Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
ExpertSpotlight: A Look Back at the First American Election
The first U.S. election, held in 1789, marks a pivotal moment in the founding of American democracy, establishing a framework that has shaped the nation's political landscape for centuries. As the world’s first modern constitutional republic, this election not only elected George Washington as the first president but also introduced a new system of governance that emphasized the balance of power and individual rights. The significance of this event reaches far beyond the political sphere, touching on issues of civic engagement, representation, and the evolution of democratic ideals. Key sub-topics that may interest journalists and the public include: The Founding Fathers’ Vision for Democracy: Exploring the role of key figures like George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson in shaping the U.S. political system, and how their ideas still influence governance today. Evolution of the Electoral Process: Examining how the original electoral system was structured, including the Electoral College, and how it has changed over time in response to shifting political dynamics. Voter Rights and Representation: Analyzing who was eligible to vote in 1789 compared to today, shedding light on the ongoing struggle for voting rights and representation for marginalized groups. Impact on Modern Democracies: Investigating how the U.S. election model influenced other nations' democratic structures and how it continues to serve as both an inspiration and a subject of debate. The Role of Media and Public Discourse: Looking at how the first election was communicated to the public and the early role of newspapers, pamphlets, and public speeches in shaping voter opinion. Legacy of George Washington’s Presidency: Reflecting on George Washington’s leadership style, his decision to step down after two terms, and the precedent it set for future presidential transitions. The history of the first U.S. election offers a lens through which to explore broader questions about governance, the role of leadership, and the ongoing evolution of democracy, providing journalists with numerous story angles relevant to both historical analysis and contemporary political discourse. Connect with an expert about the history of US elections: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com
Welcome to Retire with Equity: Where a New Retirement Journey Begins
Summary: A recent study reveals that 40% of Canadians over 50 feel financially unprepared for retirement. Retire with Equity aims to address this issue by educating retirees on the importance of leveraging home equity. The initiative emphasizes transparency, financial literacy, and personalized guidance to help seniors make informed decisions and achieve financial security in retirement. According to a recent National Institute of Aging study, almost 40% of Canadians over 50 feel they are not financially prepared for retirement. As a seasoned citizen myself, I know we can do better. That's why we've created Retire with Equity. It's time to help Canadians get the knowledge they need to make more informed financial decisions. My observations from my time in the industry, enriched by the research I've done over the past few years, clearly reveal a growing retirement crisis in Canada. I've worked in the banking and mortgage industry for over 25 years, specializing in equity lending, and spent the last 6 years as an executive at Canada’s largest Reverse Mortgage bank. Many people are struggling with mounting debt and no company pension. And they are living longer. Additionally, the long-term care situation in Canada has many seniors looking to age in place in their homes. Strategies like downsizing and moving in with family are often too simplistic and have little appeal to today's seniors. Some eventually, often begrudgingly, turn to home equity options such as reverse mortgages as a solution. However, Canadians are conservative by nature, and many think it is taboo to touch their equity (nest egg). Consequently, a reverse mortgage is a last resort. 76% of people over 65 are homeowners, many of which have built up a substantial amount of equity yet cannot afford to retire. (Source: Statistics Canada) Income is the only way to solve the retirement crisis. Many are choosing to work longer to delay spending savings. Some need to pay off debt to eliminate payments that will free up cash flow. Others do not have enough savings to retire. I saw the stress this caused watching my Mother “do without” in her retirement. With the benefit of experience, I now know there was a better way for her to finance her golden years. The Retirement Problem in Canada is Dire Many 55+ Seniors Don’t Have the Funds They Need: Many need an adequate budget and financial plan. And many don’t fully realize that employer and government pensions will fall short of their cashflow needs. Home Equity Unlocks Opportunities, But It's Misunderstood: Many retirees don’t fully understand the short—and long-term impacts of their home equity financing decisions. They rely on biased, incomplete, anecdotal information from friends and family. Seniors Need to Be Cautious: Homeowners are especially vulnerable targets for misinformation and fraud. However, this demographic does not have time to recover from a financial mistake. Making the wrong choices that affect how they finance retirement and protect themselves could leave seniors without enough money later when they need cash for costly expenses like health care. The Financial Industry Needs to Do More: There is a need for unbiased, transparent, and trusted sources of information on home equity options that are aligned with consumer interests. Gone are the days of cookie-cutter retirement plans and guaranteed pensions. Every Canadian needs to proactively craft their unique vision and path for retirement. Banking on My Experience The Retire With Equity mission is dedicated to helping retirees find the right combination of financial strategies to achieve their goals. The Equity Advantage One of the standout features of Retire with Equity's approach is our focus on home equity as a key component of retirement planning. For many Canadians, their home is their most significant asset, and unlocking its potential can be a game-changer. Whether through downsizing, refinancing, or reverse mortgages, Retire with Equity will offer guidance on integrating this valuable resource into a retirement strategy. The Human Touch At Retire with Equity, we promise to offer straightforward advice with a personal touch. It's not just about the numbers – it’s also about the dreams you have for retirement. We will bring patience, empathy, and respect to every conversation. And we won't forget our sense of humour, as retirement is supposed to be fun. We're committed to making things easy to access and understand, no matter where you are in life. Education is Everything Two of our core values are empowering education and epic transparency. Our online resources, webinars, and workshops will be tailored to demystify the world of finance for retirees and soon-to-be retirees, increasing their financial literacy. We will bring transparency to the vital information reserved for the small print, answering the questions retirees don't even know to ask. Whether you're a financial guru or just starting to think about your nest egg, we'll have something for you. A Senior-Friendly Approach Our approach will integrate technology with a user-friendly interface so that retirees can access their services without hassle. Gone are the worries of getting stuck in the weeds of complex interfaces or endless financial jargon. We bring "kitchen table" logic when explaining all financial details, no matter how complex the concept is. Stories that Inspire From coast to coast, Retire with Equity will share personal stories that help educate and motivate Canadians. We want to show you visible proof that it's always possible to rethink and revitalize retirement plans. Hearing from fellow Canadians who have successfully navigated the retirement waters offers hope for those still planning their way. Feelings of guilt and shame are common among retirees searching for retirement options. Learning about countless other retirees in similar situations often alleviates this guilt and shame. Join the Revolution Retire with Equity is more than just a company—it’s a movement. Canadians across the country will join in and transform their retirement years into the best chapter of their lives. Empowered by new tools and expertise at their fingertips, they will not just survive but truly thrive in retirement. As an "Equity Advocate," I pledge to help Canadians navigate the complexities of retirement in ways that educate, inspire, and entertain. I look forward to the conversation. Please subscribe to our regular updates and follow us on social media. Here's to the best years ahead! Don't Retire---Re-Wire! Sue
University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication unveils new vision, goals and leadership
The University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication (CPC) is excited to announce a transformative new chapter with the unveiling of its updated vision, goals and leadership for 2024 and beyond. Since its founding in 2010, the CPC has been at the forefront of innovative public opinion research on politics and media, always with an eye towards protecting and improving American democracy. With this new chapter, the CPC is actively integrating political psychology (the study of how and why people make political judgments and form political beliefs) into the study of public opinion and media effects. “Our vision is responsible democracy-centered journalism informed by our rigorous research on Americans’ thoughts, feelings, knowledge and behaviors,” says Dr. Dannagal Young, incoming Director of the Center for Political Communication. “In a few weeks, will be releasing new data on Americans’ knowledge and beliefs about abortion – an issue on which there are widespread misperceptions. Later this fall we are also launching an interdisciplinary initiative to understand the relationship between Americans’ personal wellbeing and their support for democratic institutions and norms.” By producing high-quality research at the intersection of media, politics and psychology, the CPC strives to elevate public conversations and inform news coverage to improve democratic health. Additionally, the Center seeks to serve as a vital resource for journalists, offering expert commentary and empirical data to encourage democratically responsible journalism. With this new direction comes new leadership, bringing together a team of esteemed scholars from Political Science, Communication and Journalism: Director Dr. Dannagal Young, Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, TED speaker, and author of Wrong: How Media, Politics, and Identity Drive our Appetite for Misinformation (Johns Hopkins, 2023) and Irony and Outrage: The Polarized Landscape of Rage, Fear, and Laugher in the U.S. (Oxford, 2020). Areas of Expertise: Misinformation, Political Satire, American Politics, the Psychology of Media Effects. Associate Director Dr. Erin Cassese, Professor in the Departments of Political Science and International Relations, Communication, and Women and Gender Studies, co-author of Abortion Attitudes and Polarization in the American Electorate (Cambridge, 2024). Areas of Expertise: Gender, Abortion, Public Opinion, Campaigns and Elections. Director of Research Dr. Phil Jones, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations, current Editor-in-Chief at Public Opinion Quarterly. Areas of Expertise: Electoral Politics and Public Opinion. Director of Engagement Dr. Lindsay Hoffman, Associate Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, and research leader for the American Council of Trustees and Alumni two-year Braver Angels project funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Areas of Expertise: Communication across Difference, Media Technologies, and Political Participation. Delaware Politics Director Dr. Paul Brewer, Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, co-author of Science in the Media: Popular Images and Public Perceptions (Routledge, 2021), former editor of the International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Areas of Expertise: Delaware Politics, Media effects, Political and Science Communication, Public Opinion, and Perceptions of Science. Delaware Debate Director: Nancy Karibjanian, Director of the University of Delaware’s Journalism program, faculty member in the Department of Communication, and former Director of the CPC with 30 years of broadcast experience. Areas of Expertise: Broadcast Journalism, and Delaware Debates. The CPC’s goals reflect its commitment to a vibrant and collaborative research environment that engages scholars and students at all levels. The CPC will continue to spearhead interdisciplinary research across the domains of communication, political psychology, public opinion, media effects, and public policy. The Center offers applied research opportunities for both graduate and undergraduate students in communication and political science, as well as an undergraduate minor in political communication, thus mentoring the next generation of scholars and practitioners. The CPC is proud to put its academic research to work in service of American democratic health.
West Sanctions Russian Aviation, But Moscow Decides to Keep Planes Flying Despite Risks When the U.S. and its allies slapped sanctions on Russia for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, severing aviation links was at the top of the list. Direct flights vanished and Russian airlines lost access to spare parts for their foreign airplanes. In retaliation, Vladimir Putin’s regime impounded foreign aircraft and shut off the world’s largest air space to countries imposing sanctions. Not since the early 1980s—when the U.S. suspended routes to the USSR over the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, repression in Poland and downing of a Korean Air Lines plane—have aviation ties between the two countries dipped so low. Aviation sanctions today are having an impact but come with a major risk. If the fatal crash of a jetliner killing hundreds is linked to the lack of spare parts, Putin will blame sanctions and the West. The stakes are high as Russia seeks to use any issue from cluster bombs to soccer to widen cracks in Western unity over Ukraine. To get ahead of this, U.S. policymakers and their allies need to better explain the effects of sanctions, why they’re worth the risk and why the Russian state, not the West, is ultimately responsible for any fatal crash. U.S. government assessments place Russian aviation among sectors negatively impacted by sanctions. A closer look shows widening success in degrading this increasingly weak link in Russia’s political economy. By late 2021, foreign aircraft comprised 70% of Russia’s fleet of 801 passenger airplanes, which included 298 Airbuses, 236 Boeings, and 23 other foreign aircraft such as Embraers. In addition, 95% of Russian airline flights were on foreign-made aircraft. Consequently, sanctions aimed at depriving spare parts for foreign airplanes have caused many disruptions such as fare increases to cover higher costs of repairs. Some of Russia’s 53 airlines have periodically suspended or stopped flying some of their foreign planes. Reports of Russian airlines’ cannibalization of foreign aircraft similarly underscore a dire situation. Less well known is how sanctions hurt Russian manufacturing since Western technology is critical to aircraft such as the Sukhoi Superjet 100, which uses a French-Russian engine (though Russians are working on a substitution). Production of the Yakovlev design bureau’s MC-21 passenger airplane faces significant delays due to sanctions that force substitution of its Western-made parts. Sanctions even helped push Russia out of a joint venture with China to produce the CR929 widebody aircraft. While China is happy to help Russia thwart sanctions, this plane needs Western systems that sanctions complicate. In response, Russia has adapted to and thwarted some aviation sanctions, which I predicted would happen because Putin’s regime is reproducing a state-centered aviation sector rooted in the Soviet past. The war has accelerated the state’s growing control over this vital economic sector, which began before Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine. Examples include the state’s 51% ownership of Aeroflot since 1994, the merger of two smaller, state-run airlines in 2003 and the consolidation of aircraft manufacturing in the state-owned United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), which was created in 2006. More recently, the Russian state has helped the country’s airlines weather sanctions by facilitating the illegal confiscation of foreign aircraft. Russian airlines have also proven resourceful by purchasing spare parts through brokers in the United Arab Emirates and Turkey. Better known for supplying Russia with drones, Iran also agreed to provide Russian airlines with spare parts and has been fixing an Aeroflot Airbus for months. Many foreign airlines continue to fly to Russia, and Putin’s regime rewards friendly countries with overflight rights. But the longer sanctions remain, the harder it’s getting for Russia. To regain profitable foreign routes, its airlines are receiving government assistance to legitimately purchase the Western aircraft they illegally seized, although recent holdups in allocating such funds are causing doubts. In a throwback to the Soviet era, Putin’s regime boasts that Russia doesn’t need the West’s airplanes anyway since its one manufacturer, the UAC, will pick up the slack. Such import substitution is unlikely to succeed, as multiple delays suggest. More likely, Russia’s aviation sector will grow more reliant on the state, if not actually part of it like the UAC. This will make Russian aviation less efficient, less innovative and more expensive. Iranian airlines, which have long suffered under foreign sanctions despite some success circumventing them, present their Russian counterparts with a grim vision of the future such as being shut out of lucrative air travel markets and falling behind in emerging aviation technology. How does this shape safety in Russia’s skies? The short answer is that it’s not as bad as headlines suggest and the impact of sanctions is ambiguous at best. Click bait stories paint a dire picture but often conflate commercial, military and general aviation into alarming numbers that do not accurately capture what ordinary passengers face. Some accounts, such as one claiming 120 accidents occurred in 2023, provide few details or sources. Annual safety reports from Russia’s Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) allow for comparison over time but often obscure Russia’s situation by combining data from each post-Soviet state it monitors. Its 2019 report is mysteriously missing and its decision not to investigate the fatal crash of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Embraer Legacy 600 plane suggests meddling from above. That said, the IAC source base is the most systematic we have. Keeping in mind the potential for the politicization of its conclusions, what does a critical reading of its data alongside other sources suggest? First, fatal crashes in commercial and general aviation actually decreased in Russia from 18 in 2021 to 13 in 2022, and related deaths decreased from 70 to 24. Data for the first half of 2023 points in the same direction, with six fatal crashes and nine deaths. This trend was likely helped by the 14% decline in traffic after February 2022. While so many fatal crashes sound substantial, all but three in 2021 and all but one in 2022 involved small aircraft under 5,700 kilograms, not the jetliners we associate with most commercial flying. Absolute figures on crashes and deaths capture headlines but they don’t say much about safety without considering their relation to passengers flown or departures. According to the IAC, the rate of aviation accidents and the rate of fatal crashes per one million departures both increased from 2020 to 2021 but then decreased in 2022. The IAC does not single out Russia from other post-Soviet states for this metric. But since Russia has the largest aviation sector among those countries, these data suggest that its aviation safety has not dramatically worsened since early 2022. Indeed, even critics who argue that Russian airlines are less safe partly because of sanctions conclude that “2022 and 2023 were also good years for airline safety [in Russia] compared to 2021.” Comparisons with the U.S. similarly suggest that passenger aviation is not as disastrous as some headlines suggest. The IAC data indicates that Russia and other post-Soviet states are usually but not always behind the U.S. in passenger aviation safety. In 2018, for example, IAC countries reported a 0.8 rate of fatal crashes per 1 million departures of passenger aircraft above 5,700 kilograms. Comparable statistics from the National Transportation Safety Board showed a 0.11 rate for that year for scheduled U.S. carrier flights. In 2019, the rates were 2.3 (IAC) and 0.10 (U.S.), but in 2020, both IAC countries and the U.S. enjoyed a 0.0 rate of fatal crashes. The following year, however, IAC countries reported a 1.9 rate of fatal crashes, whereas the NTSB reported a 0.0 rate.1 Against this background of Russian airline safety, let’s now turn to the impact of sanctions. While some commentators emphasize that no fatal crashes have been tied to sanctions, others claim they make Russian airlines unsafe and that it’s only a matter of time before such a fatal crash happens. Some even argue that life-threatening dangers prove aviation sanctions are effective and could help turn Russians against Putin. To reassure the public, Russian aviation officials insist the country’s airlines are safe despite sanctions, as do Russian business media and aviation journalists. This plays to Putin’s claims to legitimacy based in part on withstanding anything the West throws at him. In sharp contrast, Ukrainian media tells Russians their airlines are a disaster waiting to happen precisely because of sanctions. Independent Russian journalists banished by Putin concur, raising alarms about efforts to cover up the impact of sanctions and about the many ways Russian airlines cut corners on safety. In short, an information war exists around the morbid question of whether a Russian jetliner will crash and the role sanctions could play. Fears of a fatal crash were validated by the emergency landing of a Ural Airlines A320 in September, apparently caused by malfunctioning hydraulics tied to sanctions. But a closer examination by a Russian aviation journalist suggests the pilots played a more important role by pressing on to an airport for which there wasn’t enough fuel. Recent Russian state assessments of aviation safety similarly point to pilot error and poor training as the chief causes of aviation incidents. More generally, airplane disasters are usually caused by a convergence of factors—bad weather, a manageable mechanical failure and pilot error—not just one problem. In public discussions, however, pinpointing sanctions’ role tracks more with the politics of the war than technical expertise. At the end of the day, Russian airlines and aviation authorities are solely responsible for putting planes in the sky and Russians’ lives at risk. They continue to claim that everything is fine. But if a fatal crash of a Boeing or Airbus flown by a Russian airline kills hundreds, I predict this narrative will quickly change. Putin will blame the West as he does for everything else affecting his legitimacy, from Russia’s economic problems and his diplomatic failures to protests against his regime and even the war he started in Ukraine. Such a scenario will be a serious test for policymakers who argue that punishing Russia with sanctions is still worth it. To prepare for this, they need to take a page from the Biden administration’s release of intelligence on Russia’s military buildup before the full-scale invasion: publicize as much intelligence as possible on sanctions and their impact, as well as Russia’s aviation sector and what it does or doesn’t do to ensure safety. As Putin’s regime falls back on Soviet-era secrecy about airline safety, sharing such intelligence will be a powerful tool. This will also contribute to broader Western efforts at combatting Russia’s better known disinformation campaigns such as those denying its human rights abuses in Ukraine.
Expert Perspective: UMW's Steven E. Harris lends his opinion to The Russia File
The following piece was written by Steven E. Harris published by the Wilson Center in April 2024 Sanctions Are Spoiling Russia’s Plans to Make Its Own Airplanes Putin’s regime is feeling confident these days. Advances on the battlefield in Ukraine, expansions in armaments production, and the dithering of Republicans in the U.S. Congress show the war has turned in Russia’s favor. A well-orchestrated presidential election and some real public support buoy the regime. Political opponents are either dead, in prison, or in exile. Putin’s regime has also declared victory in blunting Western sanctions and now plans to permanently thwart them with programs of import substitution. Nowhere is this better seen than in aviation, where the state proclaims it will produce over a thousand new airplanes to replace the foreign aircraft its airlines have long flown. But this bold vision for aviation autarky has little chance of succeeding. Russia’s Short-Term Success in Blunting Aviation Sanctions Thus far, Putin’s regime has weathered aviation sanctions through a two-pronged strategy. First, Russian airlines illegally kept about 400 foreign airplanes—primarily Airbuses and Boeings—owned by foreign leasing companies. Second, the state bankrolled settlement claims in order to purchase some of these airplanes so that airlines could fly them abroad without risk of repossession and reduce their foreign debt. To date, approximately 170 foreign airplanes have been legally acquired in this fashion, and the Ministry of Transportation recently asked for more cash to continue settling claims on the remaining 230 foreign planes. The next question is how long Russian airlines, from the state-owned flag carrier Aeroflot to private companies such as S7 and Ural Air Lines, can continue flying their foreign planes. As I wrote in late October, safety has been degraded far less than predicted. But in the absence of spare parts, software updates, and thorough maintenance by foreign providers, Russian airlines have about two years before they will have to ground Boeings and Airbuses for major repairs performed using third-party spare parts. Anticipating the eventual retirement of foreign planes, Putin’s regime has embarked on a massive program to make all-Russian airplanes. This program promises independence from Western technology and leasing companies but reveals the success of sanctions and fundamental weaknesses in state capacity. The 2030 Aviation Manufacturing Plan Announced in June 2022, the program calls for the state-owned industrial conglomerate Rostec to manufacture 1,036 airplanes with only Russian parts by 2030. In January 2024, the state allocated 283 billion rubles (U.S. $3.1 billion) to help finance the production of 609 airplanes and prioritize medium-haul aircraft in the overall manufacturing plan. Before sanctions, Russian manufacturers produced a small number of narrow body, medium-haul airplanes such as the MC-21 and the Superjet-100 (SSJ-100) with Western components. Twelve SSJ-100s were manufactured in 2021 and ten the following year. Among the aircraft slated to replace Boeings and Airbuses, the plan called for production in 2023 of three medium-haul Tupolev-214 (Tu-214) airplanes and two Superjet-NEW planes (Superjet-100s with all-Russian parts). None of these were built. In fact, the state-owned United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) failed to manufacture a single passenger airplane in 2023. More recently, the UAC conceded further delays of up to two years for rollout of the MC-21, SSJ-NEW, and Tu-214, as well as of smaller, short-haul aircraft such as the Ilyushin-114 (Il-114) and the “Baikal.” The transition to total import substitution is proving difficult, making it impossible to fulfill early targets of the manufacturing plan. By withdrawing access to Western technology critical for manufacturing, sanctions have successfully shut down production. Russian manufacturers will produce at best inferior aircraft that fly shorter routes using more fuel. At its current rate, the UAC is unlikely to manufacture more than a dozen or so showcase narrow body airplanes before 2030. The manufacturer may have better luck producing simpler planes, such as the Baikal, but the state’s injection of 283 billion rubles doesn’t target its production or that of two other short-haul airplanes. Since the UAC will likely not meet the plan’s annual targets any time soon, Russia’s airlines will have to make do with their aging foreign airplanes and acquire spare parts from third parties. Putin admitted as much at his call-in event in December 2023, during which he praised the import-substitution plan but added that the government would continue to purchase illegally held foreign planes. What Will Russia’s Aviation Manufacturing Plan Actually Produce? Rather than produce new aircraft, the immediate purpose of the state’s manufacturing plan is political theater. The infusion of 283 billion rubles was meant to show the public, before the presidential elections, that Putin’s regime is serious about securing commercial aviation and to generate a sense of normalcy in the midst of war. In the long run, the manufacturing plan is more likely to produce further distortions in Russia’s political economy. These include corruption, secrecy, technologically backward aircraft, and even more state control over commercial aviation. The 283 billion rubles will help Rostec keep state-run subsidiaries such as the United Engine Corporation operating with soft budget constraints and favorable contracts that now lack any competition from Western firms. Executives will siphon off their share of the funds, while Putin’s regime will turn a blind eye as long as everyone remains loyal. If the manufacturing plan continues to falter, state-owned manufacturers will have more incentive to keep their failures secret. In 2023, for example, the Ural Civil Aviation Factory kept hidden cost overruns for the Baikal. When news of a 48 percent increase was finally publicized, Putin’s point man for the Far East region, Yuri Trutnev, was incensed and proclaimed, “Our people are like that: they don’t like to share information.” For now, Putin’s regime allows the Russian business media to report fairly openly about the country’s aviation industry on issues such as spare parts and safety, state subsidies, and shortfalls in production. But if commercial flying becomes more precarious and the manufacturing plan remains unfulfilled, the government will likely limit what the public knows about its airlines and long-term plans to maintain them. As the economic historian Mark Harrison shows in his recent book, Secret Leviathan, secrecy in the Soviet era significantly degraded state capacity in many areas, including production. Post-Soviet autocrats face a similar “secrecy/capacity tradeoff,” while newer techniques of disinformation further erode capacity. In attempting to revive the Soviet Union’s autarkic aviation industry, Putin’s regime will find it hard to avoid similar reductions in capacity. Insofar as Russia’s commercial aviation industry is concerned, the lesson for the West is that it pays to play the long game. Russia has effective tools for blunting sanctions in the short run, but in the long run it faces structural obstacles and the absence of Western technology, both of which will degrade this economic sector. The main question remains whether the United States and its allies can keep up the pressure by enforcing sanctions.
Amid Detainees' Release, Putin Flaunts Power and Flouts Western Influence
On August 1, the United States, Russia, Germany and three other European nations engaged in an historic 24-person East-West prisoner exchange. The largest such swap since the end of the Cold War, the multi-country deal secured the release of three prominent American detainees: Wall Street Journal correspondent Evan Gershkovich, corporate security executive Paul Whelan and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty editor Alsu Kurmasheva. It also freed a dozen Russian opposition leaders, incarcerated in their native country for challenging Vladimir Putin and his authoritarian regime. Lynne Hartnett, PhD, is the chair of Villanova University’s Department of History and an expert on modern Russia, protest movements and dissidents in exile. Recently, she shared some insights on the Kremlin's decision to release the American and Russian prisoners—as well as the egotism, oppressive tendencies and political posturing that drove their detention. Q: The arrests and sentencings of Gershkovich, Whelan and Kurmasheva have been described as "outrageous," "a mockery of justice" and reflective of "a total disregard for basic freedoms." What prompted Putin and the Russian government to detain these individuals? Dr. Hartnett: For Putin, seizing Gershkovich, Whelan and Kurmasheva was a power play. They were pawns for him to use when he deemed it convenient. If they could be used in a prisoner swap, they would be. But if that time never arrived, their incarceration, suffering and even potential deaths were inconsequential to him. Their arrests were also a signal that, in Russia, Putin's authority is uncontested. These were American citizens, and around the world, a U.S. passport opens doors: It holds power; it provides access; and it affords its holder protection. But the arrests of Gershkovich, Whelan and Kurmasheva were Putin’s attempt to demonstrate the limits of American influence. They were meant as a signal that, in Russia, a U.S. passport becomes meaningless if it serves Putin to make it so. Q: In recent years, the Russian government has seemingly worked to rehabilitate the reputations of figures like Josef Stalin, who infamously used the Soviet Gulag to stifle opposition and criticism. Is Putin's use of detentions as a political cudgel similar? DH: The show trials of the Stalinist era are frequently referenced. However, it should be stressed that those were largely intended for domestic consumption. They were used to justify the Communist elites' repression of fellow citizens by broadcasting "evidence" that enemies lurked within. The trials of Americans like Gershkovich and Brittney Griner [a professional basketball player detained on smuggling charges] were designed to show the world, not just Russians, that Putin's regime would not be cowed—even if the person being tried had fame and a powerful enterprise, like the Wall Street Journal or the WNBA, supporting them. Q: The New York Times recently ran a piece on the Russian dissidents released, claiming "hopes are high [they] will breathe new life into a fragmented opposition force." What do you anticipate these political players' activism will look like in the coming years, especially in exile? DH: As in the Imperial and Soviet periods, Russian censorship prevents any news or opinions that are not the government's from coming to light. As Putin has dismantled political opposition in Russia and tightened his grip on any vestiges of civil society in the country, there is little hope that a powerful opposition movement can gain momentum without outside support. This is where the Russian dissidents living abroad come in. They will ensure that a vision for another type of Russia is articulated. At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries, political exiles smuggled illegal newspapers and journals into the Russian empire to instill hope in their compatriots, to give them some indication that a nation beyond the autocracy was achievable. This, in my opinion, is the role that Russian dissidents living in exile must have today. They must provide the vision. They must provide the hope. While they cannot change the system on their own—they need a movement en masse—the dissidents abroad are needed to demonstrate that a nation without Putin and his repressive regime is possible. This is certainly not an easy venture, and it will require extraordinary sacrifices to be made a reality. However, it may be the Russian people's only hope.
Hofstra Experts Weigh In on the 2024 Presidential Election
Hofstra University boasts a team of distinguished media-ready experts, ready to talk about the newest developments in the 2024 presidential race. They include presidential scholar Meena Bose, constitutional law professor James Sample, media expert and former NBC executive Mark Lukasiewicz, and Lawrence Levy, an expert in suburban studies and suburban voting trends More details on their expertise and recent media appearances are provided below, along with information on how to connect with them for interviews and commentary. Dr Meena Bose Executive Director of the Kalikow Center for the Study of the American Presidency & Professor of Political Science Dr. Meena Bose brings her extensive experience and frequent media presence to discussions on the historic nature of the 2024 presidential race. Recent topics she has been interviewed about include next steps for the Democrats now that President Biden has withdrawn from the 2024 presidential race, former President Donald Trump’s selection of J.D. Vance as his running mate, how the assassination attempt on Trump may have impacted the race, and the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity rulings View Profile & Connect Recent Media Dr. Meena Bose has recently been called on by media to discuss: CNN's Biden-Trump debate; how President Biden may recover from his poor debate performance; and the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling. She has appeared on WABC-TV, WNYW Fox 5, Fox radio stations across the country, and Reuters TV. She is frequently interviewed by Newsday and Newsweek, and her expertise has also been prominently featured in The Washington Post and The New York Times. She is the author of the forthcoming book: Pragmatic Vision: Obama and the Enactment of the Affordable Care Act. James Sample Professor, Maurice A. Deane School of Law James Sample, a constitutional law professor, is a sought-after legal and political commentator on legal challenges facing former President Donald Trump, Supreme Court ethics, the broader implications of presidential immunity, and the guilty verdict delivered in the Senator Robert Menendez trial. He most recently was interviewed about President Biden leaving the race and throwing his support behind VP Kamala Harris. View Profile & Connect Recent Media James Sample is a regular commentator for Reuters, CNN, CBS, WNYW Fox 5, and WCBS on topics like the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity; ethics questions facing Supreme Court Justices Alito and Thomas; former President Donald Trump’s legal challenges, including the election interference case and the “Hush Money” trial. In addition to his broadcast media interviews, Professor Sample has been interviewed by The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Economist, U.S. News & World Report, the Los Angeles Times, National Public Radio, Salon, USA Today, and The National Law Journal, as well as in leading blogs and regional outlets throughout the country. Mark Lukasiewicz Dean of the Lawrence Herbert School of Communication Mark Lukasiewicz offers his expertise on media coverage of the presidential race, drawing on his vast experience in planning and supervising election coverage. Before joining Hofstra, Dean Lukasiewicz was senior vice president of specials at NBC News, planning and supervising coverage of major breaking news events, including presidential elections and debates from 2004 to 2016. View Profile & Connect Recent Media A former NBC executive, Dean Lukasiewicz is available to speak about media coverage of the 2024 presidential race. Recent examples include the June 27th debate and expectations for President Biden’s interview on July 5 with George Stephanopoulos. Before joining Hofstra, Dean Lukasiewicz was senior vice president of specials at NBC News, planning and supervising coverage of major breaking news events, including presidential elections and debates from 2004 to 2016. He has been interviewed in recent weeks by the Wall Street Journal, Newsday, Tribune News Service, Scripps Morning News, and the AP. Lawrence Levy Associate Vice President and Executive Dean of the National Center for Surburban Studies (NCSS) In his leadership role at NCSS, Dean Levy has worked with Hofstra's academic and local communities to shape an innovative, interdisciplinary agenda for interdisciplinary suburban study. He has commented on a variety of political issues – most recently President Biden dropping his reelection bid and what that means for down-ballot elections. View Profile & Connect Recent Media Prior to joining Hofstra, Dean Levy spent 35 years as a reporter, editorial writer, columnist and PBS host, winning many of journalism's top awards (including Pulitzer finalist) for in-depth works on suburban politics, education, taxation, housing and other key issues. As a journalist, he was known for blending national trends and local perspectives and has covered seven presidential campaigns and 15 national conventions. Visit our Expert Center for a full directory of Hofstra experts insights.
Can the Olympics Help Americans Forget Politics (at Least for 16 Days)?
Americans are divided on a multitude of different issues, but could the Olympic Games unite the country – at least for the duration of an Olympiad? A Baylor University sports marketing and branding expert says yes, the Olympics can help bring people together even when it’s hard for them to agree about anything else. In his latest Forbes Sports Money column, Baylor University sports marketing and branding expert Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., executive director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program at Baylor’s Hankamer School of Business, analyzed a July 8 national population poll that asked Americans questions about politics but also included the Steen Happiness Index (SHI). The 20-item happiness index provides a series of statements for participants to read and choose the one from each group that describes their state at that moment. Happiness items focus on three types of happy lives: the pleasant life (experiencing and savoring pleasures), the engaged life (losing the self in engaging activities) and the meaningful life (participating in meaningful activities). Are people happier when watching the Olympics? “Happy people follow the Olympics and people who follow the Olympics are happy people,” Wakefield wrote. The higher people scored on the happiness index, the more likely they are to: Watch at least some of the Olympics (49.75%) Root for the U.S. to win (31.8%) Follow the results of the Olympics (28.1%) Read stories about athletes in the Olympics (19.6%) Will talk with others about the Olympics events (18.7%) “Controlling for age, gender, income, education, race and marital status, Americans who follow the Olympics in one, two, or three of these ways are somewhat more happy people (+4% on the SHI). But those who follow the Olympics in four or all five of these ways are significantly happier people (+10% on the SHI),” Wakefield wrote. Who is happiest when the Olympics are on? The happiest? Those would be the Americans who love to talk about the Olympics with others while also cheering for U.S. athletes to win. In fact, they are about 14% happier than those who don’t follow the Olympics, according to the SHI. “Perhaps best of all, people of all political leaning and presidential preferences are equally likely to follow the Olympics. No matter the party, people can party together in unity following the Olympics,” Wakefield wrote. “Maybe we can’t forget politics. But we can give it a break to watch the Olympics.” ABOUT KIRK WAKEFIELD, PH.D. Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., is The Edwin W. Streetman Professor of Retail Marketing at Baylor University, where he is the Executive Director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program in the Hankamer School of Business. The author of Team Sports Marketing and founder of Wakefield Research Partners, Wakefield has conducted fan research on partnerships, pricing, promotions, sportscape, service, and anything else that explains why fans do what they do in nearly every venue in sports, including the NBA, NFL, MLB, MLS, NHL and NASCAR. His scholarly works appear in a breadth of journals: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Service Research, Journal of Retailing, Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research and Journal of Sport Management, among others. Wakefield is a regular contributor to Sports Money on Forbes.com. ABOUT THE CURB CENTER FOR SALES STRATEGY IN SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT (S3E) The Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) at Baylor University is the only program in the U.S. focused on generating revenue for sports. S3E graduates have career opportunities in sales, digital marketing or business analytics for major league teams, university athletics, corporations and agencies. Baylor is the only university combining learning with practice in partnership with the Athletics Department to prepare graduates for careers in the business of sports. The S3E program is unique in vision, values, mission and culture to transform the business of sports and entertainment. Consistent with the Christian mission and purpose of Baylor University, we prepare passionate servant leaders to positively influence lives in places people go to play or watch others play.
How Do Political Conventions Work?
Political conventions in America are a fundamental aspect of the democratic process, serving as pivotal events where major political parties select their presidential candidates, solidify party platforms, and galvanize their bases ahead of the general election. These conventions are not only newsworthy because of their immediate political significance but also due to their historical, cultural, and strategic importance. They provide a stage for showcasing party unity, leadership vision, and policy priorities, making them crucial for understanding the direction of American politics. Key story angles for journalists could include: Convention History and Evolution: Exploring the origins and historical changes in political conventions, including how their roles and significance have evolved over time. Nomination Process: Examining the mechanics of how delegates are selected, how they vote, and the strategies candidates use to secure their party's nomination. Party Platforms: Analyzing the process of developing and ratifying party platforms, highlighting key policy positions and their implications for voters. Role of Delegates and Superdelegates: Investigating the influence of delegates and superdelegates in the nomination process and their impact on the democratic process within parties. Media and Public Perception: Assessing how conventions are covered by the media, the role of speeches and presentations, and their effect on public opinion and voter behavior. Security and Logistics: Providing insights into the extensive planning and security measures required to host these large-scale events, especially in light of recent public health and safety concerns. By focusing on how political conventions work in America, journalists can provide the public with a comprehensive understanding of these complex and significant events, shedding light on their impact on the democratic process and the broader political landscape. Connect with an expert about the role, purpose and history of political conventions in America: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com Photo credit: Isai Ramos
It Has to Matter Who Wins: Futurecasting the MLB All-Star Game
Globe Life Field in Arlington, home of the 2023 World Series champion Texas Rangers, will play host to the 94th edition of the Major League Baseball All-Star Game on July 16, marking the second time in franchise history the Rangers will host the Midsummer Classic. MLB’s All-Star game – which matches up the best players from the American League and National League as selected by fans, managers and players – is considered one of best all-star contests among professional sports, said Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., executive director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program at Baylor University’s Hankamer School of Business. However, the game faces continued headwinds, Wakefield said, ranging from lagging viewership to fan voting to a game that is more an exhibition than a meaningful game. Wakefield Weighs In: Five Thoughts on MLB's All-Star Game Is the MLB All-Star game the best All-Star contest of all major leagues? Wakefield: Yes, it’s the only one where players seem to try their best. The NBA and NFL – who have practically given up – have declining viewership since 2011. Unfortunately, MLB All-Star game is on the same downhill skid. (According to Statista, viewership has declined from 22 million in 1993 to seven million in 2023.) The reason why is it doesn’t really matter who wins. If the players don’t care who wins, neither will fans. Further, fans aren’t particularly a fan of only one league so that it really matters if one league has bragging rights. That was less the case years ago before interleague play. How could viewership improve in any of the All-Star games? Wakefield: It has to matter who wins. MLB tried this with home field advantage for the World Series. They gave that up. The current approach in baseball is truly an exhibition because every player gets to play, so it’s like three players at every position playing three innings. That’s not how a manager would play it if trying to win. And it’s not like it used to be when the starters (who were more likely to be the best at their positions) played longer. One suggestion I’ve heard is to make the payoff big enough for the winners so that the players gave it their best. Get a sponsor to put up the money so the winners each make seven figures and could be the players and managers will play more like a team trying to win. Does Monday’s prelude, the hugely popular Homerun Derby, enhance Tuesday’s game? Wakefield: The Homerun Derby is popular because fans do follow individual players. It matters more who wins. That said, the HR derby’s viewership has still lagged. Bottom line: Fans are loyal to teams more than to leagues or individual players. Fan voting… Need we say more? Wakefield: Major market teams with huge fan bases will dominate, but what about the Kansas City Royals, who at one point in the season were on pace for the biggest year-over-year improvement in wins and losses? Given the way fan voting has become essentially a promotion game to get more fans to vote more often, it’s hardly representative of anything other than largest markets with the best promoters. The good news is that the MLB All-Star game will be quite the occasion in Arlington, Texas, with a bevy of game-related activities and events July 13-16. Wakefield: Arlington is an optimal location central to the U.S. with plenty of space to blow out the occasion. It’s like the Texas State Fair came to baseball, where all the rides and attractions are baseball-happy. ABOUT KIRK WAKEFIELD, PH.D. Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., is The Edwin W. Streetman Professor of Retail Marketing at Baylor University, where he is the Executive Director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program in the Hankamer School of Business at Baylor University. The author of Team Sports Marketing and founder of Wakefield Research Partners, Wakefield has conducted fan research on partnerships, pricing, promotions, sportscape, service, and anything else that explains why fans do what they do in nearly every venue in sports, including the NBA, NFL, MLB, MLS, NHL and NASCAR. His scholarly works appear in a breadth of journals: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Service Research, Journal of Retailing, Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research and Journal of Sport Management, among others. Wakefield is a regular contributor to Sports Money on Forbes.com. ABOUT THE CURB CENTER FOR SALES STRATEGY IN SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT (S3E) The Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) at Baylor University is the only program in the U.S. focused on generating revenue for sports. S3E graduates have career opportunities in sales, digital marketing or business analytics for major league teams, university athletics, corporations and agencies. Baylor is the only university combining learning with practice in partnership with the Athletics Department to prepare graduates for careers in the business of sports. The S3E program is unique in vision, values, mission and culture to transform the business of sports and entertainment. Consistent with the Christian mission and purpose of Baylor University, we prepare passionate servant leaders to positively influence lives in places people go to play or watch others play.