PR in the Philippines

This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up to get stories like this sent to your inbox. Former President Donald Trump has faced at least two credible assassination attempts this election year. The most recent incident, on Sunday at one of his golf clubs in Florida, was not as close as the one that injured him at a Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally on July 13. However, it was still a real and immediate threat – a fully loaded assault rifle allegedly held by Ryan Wesley Routh from 400 yards away, targeting the leader of the Republican Party, with the potential to disrupt American politics and history. This incident is just the latest in a series of events that have shaken the nation this summer. Two weeks before the attack on Trump's life in Butler, President Joe Biden triggered a crisis within the Democratic Party with his struggling debate performance. A week after the attack, Biden withdrew his bid for a second term, paving the way for Vice President Kamala Harris to quickly consolidate her party's support and reset the competition for the presidency. Over the following weeks, details emerged about two international plots to disrupt the election – one from Iran, which had initiated operations to hack Trump's campaign and potentially harm him, and another from Russia seeking to influence public opinion and erode faith in the voting process. Any one of these shocking events would warrant extensive historical analysis. However, taken together, they seem less impactful than the sum of their individual parts. They form a series of developments that blend into one another, diminishing the urgency of each and numbing the shock that accompanies them. But the recent attempt on Trump's life cannot be treated as another routine event. American democracy, at its best, is based on the strength of arguments, the character of its leaders, and the collective judgment of the nation. When the threat of political violence, or even its actual occurrence, becomes normalized, democracy itself is undermined. It is therefore crucial for the public to understand that these assassination attempts this summer are seen as an attack on patriots of all political persuasions, especially given their uncertain impact.  There are parallels between this moment and 1968, an election year that was similarly consumed by extreme politics. Lyndon Johnson faced a rebellion within his Democratic Party over American involvement in Vietnam, leading him to step down. After a tumultuous period, the new nominee, Hubert Humphrey, bypassed the primaries altogether and secured the nomination at a Chicago convention amidst street violence. Meanwhile, Republicans chose to stick with an imperfect but familiar figure – former Vice President Richard Nixon – while also considering a promising young politician from California named Ronald Reagan. As public opinion soured on the war, the frustrations of the Civil Rights movement boiled over in the face of ongoing and persistent inequality. The assassinations of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy shattered the faith millions of Americans had in their nation's ability to engage in peaceful debate and the transfer of power. By the time 1968 was in the past, the standards of what Americans expected from their leaders had shifted significantly, ultimately reshaping both parties and their interactions with the country. Democrats embraced the emerging coalitions from the anti-war and Civil Rights marches while shedding their Dixiecrat roots. Republicans recognized the value of early culture war skirmishes and began to assist some Christian groups in gaining political influence. The political center fractured as both parties started to move toward polarity, setting the stage for the country's first significant political reset in the post-World War II era. It is easy to lose perspective amidst such historical events. During a flood of information, prioritizing news becomes a survival mechanism as much as a civic duty. We all find ways to cope with crises, and overlooking complicated and contradictory moments is the most common response. As the threat of political violence pervades so much of this election season, this "nothing to see here" attitude is understandable. However, our leaders' responses should be held to a higher standard. A day after federal officials shot and arrested alleged would-be assassin Routh, Trump thanked the U.S. Secret Service, the local sheriff, and law enforcement officers for their swift action in spotting a rifle sticking out from the treeline. However, he also quickly blamed Biden and Harris for both recent attempts on his life, accusing them of using heated political attacks that have portrayed Trump as a fundamental threat to democracy. "Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country, and they are the ones that are destroying the country," the former President stated, using much of the same rhetoric that helped his polling and fundraising surge after the attempt on his life at a rally in Pennsylvania. At the White House, Biden briefly addressed the potential shooting, telling reporters Monday morning that the Secret Service "needs more help. And I think Congress should respond to their need." Over the weekend – but before the drama at Trump's golf course – Biden had blamed his predecessor for the escalating tensions in the country. He specifically cited Springfield, Ohio, where leaders are dealing with bomb threats and other threats of violence as Trump continues to make unsubstantiated claims that Haitian immigrants are preying on residents' dogs and cats. Biden pointedly said "any President should reject hate in America" and "not incite it." America is a deeply divided nation, just as it was in 1968. And because election-year events like those 56 years ago and today can alter the course of the country, Americans deserve leaders who will responsibly guide a path through the disruption towards a new political consensus. Make sense of what matters in Washington. .

Every act of generosity and volunteerism strengthens our social fabric. Civil society is the bedrock of America's strength. We have a history of generosity rooted in the collective efforts of millions of everyday Americans who dedicate their time and resources to causes they care about, collectively creating monumental social good. This fundamental aspect of our identity goes beyond meeting local needs. Everyday giving and volunteering mobilize communities around shared values. It bridges divides and fosters connections. It empowers us to imagine—and build—a better future. It encourages broad civic engagement—the kind that is vital for a thriving democracy. Despite the enduring strength of overall giving in America, underlying data raises concerns. While total contributions have increased year-over-year, fewer Americans are making those contributions. According to Indiana University’s , 2018 marked the first time in their research that less than half of households reported any charitable giving. More recent data from shows this decline continued post-pandemic–in 2021, fewer people donated to nonprofit groups than did so in 2019. Similarly, found that the rate of volunteering had fallen from 30% in 2019 to 23% in 2021—the steepest decline in the history of their research, going back to 2002. These numbers are concerning, but they also serve as a call to action and a pathway toward a stronger future. We are the co-chairs of the Generosity Commission, a blue-ribbon panel of social sector leaders committed to highlighting the vital role of what we call “everyday givers and volunteers,” celebrating their efforts, and encouraging others to join them. The Commission’s capstone report, “Everyday Actions, Extraordinary Potential: The Power of Giving and Volunteering,” released today, proposes several hypotheses to explain the steep decline in giving to and volunteering with nonprofits. Economic hardship is a primary factor. Moreover, our systems are not designed to encourage everyday giving and volunteering. Tax incentives for charitable giving, for instance, are not available for those who can only contribute smaller amounts. Our report points to other possible social factors, including , the decline in religious and civic connection, and a general decrease in social trust. These factors paint a complex picture of generosity today—and underscore the civic power and potential of the act of giving and volunteering. In fact, everyday giving—of money or time—is a leading indicator of other forms of civic engagement. The University of Maryland’s Do Good Institute, in research commissioned by the Generosity Commission, found that generous, or “pro-social” behaviors tend to cluster. Individuals who volunteer and donate are more likely to participate in organized groups and even to. In an era of sharp polarization and widespread loneliness, it’s hard to imagine something more critical. We recognize that giving and volunteering are the primary ways Americans practice the essential human endeavor of working together for a greater purpose; that they serve as an indispensable foundation of connection. It turns out, they are also fundamental pillars of our democracy. To further expand the base of American generosity, we need to engage all segments of our society. Businesses can contribute by encouraging employees to give and volunteer, and by developing their own social impact programs. Engaging public figures, community leaders, and business leaders, and encouraging them to speak publicly about how and why they participate in their communities can create a ripple effect. Taking younger generations seriously and empowering their innovative impulses can build a stronger foundation for future participation.  Further research into the evolving nature of generosity, and making research more accessible, are also crucial components in any effort to reverse our current trajectory. In this endeavor, charitable organizations of all sizes can be further empowered to dedicate resources to encourage everyday giving and volunteering, so that they can reach everyday givers and volunteers at the grassroots level instead of being driven to only seek support from larger donors. While the challenges facing civil society are significant, they are not insurmountable. Significant, coordinated actions across our society—like the recommendations outlined in this report—can reengage Americans in the time-honored tradition of supporting each other through nonprofit groups, and inducting new generations into the same. All sectors, media organizations, academic institutions, and each one of us, have a role to play in this effort. In an era where we disagree more on a shared vision for our future than ever before, few endeavors could be more worthwhile.

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, announced on Monday that it will ban RT and other Russian state media from its platforms globally. This decision comes after the State Department imposed sanctions on Kremlin-backed news organizations. “After careful consideration, we expanded our ongoing enforcement against Russian state media outlets: Rossiya Segodnya, RT and other related entities are now banned from our apps globally for foreign interference activity,” Meta stated in a statement provided to TIME. Prior to the ban, RT had over 7 million followers on Facebook, while its Instagram account had over a million followers. This action represents an escalation of measures Meta implemented in 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. These measures included labeling and downranking posts containing links to Russian state-controlled media outlets, demonetizing their accounts, and prohibiting them from running ads. The company also complied with requests from the E.U. and U.K. governments to restrict access to RT and Sputnik in those territories. In March 2022, Russia retaliated by blocking access to Facebook and Instagram within its borders.  Meta’s latest actions follow a statement by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who asserted that the U.S. government has concluded that Rossiya Segodnya and five of its subsidiaries, including RT, “are no longer merely firehoses of Russian Government propaganda and disinformation; they are engaged in covert influence activities aimed at undermining American elections and democracies, functioning like a de facto arm of Russia’s intelligence apparatus.” Sanctions were imposed on RT’s parent company TV-Novosti, as well as on Rossiya Segodnya and its general director Dmitry Kiselyov. The State Department also issued a notice describing them as “.” Dmitry Peskov, spokesperson for Russian President Vladimir Putin, dismissed the State Department’s allegations as “nonsense.” Meta’s new global ban echoes a similar YouTube on Russian state-funded media channels, while TikTok and X (formerly Twitter) block access to RT and Sputnik in the E.U. and U.K.

At a recent event in San Francisco, prominent figures in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) gathered to discuss the technology's potential to transform our world. Among the panelists were inventor and futurist Ray Kurzweil, researcher and Brookings Institution fellow Chinasa T. Okolo, director of the U.S. Artificial Safety Institute (AISI) Elizabeth Kelly, and Cognizant CEO Ravi Kumar S. TIME's editor-in-chief, Sam Jacobs, moderated the discussion. Kurzweil expressed his belief that we will achieve Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), a form of AI capable of exceeding human intelligence, by 2029. He acknowledged the widespread skepticism surrounding AI, stating, "Nobody really took it seriously until now. People are convinced it’s going to either endow us with things we’d never had before, or it’s going to kill us." Cognizant sponsored the event, which celebrated the 100 most influential individuals driving change in the AI landscape. The gathering highlighted the contributions of computer scientists, business leaders, policymakers, advocates, and others at the forefront of this evolving industry. Jacobs engaged the panelists, three of whom were included in the 2024 list, in a dialogue about the opportunities and challenges presented by AI's rapid advancement. Kumar discussed the potential economic impact of generative AI, citing a study by Cognizant that projected generative AI could contribute over a trillion dollars annually to the US economy by 2032. He identified key obstacles hindering widespread adoption, including the need for improved accuracy, cost-effectiveness, responsible AI practices, and explainable outputs. "If you don’t get productivity," he said, "task automation is not going to lead to a business case stacking up behind it." Okolo highlighted the growth of AI initiatives in Africa and the Global South, citing the work of professor Vukosi Marivate from the University of Pretoria in South Africa, who has inspired a new generation of researchers within and outside the continent. However, Okolo acknowledged the uneven progress in diversifying the languages used to train AI models, with grassroots communities in Africa leading the charge despite limited support and funding. Kurzweil expressed his excitement about the potential of simulated biology to revolutionize drug discovery and development. By simulating billions of interactions within days, he noted, researchers can accelerate the process of finding treatments for diseases like cancer and Alzheimer's. He also offered a long-term perspective on the exponential growth of computational power, predicting a steeper S-curve (a gradual start followed by rapid growth before leveling off) for AI disruption compared to previous technological revolutions.  Kelly addressed concerns about AI's potential for content manipulation in the context of the 2024 elections and beyond. "It’s going to matter this year, but it’s going to matter every year more and more as we move forward," she noted. She added that AISI is working to advance the science behind detecting synthetically generated content and authenticating genuine information. Kelly also pointed out that lawmakers have been focusing on AI's risks and benefits for some time, with initiatives like the AI Bill of Rights and the AI Risk Management Framework. "The president likes to use the phrase ‘promise and peril,’ which I think pretty well captures it, because we are incredibly excited about stimulant biology and drug discovery and development while being aware of the flip side risks," she said. As the panel concluded, Okolo urged attendees, which included nearly 50 other prominent figures and present TIME100 AI honorees, to consider critically how they develop and apply AI and to strive to ensure that its benefits reach underrepresented regions in a positive manner.  “A lot of times you talk about the benefits that AI has brought, you know, to people. And a lot of these people are honestly concentrated in one region of the world,” she said. "We really have to look back, or maybe, like, step back and think broader," she implored, encouraging industry leaders to think about individuals from Africa to South America to South Asia and Southeast Asia. "How can they benefit from these technologies, without necessarily exploiting them in the process?" The TIME100 Impact Dinner: Leaders Shaping the Future of AI was presented by Cognizant and Northern Data Group.

LIMA — Wildfires in Peru have resulted in at least 15 fatalities and the burning of over 3,000 hectares (11.58 sq. mi.) of cultivated land and natural areas, authorities reported on Monday. Prime Minister Gustavo Adrianzén informed reporters that the fires were ignited by human activity and that 22 out of the 24 regions comprising the country are experiencing active outbreaks. He further mentioned that clouds, smoke, and winds are hindering the effectiveness of aircraft deployed to combat the fires. A Civil Defense report reviewed by the Associated Press reveals that since July, at least 15 individuals have perished, and another 98 have sustained injuries as a consequence of the fires. Among the fatalities, 10 occurred in the past two weeks, and more than 1,800 people have been affected. The livestock sector has reported the loss of 334 animals. Peru’s National Forest and Wildlife Service, SERFOR, has indicated that the impacts of climate change exacerbate conditions that facilitate the spread of fire. “Extremely strong winds and prolonged droughts dry out vegetation, transforming it into highly flammable fuel,” explained Romina Liza, a specialist in monitoring and management of forest Fires at SERFOR. “This enables the fire to spread rapidly.” Some of the most challenging fires are situated in the Amazon region, which shares a border with Ecuador, as disclosed by the head of civil defense, Juan Urcariegui, to a local television station.

The statistics are alarming. Worldwide, 48 million children face stunted growth, 45 million suffer from wasting, and nearly half of all child deaths are attributed to malnutrition. “Even for children who survive [malnutrition], their ability to reach their full physical and mental potential is significantly impacted, affecting their quality of life and the development of their country,” says Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. “Sadly, in Africa, 40% of children never achieve their full physical or mental development.” Each year, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation highlights a critical issue in its Goalkeepers Report, one with a significant unmet need and for which the organization offers proven, actionable solutions. This year, the focus is on childhood malnutrition and its lifelong consequences. Addressing nutritional deficiencies in young children enables more children to attend and remain in school. A more educated population drives economic progress, explains Gates. The report outlines several strategies to combat nutritional deficiencies globally, ranging from direct interventions to boosting food production methods in various countries. One of the most straightforward approaches involves fortifying existing food staples, such as salt, oil, and bouillon cubes, commonly used in low-resource households to enhance flavor. Fortifying bouillon cubes with iron, folic acid, zinc, and vitamin B12, for example, could prevent 16.6 million cases of anemia annually in Nigeria. Folic acid is already incorporated into staples like wheat and other flours, but adding it to iodized salt could significantly reduce the risk of neural tube defects in newborns. The Ethiopian government is exploring such an approach, which could prevent 75% of deaths and stillbirths caused by these defects. These defects typically occur in the first month of pregnancy and result in nerve damage that contributes to learning disabilities, paralysis, and death. Another strategy centers around food fortification: expanding the distribution of , a complete set of 15 prenatal vitamins and minerals established by the United Nations that are crucial for early fetal development and maternal health. If current low- and middle-income countries provided these supplements to expectant mothers, the Foundation estimates that nearly half a million lives could be saved by 2040. These supplements can reduce the risk of low birthweight babies, increasing their vulnerability to other health conditions and the likelihood of developing anemia. They could also lower stillbirth and maternal mortality rates. Beyond directly providing nutrients to infants or pregnant women, the Foundation also advocates for long-term strategies to sustain nutritious food supplies. These include adopting agricultural practices and breeding animals commonly used in developed countries to enhance egg production in chickens and milk production in cows. “Chickens [and cows] in the West produce four times more eggs and milk than those in Africa,” says Gates. “By combining this productivity with key tolerance and disease resistance in African animals, we can create chickens and cows with higher egg and milk output. As the cost of eggs decreases, more children will have access to them.” Approximately 80% of cows in Kenya produce only 2 liters of milk per day, but this is changing as farmers breed more productive cows and utilize higher-quality crop waste for feed. This has led to some Kenyan cows producing six to 10 times more milk than before. By boosting dairy productivity in just five African countries, the Foundation estimates that 109 million cases of stunted growth could be prevented by 2050. Gates emphasizes that these interventions are deliberately easy and affordable for countries to adopt. Prenatal supplements, for instance, cost $2.60 to provide for a woman’s entire pregnancy. However, overall aid reductions over the past two decades mean that progress made in the 2000s is being reversed or threatened. “I would say that the financial challenges African countries face in funding primary health care are the most significant obstacle,” says Gates regarding the hurdles to implementing even these relatively simple solutions. “I'm not as concerned about research efforts [to discover more interventions]; we're not in a research crisis. The crisis lies in the need for affordable aid budgets.” Gates asserts that a mere 1% to 2% of the budgets of wealthier nations could be allocated to save around $1,000 per life in the poorest countries. “This should be achievable, but we must have a value system where voters prioritize spending 1% to 2% to help people in distant lands,” he says. “Demonstrating success can encourage voters to prioritize what I believe is a moral imperative, but it also offers other benefits like preventing conflicts, pandemics, and fostering strong economic relationships. A thriving Africa is beneficial for the entire world.” He points to Asian countries that have successfully transitioned out of poverty and now primarily rely on internal resources to fund their primary health care systems. “We’ve witnessed this in Asia, particularly in Indonesia, Vietnam, and India, where they are able to fund primary health care through their own tax base. We aspire to create similar success stories in Africa.” However, shifting global priorities, coupled with conflicts in various parts of the world, including eastern Europe and the Middle East, have resulted in shrinking aid budgets, especially for initiatives aimed at lifting African countries out of poverty. “The situation is quite dire right now,” he states regarding the continent's health and nutrition needs. “We must renew our ability to tell this story. While we acknowledge the significance of the war in Ukraine and turmoil in the Middle East—I’m not downplaying those situations at all—it’s unfortunate that Africa has, to some extent, fallen off the agenda, and this is reflected in aid figures. We have the capacity to address 40% of global malnutrition with the existing interventions.”