Hello again from Fast Companyand thank you for reading this edition of Plugged In.
Last Tuesday, the world marked International Apple Day, a name I just made up to describe a very real annual ritual. Certainly, the annual unveiling of new iPhonesalong with updated Apple Watches and AirPodsis the biggest day on Apples product calendar. Its the moment when many people either decide a new iPhone is in their future or that they can eke another year out of the one theyve already got.
The headline this week was the long-anticipated debut of the iPhone Air, a new phone whose selling point is that its an iPhone, except thinner and lighter. Much of the other announcements involved new Apple products that offer even more of what folks liked about predecessorslonger battery life, additional megapixels, improved noise cancellation. Apple gave the base iPhone 17 the ProMotion and always-on display technologies formerly reserved for the iPhone Pro and (finally!) decided to release an iPhone Pro in an exuberantly fun color, Cosmic Orange. It also gave all the new iPhones front-facing camera a square sensor, allowing you to shoot in landscape mode even if youre holding the phone vertically, a feature I never realized I wanted but now crave.
Even when Apple doesnt have anything radically new to reveal (like, oh, a folding iPhone), its good at the kind of incrementalism that keeps its hardware progressing in logical directions with clear benefits. This weeks launch was dominated by that sort of news. But Apple didnt have much to say about AI, an area thats critical to the future of the companys products. For now, its quietly trying to regain its footing after a period of embarrassingly public failure with the technology, leaving the details of whats ahead uncertain.
Lets recap. At its WWDC conference in June 2024, Apple introduced a portfolio of AI-powered features called Apple Intelligence. Among the most ambitious was the Siri voice assistants new ability to answer questions that involved seamlessly plucking bits of information from different apps on the flysuch as Siri, when is my Moms flight landing?; Whats our lunch plan?; and How long will it take us to get there from the airport?
Apple stoked expectations: This year marks the beginning of a new era for Siri, explained the executive who demonstrated the mom-visit scenario in the WWDC keynote video. By the end of the year, however, the company hadnt shipped the most ambitious elements of its Siri improvements. Last March, it acknowledged, Its going to take us longer than we thought to deliver on these features and we anticipate rolling them out in the coming year. At this years WWDC, it didnt say anything about Siris AI future other than to reiterate the coming year timetable.
A new twist developed last month when Bloombergs Mark Gurman reported that Apple was in early talks with Google to build a new version of Siri on top of Googles Gemini LLM. Given that more than 15 months had passed since Apples announcements at WWDC 2024, I did a double-take at Gurmans scoop. How could Apple still be in the process of assembling third-party ingredients to build something it had already demoed and claimed was an era-shifting step forward?
Any Gemini partnership might have as much to do with Siris longer-term AI trajectory as implementing the specific features Apple announced and then failed to complete. Still, considering the companys instinctive preference to develop its own technologies rather than rely on others, even a whiff of Google AI becoming essential to one of the iPhones highest-profile features would be a big deal. Particularly given that Apple and Google are both long-time partners and fierce competitors.
Clarity about Siris smarter, more personalized future is probably months off and wont arrive all at once. After burning itself with premature hoopla, Apple has every incentive to stay mum until its absolutely, positively certain its ready to deploy the features it announced at WWDC 2024. According to Gurman, its shooting for next spring. That would make them an off-cycle update before Apples standard round of OS upgrades for fall 2026, which will likely bring another round of AI enhancements to Siri.
Meanwhile, Google has been bounding forward with its own AI game plan for Android. At its Pixel 10 phone launch last month, it showed off a feature called Magic Cue. Its not a precise counterpart to the new, unreleased Siri, but also relates to dynamically weaving together data from multiple apps to keep users informed about everyday life. Having lost time to its Siri mishap, Apple may still be scrambling to catch up with Googles version of this helpful AI vision a year from now.
Now, Apple has hardly dug itself an AI hole it can never emerge from. For one thing, its not clear to me that most consumers are prioritizing AI when choosing which devices to buy. The new iPhones, Apple Watches, and AirPods Pro have plenty of other new features that should appeal to upgraders even if elements of their AI story remain fuzzy, giving Apple some breathing room to figure out whats next. Deciding to build a Siri experience on top of Gemini might be a healthy sign that Apple understands its own limitations and is willing to try new approaches to overcoming them.
From the Apple II to the iPod to the iPhone to the iPad to the Apple Watch, Apple is legenary not for inventing product categories but for reinventing them. Once it shows up, its offerings are often so well thought-out that people forget it was late to the party. So far, nobody else has figured out how to build AI into smartphones and other consumer devices in a way thats so life-changing that Apple cant theoretically top it.
Im not arguing that the new-and-improved Siris delayed rollout is a classically Apple-esque act of confidence. Instead, it reflects the enormous pressure the company is under to deliver tangible AI in its products, and its relative inexperience with the technology. But the company still has a shot at turning its misadventures in AI into a fresh start that works to its advantage. That might be the biggest challengeand opportunityit faces in 2026.
Youve been reading Plugged In, Fast Companys weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to youor if you’re reading it on FastCompany.comyou can check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself every Friday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at hmccracken@fastcompany.com with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters. I’m also on Bluesky, Mastodon, and Threads, and you can follow Plugged In on Flipboard.
More top tech stories from Fast Company
Thanks to AI, this guy is running a Google rival from his laundry roomLarge language models aren’t just making mainstream search engines worse; they’re making the next generation of search engines easier to develop. Read More
Millennials refuse to give up ‘lol’Once merely shorthand for laughter, ‘lol’ has become a new flashpoint in the online generation wars. Read More
Why most AI wearables are still terribleAnd how beauty, privacy, and expression can fix them. Read More
X has been CEO-less for months. Oddsmakers don’t believe that’s changingTwo months after Yaccarino bailed, Musk hasn’t picked a new chief. Polymarket bettors don’t anticipate he will anytime soon. Read More
Ralph Lauren’s new AI app is paving the way for a shopping revolutionThe 58-year-old fashion brand partnered with Microsoft to create Ask Ralph, an AI agent that mimics the experience of speaking with a stylist. Read More
This startup is bringing AI to an Excel-style spreadsheetSourcetable’s AI agents can fetch data from cloud services and databases, then write code to analyze itall from a familiar spreadsheet environment. Read More
The current college football season enters its third weekend with something that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago: universities cutting actual paychecks to star players. Thanks to the $2.8 billion House v. NCAA settlement approved in June, schools can now share up to $20.5 million of their revenue directly with players across all college sports this year. That figure will climb by at least 4% annually over the decade-long agreement.
It’s a far cry from the “they’re not employees” rhetoric we’ve heard from universities in recent decades and represents a fundamental reordering not just of college football but of college athletics in general. Until 2021, college athletes couldn’t profit from their talents at allno endorsements, no appearance fees, nothing. Then name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals provided the first crack in the dam, allowing players to finally monetize their name, image, and likeness through third-party deals.
Welcome to the age of post-amateurism
Now, direct payments from schools represent an even bigger shift. Under the new revenue-sharing model, roughly 75% of revenue will go to college football players, 15% to men’s basketball, 5% to women’s basketball, and 5% to all other sports. The booster collectives that dominated NIL since 2021 are being absorbed into athletic departments or fighting for their lives as NIL returns to actual endorsements rather than disguised pay-for-play. And now, as private equity money begins flowing into college sports through media rights deals and conference partnerships, the dam has officially collapsed.
The rapid evolution has created a landscape where every move is scrutinized for potential conflicts of interest and precedent-setting implications. Even established players like OneTeam Partnerswhich represents over 20,000 professional and college athletes through a joint venture between the NFL and MLB players’ unionshave found themselves under scrutiny as regulators and stakeholders attempt to navigate the blurred lines between advocacy, representation, and business interests.
But Sean Sansiveri, CEO of OneTeam Partners, views this regulatory complexity as expensive theaternecessary steps toward professionalization, but ultimately a detour from the real solution. OneTeam is not the target of the ongoing investigation and has fully cooperated from the beginning, the company says.
During his previous 13-year tenure with the NFL Players Association (NFLPA), Sansiveri helped develop concussion protocols and grew the union’s licensing program from $90 million to nearly $400 million.
Sansiveri spoke with Fast Company to discuss why unions are key to sustainable athlete compensation, how private equity could accelerate this process, and how the next three to five years have the potential to transform college sports as we know them.
House v. NCAA
The House v. NCAA settlement allows schools to pay players directly for the first time, but NIL deals have been the main source of athlete compensation since 2021. How do you see the relationship between these two compensation streams?
NIL was never meant to replace fair compensation from the system itselfit was just a first step. The House settlement creates, for the first time, a direct compensation stream from schools to athletes. But it doesnt replace NILit sits alongside it. Increased revenue sharing is going to be the biggest determination of what the future looks like. Some schools and conferences are already exploring alternative direct payment models, and we expect that to accelerate.
I think the issue thats going to continue to change everything is primarily employment status. Will college athletes be recognized as employees? They should be, but that’s going to carry the most significant implications for compensation, benefits, rights to organize, etc.
So in this new world where schools can pay up to $20.5 million directly to athletes, what role do third-party NIL deals actually play?
In the pros, you have revenue sharing from the league and the teams. Roughly 50% of the revenue generated in the NFL, for example, funds the salaries and benefits of players. But we also have a group licensing program and individual athlete endorsement deals. A comparable model is likely in the best interests of collegiate athleteseach existing in parallel. But if the schools assume the duty to represent athlete NIL directlyas opposed to a collective bargaining unitand fail to maximize the value of those rights, I anticipate there being a lot of legal pain for those schools down the line.
Booster Collectives get the boot?
Booster collectives have been the dominant force in NIL since 2021. With schools now able to pay players directly, what’s happening to these collective organizations?
I think it depends on whether they’re going to professionalize themselves and find an athlete empowerment role. If they don’t, they’re probably not going to play much of a role at all.
It’s no longer about donations. It’s about investing in systems that generate long-term value. Private equity money typically goes into media rights, licensing, and infrastructure. To meand I think to every athlete who’s focused on thisthat means players should benefit through structured revenue sharing, formal employment models, and eventually maybe even equity in the teams themselves. So it’s less of this one-off cash model and more of a long-term compensation model, very much similar to what the pros have.
Private Equity is in the house
Speaking of long-term value, private equity has started investing in college sports in ways that weren’t previously allowed. What’s the significance of that shift?
Private equity (PE) seems to be quietly becoming one of the most consequential forces in shaping the future of college sports. Unlike the NIL headlines, the story there is about who owns the ecosystem, not who’s getting paid within it. PE firms are eyeing long-term media deals as high upside investments. Infrastructure and commercializationthink stadium upgrades, campus entertainment districts, immersive fan experiencesare areas that private equity has a lot of experience in. If you can turn college athletics into a year-round multi-channel revenue engine, of course they’re interested.
The problem, though, is that athletes aren’t formal stakeholders. Private equity is coming in to extract long-term value from the athletes who deserve and don’t currently have a seat at the table. How are they going to share in the upside? In my mind, that’s the biggest question.
That raises an interesting question about power dynamics. Could private equity actually help athletes gain more leverage through unionzation?
You could actually see an acceleration towards employment status and collective bargaining if private equity decides to really jump fully into this space. If you’re going to roll up schools, roll up conferences, you’re going to want an antitrust exemption, and you’re either going to get that from Congress or through a non-statutory labor exemption by having a union.
In the professional models, if a union had decertified for purposes of antitrust in a lockout or strike, the first thing the professional leagues insist is that the union be reconstituted because of the antitrust exemption. So we could see private equity make a similar push in college sports.
The licensing gold rush
Your company, OneTeam Partners, focuses heavily on group licensing. How does that model work in college sports, and why is it important in this changing landscape?
Group licensing can be a powerful equalizer. It allows athletes across entire teams, even in non-revenue-generating sports, to benefit collectively. What started as a mechanism primarily used by the professional sports unions is now unlocking revenue for college athletes through video games, jersey sales, and brand campaigns. It’s not just the stars who are participatingit’s the walk-ons, it’s the backups. They’re all earning alongside the All-Americans.
At OneTeam, we have over 20,000 college athletes in our group licensing program today, and in just the first seven months of 2025, we’ve already delivered nearly $20 million in NIL payments to those athletes. But without a union in the space that actually represents those rights in an exclusive capacity, athletes aren’t achieving their full value.
Looking ahead three to five years, what do you think the compensation landscape will look like for college athletes?
Compensation packages would probably look more like their pro counterpartsanchored in direct payments from the schools, revenue sharing hopefully through union-negotiated agreements, and robust exclusive group licensing income from media, merchandise, gaming, trading cards, and jerseys.
With organized labor at the table, that’ll make for a more transparent, structured, and sustainable system that addresses all of these issues. Whether it’s boosters, agent regulation, health and safety concerns, commercialization of data, AIall of that could be addressed through collective bargaining.
What do you see as the biggest risk if college sports doesn’t move toward that professional model?
The biggest risk is a fractured system with no central voice for athletes. As schools, private equity, and new pay models come into college, I don’t think the danger is chaos anymore. It’s overreach. When employees don’t have a strong voice representing them and without player unions or collective governance, the money is still going to flow. But the athlete rightsthe protections, the long-term sustainabilitywould fall through the cracks.
The pro model: collective bargaining
For someone trying to understand where all this is headed, how would you explain what college sports could, and maybe should, ultimately look like?
The simplest way to explain it is to look at how it’s done in the pros. You have sustainable revenue models that fairly compensate athletes, focus on important issues like player safety, life after sporteverything ranging from prescription drug registry programs to protections for counterfeit merchandise. All of that is handled through a collective bargaining scheme that best serves the athletes.
By serving the talent that drives the value of these sports, you are ensuring a sustainable model. Follow the blueprint that has been forged by the professional sports unions over the past several decades, and do that in college. That’s the simplest path to organization and eliminating the chaos and the potential for overreach.
What advice would you give to college athletes as they navigate this rapidly changing landscape?
When I’m looking at these NIL opportunities, especially in the context of group licensing, until there’s employee recognition and a professional-style union in place, so many of these entities that are participating in the value growth are doing so for their investors. The unique factor in professional sports is that if money from NIL is going to a union, that money is strengthening a union and advocating for fair wages, hours, and working conditions on behalf of the athletes.
In the current ecosystem, we don’t have that. So who is participating in the value chain and what are their ultimate incentives? If I’m an athlete, those are the questions I’d be asking.
For years, millennials have watched the C-suite from just on the other side of the glass wallmanaging divisions, leading teams, and driving innovation while patiently waiting their turn. That turn is now arriving. With baby boomers rapidly aging out of leadership, a long-stalled generational shift is gaining momentum. The question is no longer if millennials will lead, but whether they will be ready when the moment comes.
Born between 1981 and 1996, millennials are now between 29 and 44 years old. Many have spent 15 to 20 years climbing the corporate ladder, only to find the final rung out of reach. Executive bottleneckscreated by boomer longevity, flat org charts, and limited enterprise-level roleshave kept many qualified candidates in a holding pattern. Ironically, the very lack of top-tier experience that holds them back is also the result of being held back.
And yet, the baton is clearly passing. By 2030, millennials and Generation Z are projected to make up 74% of the global workforce. As boomer retirements accelerateoften for reasons no strategic plan could predictmillennials are stepping into the void. But the rules have changed. There is no clear playbook for how to assume leadership amid organizational flux, economic volatility, and rapidly shifting workplace values. Thats why now is the time for intentional preparation, not hopeful waiting.
The Case for a New Succession Mindset
Most companies still treat succession planning as a private conversation among top brass, an exercise postponed until a health scare or sudden resignation forces action. This approach is no longer sustainable. Succession isnt a milestone; its a business continuity strategy. Organizations that fail to modernize their models risk losing talent, stability, and credibility.
Heres what companies need to start doing differently:
Spot leadership potential earlier. Relying on time-in-role or box-checking delays progress and demotivates high performers.
Design stretch and rotational assignments. Exposure to cross-functional leadership and enterprise-level challenges builds the experience candidates need before they step up.
Normalize and celebrate planning. Succession should be seen as a mark of maturity and foresight, not a threat.
Hold legacy leaders accountable. Preparing the next generation isnt optional; its a fiduciary responsibility.
Organizations that embrace these strategies will build stronger, more resilient leadership pipelines and send a clear message to ambitious millennials: Youre wanted here.
Millennial Leaders: Its Go Time
For millennial leaders-in-waiting, the opportunity is real, but so is the responsibility. This is not the moment for entitlement. The next wave of executive leadership must be as self-directed as it is strategic. Whether your current employer has a plan for your promotion or not, heres how to proactively build executive readiness:
1. Take on initiatives with real enterprise risk.
Its not enough to manage well within your silo. To lead at the enterprise level, you need experience with complexity, ambiguity, and full-spectrum accountability. Raise your hand for projects with broad impactlike spearheading entry into a new market with defined revenue targets and budget oversight or volunteering to lead an ERP implementation that spans all departments. These high-stakes opportunities will sharpen your financial literacy, strategic agility, and ability to drive results across functions.
2. Get inside the roomeven if its just as a listener.
You dont need a title to learn how decisions get made at the top. Ask to observe board meetings, quarterly earnings calls, or executive strategy sessionseven if your initial role is just to take notes. If that feels too bold, start by listening in on investor calls and studying how leadership communicates priorities under pressure. Youll build fluency in the language of power, understand the dynamics of alignment and dissent, and develop a mental model of how high-level decisions unfold.
3. Build a cross-generational, cross-industry bench of mentors.
Relying solely on internal sponsors can leave you with a limited view. Seek mentorship beyond your company and comfort zone. Reach out to retired industry executives on LinkedIn, or connect with entrepreneurs in your alumni networkespecially those with experience in areas like private equity exits or value creation. These relationships can provide unfiltered insights, challenge your assumptions, and give you access to perspectives that rarely surface in internal conversations.
4. Invest in structured learningand signal that youre serious.
If your company isnt investing in your executive development, youll need to take the lead. Enroll in executive education programs like Whartons Advanced Management Program, or join a peer-learning group such as Vistage. These environments offer both credibility and capability. They help you build critical skills like systems thinking, strategic finance, and leadership under uncertainty. Just as important, they show your readiness to step into bigger roles without waiting for permission.
5. Understand how power really works.
Its not enough to want a seat at the tableyou need to understand how the table is constructed and governed. Track your companys stock performance, read analyst reports, and follow how boards evaluate CEO performance, especially through compensation committee disclosures. Develop an understanding of how governance shapes strategy and how shareholder sentiment influences executive decision-making. This level of fluency sets you apart as someone who can lead for long-term value, not just short-term gains.
6. Cultivate executive presence before the title arrives.
Leadership isnt just about the decisions you makeits about how you carry them. Start practicing now. Record yourself presenting and review your communication habits with a critical eye. Join Toastmasters to refine public speaking under pressure. Or step in to mediate a cross-functional conflict, not as a referee but as a bridge-builder. Presence is earned through discipline, self-awareness, and repeated exposure to uncomfortable moments. The earlier you start, the more natural it becomes when the stakes are highest.
Its important to remember that your next big move might not come from your current company. Promotions are earned, not inherited. Be visible. Be prepared. And be open to opportunities beyond your corporate backyard.
Mindset Over Milestones
Millennials have often been stereotyped as entitled or impatient, labels that obscure the realities of a generation that has navigated recessions, restructuring, and rapid transformation. The most successful leaders will move beyond these narratives by pairing confidence with humility and urgency with preparedness.
The core mindset shift is this: Be ready, not owed. That means embracing ambiguity, staying coachable, and resisting the temptation to assume the job is yours by default. Leadership is earned every day, in the way you show up, guide teams, and respond under pressure.
Legacy Leaders: Your Moment of Impact Is Now
Forsenior executives still in the seat, this generational transition is not on the horizonits happening now. How you handle it will define your legacy. Smooth handoffs signal strength to the market and provide incoming leaders with the support they need to succeed.
Whats at stake if you dont? Unplanned exits, talent flight, and misaligned leadership choices can create chaos and erode shareholder confidence. Companies that delay succession planning until the eleventh hour often end up with rushed decisions and rocky transitions.
Warren Buffetts long-anticipated succession plan is a recent, high-profile example of doing it right: public, planned, and deliberate. Not every company needs a Buffett-scale blueprint, but every leader should view transition as an act of stewardship, not surrender.
The Road Ahead
Millennials arent just coming for the C-suitetheyre already sitting at the table in growing numbers. What they need isnt permission. Its a road map, a challenge, and a vote of confidence.
Organizations that invest in preparing themand leaders who take responsibility for their own readinesswill shape the next generation of executives and the future of business itself.
The era of waiting is over. The window is open. Step through.
They are as short as a toothbrushing tutorial but pack the same spicy wallop as a BookTok romantasy. Theyre as bingeable as a bajillion-dollar Netflix series, but with the stripped-down aesthetics of a Hallmark movie.
Im talking, of course, about microdramasthe fast, fizzy serialized videos flooding phones worldwide. In just a few years, theyve become a full-blown phenomenon, generating billions in revenue without Hollywoods help. At least, not until now.
As studios grapple with a sluggish summer box office and another thin fall TV lineup, a growing legion of viewers is glued to stories made exclusively for their phones. Microdramasor vertical shows, as theyre often calledblend the raw emotion of K-dramas with a TikTok sensibility. Think high-intensity, telenovela-like series, unfurling in one-to-three-minute chunks across 50 to 100 mostly paywalled episodes. They may have titles such as Doctor Boss Is My Baby Daddy or Signed, Sealed, Deceived by My Billionaire Mailboy, but their massive, global fan base makes them impossible to dismiss.
A structural shift
Born in China during the early COVID years, microdramas have since ballooned into a $7 billion industry, and are projected to generate $10 to $13 billion in revenue by 2027. More than 40 dedicated apps, including Seoul-based Vigloo and Californias ReelShort, operate on a freemium model. Curious viewers can try a multi-episode taste of most series, with the option to continue by either paying to subscribe or making in-app purchases.
Although the format first gained traction in Eastern regions, the U.S. emerged last year as the largest market for microdrama apps, contributing 60% of global revenue, according to data analysis firm Sensor Tower. Apps like GoodShort and DramaBox now regularly jostle with Netflix for top slots in entertainment rankings. (To be clear, these companies remain well behind Netflix in revenue and profit.)
Now, as U.S. demand for vertical shows surges, a group of Hollywood veterans is jumping in. MicroCo, a new partnership between horror-focused studio Cineverse and Lloyd Brauns Banyan Ventures, has tapped former Showtime president Jana Winograde as CEO and ex-NBCUniversal content chief Susan Rovner as COO. The companys still-unnamed app wont launch until next spring, but its very existence suggests a massive sea change is currently underway.
Vertical viewing is not just a passing trend,” says Neil Hyuk-jae Choi, CEO of Vigloo parent company SpoonLabs, “but a structural shift.
Dont call it Quibi 2.0
To understand what microdramas are, its important to know what theyre not, which is: Quibi.
Jeffrey Katzenbergs quixotic quest to bring short-form A-list streaming content to the masses failed spectacularly, lasting all of seven months in 2020. Once it officially folded, Quibi became both a cautionary tale and an all-purpose punch line for jokes about doomed media projects.
Heres the thing, though: For all its flaws, the “quick bites” concept now seems rather prescient.
Quibi launched in April 2020, at the dawn of the pandemic, about a split-second before TikTok exploded. At the time, the average U.S. social media user had not yet internalized the habit of swiftly thumbing through a succession of vertical videos, nor had TikTok yet matured into a marketing juggernaut. (Indeed, microdrama studios now frequently seed samples on TikTok to reel in fresh viewers.)
If theyd launched two years later, we’d probably be telling a very different story now, says Cineverse president Erick Opeka, who is part of the MicroCo team.
It wasnt just the length of the clips that sank Quibi. The company banked on repackaging star-driven cable-style shows into bite-size chunks. If consumers had wanted to see so-so cable TV shows in seven-minute increments, well, there were already plenty of streaming apps aroundand all of them came equipped with pause buttons. What potential viewers seemed to want, in retrospect, was something they hadnt seen before.
Quibi was less microdrama and more micro-TV show, says Sammi Cohen, a tech and culture influencer who runs the YouTube channel and podcast Social Currency. The concept made so much sense to me, though; as people have shorter and shorter attention spans, it seemed like the obvious direction shift for the entertainment industry.
Katzenbergs venture had the right tech too early, and with the wrong content. Microdramas, however, seem to have arrived right on scheduleand many viewers are now quick to bite.
All gas, no brakes
These shows arent just TV that’s been shrunk down. They thrive on hyper-speed pacing, heightened dialogue, and Kabuki-level performances.
A conventional three-act structure in cinema requires 20 to 30 minutes spent setting up the characters and their goals, followed by another 40 to 50 minutes of compelling complications, and finally, 20 to 30 minutes of resolution. Microdramas, however, speed-run much of that process and fill it with the emerging conventions of the format, such as hidden identities, rescue moments, and love-triangle showdowns.
In effect, that means ubtlety is out, and nearly every episode ends on a cliffhanger. (Viewers will never have to question, for instance, the motives of Escaping the Bridezilla’s protagonist as she tears through one conflict after another.)
Its a format designed for a generation hyper-exposed to endless streams of content, where you must capture attention instantly and sustain it across 50 or 60 episodes,” says Mauricio Osaki, a filmmaker with several microdramas to his credit, including 2025’s Fight for Love, the most-watched English-language series on Vigloo.
Closed-captioning is standard, so viewers can keep up while watching with the sound off during downtime in a college classroom, during a Zoom meeting, or at their kids Little League game. (The latter seems more likely, too, given that 70% of Vigloos viewership is over the age of 35.)
Its not really meant to be sat down and fully engaged with, says Tristan McKenzie, a young filmmaker who has been producing microdramas, like this years Under the Hood, since 2022. It’s a new type of media, in a language that’s actively being created.
How your microdrama sausage is made
As several creators who spoke with Fast Company tell it, the all-gas-no-brakes urgency of these series carries over to production. Microdramas come together with head-spinning speed and efficiency, going from concept to streaming in a matter of months or even weeks. Budgets are tight, typically in the $100,000 to $200,000 range.
Apps like Vigloo look for creative partners who have already notched vertical hits, or those who seem most open to working in an experimental style and with limited resources. Those who deliver highly viewed shows for the app tend to come back for more, with the two sides working hand in glove to optimize the material. According to Osaki, who has made several microdramas with Vigloo, the company regularly shares data with returning collaborators.
The data may reveal patternsmoments when viewers skip ahead or exit the story,” he says. “When we see those weak points, we rework them in future scripts, whether its adding a dramatic element, shifting when a reveal happens, or strengthening a cliffhanger.”
Because microdramas are tailored for vertical viewing, they require not only the ability to work lean, but also with a vastly different approach to visual storytelling. The 9:16 aspect ratio makes for a more intimate format, with much less room in each frame to add directorial razzle-dazzle. Instead, microdrama creators tend to focus heavily on the interactions between people, and what they are doing with their facessometimes with the assistance of an inner monologue.
You can’t really do expansive vistas and big special effects, Opeka says.
The industry has already spun up its own talent ecosystem to form a kind of MicroHollywood. Actor Kasey Esser, dubbed the Brad Pitt of microdramas by The Ankler, has starred in more than 50 vertical shows and now writes and produces them as well. Beyond Esser, a growing roster of recognizable, camera-ready actors has emergedenough that, according to Choi, many Vigloo subscribers in the U.S. pick shows based largely on whos in the cast.
Given that these projects operate outside the traditional entertainment system, theyre unsurprisingly non-union productions. Many of them also rely on AI to some degree, a practice still largely frowned on in Hollywood, as evidenced by this years Oscars fracas around minor AI usage in The Brutalist.
For us, the question isnt whether to use AI, but how to apply it creatively and responsibly, Choi says.
The CEO claims that Vigloo has been testing AI in post-production, visual effects, and marketing assets. Considering how quickly Vigloos rival studios are churning out content, though, and how cookie-cutter the dialogue can get, it seems inevitable that some series are (or will be) written with AI. As for MicroCo, although Braun has signaled his intention to use AI tools to keep costs down, Opeka says the team has no plans for using them on the storytelling side.
My perception is that AI scriptwriting is just not ready for prime time, he says.
Microdramas, American-style
The shows geared toward U.S. audiences have started to develop their own identity. Romance is still the top genre everywhere, but some subgenres have especially taken off stateside. Romantasy titles, like Vigloos A Vampire in the Alphas Den, are huge in the U.S., the epicenter of BookTok, as are sports romances and high school-set dramas.
The storytelling is definitely adapting [for Western audiences,] Osaki says. Compared to Asian IP, there are fewer toxic relationships; stronger, more empowered female characters; and the narratives are beginning to reflect settings and cultural touchpoints that feel distinctly American. (One show, for example, takes place during spring break.)
Microdramas are on the verge of becoming even more Americanized as MicroCo assembles its in-house team of writers and prepares to flood the zone with fresh content. The team is wary, however, of messing too much with a winning formula.
Romance is working very well in the microdrama space, and so we want to lean into that, says MicroCo CEO Jana Winograde. But it will have the same formatted nature. We’re not trying to change what it is.
Beyond content, the fledgling company also aims to shake up the tech. Winograde says the app wont just host viewing but will add social featuresletting users like, comment, clip, share, and engage in ways the team hasnt yet disclosed.
We all wanted to make watercooler TV, she says, and now we have this thing in our hands that is both the TV and the watercooler.
Microdramas may be light-years away from Hollywood film and television, but as audiences continue flocking to the bite-size series, the industry may have little choice but to rethink what storytelling looks like in the palm of a hand.
Ultimately, humans will always crave stories, Osaki says. “Thats part of who we are. And well continue to explore new ways to tell them.
In 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom used his first State of the State address to level about the high-speed rail. The Los Angeles-to-San Francisco project would cost too much and, respectfully, take too long, he said at the time.
Newsom was taking issue with a plan first laid out in 2008 that promised a 2 hour 40 minute high-speed rail journey between S.F. and L.A., funded by a $10 billion bond. Those travel time requirements, combined with a too-low estimate for the initial funding, had made the full project practically impossible to execute.
So California came up with a solutionsort of. For the past six years, the state has focused its energy and funding on a 170-mile section in the middle of the route connecting the Central Valley cities of Merced and Bakersfield.
Now the newly instated CEO of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, Ian Choudri, is imploring Newsom and the state legislature to reverse course once again. Choudri is publicly declaring what has been intuitively obvious to anyone with the vaguest sense of the states geography: Merced to Bakersfield is not a great high-speed-rail corridor. A politically and economically viable system needs to connect the states major population centers. It needs to make good on what voters were promised in 2008 when the project was introduced.
Choudri has succeeded in one part of his mission: getting the state to extend its funding commitment to the project to the tune of $1 billion per year through 2045. But thats just the start of what he’ll need to accomplish to make high-speed rail a reality in California.
Choudri has asked the state government to consider a new plan that would expedite connections to the Bay Area and Los Angeles area using private funding. While hes at it, he has put out a laundry list of procedural reformspiggybacking off of the ascendent abundance movement popularized by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompsons best-selling bookthat could grease the wheels of a project notorious for delays.
It could be a do-or-die moment for California high-speed rail. The Trump administration is seeking to claw back more than $4 billion in grants, and Republicans in Congress have made clear that no new federal funds will be forthcoming as long as theyre in power. (The California High-Speed Rail Authority, or CHSRA, is fighting the administrations funding clawbacks in court.)
The program is now at its crossroads, Choudri said at a press conference in August. We can choose to let the challenges of the past define the program’s future, or we can meet the moment by supporting high-speed rail with the right tools and partnerships to make the kind of meaningful progress we all want to see.
A completed traffic-rail overpass in Tulare County [Photo: CHSRA]
A long time coming
Choudri has been talking about making major changes to the project since shortly after he took the CEO job a year ago. In August, the CHSRA offered the most detailed look at what those plans could entail in a published report.
The 2025 Supplemental Progress Update Report states that the current project, connecting Merced and Bakersfield, could be completed by 2032 at a cost of $37 billion. But it would be saddled by an ongoing operating deficit of at least $30 million annually, violating the terms of the 2008 ballot measure, which requires the project not to receive operating subsidies. That deficit would also make it impossible to bring in private investor partners.
A rendering of the planned Bakersfield station [Image: CHSRA]
By contrast, the report finds that a route connecting Bakersfield and Gilroy, on the rural fringes of Santa Clara County, would generate an operating surplus of roughly $300 million. Under this plan, high-speed trains would continue up to San Francisco on tracks shared with Caltrain. Construction would cost $54 billionnot including an additional $3 billion to $6 billion to electrify and improve Union Pacific-owned tracks connecting Gilroy and San Joseand be complete by 2038.
An additional connection from Bakersfield to Palmdale, where riders could transfer to local trains for Los Angeles or, potentially, to Brightline trains bound for Las Vegas, would generate an even greater operating surplus, of more than $600 million annually. Combined with the section up to Gilroy, this scheme would cost a total of $87 billion and could also be ready by 2038.
Those operating surpluses could be used to pay back investors over time, or to fund future extensions of the line.
A rendering of Brightline’s Las Vegas train [Image: Brightline West]
All of these scenarios would be value-engineered to be cheaper and more feasible to construct than previously envisioned. The railrod would be designed to handle steeper grades and sharper turns, limiting the expensive tunnels and viaducts that would be needed. Stations would be far smaller and less elaborate.
Choudri also hopes to maximize other revenue streams, like building transit-oriented development around stations, using railroad corridors for fiber-optic cables and electrical transmission lines, selling clean energy, and even building AI data centers.
To do this, and build the railroad, the CHSRA wants more power to streamline its own activities through permitting reform. These proposals build off of the abundance-inspired California Environmental Quality Act exemptions the state legislature passed in June, one of which specifically exempted high-speed rail stations and maintenance facilities from environmental review.
Another permitting reform bill that would have allowed neutral third parties to provide construction permits and capped the amount of time such permits would be allowed to take died in committee in August. A different bill that would empower the authority to capture profits from transit-oriented development is pending.
The project scored a major victory on September 10, when the state legislature and Newsom agreed to extend CHSRAs share of cap-and-trade funds through 2045, ensuring the project will receive $1 billion per year in funding. It is the single largest funding commitment the project has received in its history.
With this consistent revenue stream, Choudri believes private investors will come calling to help get the railroad out of the Central Valley. Over the summer, the authority received 31 responses to its request from private entities interested in getting involved in the project.
The part of the community that came in a strong way was the equity partners, Choudri said at the authoritys August 28 board meeting. The authority is continuing to have more detailed discussions with these groups.
Another potential model for partners is to make an up-front investment and then earn their money back by operating passenger trains, freight, or other services using the projects infrastructure. This is done in many other countries, Choudri noted at the board meeting, and many of those same firms are among those that responded to the authoritys request for expressions of interest.
However, in his statement celebrating the cap-and-trade funding, Choudri also suggested that a greater financial commitment from the state would be needed to get the project out of the Central Valley. We must also work toward securing the long-term fundingbeyond todays commitmentthat can bring high-speed rail to Californias population centers, where ridership and revenue growth will in turn support future expansions.
A rendering of the planned Merced station [Image: CHSRA]
New line, new challenges
The Bakersfield to Gilroy to San Francisco plan appears to be the authoritys favored option going forward, though Choudri insists that it would be a building block to completing the entire system. The NorCal-first phasing, leaving the project more than 100 miles and a mountain pass away from Los Angeles, has historically been an impediment to securing L.A.-area politicians support.
This plan would also require other challenging maneuvers. It would nix the city of Merced from the route after years of big promises, angering leaders there. It will also require negotiating with Union Pacific, and identifying additional funds to upgrade the stretch of track it owns between Gilroy and San Jose. (In a statement, Union Pacific said it had previously discussed sharing track with California High-Speed Rail along that segment, and is open to continued discussions.) Additionally, the plan would require a repeal of a 2022 law that limited spending outside of the Central Valley.
The pivot may even contravene the terms of the 2008 ballot initiative. As California Policy Center fellow Marc Joffe has observed, the slower travel times on that Gilroy to San Jose segment could render the total San Francisco to Los Angeles journey impossible to make in under 2 hours and 40 minutes, violating the ballot initiative language.
Joffe, a longtime critic of California High-Speed Rail, believes the best way forward is a new ballot initiative laying out a more manageable project, roughly in line with what Choudri is currently proposing. With recent polls showing Californians remain broadly supportive of the project, that could be a winning proposition.
Whats undeniably clear is that Choudri is finally leveling about the project in a way no public official has done. Hes not simply pointing out the overambitiousness and underfunding of the initial concept; hes also laying out more modest steps that could get a useful project up and running in our lifetimes, in his words. That means reckoning with the morass of procedural obstacles that have turned practically every lawsuit and permit into a delay, and the overdesigned stations and track structures that the project blithely pursued despite the escalating costs.
Instead of shooing away private-sector partners, as the CHSRA has done in the past, Choudri is welcoming them in with the humility that outside entities might know a little bit more about building high-speed rail than a state agency with no prior experience.
Perhaps the Trump administration’s threats arehaving a focusing effect for everyone involved. Newsom, hero of the anti-Trump resistance movement, would be loathe to concede defeat to the president on the states signature infrastructure project. Democrats skeptical of the project are probably going to be wary of aligning themselves with Trump.
The abundance movement has offered a new vocabulary for liberals to support cutting red tape for projects like this one. Indeed the book Abundance cites California High-Speed Rail as the epitome of liberal governance gone wrong. Choudris fixes for the project look like they came right out of the abundance playbook.
The tides have turned. The question is whether its too little, too late.
I don’t care about Starbucks.
Madrid now drowns in indie coffee shops with coffee brewed from specialty beans that are flown in by winged unicorns and roasted to perfection. In this city, the green mermaid feels as relevant as a McDonald’s next to Casa Botín (the oldest restaurant in the world, opened 51 years before the United States declared its independence), Dabiz Muozs three-Michelin-starred DiverXo, or any other of the best restaurants on the planet that reside in Madrid.
But for all my Eurotrash snobbery, I also dont hate Starbucks. In fact, I credit it as the first place in Madrid that actually offered a cup that didnt taste like it could resuscitate a fentanyl victim or kill an ironman triathlete. For a long time, Spanish coffee was strong, but not very pleasant.
[Photo: fitopardo/Getty Images
So when I learned that Starbucks planned to open a new flagship store in the troubled Santiago Bernabéu Stadiumhome of Real Madrid Club de Fútbol and host to Taylor Swifts fansI had to see it for myself. I live just around the corner from the stadium, so I took along my personal Lego architect (my son) for commentary.
His verdict? Oh boy!
And oh boy it is.
[Photo: courtesy of the author]
This isn’t your typical neighborhood Starbucks. We entered through the rather bland storefront, which looks just like every other restaurant and bar integrated in the stadium facade. But beyond the door there is a foyer with digital displays that completely cover the walls. They illustrate the journey of coffee, according to the company, in animated impressionistic sequences.
[Photo: courtesy of the author]
A destination in a destination
The cool starts when you walk into the central atrium. Concrete columnspart of the old stadium’s brutalist bonessoar toward the ceilings. Custom fixtures and plants line the walls. There is a big metal-and-wood staircase flanked by a large suspended sculpture, created by Madrid artist Cristina Mejías: a flowing ribbon that, according to the company, is an abstract Starbucks Siren that echoes the stadium’s curves. It accentuates the impression of never-ending space ahead of you.
[Photo: Starbucks]
On the bottom floor, there is your usual Starbucks counter, where you can order coffee and food. The company says the design pays homage to the original Pike Place store in Seattle and to the energy of Madrids San Miguel Market, an iconic iron fixture designed and built by Spanish architect Alfonso Dubé in 1916, now turned into a gourmet food court. To me, it feels nothing like San Miguel despite the use of metal, but whatever. Its a welcoming space that, unfortunately, was overcrowded (the stadium is Madrid’s top tourist destination, according to city officials).
[Photo: courtesy of the author]
The upper floor is what really got us going La madre que me parió! (literally, The mother who birthed me!one of Spains equivalents to Holy f%ck!). Its comprised of different lounge areasthere are small tables for small groups and large community tables, a library/reading space, and a giant mural that says MADRID. But the real attraction is the unobstructed view of the Bernabéu pitch, courtesy of floor-to-ceiling widows that stretch the entire length of the space.
[Photo: courtesy of the author]
On the right is the Reserve Bar, with a menu of delicious beverages and plates. Theres even a cheesecake created by chef Albert Adri, currently of Michelin-starred restaurant Enigma; Adri was the pastry chef at his brother Ferráns three-Michelin-starred elBulli, considered one of the world’s best restaurants before its closing in 2011. Starbucks boasts its mixology bar serves cocktails crafted by Coffee Masters who’ve competed in international championships.
[Photo: Starbucks]
I ordered a croque monsieurwhich was huge, with actual béchamel sauce, very good Emmental and Gruyre, and equally good ham on excellent sourdough breadand a Special Reserve cold brew coffee. My son got a strawberry croissant and a stracciatella (gelato) shake. The food was legitimately goodrestaurant quality, not chain store-y at all.
[Photo: Starbucks]
Can you watch games?
I wanted to know if it was possible to watch games on match days. Unfortunately, you cant. Starbucks says, “On match days, the store is closed a few hours before kickoffthis is to allow the usual security checks to take place at the Stadiumand reopens around an hour after the game concludes. The store has to be closed to allow VIP seat holders to reach their seats, but it remains closed and doesnt serve food for the duration of the game, the spokesperson says.
Starbucks says Bernabéu is among its largest coffeehouses, rivaled only, perhaps, by its other Reserve Roasteries in Chicago and Taipei, Taiwan. Superlatives don’t matter here. Spanning almost 10,000 square feet over two floors, this Starbucks feels like the biggest coffee shop I’ve ever seen.
The fact that it is integrated into an iconic location could have been a problem, but Starbucks is conscious about where it isthe city of Madrid and the Real Madrids stadium. The company built everything around those elements, rather than dropping corporate branding onto generic retail space.
The Chicago and Taipei Starbucks dont have the fundamental element that makes this the greatest Starbucks shop in the known universe: the views into the legendary pitch of the Bernabéu Stadium, home of the greatest soccer team of all time. It feels more like a destination that happens to serve coffee than a coffee shop with a nice view. I just hope there wont be a line out the door every day.
Sitting on a hillside between the mountains and the ocean in Lahaina, Hawaii, this new neighborhood of brightly-colored cottages did not exist a year ago.
The housesmost of which were built in factories in Colorado and Idaho and delivered to Maui on a bargeare temporary homes for families who lost everything in the Lahaina wildfires in 2023. Theyre also a new type of housing for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Built to meet local and international building codes, theyre very different from the cheap, toxic trailers that FEMA deployed 20 years ago, when Hurricane Katrina displaced hundreds of thousands of people. Some of those trailers had formaldehyde levels that were 75 times greater than safe levels. They were poorly insulated and never meant for long-term housing, but some families were stuck in them for years.
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
The cottages in Hawaii, by contrast, use materials chosen to maintain healthy air quality. The homes are filled with light, with huge windows and high ceilings. They were built to be durable, with the potential to be turned into affordable long-term housing after their temporary use.
They could be a model for future disaster response. But as the Trump administration pushes to dismantle FEMA, its not clear what will happen to the homes nowor what will happen during the next disaster.
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
Rethinking disaster housing
Liv-Connected, the New York City-based modular home company that designed most of the new Hawaiian cottages, didnt originally plan to build disaster housing. But the startup, founded in 2019, got attention from the disaster relief world after it made some early prototypes.
The companys first goal was to lower costs by making transportation easier for modular homes. The team saw the potential of building Lego-like homes efficiently in factories, but it also saw that other modular companies had failed in part because the homes were expensive to move, and building big factories in multiple locations was even more expensive.
We just said, all right, our modular can be differentits going to fit on a flatbed truck, says Jordan Rogove, CEO and cofounder of Liv-Connected. We worked backward from there: How do we get a really great house that fits on a standard flatbed?
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
While shipping a fully constructed volumetric modular house might require a couple of oversize trucks and cost $16 to $18 a mile, a home that fits on a flatbed truck could cost $2 to $3 per mile instead. The companys basic design includes some fully built pieces, like the kitchen and the bathroom. But most of the house can be flat-packed and then quickly assembled on-site.
The installation in Hawaii turned out to be different. Because the homes needed to travel more than 2,000 miles over the open ocean on a barge, it made sense to fully build each house and ship them in complete, watertight sealed units. (Future homes delivered to the continental U.S. could use the less expensive flat-packed version.) But there were other reasons that FEMA picked Liv-Connected to provide more than 100 homes for the site.
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
The houseswhich range from a 480-square-foot one-bedroom unit to a 980-square-foot three-bedroom homeare designed to help improve well-being, with high ceilings, wood-paneled walls, and outdoor views. “It’s just more generous and dignified,” Rogove says. “Our understanding of providing accommodations like that is that healing happens a lot faster.”
Outside, the homes are painted in different colors, both as a nod to buildings that were lost in the fire and to help the development feel more like a neighborhood. “I think the issue with those FEMA trailers is that they’re all identical, and then it starts to have this quality of barracks,” he adds. “So there isn’t a sense of neighborhood or a community.”
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
The homes are also designed to last, with fire-resistant siding and tight insulation. They could stay in good condition for decades, versus months or a few years for an old FEMA trailer. “In our discussions with FEMA, you really need to do better for people,” Rogove says. “If you are willing to spend upward of 20% to 30% more than you would for a trailer, you can have a home that could be used for up to 30 years. So it could be deployed multiple times as opposed to a single deployment and then basically tossed into the garbage.”
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
Building the neighborhood
After the wildfires in August 2023, FEMA invited developers to submit proposals for the homes the following March. In late June last year, Liv-Connected learned that it was selected to provide 109 homes in a first installment. (Two other companies provided a smaller number of houses, with 167 total in the development.) Then it worked with two manufacturing partners to begin building. One of FEMA’s requirements was that the homes would be delivered by November 2024.
“We effectively had about two months to build 109 homes,” Rogove says. “And then another two months to have all of them installed.” At the same time, engineers were preparing the site. Hawaii offered state-owned land for FEMA’s temporary use at no cost.
At a Colorado factory owned by Liv-Connected’s partner Fading West, a crew of workers spent 12-hour days on the project, building as many as 10 homes each week. Guerdon Modular Buildings, in Idaho, was contracted to build the final 25 homes, and it finished in two weeks. Then the houses were trucked to the Port of Seattle and spent three weeks on a barge to Maui. Just before Thanksgiving, families started moving in.
The process was incredibly fast, although the factories say that it could be even faster if FEMA could preapprove particular designs. “If FEMA had a library of preapproved modular plans, we could start production within seven to 10 days of a natural disaster, Tommy Rakes, CEO of Guerdon, said in one case study of the project. These homes could be shipped anywhere in the continental U.S. in three to five days, installed, and occupied within a day. In under three weeks, displaced victims could have permanent homes.
Having additional factories in some areas could also help. Fading West has talked to the Hawaiian government about the possibility of setting up a local modular housing factory to avoid long-distance transportation. The state also sees the potential for modular housing as a way to help it deal with the affordable housing crisis.
[Photo: Liv-Connected]
An uncertain future
In FEMA’s original plan, families would have up to five years to live in the homes in Lahaina, paying a fair market rent that’s limited to 30% of a household’s gross income. But the development may now close as soon as next February. FEMA would have to grant an extension to the state to keep it open later and continue providing financial assistance. The agency says that the state’s request is currently under review, but it didn’t provide more details.
It’s not clear what will happen next, or where the homes will end up when the project ends. Trump has called for eliminating FEMA and tried to cut billions in disaster funding. FEMA originally planned to build another 231 modular disaster relief homes in Lahaina, Rogove says, but that doesn’t appear to be moving forward. “It’s been absolute silence,” he adds. “So I think the likelihood of that happening seems to decrease day by day.” FEMA says that it isn’t planning another 231 homes.
In future disasters, it’s not clear how FEMA will handle housing or what role modular homes will play, though the agency says that modular homes may be considered when they’re a fit for local requirements. It’s possible that states may push the solution forward faster. In Maui, the state of Hawaii partnered with a nonprofit developer on another modular neighborhood built near the FEMA site. Texas has explored the idea of building modular housing in advance and storing the units in warehouses in key citiesready to deploy in a disaster. In California, Liv-Connected and other modular housing manufacturers are offering options to residents trying to rebuild after the Los Angeles fires.
“What we’ve seen so far is states stepping in to fill the gap, in the absence of the clear organizational order that was there before,” Rogove says. “I think that’s probably what it’s going to look like for the next several years. That fills me with hope for the states that have the capacity to do that. And I have a lot of reservations for states that don’t have those types of resources.”
In Hawaii, the state government says that FEMA’s assistance has been critical over the last several years through hurricanes, flooding, fires, and volcanic activity. “While state, local, and private resources have supported recovery, they are limited in scale and speed,” Gov. Josh Green wrote in a recent letter about the agency. “Timely federal deployment remains crucial to meeting the needs of affected communities.”
Today, a new glossy magazine called 72 hits the news stands. On the cover, you’ll find Julia Roberts gazing intensely at the camera, wearing a black button-down shirt and jacket designed by Phoebe Philo along with chunky diamond-encrusted jewelry. Inside, she’s interviewed by George Clooney, but you’ll also find stories about luminaries across fashion and entertainment, from Stella McCartney and Jonathan Anderson to Oprah Winfrey and Adwoa Aboah.
72, a quarterly fashion magazine, is the flagship product of a new media and entertainment company called EE72. It is cofounded by Edward Enninful, the former editor-in-chief of British Vogue, along with his sister, Akua Enninful, a talent agent. (The company’s name combines Edward’s initials and the year of his birth.) After more than two decades running some of the best-known fashion titles in the world, Enninful is ready to strike out on his own.
[Cover Image: Craig McDean (photograph)/courtesy EE72]
“When you are on someone else’s masthead, you have to please your bosses and advertisers,” he says. “I was ready for total creative freedom.”
Launching a new magazine in this moment is a bold move. The media industry has been on the decline for more than a decade, as people shift their attention toward streaming services and TikTok, and advertisers cut their spending on magazines and newspapers. Last year, 15,000 media jobs were cut in the United States, as places like the Washington Post and Vox Media had layoffs.
But Enninful is confident in his ability to create a profitable media business, despite these headwinds. After all, he’s done so before. In 2011, he took over W magazine when the publication was struggling and increased ad pages by 16%. Between 2017 and 2023, as editor-in-chief of British Vogue, he drove up both digital traffic and print circulation. “From the time I was in my twenties, I was always offered magazines that needed to be turned around,” he recalls. “Then I realized that turning things around is my superpower.”
New Business Models
Enninful started his career at a time when magazines were still thriving. He was scouted as a model in London as a teenager, going on to model for Arena and i-D, before pivoting to styling fashion shoots. He was eventually named fashion editor of i-D.
Until the internet and social media took off 20 years ago, magazines were a lucrative business because brands would pay top dollar to have their ads seen by large audiences. But 15 years ago, Enninful began to see the uphill battles the media industry was facing. In 2011, when he became style director at W, and then in 2017, when he became the editor in chief of British Vogue, advertising was beginning to decline.
To ensure the success of his magazines, Enninful had to think creatively about working with advertisers. Rather than just selling them banner ads or print pages, he’s been focused on finding other ways to collaborate. “The advertising system needed to be disrupted, and I’ve been doing this my whole career,” he says.
He’s bringing this same approach to 72. For the first issue, there isn’t a single page of advertising. Instead, he creates bespoke partnerships with each brand that involves things like in-person events, podcasts, videos, and even products. For instance, for the magazine’s launch party, 72 partnered with Moncler and Google Shopping, enabling these brands to get in front of some of the most influential people in fashion. “We offer our clients holistic packages that are tailored to their needs.” he says.
While Enninful is the chief creative officer of the company, he has hired a team of experts to run various parts of the business. Simone Oliver (formerly of BET and Refinery29) is the head of content, Sarah Harris (formerly of British Vogue) is the editorial director for both the magazine and website, and Lee Swillingham and Stuart Spalding (founders of the creative agency Suburbia) are co-creative directors of the magazine.
EE72 will also have another revenue stream in the form of a consulting wing that works directly with brands to advise them on how to be relevant in this cultural environment. “This takes the pressure off the magazine,” he says. “For the magazine, we can just focus on creating really excellent journalism and beautiful art rather than the needs of the advertisers.”
More Diversity
But to succeed as a magazine, you need more than just strong advertising revenue. You also need a fresh and relevant point of view. Over the course of the last two decades, Enninfulwhose family moved from Ghana to London when he was a childhas done this by bringing diversity to the notoriously exclusive fashion industry.
Throughout his career, he’s focused on highlighting the importance of inclusivity. In 2017, after President Trump was elected the first time, Enninful brought together 80 prominent members of the fashion industry to create a video called, “I Am An Immigrant.” In 2019, he used the September issue of British Vogue to spotlight 15 female trailblazers including Greta Thunberg. (The issue was guest-edited by Meghan Markle.)
Enninful says he will bring much of the same approach to 72. In many ways, the magazine will be reminiscent of other high-end fashion magazines on the market, including Vogue. We’ll see top designers’ latest collections and read interviews with cultural icons. There will be lavish photo spreads by top photographers. But Enninful will continue to focus on bringing in underrepresented voices and perspectives.
He believes it is particularly important to do this now because “diversity, equity, and inclusion” are under attack not just in the United States, but around the world. Enninful believes that promoting diversity isn’t just a moral issue: It’s good for business. “When you feature diverse people on the cover of the magazine, you attract more people into the eco-system that had previously been ignored,” he says. “Throughout my career, I’ve seen that this is great for business.”
But for all his experience in the magazine business, Enninful believes there’s still a lot to learn because the industry keeps changing. He says one of the most exciting things about starting a brand-new media company is that he has the freedom to experiment. He plans to run the magazine like a startup, instead of being bound to the traditions and systems of legacy media companies. “There’s a reason we didn’t buy an existing maazine title,” he says. “We didn’t want to be stuck with a legacy brand. We wanted something new, young, and agile. We can learn from mistakes, move quickly, and adapt.”
And ultimately, he believes that readers are also looking for something new right now. “Many people are exhausted by what they’re seeing in the media,” he says. “I think it’s a great time to be starting something new.”
When Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, it was the largest climate bill in U.S. history, with major incentives for electric vehicle production and adoption. In its wake, investment in the U.S. electric vehicle industry accelerated. But in 2025, President Donald Trumps so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act eliminated most of the incentives, and U.S. investment collapsed.
Hitting the brakes on electric vehicles will clearly mean less progress in reducing transportation emissions and less strategic U.S. leadership in a key technology of the future. But in a new study, my colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University and I find that fewer electric vehicles will also mean less investment to clean up the electricity sector.
How we got here
U.S. electric vehicle adoption lags behind the rest of the worldespecially China, which has invested heavily and strategically to dominate electric vehicle markets and supply chains and to leapfrog the historical dominance of American, European, and Japanese manufacturers of vehicles powered by internal combustion engines.
Electric vehicles are much simpler to engineer, and this opened a window for China to bet big on EVs with investment, incentives, and experimentation. As battery prices dropped dramatically, electric cars became real competition for gasoline carsespecially for the massive Chinese market, where buyers dont have strong prior preferences for gasoline. China now dominates the supply chain for battery materials, such as lithium, nickel, cobalt, and manganese, as well as the rare earth minerals used in electric motors.
In 2022, the U.S. took action to change this trend when Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act. The law encouraged EV adoption by lowering costs to manufacturers and consumers. But it also encouraged automakers to find ways to build EVs without Chinese materials by making the largest incentives conditional on avoiding China entirely.
After the law passed, investment soared across hundreds of new battery manufacturing and material processing facilities in the U.S.
But in 2025, Congress passed and Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which eliminated most of the incentives. U.S. investment in EV-related production has collapsed.
Electric vehicles are cleaner
As a scholar of electric vehicle technology, economics, environment, and policy, I have conducted numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies characterizing the benefits and costs of electric vehicles over their life cycle, from production through use and end of life. When charged with clean electricity, electric vehicles are one of the few technologies in existence that can provide transportation with near-zero emissions.
With todays electricity grid, EV emissions can vary, depending on the mix of electricity generators used in the region where they are charged, driving conditions such as weather or traffic, the specific vehicles being compared, and even the timing of charging. But EVs are generally better for the climate over their life cycle today than most gasoline vehicles, even if the most efficient gas-electric hybrids are still cleaner in some locations. EVs become cleaner as the electricity grid becomes cleaner and, importantly, it turns out that EVs can even help make the electricity grid cleaner.
This matters because transportation and electricity together make up the majority of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and the passenger cars and light trucks that we all drive produce the majority of our transportation emissions.
In its efforts to prevent the government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions, the Trump administration is now claiming that emissions from cars and trucks are not meaningful contributors to climate change. But in reality, a technology that cleans up both transportation and electricity at the same time is a big deal.
Across most of the U.S., adding electricity demand, such as from increasing the use of electric vehicles, would spark development of clean-energy power plants to meet that rising need. [Image: Michalek et al.]
An opportunity for cleaner electricity
Our research has found that turning away from electric vehicles does more than miss a chance to curb transportation emissionsit also misses an opportunity to make the nations electricity supply cleaner.
In our paper, my coauthors Lily Hanig, Corey Harper and Destenie Nock, and I looked at potential scenarios for electric vehicle adoption across the U.S. from now until 2050. We considere situations ranging from cases with no government policies supporting electric vehicles to cases with enough electric vehicle adoption to be on track with road maps targeting overall net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
In each of these scenarios, we calculated how the nations power grid and electricity generators would respond to electric vehicle charging load.
We found that when there are more electric vehicles charging, more power plants would need to be builtand because of cost competitiveness, most of those new power plants would be solar, wind, battery storage, and natural gas plants, depending on the region.
Once wind and solar plants are built, they are cheaper to operate than fossil fuel plants, because utilities dont need to buy more fuel to burn to make more electricity. That cost advantage means wind and solar energy get used first, so they can displace fossil-fuel generation even when EVs arent charging.
A virtuousor viciouscycle
Our analysis reveals that whats good for climate in the transportation sectoreliminating emissions from vehicle tailpipesis also good for climate in the power sector, supporting more investment in clean power and displacing more fossil fuel-powered generation.
As a result, encouraging electric vehicle adoption is even better for the climate than many people expected because EV charging can actually cause lower-emitting power plants to be built.
Gasoline vehicles cant last forever. The cheap oil will eventually run out. And EV batteries have gotten so cheap, with ranges now comparable to gas cars, that the global transition is already well underway. Even in the U.S., consumers are adopting more EVs as the technology improves and offers consumers more for less. The U.S. government cant single-handedly stop this transitionit can only decide how much to lead, lag, or resist. Rolling back electric vehicle incentives now means higher emissions, less clean energy investment, and weaker U.S. competitiveness in a crucial industry of the future.
Our findings show that slowing electric vehicle adoption doesnt just affect emissions from transportation. It also misses opportunities to help build a cleaner power sector, potentially locking the U.S. into higher emissions from its top two highest-emitting sectorspower generation and transportationwhile the window to avoid the worst effects of climate change is closing.
Jeremy J. Michalek is a professor of engineering & public policy, professor of mechanical engineering at Carnegie Mellon University.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The aftermath of the assassination of Charlie Kirk in Orem, Utah, has been a maelstrom of misinformation and hatred, revealing how polarized social media and the past decade of digital conflict have left us. One of the most unsettling signs that something fundamental has broken in our sense of reality comes from a seemingly trivial detail: Donald Trumps pinky finger.
In a White House statement mourning Kirks death, many viewers focused less on the presidents words than on the video itself. The high-contrast footage was scrutinized for evidence that it had been manipulated by artificial intelligence, and some viewers claimed they found undeniable proof.
At one point in the clip, Trumps left pinky finger appears to merge with the others as he clasps his hands on the desk. Conspiracy theorists have seized on this, arguing it showed the president as proof that Trump didnt make the statement at all, or that it was highly doctored.
The reality is far more prosaic. A mix of the Trump White Houses preferred color tinting, combined with the low resolution and compression of digital video on social media, can cause frames to collapse or distort. Compression adds digital artifacts. Put it all together and you end up with something that makes a metaphorical mountain out of a molehill.
Before rushing to dismiss those who are crying foul, it helps to consider the broader context. Such conspiratorial thinking is easier to understand in a world awash with generative AI. When AI image and video generation tools that are capable of producing something not dissimilar to the Trump video are just a Google search away, it becomes easy to question everything.
Seeing is no longer believing. Early signs of this shift have already disrupted public discourse. When Catherine, the Princess of Wales, revealed her cancer diagnosis in a video shared on social media in March 2024, it was done so as a way to quell rumors that she had died. Even with video proof, many people insisted it was AI-generated.
At that time, the technology was not advanced enough to make such a fabrication plausible. Since then, though, tools have improved dramatically. The release of Googles Gemini AI image generator (nicknamed Nano Banana during its development) made it possible to create images nearly indistinguishable from reality. Paired with new video-generation systems, it is now entirely feasible to replicate the look of Trumps official White House video. In fact, it could be done quickly and cheaply.
These powerful tools have been a gift in many respects. Yet they are also unraveling our shared sense of reality. Add them to the toxicity of our modern discourse, and the cracks in public trust deepen into fractures. What counts as real is no longer obvious even to the most attentive observer. And that should alarm us all.
