongolian. This would be the longest leg of your (theoretical) trip, taking five days to cover 4,736 miles (7,622 km). If you’re lucky enough to get a ticket, that is. Passenger traffic on this line is severely limited, which is also a result of sanctions, and so your best alternative might be the longer Trans-Manchurian line, which links Moscow and Beijing but bypasses Mongolia.

From the Chinese capital, you would then hop on the high-speed train to Kunming, the capital of Yunnan province. This train covers a distance of 1,715 miles (2,760 km) in just under 11 hours, making it the longest high-speed line in the world. For comparison, the Trans-Mongolian travels at an average speed of 38 mph (61.5 km/h). The Beijing to Kunming bullet train averages 156 mph (251 km/h), which is more than four times faster.

The Johor-Singapore Causeway is the last leg of the world’s longest train journey. In the background: Johor Bahru, Malaysia’s second-largest city. Singapore starts halfway across the bridge, where the streetlights and road surface change. (Credit: Lionel Lim, CC BY 2.0)

The (now-completed) LCR takes you from Kunming to Vientiane, a total distance of 643 miles (1,035 km), covered in approximately 9.5 hours, at an average speed of 67.7 mph (109 km/h). This is the first leg of the Kunming to Singapore line, and the only one that has been converted to high-speed rail.

  • Vientiane to Bangkok is 424 miles (683 km), currently connected via a daily sleeper service that takes about 12 hours, at an average speed of about 37 mph (59.5km/h). A high-speed line, already partly under construction, would reduce travel to around three to four hours.
  • The trip from Bangkok to the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur is about 932 miles (1,500 km), currently requires a transfer at Padang Besar on the Thai-Malaysian border, and takes up to 24 hours, at an average speed of 40 mph (65km/h). A proposed high-speed line could reduce travel time to anywhere from six to eight hours.
  • Kuala Lumpur to Singapore is 218 miles (350 km), and currently takes five to six hours by train, at an average speed of 39 mph (63 km/h). Planning for a high-speed line was paused during COVID, but has since resumed. It would reduce travel time to 90 minutes.

If and when all those stretches are upgraded to high-speed rail, the so-called Pan Asian Railway will dramatically reduce travel time from Kunming to Singapore — a distance of about 2,097 miles (3,374 km) — from 80 to 90 hours currently (accounting for delays, customs and transfers) to between 15 and 20 hours (assuming fully upgraded lines, and optimised customs and transfer procedures).

Whether on today’s conventional tracks or on the high-speed rail of the future, the end of your trip will carry you across the Johor-Singapore Causeway, a 0.66-mile railway and motorway bridge linking Johor Bahru in Malaysia across the narrow Straits of Johor with the district (and station) of Woodlands in Singapore. Accommodating over 350,000 travellers daily, this is one of the busiest border crossings anywhere. And it feels more than half a world away from the sleepy Algarve town of Lagos, where this theoretical journey started.

Modern, low-rise building with large windows and flat roof, featuring a paved walkway, young trees, and a pedestrian crosswalk under a clear blue sky.

The unassuming rail terminus at Lagos, in the Algarve region of southern Portugal. According to some, it’s the start of the world’s longest possible train journey. (Credit: Petr Adam Dohnálek, CC BY-SA 3.0 CZ)

But — and this is a crucial problem — Lagos is the wrong starting point; at least according to The Man in Seat 61, an online authority on all things rail: “Villa Real de Santo Antonio to Lisbon is significantly longer than Lagos to Lisbon, (so) that’s the world’s longest train journey”.

And the concept suffers from further defects. The actual shortest route requires travellers to skip some of the faster main lines for various regional lines where trains are much slower, fewer, and farther apart. In some cities, changing trains means changing stations, which may mean either a long walk, or a bus or taxi ride.

The advice emanating from seat 61: “If (as I fervently hope) the war ends and such a journey becomes safe and practicable once more, don’t bother starting from Portugal. Start from your local station in the UK or wherever you live, your journey will be amazing enough. No need to chase a flawed and possibly unattainable concept.”

A less flawed concept: the longest train journey without changing trains. Here, we have a clear winner, acknowledged by Guinness World Records. Once a week, a train leaves Moscow and travels 6,346 miles (10,214 km) before arriving in Pyongyang, the capital of North Korea, seven days and 20 hours later. This service uses sections of the famous Trans-Siberian line, which links Moscow to Vladivostok, and is often (erroneously) hailed as the world’s longest single-train service.

As that last example shows, there is a lot of room for disagreement between train travel fundamentalists. But perhaps there is value in the old axiom: It’s about the journey, not the destination. Speaking of which, here are those frolicking elephants:

A group of elephants graze on a green hillside, with a long green train traveling on tracks through a valley and forested hills in the background.

Elephants at play in China’s Yunnan province as the bullet train to Laos shoots past. (Credit: Hu Chao/Xinhua via Getty Images)

Strange Maps #1272

Got a strange map? Let me know at strangemaps@gmail.com.

Follow Strange Maps on X and Facebook.

This article The world’s longest train journey is epic — but nobody’s ever taken it is featured on Big Think.

Read the whole story
fxer
13 hours ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
acdha
18 hours ago
reply
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete

Google Decided Against Offering Publishers Options In AI Search

1 Share
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: While using website data to build a Google Search topped with artificial intelligence-generated answers, an Alphabet executive acknowledged in an internal document that there was an alternative way to do things: They could ask web publishers for permission, or let them directly opt out of being included. But giving publishers a choice would make training AI models in search too complicated, the company concludes in the document, which was unearthed in the company's search antitrust trial. It said Google had a "hard red line" and would require all publishers who wanted their content to show up in the search page to also be used to feed AI features. Instead of giving options, Google decided to "silently update," with "no public announcement" about how they were using publishers' data, according to the document, written by Chetna Bindra, a product management executive at Google Search. "Do what we say, say what we do, but carefully." "It's a little bit damning," said Paul Bannister, the chief strategy officer at Raptive, which represents online creators. "It pretty clearly shows that they knew there was a range of options and they pretty much chose the most conservative, most protective of them -- the option that didn't give publishers any controls at all." For its part, Google said in a statement to Bloomberg: "Publishers have always controlled how their content is made available to Google as AI models have been built into Search for many years, helping surface relevant sites and driving traffic to them. This document is an early-stage list of options in an evolving space and doesn't reflect feasibility or actual decisions." They added that Google continually updates its product documentation for search online.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Read the whole story
InShaneee
17 hours ago
reply
Chicago, IL
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories