Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Expert Perspective: Mitigating Bias in AI: Sharing the Burden of Bias When it Counts Most
Whether getting directions from Google Maps, personalized job recommendations from LinkedIn, or nudges from a bank for new products based on our data-rich profiles, we have grown accustomed to having artificial intelligence (AI) systems in our lives. But are AI systems fair? The answer to this question, in short—not completely. Further complicating the matter is the fact that today’s AI systems are far from transparent. Think about it: The uncomfortable truth is that generative AI tools like ChatGPT—based on sophisticated architectures such as deep learning or large language models—are fed vast amounts of training data which then interact in unpredictable ways. And while the principles of how these methods operate are well-understood (at least by those who created them), ChatGPT’s decisions are likened to an airplane’s black box: They are not easy to penetrate. So, how can we determine if “black box AI” is fair? Some dedicated data scientists are working around the clock to tackle this big issue. One of those data scientists is Gareth James, who also serves as the Dean of Goizueta Business School as his day job. In a recent paper titled “A Burden Shared is a Burden Halved: A Fairness-Adjusted Approach to Classification” Dean James—along with coauthors Bradley Rava, Wenguang Sun, and Xin Tong—have proposed a new framework to help ensure AI decision-making is as fair as possible in high-stakes decisions where certain individuals—for example, racial minority groups and other protected groups—may be more prone to AI bias, even without our realizing it. In other words, their new approach to fairness makes adjustments that work out better when some are getting the short shrift of AI. Gareth James became the John H. Harland Dean of Goizueta Business School in July 2022. Renowned for his visionary leadership, statistical mastery, and commitment to the future of business education, James brings vast and versatile experience to the role. His collaborative nature and data-driven scholarship offer fresh energy and focus aimed at furthering Goizueta’s mission: to prepare principled leaders to have a positive influence on business and society. Unpacking Bias in High-Stakes Scenarios Dean James and his coauthors set their sights on high-stakes decisions in their work. What counts as high stakes? Examples include hospitals’ medical diagnoses, banks’ credit-worthiness assessments, and state justice systems’ bail and sentencing decisions. On the one hand, these areas are ripe for AI-interventions, with ample data available. On the other hand, biased decision-making here has the potential to negatively impact a person’s life in a significant way. In the case of justice systems, in the United States, there’s a data-driven, decision-support tool known as COMPAS (which stands for Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions) in active use. The idea behind COMPAS is to crunch available data (including age, sex, and criminal history) to help determine a criminal-court defendant’s likelihood of committing a crime as they await trial. Supporters of COMPAS note that statistical predictions are helping courts make better decisions about bail than humans did on their own. At the same time, detractors have argued that COMPAS is better at predicting recidivism for some racial groups than for others. And since we can’t control which group we belong to, that bias needs to be corrected. It’s high time for guardrails. A Step Toward Fairer AI Decisions Enter Dean James and colleagues’ algorithm. Designed to make the outputs of AI decisions fairer, even without having to know the AI model’s inner workings, they call it “fairness-adjusted selective inference” (FASI). It works to flag specific decisions that would be better handled by a human being in order to avoid systemic bias. That is to say, if the AI cannot yield an acceptably clear (1/0 or binary) answer, a human review is recommended. To test the results for their “fairness-adjusted selective inference,” the researchers turn to both simulated and real data. For the real data, the COMPAS dataset enabled a look at predicted and actual recidivism rates for two minority groups, as seen in the chart below. In the figures above, the researchers set an “acceptable level of mistakes” – seen as the dotted line – at 0.25 (25%). They then compared “minority group 1” and “minority group 2” results before and after applying their FASI framework. Especially if you were born into “minority group 2,” which graph seems fairer to you? Professional ethicists will note there is a slight dip to overall accuracy, as seen in the green “all groups” category. And yet the treatment between the two groups is fairer. That is why the researchers titled their paper “a burden shared is a burdened halved.” Practical Applications for the Greater Social Good “To be honest, I was surprised by how well our framework worked without sacrificing much overall accuracy,” Dean James notes. By selecting cases where human beings should review a criminal history – or credit history or medical charts – AI discrimination that would have significant quality-of-life consequences can be reduced. Reducing protected groups’ burden of bias is also a matter of following the laws. For example, in the financial industry, the United States’ Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) makes it “illegal for a company to use a biased algorithm that results in credit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because a person receives public assistance,” as the Federal Trade Commission explains on its website. If AI-powered programs fail to correct for AI bias, the company utilizing it can run into trouble with the law. In these cases, human reviews are well worth the extra effort for all stakeholders. The paper grew from Dean James’ ongoing work as a data scientist when time allows. “Many of us data scientists are worried about bias in AI and we’re trying to improve the output,” he notes. And as new versions of ChatGPT continue to roll out, “new guardrails are being added – some better than others.” “I’m optimistic about AI,” Dean James says. “And one thing that makes me optimistic is the fact that AI will learn and learn – there’s no going back. In education, we think a lot about formal training and lifelong learning. But then that learning journey has to end,” Dean James notes. “With AI, it never ends.” Gareth James is the John H. Harland Dean of Goizueta Business School. If you're looking to connect with him - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Experts in the Media: With Kemp bowing out of mid-terms is Georgia staying blue?
Control of the Senate is key for most administrations, and with a razor-thin edge favoring the Republicans, any pickup to keep control of the Senate after the mid-term elections is a priority. However, with a heavy favorite in Gov. Brian Kemp stepping away from the chance to run for the GOP, many are speculating the once traditionally Republican stronghold could stay blue under the Democrats with the re-election of Sen. Jon Ossoff. It's a topic that has political watchers and media trying to cover and figure out as parties get ready to get back on the campaign trail for next year. It's also why journalists and news outlets like Newsweek are connecting with experts like William Hatcher, PhD, for expert opinion and perspective. An award-winning scholar, Hatcher is the chair of the Department of Social Sciences and a professor of political science. His research focuses on the connection between public administration and the development of local communities. Kemp's decision not to challenge Ossoff in the state's 2026 Senate race could be a boon to Democrats' chances of holding the seat in the battleground state, according to recent polls... Kemp's announcement follows months of speculation about whether he would challenge Ossoff, a Democrat first elected in 2020. Polls suggest Kemp would have been the strongest candidate against Ossoff and that other potential Republicans trail the incumbent senator in a hypothetical matchup. "Given that Kemp was perhaps the strongest candidate to face Ossoff, his decision to not run will make it difficult to find another candidate that would be as competitive. However, the election is over a year away, and in politics, a lot can happen in that amount of time," William Hatcher, chair and professor of social sciences at Augusta University, told Newsweek on Tuesday. A poll from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that Kemp led Ossoff by 3.3 points (49% to 45.7%), Ossoff led three other prospective challengers. That poll surveyed 1,426 respondents from April 24 to April 27, 2025, and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. Hatcher said the state Republicans face a "limited" bench to challenge Ossoff, but whoever prevails will eventually have to defend Trump's "unpopular economic policies that will most likely adversely affect states like Georgia, particularly his recent commentary on leveling tariffs on the film industry – a industry that has a significant presence in Georgia." May 06 - Newsweek The race is obviously already on for the mid-term elections in November of 2026, and if you're a journalist looking to cover Georgia politics, let us help. William Hatcher, PhD, is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Most companies around the world have a leader, whether that title is a President, CEO, or Founder. There’s almost always someone at the very top of a corporate food chain, and from that position down, the company is structured hierarchically, with multiple levels of leadership supervising other employees. It’s a structure with which most people in the working world are familiar, and it dates back as long as one can remember. The word itself—leader—dates back to as far as the 12th Century and is derived from the Old English word “laedere,” or one who leads. But in 2001, a group of software engineers developed the Agile Workflow Methodology, a project development process that puts a priority on egalitarian teamwork and individual independence in searching for solutions. A number of businesses are trying to embrace a flatter internal structure, like the agile workflow. But is it necessarily the best way to develop business processes? That’s the question posed by researchers, including Goizueta Business School’s Özgecan Koçak, associate professor of organization and management, and fellow researchers Daniel A. Levinthal and Phanish Puranam in their recently published paper on organizational hierarchies. “Realistically, we don’t see a lot of non-hierarchical organizations,” says Koçak. “But there is actually a big push to have less hierarchy in organizations.” Part of it is due to the demotivating effects of working in authoritarian workplaces. People don’t necessarily like to have a boss. We place value in being more egalitarian, more participatory. Özgecan Koçak, Associate Professor of Organization & Management “So there is some push to try and design organizations with flatter hierarchies. That is specifically so in the context of knowledge-based work, and especially in the context of discovery and search.” Decoding Organizational Dynamics While the idea of an egalitarian workplace is attractive to many people, Koçak and her colleagues wanted to know if, or when, hierarchies were actually beneficial to the health of organizations. They developed a computational agent-based model, or simulation, to explore the relationships between structures of influence and organizational adaptation. The groups in the simulation mimicked real business team structures and consisted of two types of teams. In the first type, one agent had influence over the beliefs of rest of the team. For the second type, no one individual had any influence over the beliefs of the team. The hierarchical team vs. the flat structured team. “When you do simulations, you want to make sure that your findings are robust to those kinds of things like the scale of the group, or the how fast the agents are learning and so forth,” says Koçak. What’s innovative about this particular simulation is that all the agents are learning from their environment. They are learning through trial and error. They are trying out different alternatives and finding out their value. Özgecan Koçak Koçak is very clear that the hierarchies in the simulation are not exactly like hierarchies in a business organization. Every agent was purposefully made to be the same without any difference in wisdom or knowledge. “It’s really nothing like the kinds of hierarchies you would see in organizations where there is somebody who has a corner office, or somebody who is has a management title, or somebody’s making more than the others. In the simulation, it’s nothing to do with those distributional aspects or control, and nobody has the ability to control what others do in (the simulation). All control comes through influence of beliefs.” Speed vs. Optimal Solutions What they found in the simulation was that while both teams solved the same problems presented to them, they achieved different results at different speeds. We find that hierarchical teams don’t necessarily find the best solution, but they find the good enough solution in the shorter term. So if you are looking at the really long term, crowds do better. The crowds where individuals are all learning separately, they find the best solution in the long run, even though they are not learning from each other. Özgecan Koçak Özgecan Koçak (pronounced as ohz-gay-john ko-chuck) is associate professor of Organization & Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. She holds a Ph.D. in organizational behavior from the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. For example, teams of scientists looking for cures or innovative treatments for diseases work best with a flat structure. Each individual works on their own timeline, with their own search methodologies. The team only comes together for status updates or to discuss their projects without necessarily getting influence or direction from colleagues. The long-term success of the result is more important in some cases than the speed at which they arrive to their conclusion. That won’t work for an organization that answers to a board of directors or shareholders. Such parties want to see rapid results that will quickly impact the bottom line of the company. This is why the agile methodology is not beneficial to large-scale corporations. Koçak says, “When you try to think about an entire organization, not just teams, it gets more complicated. If you have many people in an organization, you can’t have everybody just be on the same team. And then you have to worry about how to coordinate the efforts of multiple teams. That’s the big question for scaling up agile. We know that the agile methodology works pretty well at the team level. However, when firms try to scale it up applied to the entire organization, then you have more coordination problems. Özgecan Koçak “You need some way to coordinate the efforts with multiple teams.” The Catch: Compensation Makes a Difference The simulation did not take into account one of the biggest parts of a corporate hierarchical structure—incentives and reward. The teams in the simulation received no monetary compensation for their leadership or influence. That is not something that happens in real life. Koçak says, “If you built up an organization with just influence, you just say we’re not going to have any authority, and we’re not going to give anybody the right to control anybody else’s actions. If we’re not going to be rewarding anyone more than the other, there’s not going to be any marks of status, etc. We’re just going to have some people influence others more. I would guess that would automatically lead to a prestige hierarchy right away. The person with more influence, you would start respecting more.” It’s almost like we’re incapable of working in a flat society, because somebody always wants to be or naturally becomes a leader and an influencer whether they planned on it or not. Özgecan Koçak The paper concludes that both methodologies, with either hierarchical and flat organization of teams, reach their goals. They just arrive at different times with different end results. If an organization has the luxury of time and money, a flat, agile methodology organization might be the right structure for that company. However, even agile workflow needs some coordination, according to Koçak. “There are also some search tasks that require coordination. You can’t always be searching on your own independently of others. There are some situations in which search needs to be done in a coordinated fashion by more than one person in teams. That’s because many of the knowledge-based settings where we do discovery require some division of labor, some specialization by expertise.” Communication is Key The key to any successful workflow, whether it be agile or hierarchical, is coordination and communication. Looking back to the example of scientific researchers, Koçak said, “You have scientific teams working independently of one another without a common boss dictating what they do research on or how they do it. Instead, they explore and experiment on their own. They write up their results, share their results, and learn from each other, because they are in the long-term game. The goal is to find the truth, however long it takes. “But when you look closely at a scientific team where everybody’s exploring, there is still some need for coordination. A lot of that happens through communication, and a lot of times projects will have a lead. Not necessarily somebody who knows better than the others, but somebody who’s going to help with coordination.” The leaner, flatter organizational structures in businesses might be gaining popularity. This simulation done by Koçak and colleagues, however, shows that it isn’t a perfect fit for every company, Further, some form of hierarchical workflow is necessary to maintain communication and coordination. Hierarchical structures don’t always find the best solution to a problem, but it’s almost always a good solution in a timelier fashion. Looking to know more? Özgecan Koçak is associate professor of Organization & Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. She is available to speak with media about this topic - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Today, on CAA’s National Slow Down, Move Over Day, the Government of Manitoba, the RCMP and CAA representatives came together at the Manitoba Legislature to remind motorists about the importance of Manitoba’s Slow Down, Move Over law (SDMO), a life-saving law designed to protect emergency responders and roadside workers. “We are pleased that the Manitoba government has proclaimed May 13th as Slow Down Move Over Day to help bring awareness to the laws designed to protect emergency responders, tow operators, and highway workers who are stopped on the side of the road to save lives on Manitoba roadways,” said Ewald Friesen, manager of government relations for CAA Manitoba. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Lisa Naylor stated, “Every day, workers risk their lives to keep our roads safe and we are asking Manitoba drivers to take one simple, life-saving action: slow down and move over.” The timing is especially important as Canada Road Safety Week begins on May 13, shining a broader spotlight on making Canadian roads safer for all. CAA has been the leading advocate in Canada to ensure that 'Slow Down, Move Over' laws include tow trucks, along with police, ambulance and fire. "Most drivers tend to slow down and move over for police cars, ambulances, and fire trucks, but this is lower for tow trucks. It's important to always remember that for many, the side of the road is someone's workplace, and everyone deserves a safe place to work. Slow Down, Move Over laws protect our roadside rescuers, and the stranded drivers we serve every day,” reinforced Friesen. CAA’s research shows that Manitobans care deeply about the safety of emergency vehicles, drivers and stranded motorists. Data also shows that 8 in ten CAA Members have heard of the Slow Down, Move Over law, and 99 per cent support it. Just over half, however, know the definition of the law, underscoring that there is still important work to do to help drivers understand exactly what the law requires a driver to do. Over 1/3 of members are not aware of specific penalties, though they do know a penalty exists and 4 in ten Manitobans aged 65 and above are unaware of any penalties. Sergeant Mark Hume, Unit Commander, North West Traffic Services, Manitoba RCMP highlighted, “Violators can be charged under Section 109.1(2) of the Highway Traffic Act ($298 fine) at a minimum. Aggravated circumstances can result in more severe charges.” The consequences of neglecting these laws can be tragic, not only for roadside workers but also for drivers and passengers. The hope is that this initiative will help remind drivers of the importance of safe driving behaviours and encourage everyone to do their part to keep Manitoba’s roads and highways safe. “Through education and awareness of ‘Slow Down, Move Over’ laws, we wish to support drivers in their crucial role in preventing incidents and fostering a culture of care and safety on Manitoba's highways,” continued Friesen. If you see an emergency vehicle or tow operator up ahead, reduce your speed and move to an open lane if it is safe to do so. If the posted speed limit is less than 80 km/h you are required to slow down to 40 km/h. If the posted speed limit is 80 km/h or higher you are required to slow down to 60 km/h. For more information about the Slow Down, Move Over law, visit: https://www.caamanitoba.com/advocacy/government-relations/slow-down The online survey was conducted by via an online quantitative survey with 916 CAA Members in Manitoba between February 3 and February 11, 2025. Based on the sample size of n=916 and with a confidence level of 95%, the margin of error for this research is +/- 3.24%.)
The Hidden Power of Invisible Experts
In a fast-moving landscape shaped by AI, hybrid work, and constant information shifts, organizations can’t afford to overlook their own expertise. Yet many still do — because the most valuable voices are often hiding in plain sight. We call them "invisible experts". These aren’t just the well-known thought leaders or executives quoted in media. They’re the researchers, engineers, clinicians, analysts, and project leads quietly shaping strategy, driving innovation, and influencing outcomes every day. They have deep knowledge, practical insight, and the credibility to build trust — but they’re often left out of the spotlight. And that’s a problem. --- The Expertise Gap Many organizations, both corporate and institutional struggle to define what makes someone an “expert”. Without a clear framework, expertise is often equated with job title, seniority, or public visibility. But in reality, expertise is multidimensional. It includes formal education, yes — but also lived experience, community influence, original research, and the ability to explain complex ideas clearly. If your organization wants to stay competitive, earn media attention, attract speaking engagements, partnerships, or influence your industry, you need a deeper bench of visible expertise. And it starts by identifying who your real experts are — not just the obvious ones. --- 7 Dimensions of Expertise Here are seven ways to think about expertise beyond the traditional credentials: Authority – Known as a go-to source in their domain. Advocate – Actively supports and elevates their professional community. Educator – Shares knowledge through teaching, speaking, or mentoring. Author – Publishes original insights or thought leadership content. Researcher – Contributes new data, analysis, or findings in their field. Practitioner – Applies knowledge in real-world contexts daily. Graduate – Has academic or technical training in a focus area. Not every expert is made for the stage or the media spotlight — and that’s okay. Some are best behind the scenes, helping create compelling content, briefing spokespeople, or surfacing insights from the field. Your job is to recognize the different ways people can contribute and make that part of your strategy. --- Visibility ≠ Seniority In the era of LinkedIn, personal branding, and AI-powered content, professional visibility is no longer tied to hierarchy. A mid-career professional, with a sharp take on current events might be more discoverable — and more in demand — than a long-tenured exec with little digital presence. That’s why organizations need to shift from thinking about expertise as a ladder, to thinking of it as an ecosystem. Not every expert wants to build a personal brand, but many are ready to contribute — if they’re supported and recognized. Here’s the truth: If you don’t tell your story, someone else will. And if you don’t help your experts show up in the right places — search engines, newsrooms, speaker directories, donor meetings — opportunities will go elsewhere. --- Give Your Experts a Digital Home Even after you've identified your internal experts, the next question is: Where do they live online? Too many organizations treat expert content like an afterthought — scattered across bio pages, outdated PDFs, or buried in press releases. To unlock the real value of your expertise, you need to give it a proper home. That means: Expert Profiles that showcase credentials, insights, and media-friendly info Expert Posts that surface their latest research, commentary, and thought leadership Searchable Directories that help media, partners, and the public find the right voice fast Inquiry Management tools that streamline incoming requests and drive results A centralized platform makes it easier for both internal teams and external audiences to discover, engage, and activate your expertise — whether it’s for media interviews, event invitations, donor conversations, or strategic partnerships. Without it, you're leaving visibility and value on the table. --- Is Your Organization Ready? Expertise is one of your most valuable and underutilized assets — but turning it into impact requires more than a list of names. You need to take stock of your internal bench strength, identify the experts who are ready to lead, and invest in the systems that make their voices heard. Start by asking: Who in our organization has untapped insight? Who’s already engaging audiences but flying under the radar? What tools, platforms, and support can we provide to amplify them? Recognizing your invisible experts is just the first step. Giving them a digital home and helping them engage with the right audiences — that’s how you turn knowledge into opportunity. Learn more about how ExpertFile helps organization's shine the light in these Invisible Experts.
Expert Q& A: ‘The Pope is also a monarch’
Kathleen Comerford, Ph.D., professor of history at Georgia Southern University, specializes in Catholic history in the 16th and 17th centuries. She is also an associate editor for the Journal of Jesuit Studies, which focuses on the work of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), a religious order within the Catholic Church. Pope Francis was the church’s first Jesuit pope. With the global significance and rarity of the conclave, Comerford answered frequently asked questions about how the conclave works, how the conclave process has evolved over time, and what the passing of a pope means for the Catholic Church and the world. Question: What does the passing of a pope mean for the world? Comerford: Multiple things! First of all, there are 1.4 billion Catholics in the world scattered in many different countries. The pope is a unifying figure for all of the Catholics. He represents something immediate in the sense that he’s the head of the church and is a recognizable figure. The pope is also a monarch. I was just talking with my classes about this. He is the head of the government of the Vatican City State, which is the smallest independent state in the world. It has a very long history itself. Pretty much everybody who lives in Vatican City works for the Vatican. The pope is one of the few elected monarchs in history. He is responsible for financial and political decisions, and he has ambassadors around the world as a result of his role in global policy. Question: How is a new pope selected? Comerford: The College of Cardinals will meet for an election called a conclave, and they actually stay in a dormitory-like place in Vatican City for it. They are sequestered from the public, and they take some time to meet, pray and vote. The cardinals aren’t supposed to be sitting around talking about who would be a really good pope, but we don’t know whether they do because they’re sequestered and nobody is supposed to talk about it. They will likely take a vote on the first day, but that’s not required. Every subsequent day, they can take a maximum of four votes; two in the morning and two in the afternoon until a candidate gets a two-thirds majority. Question: What does the voting look like? Comerford: There are ballots, and the cardinals write their preferred candidate on the ballot, and then they put their vote in a chalice. To count the votes, there’s a group of three people who are in charge of counting and then announcing the results to the fellow cardinals. There are 252 cardinals, but only 135 of them are eligible to vote because anyone over the age of 80 is ineligible. The procedure where only cardinals can elect the pope dates from 1059. The secret ballot and the two-thirds majority requirement is from 1621. The sequestration for the process dates from 1271 because they argued about who the new pope would be for two years and nine months; a total of 33 months. And so, they decided that the only way to make sure that this didn’t happen again would be to create this scenario with the cardinals locked in a room with a key. Question: When one of the candidates receives a two-thirds majority and becomes the next pope, how will it be announced? Comerford: Well, this is kind of fun, because they have four votes every day until one of the candidates receives a two-thirds majority. After they take the votes, the papers used to vote are burned. How the news is shared to the crowds outside is based on the color of smoke. If the smoke is black, that means no one received the majority and there’s no new pope yet. If there’s white smoke, it means there’s a new pope. This practice really only dates to the early 19th century. At first, it was just if there was smoke, there was no pope; if there was no smoke, then there was a pope. In 1914, they changed this aspect of the election so that black smoke means “no pope” and white smoke means “new pope.” Question: It’s expected that the next pope will be one of the cardinals in the room when they vote, yes? Comerford: Yes, but it doesn’t have to be. There have been a lot of popes, but in the last 200-300 years, there hasn’t been somebody who wasn’t in the conclave that was elected. Theoretically, they could nominate somebody who’s not a cardinal and the whole room could say, “yes, that’s the person we want as pope.” However, they don’t vote by acclamation anymore. They stopped doing that in the 19th century. Question: Pope Francis appointed 108 of the cardinals, so that’s a total of 80% of those eligible to vote for the next pope. How likely is it that we see a pope similar to the late Francis, considering he provided the electorate for his successor? Comerford: First of all, he deliberately went out and created cardinals in places where there had never been cardinals before. And he didn’t do that by saying, “I’m going to find somebody who’s like-minded to me.” He just said, “There are a lot of Catholics in Myanmar and they’ve never had a cardinal. So I’m going to make sure that there’s a cardinal now.” Most of these new cardinals are in places like Rwanda, Cape Verde, Tonga, Myanmar, Mongolia and so on. So these are non-European cardinals. Now, less than 40% of the voting cardinals are European. So to speculate on how similar they are to Francis, you have to break down what Francis was. There has been his entire pontificate about how he’s the first American pope, but his parents were born in Italy. He didn’t grow up speaking Italian, but it was a dialect of Italian as well as Spanish, because he grew up in Argentina. He was the most European you can get and still be an American. Another part of the question is, will the new pope be somebody who is of a similar mind to Francis in terms of his governance, which was very devolved. He introduced this idea of “synodality,” which is about fairly consistent communication with groups of people. Pope Francis was not particularly monarchical or hierarchical. There is also the aspect of his thinking that leans more to the left than the right on a number of social issues like immigration, women’s rights, the rights of minorities and immigration. He opened a lot of conversations, which the very right leaning portions of the church have been very uncomfortable with. If you're interested in learning more about this topic and want to book time to talk or interview with Kathleen Comerford then let us help - simply contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.
Rural health documentary earns Peabody Award for Georgia Southern professor
Georgia Southern University Professor Matthew Hashiguchi has won a Peabody Award for his documentary, “The Only Doctor,” which focuses on rural health and the services provided by a single doctor in southwest Georgia. The Peabody Awards are prestigious accolades in storytelling across television, radio, streaming and other digital mediums. Categories for winning a Peabody include journalism, social video, interactive documentary, gaming and more. The nearly hour-long feature received the award in the Public Service category, which recognizes projects that address or respond to public health concerns, enhance public engagement or educate the public. For Hashiguchi, the award represents a personal and career accolade. “This award isn’t just a professional achievement, but also represents a moment in my life where I became a father,” said Hashiguchi. “I started filming right before my first daughter was born, and finished right after the second. While this award is an incredible acknowledgment of my work, it means even more to me as a priceless moment from their childhood.” The documentary focuses on Karen Kinsell, M.D., the sole physician serving 3,000 citizens in Clay County, Georgia, near the Georgia-Alabama border. The film spotlights the plight of a community in need of medical assistance and the dedicated doctor fighting to keep her clinic’s doors open. Hashiguchi delves into Kinsell’s sacrifices for her clinic’s operations, revealing her commitment to her patients. “Dr. Kinsell gets calls at home at all hours of the day and night,” Hashiguchi said. “She, at times, has had to pay the bills from her own bank account. But I’d say the biggest sacrifice is that she’s a doctor who does not have breaks.” The final cut of “The Only Doctor” is a bit different from the angle Hashiguchi took when he began work on it several years ago. He initially started the project to better understand the risks associated with maternal health care and childbirth when he and his wife were expecting their first child. Through his work, he learned of a more complex issue of health care access in rural communities. The documentary first premiered on the PBS program Reel South and is now available internationally on Al Jazeera’s documentary series “Witness.” Hashigchi’s work earned him a 2019 Gucci Tribeca Documentary Fund award and a 2021 American Stories Documentary Fund award from Points North Institute. The film’s world premiere took place at the 2023 Hot Docs International Documentary Film Festival in Toronto, Canada, and was awarded Best Documentary Feature at the 2024 South Georgia Film Festival, Best Feature at the 2023 Newburyport Documentary Film Festival and Award of Merit at the 2023 University Film and Video Association Conference. His rise to media prominence wasn’t on his radar early in his academic career. He described himself as a “C student,” and still sees himself as that young boy struggling with math and science courses. With one of the nation’s highest media honors, he can show his students new paths to success as well as the skills it takes to win a Peabody. “I want my students to know how I failed and know that I struggled,” he said. “I tell them that if they want to excel, they really have to put in hard work. That’s very much who I am now as I devote myself to these films.” If you're interested in learning more and want to book time to talk or interview with Matthew Hashiguchi then let us help - simply contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.
Research Matters: Ultra-conductive molecule sets stage for post-silicon computing era
A research team has uncovered what it believes is “the world’s most electrically conductive organic molecule,” a discovery that opens new possibilities for building smaller, more powerful, and more energy-efficient computers. It could also allow computer chip manufacturers to eliminate their reliance on silicon and metal as conductors. “Molecules are nature’s tiniest, mightiest, and most configurable building blocks and can be engineered to build ultra-compact, ultra-efficient technology for everything from computers to quantum devices,” said Ignacio Franco, who was part of the research team that was led by scientists at the University of Miami. Their research was detailed in a paper published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. The molecule, which is composed of chemical elements found in nature, including carbon, sulfur, and nitrogen, can carry electrical current over record-breaking distances without losing efficiency. Using molecular materials in electronic chips offers several advantages. They consume less power. They can be more easily customized than silicon. They are more environmentally friendly. And, perhaps most importantly to manufacturers, they are potentially cheaper to produce. “This molecular design overcomes many of the big issues that for decades have prevented the use of molecules in electronics,” Franco said. To learn more about this ground-breaking research, read about it at the University of Rochester News Center, and contact Franco at ignacio.franco@rochester.edu.
As the busy summer travel season approaches, CAA South Central Ontario (CAA SCO) and the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) are teaming up to remind motorists about the importance of Ontario’s Slow Down, Move Over law, a life-saving rule designed to protect emergency responders and roadside workers. CAA clubs across Canada are marking the second Tuesday in May as National Slow Down, Move Over Day today. OPP and CAA SCO representatives are holding an education event at the ONroute King City from 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. OPP is also conducting a ride-along with the media to highlight enforcement efforts. The timing is especially important as Canada Road Safety Week also begins today, shining a broader spotlight on making Canadian roads safer for all. “Our highways are among the busiest in Canada, and for first responders and tow truck drivers, they are also their workplaces,” said Michael Stewart. “Everyone deserves a safe place to work. Drivers can do their part by slowing down and moving over when they see flashing lights.” The Slow Down, Move Over law is designed to protect their lives. In Ontario, drivers are required to slow down and, if it is safe to do so, move over one lane when approaching a stopped emergency vehicle — including police, fire, ambulance, and tow trucks — with flashing lights activated. Failure to comply could result in fines ranging from $400 to $2,000, three demerit points, and even a possible driver’s licence suspension for up to two years if convicted. “Education and awareness are key,” said Kerry Schmitt. “Each year, first responders and tow operators are put at risk when assisting stranded drivers or attending collisions. By slowing down and moving over, drivers can help make the roads safer for everyone.” CAA SCO and the OPP encourage all drivers to keep safety top of mind, not just during the summer months but every day of the year. For more information about the Slow Down, Move Over law, visit caasco.com.
Aston University researcher to help uncover hidden impact of painkiller overuse among older people
The HOPE-AO project led by the University of Plymouth will look at the potential harms of overprescribed pain medication in older people in the UK Aston University’s Professor Ian Maidment will bring his expertise in pharmacy and work with patient groups on medicine optimisation The project has been funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) A new study led by the University of Plymouth will explore chronic pain prescribing in older adults across the UK, with the aim of understanding whether current treatments and processes meet their needs. The HOPE-AO: Helping to Optimise Pain control in the Elderly experiencing Analgesic Overprescribing project is being supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) and includes Aston University’s Professor Ian Maidment. It will investigate whether certain groups of the older population are more likely to have analgesic (pain relief) medication overprescribed to them, and any side effects or other harms these medications can pose if taken for long periods. It aims to identify alternative treatment solutions to reduce the use of unnecessary pain medicines, working with patients to develop a list of acceptable strategies that could be tested and implemented across the UK. Around 4m older people across the UK live with varying degrees of chronic pain as a result of conditions including arthritis, diabetes or frailty. While some people benefit from pain relief medicines, many end up receiving long-term repeated prescriptions – for medications ranging from paracetamol and ibuprofen to opioids and antidepressants – for weeks, months or years at a time. The project is being led by researchers from the University of Plymouth, working with colleagues at the University of Exeter, Aston University, University of Aberdeen and the North East London Foundation NHS Trust. It is funded by through a Programme Development Grant from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). The project team comprises experts in the care of older people – including healthcare researchers, nurses, consultants, GPs, pharmacists and psychiatrists working across the UK – as well as medical statisticians and health economists. It also involves an advisory group of patients with lived experience of receiving repeat prescriptions for pain medication. During the project, the team will speak to patients aged 65 and over with a history of chronic pain for which they are taking, or have taken, medication and families who cared for and supported relatives with chronic pain. They will also speak to healthcare professionals who are either prescribing or supporting older adults taking medication for chronic pain management. Alongside this work, the team will analyse anonymised healthcare data to understand more about older adults who are prescribed medication for chronic pain. This includes patterns in prescribing, health and demographic factors associated with pain medication use, and potential health outcomes, and will help identify those likely to benefit most from support. Professor Maidment, from Aston Pharmacy School, will bring his expertise in pharmacy, medication use in day-to-day clinical practice and working with diverse groups of patients to support medication optimisation. He said: “From my experience in community pharmacy, the use of pain medicines is very common in older people. We need to work with older people to understand how we can help older people to use other potentially safer approaches.” Patricia Schofield, professor of clinical nursing at the University of Plymouth and one of the study’s chief investigators, said: “Very often, older people are told by a doctor that the most effective means of treating a health condition is through some form of pain relief. But they often don’t get any form of follow-up appointment and, as a generation, are less likely to seek one as they either feel pain is part of the ageing process or they don’t wish to be seen as a burden. The result is that they end up getting repeat prescriptions, potentially for pain medications they no longer need and also at significant cost to the NHS. “This study will give us a clearer understanding of the scale of the issue which we can use to develop ways of benefitting patients and their families, and the healthcare professionals working to treat and support them.” Victoria Abbott-Fleming MBE, founder of the charity Burning Nights CRPS Support, is the chair of the Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group for the HOPE-AO study. It will be made up of several adults over the age of 65 who live with chronic pain and have received repeat prescriptions for pain medication. Victoria has herself lived for more than 20 years with a chronic pain condition, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), and set up Burning Nights to support those affected by it on a day-to-day basis and their families. She is also chair of the Expert Patient and Carer Committee at the British Pain Society. She said: “I’m excited to support this study that places the voices of older adults and their carers at the heart of pain management. All too often, those living with chronic pain – especially older adults – are prescribed medication without regular review or consideration of alternative approaches. This study is a vital step towards more informed and balanced care, helping ensure that older people living with chronic pain are not just treated, but truly heard and supported.”
