Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Summary: The article explores the Fear of Running Out (FORO), a psychological phenomenon that stems from anxiety about resource scarcity, particularly in retirement. FORO is especially common among seniors who fear depleting their financial, physical, or emotional resources as they age. Unlike FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), FORO focuses on the depletion of existing assets, often leading to cautious decision-making, delayed spending, or self-sabotaging behaviours like excessive frugality or social withdrawal. While some instances of FORO are valid—such as retirees who underestimated their living expenses—others are more psychological, with financially secure individuals still feeling paralyzed by fear and unable to enjoy their retirement fully. There are practical solutions, but they require more than just emotional support. We also need to address the lack of formal retirement planning and literacy. Most retirees have insufficient knowledge about tax-efficient asset drawdowns, and the limited guidance from financial institutions exacerbates these fears. We’ve all heard of FOMO (fear of missing out)—that nagging anxiety when everyone else seems to be at a fabulous party while you’re at home scrolling through social media, eating last night’s leftovers straight from the container. As we age, the fears we carry evolve—and for some, they get a little louder, quirkier, and much more challenging to ignore. A unique set of acronyms has emerged for older adults to describe these creeping anxieties. Allow me to introduce you to the unholy trinity of aging fears: FOGO (Fear of Getting Old): This one typically kicks in around our mid-to-late 50s when the realization hits and panic sets in: "Wait... I’m not young anymore?" Have I saved enough? Have I experienced enough? Am I running out of time? Cue the classic symptoms: splurging on bright red sports cars, embarking on bucket-list trips to exotic locales, or dating someone who knows what "Netflix and chill" really means, not cozying up with a movie. And yes, sometimes while still married. It’s all part of the "midlife crisis" package—a desperate attempt to outrun Father Time. But let’s be honest: The comb-over isn’t fooling anyone. FOBO (Fear of Being Old): This stage sneaks in during your 70s, as your "best before" date blinks ominously on life’s metaphorical packaging. Many enter into a state of "defensive denial," refusing to acknowledge their age or any limitations, insisting they are still as capable as ever, even when struggling with specific tasks. In this stage, people can demonstrate "overcompensation - Desperately trying to prove they’re still youthful. Many will refuse to use mobility aids or decline assistance from family or caregivers out of pride. Others will shut down anyone who dares to suggest they are old. “Me? Old? Please. I just got a brand-new hip last year!” FORO (Fear of Running Out): Now we get to the show's real star. FORO enters the spotlight as you thoughtfully consider retirement and suddenly takes over the plot. It’s the fear of running out—of money, energy, time, or maybe even snacks at movie night. This one’s a relentless buzz in the background of every decision, from how you spend your savings to whether you should buy name-brand peanut butter or settle for the generic jar. If left unchecked, FORO can steal the joy out of today by worrying too much about tomorrow. We have all heard the stories of people passing away with millions of dollars in the bank, yet they lived in squalor, afraid to spend their money. Now, FORO can manifest in all kinds of ways. Some are almost funny in hindsight. Remember the pandemic toilet paper wars of 2020? Or that panic at a party when you’re convinced you don’t have enough food for your guests, only to find yourself drowning in leftovers? But for seniors in retirement, FORO often takes on a much more serious tone—like running out of money, energy, or health as the years go by. These thoughts can be terrifying for the aged. And sometimes, this fear is warranted. Imagine a retiree who underestimated their living expenses, burned through savings too quickly, and now faces the stark reality of financial insecurity. That’s a legitimate case of FORO that demands attention, planning, and maybe a shift in lifestyle. But other times, FORO is more like a shadow in the dark—unsettling at first glance but harmless once illuminated. For example, some seniors with reasonable pensions, savings, and even supplemental income streams might still be too paralyzed by the fear of running out to take that dream vacation or help their grandchildren with school. In this situation, it is doubtful that there will ever be enough. This type of FORO can cause harm through neglect. This unfounded FORO can keep people from genuinely thriving during their golden years. There are well-documented cases of individuals who have perished from thirst in the desert while carrying full bottles of water. They were too frightened of running out of water to save their lives by drinking it. Most of us shake our heads and think we would never do that, but FORO represents a compelling fear that can lead to self-sabotaging behaviours. If FORO could result in death in the aforementioned desert scenario, how might it influence decisions regarding our significant assets, such as our homes? Unfortunately, many retirees pinch pennies and go without while living in homes with considerable equity, refusing to access it for fear of running out (FORO). So, how do we know when FORO is a valid warning signal and when it’s just a psychological hurdle? And, more importantly, how can we tackle this fear to ensure it doesn’t stand in the way of living a joyful, fulfilled retirement? Read on; we’ll dive deeper into the concept of FORO—why it exists, how it can sneak into our decision-making, and, most importantly, actionable strategies to manage it. Remember, your golden years shouldn’t be ruled by fear—they should be a time to shine. The Fear of Running Out (FORO) is a psychological concept rooted in anxiety about scarcity or insufficiency, particularly concerning essential resources like money, time, or opportunities. It's akin to FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), but instead emphasizes the anxiety of depleting one's existing resources rather than worrying about missed experiences. While FORO has not been as widely studied as FOMO in academic circles, the term has gained traction in financial and psychological contexts, particularly regarding retirement planning, economic behaviour, and decision-making. Although it’s unclear who explicitly popularized the term “Fear of Running Out,” it has become a recurring theme in financial planning discussions and among behavioural psychologists studying how individuals manage uncertainty and risk. The Psychology of FORO FORO is deeply rooted in psychological concepts of scarcity and loss aversion, both key ideas in behavioural economics. Loss aversion, central to Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s prospect theory, highlights that the pain of losing something outweighs the joy of gaining an equivalent amount. In the context of retirement, the fear of running out of money reflects this principle—financial depletion carries the weight of losing essential aspects like security, independence, and quality of life, making it feel particularly distressing. The work of researchers like Eldar Shafir and Senthil Mullainathan on the scarcity mindset further illuminates this phenomenon. They suggest that when people are preoccupied with avoiding resource depletion, they often develop tunnel vision, focusing narrowly on the immediate issue. For seniors worried about outliving their savings, this can manifest as excessive caution or hesitation in deciding to spend or draw down resources, even when such concerns may not be warranted. Faced with this dilemma, some seniors develop inertia, choose to do nothing, and ignore the situation altogether. According to a 2024 report by the Ontario Securities Commission, 13% of pre-retirees and 19% of retirees among Canadians aged 50 and older have a formal written retirement plan, which is a significant cause for concern. This reflects a widespread lack of structured financial and retirement literacy. Without a clear strategy, many individuals may not fully understand how to manage their resources effectively throughout retirement, particularly when it comes to de-accumulating (spending) assets in a tax-efficient manner. We can quickly start to see why many older Canadians have FORO. One key issue is that minimal accessible information exists on strategies for drawing down retirement savings to minimize taxes while ensuring long-term financial security. For example, the timing and order in which individuals withdraw from registered accounts like RRSPs, TFSAs, non-registered investments, or access their home equity can dramatically impact their overall tax burden and available income in retirement. Unfortunately, this type of guidance is often overlooked in financial planning resources, leaving most retirees guessing how much money is enough. The financial industry also contributes to this gap. Banks and many financial advisors are primarily compensated through commissions tied to the sale and management of investments, such as mutual funds or other financial products. This model does not incentivize them to provide comprehensive advice on strategically spending down savings. As a result, many seniors are left without the critical guidance they need to navigate the complexities of de-accumulation, leading to suboptimal emotionally driven decisions and increased financial stress. This lack of tailored advice is particularly problematic for Canadians who rely on paying off their homes as their primary financial plan. While homeownership is a valuable asset, it is not liquid, and converting it into usable retirement income can be challenging without proper planning. The fear of running out of money (FORO) becomes especially acute for these individuals, as they may not have the financial and retirement literacy or tools to make informed decisions about how to fund their retirement, especially concerning using home equity. In short, the low prevalence of formal retirement plans, insufficient education on tax-efficient de-accumulation, and the misaligned incentives of financial institutions significantly disadvantage seniors. This gap exacerbates financial insecurity and leaves many retirees vulnerable to the psychological and practical challenges of FORO, particularly those who rely on home equity, an illiquid asset, as their primary financial safety net. Addressing these issues requires a broader emphasis on financial and retirement literacy and unbiased, accessible advice tailored to retirees' unique needs. Key Components of FORO: 1. Scarcity Mindset—Seniors facing FORO might develop a scarcity mindset, which can lead to overly frugal behaviours. For example, they may reduce spending on essential support services or forego social activities to protect their savings, even when financially secure. 2. Emotional Triggers—FORO is tied to deeper emotional needs like safety, independence, and legacy. At its core is the fear that people will have nowhere to live, won’t have enough money to care for themselves, and will not have any money left to leave a legacy. 3. Decision Paralysis - FORO can cause retirees to delay allocating resources, from downsizing a home to sourcing pension-type income. This indecision can lead to missed opportunities or unnecessary sacrifices. 4. Overcompensation—In some cases, the fear of running out can lead to self-sabotage behaviours like hoarding money or withdrawing from social activities. These behaviours reduce quality of life and increase feelings of isolation. The Solution: A comprehensive approach that combines emotional support, practical planning, and mindset adjustments is essential to helping retirees overcome FORO. By addressing their fears and financial realities, they can gain the confidence to enjoy their retirement years without worrying about running out of money. 1. Acknowledgement and Understanding - Listen and empathize: Begin by genuinely listening to the retiree's concerns, recognizing that FORO is an emotional issue tied to deep-seated fears about security and independence. Normalize the fear: Reassure them that the fear of running out of money is common, especially in retirement. Explain the reasons behind this fear: Retirees often can’t return to work to supplement income. Lifespans and healthcare costs are unpredictable, creating uncertainty. The transition from accumulating wealth to spending it feels unnatural to many. 2. Develop a Retirement Spending Plan—Create a tailored plan. Outline a sustainable spending strategy aligning with the client's lifestyle, goals, and resources: Leverage expertise: Collaborate with their bank manager or financial advisor to develop a realistic budget covering essential and discretionary expenses. Focus on balance: Establish a balance between meeting current needs and maintaining future security. 3. Generate Pension-Like Income - Explore income solutions: Help them research ways to create predictable income streams, such as: Purchasing an annuity to convert part of their savings or equity into guaranteed income. Consider equity mortgage products for additional cash flow if they have sufficient home equity. Address misconceptions: Explain how these tools can reduce uncertainty and provide peace of mind. 4. Emergency Fund - Health care may be needed later in life and can be costly. Setting money aside for unexpected expenses will offer great comfort and peace of mind. 5. Mindset Shifts - Reframe perspectives: Encourage retirees to focus on the opportunities their resources provide rather than fixating on worst-case scenarios: Promote enjoyment: Remind them that retirement is a time to enjoy the fruits of their labour, not live in constant fear. Highlight the importance of self-care and experiences that bring joy and fulfillment. 6. Legacy Planning - Address legacy concerns: Help them create an estate plan or designate resources for loved ones and causes they care about, ensuring their wishes are honoured: Provide clarity: Show how planning for a legacy can reduce anxiety about leaving something behind while meeting their current needs. The Fear of Running Out is more than just a financial concern—it’s a deeply emotional and psychological issue for seniors facing the unpredictability of retirement. By addressing this fear in practical and empathetic ways, we can give retirees the tools and confidence to enjoy their golden years without worrying about depletion or feeling like they need to stockpile financial "water bottles" for a drought that may never come. And there you have it—FORO might be a formidable guest at the retirement table, but it doesn’t have to steal the show. By addressing the emotional roots of this fear, creating practical plans, and shifting the focus to what’s possible, retirees can turn their golden years into precisely that: golden. Remember, retirement isn’t about tiptoeing around scarcity; it’s about celebrating a lifetime of hard work and savouring the moments that make life rich. So, let’s leave FORO in the shadows where it belongs and step confidently into a retirement that truly shines. And let’s be honest, no one wants their legacy to read: "Lived frugally, died rich, and missed the Boat to the Caribbean." Don't retire---Re-Wire! Sue
Off-channel communications (OCC) occur when employees use unapproved and inadequately protected devices – such as personal cellphones – or applications to communicate with co-workers, counterparties and / or clients. Many financial services firms are required to maintain copies of all communications regarding their business, supervise the same, and produce them in response to regulatory requests. Firms cannot meet those compliance obligations when employees resort to unauthorized OCC for business-related matters. In charging 15 broker-dealers and one affiliated investment advisor in September 2022 with record-keeping violations, the SEC noted that its investigation uncovered employees at all levels of these firms who routinely used text messaging apps on their personal devices to discuss business matters between January 2018 and September 2021 [1]. The firms settled the charges and agreed to pay penalties totaling more than $1.1 billion. Just as important, the firms also agreed to engage independent compliance consultants to ensure the use of OCC meets regulatory standards as part of the settlements. In a related move [2], the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) ordered 11 financial institutions to pay more than $710 million for recordkeeping and supervision failures for widespread use of unapproved communication methods such as personal texts, WhatsApp, and Signal. Additionally, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has also taken action when it comes to OCC. Antonio Rega, digital forensics, data governance, privacy, security, emerging technology, and discovery expert with J.S. Held, observes, “While the current administration has loosened certain regulatory enforcement near-term, we continue to observe requests from clients in supporting management of “off-channel” communications, with a particular focus on 3rd party chat messaging platforms on mobile devices, such as Whatsapp. These inquiries include supporting corporate stakeholders with internal auditing of their organizational platforms, policies and procedures.” By implementing effective processes and utilizing software and outside experts to monitor and detect OCC, broker-dealers, investment advisers, and other financial institutions can reduce the risk of regulatory enforcement and penalties and ensure that they remain in compliance with regulations. Steve Strombelline, regulatory and enterprise risk management expert with J.S. Held adds, “Although concerns typically impact broker-dealers, firms outside of financial sectors are looking closely at their messaging processes as well, which is advisable." In addition to guaranteeing that these communications are properly documented and retained, the regulations are set up to prevent the use of OCC to manipulate securities transactions or commit fraud and to ensure that it is not used to violate any other securities laws. Firms’ supervisory procedures must be reasonably designed to detect for OCC when they monitor for such activity. The following article discusses the risks that OCC pose for financial services firms, especially as the SEC, FINRA, and the CFTC have made it clear that they are now targeting firms throughout the industry about their OCC to see if they are recording and preserving business information according to regulations. The piece also explains how firms, including broker-dealers of all sizes, should manage their OCC to ensure that they and their employees comply with federal securities laws and regulations. Finally, the authors address the complexity related to the collection of OCC in response to regulatory enforcement investigative requests. As the fines and settlements between those firms and the SEC exemplify, financial services firms of all sizes need to take this regulatory focus seriously and take the proactive step of engaging an independent third-party with expertise and experience in both digital forensics and compliance issues. To read the full article and learn more about the risk of off-channel communications and how companies should manage their OCC to remain compliant, click on the button below: To connect with Antonio Rega simply click on his icon now. To arrange a conversation with Steve Strombelline or any other media inquiries - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com References [1] https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-174 [2] https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8599-22
A Bumpy Ride Ahead for HigherEd
A confluence of political, economic, and social challenges is threatening the very fabric of US universities. In both red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds facing institutions are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. Universities find themselves squeezed by funding cuts, scrutinized by lawmakers, and caught in cultural crossfire. This presents a unique challenge for communications professionals. In this era of declining trust and “alternative facts,” they need to be hyper-informed, adapt quickly, and boldly emphasize the critical value institutions have in society. Communications should function as a vital link, bridging this growing divide between town and gown. In red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds hitting higher education are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. It's important to note that throughout history, universities often emerge stronger and more deeply connected to the public during times of turbulence. Universities played a key role in partnering with the government to implement Roosevelt's New Deal, helping with emergency relief and agricultural programs. They helped democratize education with the GI Bill after World War II. They responded to societal demands during the civil rights era. Most recently, they played a key role in public health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Campus communicators have a unique set of skills and a vital responsibility to steer their institutions through these tough times. But the road ahead will be hard. The New Reality for Campus Communicators Cuts to Research Funding The lifeblood of academic innovation—research dollars—is under threat. The new political regime in Washington is looking to cut billions in federal research funding. A sudden cap on NIH indirect costs (slashed to 15% from an average of 28%) will have a profound impact on programs. Many researchers report that major grants are frozen or are expected to shrink. This “budget axe” isn’t theoretical for research universities—it’s biting right now. Communicators must convey what’s at stake: essential contributions such as groundbreaking science, community health programs, and innovation pipelines that fuel the economy hang in the balance as money gets tighter. Increasing State Oversight & Regulation In state capitals, politicians are muscling into campus affairs like never before. Republican-controlled statehouses are overhauling higher education governance, introducing over 150 bills in 35 states aimed at tightening control over public institutions. Even tenure is threatened. In the past year, lawmakers in seven states moved to eliminate or curb tenure and impose stricter post-tenure reviews – an unprecedented encroachment on academic freedom. New laws and proposals are creating oversight committees, mandating changes to the curriculum, and even threatening funding for programs out of political favor. The message from some state capitols is clear: “We’re watching you.” This surge in oversight and regulatory meddling means university communicators must navigate an increasingly fine line, demonstrating transparency and accountability at every turn to appease regulators while fiercely defending their institution’s academic autonomy. Political Pressure and DEI Backlash Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are under open attack. What began as partisan rhetoric has evolved into concrete threats – and actions – against campus diversity efforts. Dozens of states have passed or proposed laws to defund DEI offices, ban diversity training, or restrict teaching about race and gender. The result? An “inconsistent and confusing landscape” for colleges as they respond to swelling political pressure. The campaign against campus DEI has dramatically accelerated in 2025, turbocharged by signals from the Trump administration pushing to eliminate DEI efforts across government and higher ed. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education 270 campuses in 38 states have already scaled back or dismantled some DEI programs under this pressure. For communications teams, the DEI backlash creates a messaging minefield. They must affirm institutional values of inclusion and support for marginalized groups, even as those very programs face hostile scrutiny from powerful critics. Threats to the Federal Department of Education In Washington, the unthinkable is suddenly on the table: the U.S. Department of Education itself is in the crosshairs. President Trump has made good on campaign promises by signing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. While outright abolition requires Congress, the administration has already laid off nearly half of the department’s staff and moved to strip the agency to its bare bones. “We’re going to shut it down… it’s doing us no good,” Trump declared. This unprecedented move could upend federal support and guidelines for universities – from financial aid administration to civil rights enforcement – leaving states to fill the void. Communications professionals must reassure students, faculty, and the public that education won’t grind to a halt if federal oversight wanes. It’s a communications tightrope: acknowledging the potential for massive change while conveying stability in the university’s core mission. After all, even if Washington pulls back, universities still answer to accreditation bodies and the public trust. The Misinformation Deluge on Social Media The information ecosystem has never been more chaotic – or more dangerous. Universities are grappling with viral misinformation and disinformation that can ignite campus controversies overnight. In the age of TikTok rumors and politicized Twitter (or “X”) feeds, false narratives spread like wildfire before facts can catch up. Recent campus incidents have shown how quickly truth gets muddled: one university saw fake reports about a protest spread widely. At the same time, another dealt with a gross misinterpretation of a student gathering that went viral. Photos and videos are routinely ripped out of context or deliberately edited with misleading labels. The public, meanwhile, is “bombarded with misinformation” online and growing distrustful of experts. For higher ed communicators, countering misinformation means fighting a two-front war: rapidly correcting falsehoods about their institution and proactively pushing out accurate, compelling content to capture attention before the rumors do. Economic Uncertainty and Budget Turbulence. Even aside from targeted funding cuts, universities are feeling economic whiplash. Inflation, endowment fluctuations, and post-pandemic enrolment dips have collided to squeeze campus finances. Many institutions face structural deficits and tough choices about programs and staffing. In fact, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, two-thirds of colleges now show at least one sign of financial stress – a startling statistic that underscores how widespread the budget crunch has become. From flagship public universities to small private colleges, hiring freezes and spending cuts are the order of the day. Every dollar is scrutinized by trustees and legislators alike. Communications pros must now operate in a climate of fiscal anxiety, where messages about any new initiative or expense can trigger questions about priorities. The task at hand is to highlight the university’s economic stewardship and continued value to students and the community, even as belts tighten. It’s critical to communicate that the institution is navigating the storm responsibly—protecting its academic core and maximizing the impact of every precious dollar. Demands to Prove Real-world Impact “What is higher ed really doing for society?” In 2025, that question echoes from state capitols, donors’ boards, and kitchen tables across America. Universities are under intense pressure to demonstrate the real-world value of their research and teaching like never before. Lawmakers openly discuss ROI (return on investment) for degrees and research grants, seeking data on graduates’ earnings and innovations spawned per taxpayer dollar. Public confidence in higher education has been shaken – a recent Gallup survey found Americans’ confidence in colleges has plummeted to 36%, down from 57% in 2015. Many believe in personal value (a college degree for better jobs) but doubt that higher education delivers for the greater good. In short, the public is skeptical whether campus research and scholarship are worth the cost. University communicators must do more than publicize exciting discoveries – they must connect the dots for people. Every media release, story, or tweet should answer: Here’s how this university’s work benefits you, your community, and the world. Whether it’s a medical breakthrough, a tech startup from the lab, or a student project solving a local problem, the mandate is clear: show impact or risk losing support. In my next post, I'll provide a detailed blueprint to help communications professionals proactively plan and organize their teams for the road ahead. This actionable framework will help you better identify where you can add value for your institution where it needs it the most and confirm your critical role as a trusted resource. To your success! Upcoming Speaking Events April 23 PRSA Virtual Workshop "Cutting Through the Noise: What Thought Leadership Strategies are Working in Today’s Environment” Register Here June 8 IABC World Conference, Vancouver “The Thought Leadership Blueprint: Why & How to Build a High-Impact Program” Register Here Sept. 12-13 PRSA East Central Conference, Cleveland “The New Comms Leadership Skillset” Register Here About ExpertFile ExpertFile is revolutionizing how organizations connect their experts to journalists, podcasters, and conference organizers who need to find credible experts on tight deadlines…fast. Featuring experts on over 50,000 topics, our free Apple and Android mobile app is the go-to resource for journalists at media outlets such as the New York Times, CNN, NPR Radio, Fox News, BBC, The Guardian, ABC News, CBC, AXIOS and Time Magazine. For over a decade, our award-winning software platform has been helping marketing departments better manage and promote their online thought leadership to reach a wider audience. Clients include Carnegie Mellon University, ChristianaCare Health, Villanova University, Aston University and Emory University. Learn more at: expertfile.com/getstarted
How authorship language helped catch a domestic terrorist – new podcast
In the latest episode of Writing Wrongs, hosts Professor Tim Grant and Dr Nicci MacLeod interview Dr Isobelle Clarke to unravel a case where forensic linguistics helped track down and convict a dangerous individual. Episode three, Imposters Tending to the Wild with Dr Isobelle Clarke, dives into the chilling case of Nikolaos Karvounakis, a self-proclaimed anarchist who planted a viable explosive device in Princes Street Gardens, Edinburgh, in 2018. Karvounakis, a Greek national, evaded capture for years, hiding behind online anonymity and extremist rhetoric. However, forensic linguists stepped in to analyse his anonymous blog posts, revealing patterns in his language that ultimately helped Police Scotland link him to the crime. The case not only demonstrates how linguistic evidence can be a powerful forensic tool but also raises crucial questions about the role of language analysis in modern terrorism investigations. On 11 January 2018, a suspicious cardboard box was discovered in a public seating area in Edinburgh’s Princes Street Gardens. After a controlled explosion, investigators determined the device could have caused serious harm had it detonated. With no immediate leads, the investigation stalled - until an anonymous blog post surfaced, claiming responsibility for the attack. The post, written in both English and Spanish, was linked to an eco-anarchist group called Individualists Tending to the Wild, a Mexican-based extremist organisation advocating violent action against technological progress. Crucially, the post included an image of the bomb’s interior, a detail only the perpetrator or law enforcement could have known. Police Scotland sought the expertise of Professor Tim Grant, who analysed the text, producing a linguistic profile that suggested the writer was neither a native English nor Spanish speaker - but rather someone influenced by another language entirely. Two years later, police identified Nikolaos Karvounakis as a suspect. Using comparative authorship analysis, Professor Tim Grant compared his online writings - including song lyrics from his rock band - to the manifesto. By dissecting word patterns, grammatical structures and stylistic quirks, he established that Karvounakis was the likely author. This evidence -alongside forensic meteorology, which linked photos of clouds in Karvounakis’ blog posts to the same weather conditions on the day of the crime - was used to secure a warrant and seize computers containing known writings by Karvounakis. To eliminate inevitable bias that would result from having worked the case for more than two years, Professor Grant invited Dr Isabelle Clarke onto the case as an independent forensic linguist. Using a version of the General Imposters Method, a technique similar to a police lineup but for language, Dr Clarke confirmed that the writing style in the blog post was the closest to Karvounakis’ known writings. Police Scotland put the evidence in the case, including the linguistic evidence, to Karvounakis, and secured a guilty plea. In February 2022, Nikolaos Karvounakis was sentenced to over eight years in prison under the UK’s Terrorism Act. Tim Grant, professor of forensic linguistics at Aston University, said: “The case highlights the growing importance of forensic linguistics in solving crimes, particularly in an age where digital anonymity combines with extremist ideologies. “It also highlights the how different types of language analysis can assist as a case moves through different stages of investigation.” Dr Nicci MacLeod, deputy director of the Aston Institute for Forensic Linguistics, said: “This episode offers listeners a behind-the-scenes look at the forensic methods that expose deception, identify threats and ultimately bring criminals to justice.” Dr Isobelle Clarke, a lecturer in security and protection science at Lancaster University and one of the first graduates from the campus-based MA Forensic Linguistics programme at Aston University, said: “It was great to be back at Aston University talking about the Karvounakis case for the Writing Wrongs podcast. “It’s an interesting case to highlight, as it shows how different types of language analysis can help with police investigations.” Writing Wrongs is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and all major streaming platforms. Listeners are encouraged to subscribe, share and engage with the hosts by submitting their forensic linguistics questions. Whether it’s about this case or broader forensic linguistic techniques, Professor Grant and Dr MacLeod welcome inquiries from listeners.
Best-selling author Kate Summerscale joins Writing Wrongs to explore true crime and justice
The true crime podcast Writing Wrongs continues its exploration of language and justice with a special bonus episode featuring best-selling author and historian Kate Summerscale. Kate is an award-winning historian, journalist and best-selling author known for her meticulous research into historical true crime cases. Her book The Suspicions of Mr. Whicher won the Samuel Johnson Prize for Non-Fiction and was adapted into a major ITV drama. Her latest book, The Peep Show: The Murders at 10 Rillington Place, revisits the infamous Christie case, shedding new light on the victims’ lives, the social conditions of post-war Britain and the power of the press in shaping public perceptions of crime. In this episode, hosts Professor Tim Grant and Dr Nicci MacLeod explore a fresh perspective on the Rillington Place murders, the wrongful execution of Timothy Evans and how forensic linguistics has helped uncover the truth in criminal cases. Following on from the first episode of the series, which examined the Timothy Evans case and the origins of forensic linguistics, this conversation with Kate Summerscale provides fresh historical insights into one of Britain’s most infamous miscarriages of justice. The episode revisits the horrifying crimes of John Christie, whose calculated murders led to one of the most infamous miscarriages of justice in British history. The wrongful conviction and execution of Timothy Evans cast a long shadow over the UK’s legal system and played a pivotal role in the eventual abolition of the death penalty. Through expert discussion, the episode examines how Evans’ case became a turning point for criminal justice reform. The conversation also looks at the role of the media in shaping crime narratives. Sensationalist reporting during the Rillington Place murders fuelled public perceptions, sometimes distorting the truth in favour of dramatic storytelling. The episode draws comparisons between 1950s tabloid journalism and today’s true crime media, examining how crime reporting has evolved - and the ethical challenges it still faces. A deeply unsettling aspect of this case is its gendered nature. The majority of John Christie's victims were vulnerable women, many facing financial and social instability. The episode delves into how structural inequalities, from the lack of legal abortion to economic dependence, made women more susceptible to predatory figures like Christie, a pattern that remains relevant in crime analysis today. Finally, the episode scrutinises government complicity in covering up a miscarriage of justice. The Brabin Inquiry, launched in the 1960s, sought to reexamine Evans’ conviction but delivered a highly controversial conclusion, failing to fully exonerate him. The discussion highlights how political interests and legal reputation management influenced the case’s outcome, leading to Evans’ eventual posthumous pardon - but not a full legal exoneration. Tim Grant, professor of forensic linguistics at Aston University, said: “It was wonderful to have Kate on Writing Wrongs. “Her work challenges the traditional true crime narrative, shifting focus from the murderer to the victims and the broader social structures that allow such crimes to happen. “Her insights in this episode provide a fresh and deeply researched perspective on a case that still haunts British legal history.” Writing Wrongs is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and all major streaming platforms. Listeners are encouraged to subscribe, share and engage with the hosts by submitting their forensic linguistics questions. Whether it’s about this case or broader forensic linguistic techniques, Professor Grant and Dr MacLeod welcome inquiries from listeners.
Can we separate our work and home memories, 'Severance' style?
The hit Apple TV show 'Severance' offers a tempting alternative to balancing work and home life by using neural implants to entirely split the memories. But according to Carnegie Mellon University neuroscientist Dr. Alison Barth, this work-life separation is somewhat possible even without an implant. In an interview, Dr. Barth explains: "We all experience some compartmentalization between our private and our work lives. Having a different location where you work and play makes that easier, but the cues for 'life' and 'work' can be as simple as time of day, or what your computer screen looks like." In addition, she says humans can "easily move in and out" of our work and personal worlds, and that there are many examples of people whose work and private lives are completely 'severed'. CMU neuroscientist Alison Barth shares her thoughts on the TV thriller Severance As far as the feasibility of technology to control our memories for us, Dr. Barth says: "I don't think that it is possible to program people so that they simply cannot access memories outside of a particular space and time." And she further warns of the dangers of such a separation: "The potential for abuse and lack of accountability are horrifying. In Severance, the office workers have little notion of what their work is. It would be hard to hold them accountable in a court of law. Severance is perfectly suited to corporate malfeasance," she explained. Watch Alison Barth's CMU Experts video below to learn more about her research seeking to understand how experience transforms the properties of neurons to encode memory.
ExpertSpotlight: History of Yemen and the Houthi Rebels
The history of Yemen and the rise of the Houthi rebels is essential to understanding one of the world’s most complex humanitarian and geopolitical crises. Once considered a crossroads of ancient trade, Yemen has in recent decades become a focal point of conflict, regional power struggles, and human rights challenges. The conflict involving the Houthi movement has had global ramifications—from maritime security and oil trade routes to civilian displacement and famine. This topic matters to the public because it highlights the intersection of war, diplomacy, and humanitarian need, while prompting critical questions about international responsibility, peace-building, and regional stability. Key story angles that may interest a broad audience include: The roots and rise of the Houthi movement: Tracing the group’s origins, ideology, and evolution into a key political and military force in Yemen. Regional power dynamics: Analyzing the involvement of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other actors in fueling or resolving the conflict. The humanitarian crisis in Yemen: Investigating the scale of famine, disease outbreaks, displaced populations, and access to aid. The role of the international community: Exploring arms sales, ceasefire negotiations, and accountability in the context of international law. Maritime security and global trade: Understanding how conflict in Yemen affects Red Sea shipping routes and international energy markets. The future of peace and governance: Examining potential pathways to a political resolution and the reconstruction of a stable Yemeni state. Connect with an expert about Yemen and the Houthi rebels: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com
MEDIA RELEASE: Nominate now: the annual CAA Worst Roads campaign kicks off
The nomination portal for the annual CAA Worst Roads campaign is now open, and CAA South Central Ontario (CAA SCO) is giving Ontarians the opportunity to voice their concerns about the bad roads in their communities. “Our research shows that 85 per cent of Ontarians are concerned about the state of our roads,” says Teresa Di Felice, assistant vice president of government and community relations, CAA SCO. “The campaign has been a vital platform for Ontarians to nominate roads they believe need urgent attention. It allows Ontarians to drive positive change in their communities by amplifying their voices.” Survey Reveals High Cost of Vehicle Damage from Poor Roads According to a survey conducted by CAA SCO, nearly half of respondents have experienced vehicle damage because of poor roads. Eighty-one per cent pay out of pocket to repair their vehicle, only three per cent file a claim with their personal auto insurance, and nine per cent forego repairs altogether. Vehicle damage caused by potholes and poor road maintenance can range from $500 to over $2,000. The average repair by those surveyed cost $933, a significant $81 increase from 2024. “With the increasing cost of living, many people hold on to their cars for longer when damaged, the last thing they need is expensive repair bills on an already stretched household budget,” adds Di Felice. The survey also found that cracked pavement remains the most dominant road-related issue (88 per cent), followed by potholes (84 per cent) and congestion (81 per cent – up four per cent from 2024). One of the highest-climbing road-related issues Members reported is reduced or closed lanes, where 78 per cent of respondents agreed it is common in their region—up six per cent from last year. “The frustration from motorists is evident,” says Di Felice, “congestion continues to grow as one of the top road-related concerns for Ontarians, and the CAA Worst Roads campaign allows governments the insight into what repairs need to be prioritized for their communities.” More than half of respondents (64 per cent) also agreed that not enough is currently being done to maintain the roads in their area. Decision-Makers Respond to the Worst Roads Campaign “We know that the campaign works and that decision-makers are listening. Since the start of the campaign, we have seen budgets prioritized and road repairs moved up,” says Di Felice, “in the last four campaigns, we have seen ten roads receive attention because of their nomination in the CAA Worst Roads campaign.” Ontario’s top 10 list is verified by the Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario (RCCAO) and its members, including the Greater Toronto Sewer and Watermain Contractors Association (GTSWCA), Heavy Construction Association of Toronto (HCAT), and the Toronto and Area Road Builders Association (TARBA). Nominations for the Worst Roads campaign can be submitted online at www.caaworstroads.com from March 25 to April 18. Once the nominations are collected, CAA will reveal the top 10 worst roads in the province to the public. CAA conducted an online survey with 2,370 CAA SCO Members between January 6 to 14, 2025. Based on the sample size and the confidence level (95 per cent), the margin of error for this study was +/- 2 per cent.
Hundreds of nurses and their colleagues at ChristianaCare gathered in a conference room at Christiana Hospital and listened through a livestream across the organization’s campuses and practices for an announcement they’ve been anticipating for many months. “For your commitment to nursing excellence and quality care, we are thrilled to recognize ChristianaCare with its fourth consecutive Magnet designation,” said David Marshall, JD, DNP, RN, chair of the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Magnet Recognition. “This accomplishment is a powerful testament to your dedication to the nurses who practice there, the entire health care team, and — most importantly — the patients you serve.” Shouts erupted, balloons and streamers floated up and, in the happy commotion, there was even a little cowbell. As the only four-time Magnet-designated health care organization in Delaware, ChristianaCare has achieved this global recognition — the highest honor in nursing practice — for continued dedication to excellence and innovation, high-quality patient care and experience, nurse engagement and work culture. “Magnet designation recognizes ChristianaCare nurses are simply the best!” said ChristianaCare President and CEO Janice E. Nevin, M.D., MPH. “A fourth Magnet designation is an incredible achievement and reflects the vital importance and commitment of our nurses as we serve together with love and excellence.” ChristianaCare has more than 3,000 nurses, and they make up the largest segment of ChristianaCare’s workforce. ChristianaCare is the largest nonprofit organization and private employer in the state of Delaware. This most recent designation for ChristianaCare includes Christiana Hospital, Wilmington Hospital, ChristianaCare HomeHealth and Community Care Services, through early 2029. What it means to be Magnet “Our fourth consecutive Magnet designation means that our nurses and all of our caregiver colleagues have upheld the ANCC’s very high standards in patient care since our first recognition in 2010,” said ChristianaCare Chief Nurse Executive Danielle Weber, DNP, RN. “That is a long time to bring your ‘A’ game every day — through 15 years of change, including a pandemic — and to sustain growth in professional practice, innovation and culture. Magnet recognition raises the bar for patient care and inspires every member of our team to achieve excellence every day.” The Magnet Recognition Program — administered by the American Nurses Credentialing Center, the largest and most prominent nurses credentialing organization in the world — identifies health care organizations that provide the very best in nursing care, exceptional nurse engagement and professionalism in nursing practice. The Magnet Recognition Program serves as the gold standard for nursing excellence and provides consumers with the ultimate benchmark for measuring quality of care. The ANCC Magnet Recognition Program® has conferred Magnet status to less than 10% of hospitals and health systems in the United States. There are 621 Magnet-designated health organizations internationally. ChristianaCare was the first in Delaware to achieve Magnet designation, in 2010. For nurses, Magnet Recognition means education and development through every career stage, which leads to greater autonomy at the bedside. For patients, it means the very best care, delivered by nurses who are supported to be the very best that they can be. While Magnet is a nursing-led initiative, the designation reflects the work of caregivers across the organization. Magnet redesignation itself is a rigorous process. Health care organizations must reapply for Magnet status every four years and demonstrate adherence to the Magnet concepts for nursing excellence and engagement and measurable improvements in patient care and quality. The ANCC commended ChristianaCare on these exemplars: Advocacy for and acquisition of organizational resources specific to nurses’ well-being. particularly through the Nursing Integrative Care Program. An innovative strategy to address the shortage of certified registered nurse anesthetists in Delaware through a partnership program between ChristianaCare and Wilmington University to launch the state’s first Nurse Anesthesiology program. Outstanding nursing research engagement and growth of the nursing research enterprise especially through the Nursing Research Fellowship in Robotics and Innovation.
New survey shows lack of public trust in Musk, DOGE
New data from the Center for Political Communication (CPC) at the University of Delaware shows many Americans have little trust in either Elon Musk or the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a nationally-representative sample of 1,600 adult Americans surveyed by YouGov between February 27 and March 5, 2025, CPC researchers asked how much trust respondents had in various people and institutions, including Elon Musk, the Department of Government Efficiency, and President Trump. Among the key findings: • 25% of Americans report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Elon Musk 26% report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). • 33% report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in President Donald Trump. • About half of Republicans report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in either (compared to 70% of Republicans who report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in President Trump). • Among independent voters, only 11% report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Musk and 13% in DOGE. “As constituents in Republican districts learn about and voice concerns about DOGE’s cuts to Veteran’s Affairs, The National Institutes of Health, National Parks, and the Federal Aviation Administration, it will be interesting to see how public trust in Musk and DOGE may be affected,” said Dr. Dannagal Young, Director of the Center for Political Communication and one of the authors of the survey. “Understanding public sentiment about these unique government entities is essential to help ensure that elected officials are responsive to voter concerns." Visit the CPC's website for full results of the survey. To connect with Young for an interview, visit her profile and click the contact button.
