PR in the Philippines

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced Thursday that President Trump supports Health and Human Services Director RFK Jr.’s decision to dismiss the head of the U.S. health agency responsible for preventing disease outbreaks. This endorsement followed a day of turmoil at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where Director Susan Monarez, a Trump appointee and veteran government scientist, was dismissed alongside other officials. Monarez, whose appointment as the CDC's new head was confirmed by the Senate in July, asserts via her lawyers that her termination resulted from a dispute over the scientific validity of directives issued by Kennedy. Her removal was unexpectedly announced late Wednesday on the Health and Human Services' X social media account. In a statement, Monarez's attorneys, Mark Zaid and Abbe Lowell, claimed she was targeted for refusing to “rubberstamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated health experts.” They further contended that her dismissal indicates a broader attempt to weaken scientific institutions within the nation for political motives. “It is about the systematic dismantling of public health institutions, the silencing of experts, and the dangerous politicization of science,” their statement read. Leavitt informed reporters that President Trump terminated Monarez after she declined Kennedy's request for her resignation. Leavitt stated, “Her lawyers’ statement made it abundantly clear themselves that she was not aligned with the President’s vision to make America healthy again.” She added, “The President has the authority to fire those who are not aligned with his mission.” CDC's chief medical officer, Deb Houry, along with other senior CDC officials, also resigned on Wednesday. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders characterized Monarez's firing as a “dangerous” decision, advocating for an investigation into her dismissal and pressing Senator Bill Cassidy, the lead Republican on the Senate's health committee, to convene a hearing regarding her exit. Leaders at the C.D.C. have increasingly found themselves at odds with Kennedy regarding his health policy vision, particularly concerning vaccines. A crucial CDC panel responsible for vaccine recommendations is scheduled to convene in mid-September and may vote on criteria for vaccines to protect against COVID-19, Hepatitis B, MMRV, and RSV, according to a preliminary agenda. On Thursday, Cassidy urgently called for the postponement of the vaccine panel’s next meeting, citing “serious allegations” about the scientific process being followed leading up to it. Cassidy stated, “These decisions directly impact children’s health and the meeting should not occur until significant oversight has been conducted.” Leavitt conveyed that Trump and Kennedy “are committed to restoring trust and credibility to the CDC by ensuring their leadership and decisions are more public-facing, more accountable, protecting our public health systems, and returning the agency to its core mission of shielding Americans from communicable diseases, investing in innovation, and preventing and responding to future threats.” During his first term, Trump himself regularly pushed to accelerate the production of COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic via the Operation Warp Speed program. Yet, he has thus far endorsed Kennedy's efforts to scale back federal vaccine guidelines and question established scientific consensus concerning the benefits of vaccines, not only for COVID-19, but also for polio, measles, and other diseases. Kennedy Jr. voiced concerns Thursday about potential additional disruptions at the CDC, informing Fox News that the agency is “in trouble and we need to fix it.” He added that some individuals at the CDC “should not be working there any more.” Kennedy became critical of Monarez less than a month after she officially assumed her role. At Monarez’s swearing-in ceremony on July 31, Kennedy had commended her “unimpeachable scientific credentials” and expressed “full confidence in her ability to restore the CDC’s role as the most trusted authority in public health.” His trust in her and her scientific expertise, however, lasted less than a month.

Humanity finds itself in a lamentable state, a condition that Yorgos Lanthimos’s intensely dark comedy, Bugonia—making its debut at the Venice Film Festival—eagerly highlights. Is it not apparent? Many people now shun traditional news sources, instead embracing ever-more bizarre conspiracy theories to validate their existing perspectives. We blindly concede to corporate authority figures even as they exploit us. Individuals once considered rational are increasingly succumbing to irrationality. Furthermore, the film points out the alarming decline of bees, crucial pollinators for one-third of global food production. These circumstances certainly provide ample reason for despair regarding the human condition, yet Lanthimos chooses to articulate his frustration in a distinctly ostentatious and self-congratulatory manner. To borrow from a classic Peanuts strip, Lanthimos possesses a fondness for humankind, but struggles with people themselves. Bugonia commences with a narrative and its two central figures: Jesse Plemons portrays Teddy, a melancholic individual enduring a soul-crushing, mundane occupation, who nurtures a passion for bees, which he keeps in the garden of his slightly dilapidated dwelling. He perceives himself as someone privy to profound truths—having diligently *researched* everything online—and endeavors to educate his impressionable, potentially intellectually challenged cousin, Donny (Aidan Delbis), on his findings. Teddy is consumed by anguish; he witnessed his ailing mother (briefly played by Radhika Apte) endure a supposed medical intervention that ultimately left her comatose, and her suffering has unhinged him. Nevertheless, he has devised a strategy to rectify matters. Together, Teddy informs Donny, they will rescue the world. He puts Donny through a rigorous physical regimen to build strength and subjects him to a form of chemical emasculation, asserting that neither of them must be diverted from their quest by conventional sexual desires. Donny, who harbors hopes of one day "being with someone," is disheartened by this, but proceeds with the plan nonetheless. Teddy’s scheme involves abducting Emma Stone’s Michelle Fuller, the callous CEO of a massive technology corporation that transparently prioritizes profit over people. His motive, however, transcends mere personal retribution. Teddy is convinced that Michelle is an extraterrestrial entity from Andromeda, dispatched to Earth with destructive intentions. Once he and Donny have secured her in their basement—after first shaving her head to prevent the Andromedans from employing advanced technology to track her via DNA—Teddy plans to compel her to summon her mothership, allowing him access to negotiate Earth’s liberation with her alien masters. This description might suggest Bugonia offers a degree of dark entertainment—and indeed, the film features some exaggerated, visceral gore involving exploding bodies—yet Lanthimos deliberately amplifies the story’s raw, brutal aspects. Bugonia is a modern interpretation of Jang Joon-hwan’s 2003 science-fiction comedy *Save the Green Planet.* (Its script was penned by Will Tracy, known for his work on series like *Succession* and *Last Week Tonight with John Oliver,* and for the 2022 culinary satire *The Menu.)* Lanthimos frequently collaborates with actors he clearly values, and for good reason: Plemons and Stone were both featured in his previous film, 2024’s laborious and bleak triptych *Kinds of Kindness. They are undeniably skilled performers who demonstrate a clear understanding of their craft. However, in Bugonia, Lanthimos unleashes his cold, impassive sadism. It is presumably intended to be morbidly amusing to observe Teddy administering 400 volts of electricity through the restrained and gagged Michelle, all while Green Day’s “Basket Case” blares at maximum volume to drown out her cries. Lanthimos and expert cinematographer Robbie Ryan film the scene subtly, allowing sound to convey more than visuals. Yet, should audiences truly desire to witness any character portrayed by Stone—or any actor, for that matter—subjected to such brutality? Lanthimos, it seems, cannot resist. Some will argue that Lanthimos’s films either resonate with you or they don’t, subtly implying that if you recoil from his work, you lack the necessary sophistication. This argument should be dismissed. Lanthimos’s cinematic creations seldom possess the profoundness or significance he appears to ascribe to them. Nevertheless, he remains a filmmaker one cannot entirely dismiss. Occasionally, he delivers a pleasant surprise, such as *The Lobster,* which tenderly explores the somber realities of human loneliness with the wandering grace of a hermit crab seeking refuge, or the fantastical and peculiar *Poor Things,* a magnificent showcase for Emma Stone’s intellect and physical ingenuity. Stone is an audacious, inventive actor. She is capable of anything, but that does not mean she should undertake every role. Her performance in Bugonia is outstanding; she is cuttingly humorous in her portrayal of a ruthless executive, impatiently rushing through the recording of a diversity-training video, and compellingly convincing, with her closely shaven head, as a cunning Joan of Arc determined to outmaneuver her captors. Her true moment of brilliance arrives in the film’s unexpected conclusion, which, largely due to her portrayal, evokes a sense of tenderness and melancholy. Yet, Lanthimos grants us the grace of this ending only after subjecting us to considerable strain, perhaps even a degree of tedium, along the way. The world is far from idyllic, and Lanthimos is sounding the alarm. One merely wishes he would convey a truth we haven't already grasped.

Effective August 29, the Trump Administration plans to levy duties on consignments valued below $800, a category previously excluded under a de minimis rule. This alteration is set to increase the cost of numerous common products, ranging from sports equipment to small gifts. Lower-income Americans are expected to experience the most significant effects of this price hike. While some observers consider the de minimis exception a loophole needing closure, asserting it permits an influx of inexpensive items into the U.S. without duties, in reality, this policy shift will add another layer of tariffs to an existing detrimental trade strategy, thereby exacerbating inflation. Essentially, this choice exacerbates an unfavorable policy with another, based on the erroneous belief that such actions are justifiable. Rather than imposing higher duties on smaller consignments, the Administration ought to reduce tariffs on larger ones, which would decrease prices, broaden consumer options, and enable Americans to gain from international trade benefits. The de minimis exception began in the past, initially exempting parcels under $1 to "prevent costs and difficulties for the Government." Gradually, this threshold was raised to its present $800. Following its temporary suspension during Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement in April, the Administration restored the de minimis provision in early May for all trading partners except China. With the rise in the de minimis exception limit, an increasing number of businesses have utilized this provision; last year, more than 1 billion packages entered the U.S. through the de minimis exemption. However, due to the small size of these consignments, averaging just $47.50 in value, de minimis imports constituted only 2% of the approximately $3.2 trillion in total imported merchandise. Advocates have attempted to validate the Administration’s extensive tariff program by claiming these duties will invigorate American manufacturing and generate significant government income. Nevertheless, a considerable number of products affected by this policy shift—like footwear, plastic playthings, and rain coverings—are not economically sensible for our nation to produce. Is it truly believed that our industrial foundation can be rebuilt by manufacturing $6 sandals? Furthermore, while the de minimis exemption encompasses numerous items, the low value of these consignments means the tariff revenue generated will be relatively small. In spite of the administration’s stated commitment to government efficiency, this policy adjustment risks becoming a bureaucratic quagmire. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has not addressed several critical implementation details, including the methods for collecting these customs fees and the data businesses will need to provide. Consequently, various shipping providers, such as, have initiated a halt on transporting commercial parcels to the United States, and the postal agencies of more than 30 nations, including the United Kingdom, Germany, India, and Singapore, have indicated intentions to temporarily pause shipments awaiting clearer guidance. Apart from these operational challenges, imposing tariffs on consignments valued under $800 will unfairly affect America’s most financially vulnerable households. Lower-income Americans acquire a greater proportion of items typically covered by de minimis exemptions, making them more susceptible to the price escalations resulting from this policy modification. Moreover, even individuals who do not buy imported products will suffer due to what economists term tariff spillovers. Previously, under the de minimis exemption, inexpensive imports exerted downward pressure on market prices. With the termination of this exemption, such price restraint will diminish, leading to a general rise in prices. Some might contend that removing the de minimis exception creates a fairer competitive environment among retailers. Indeed, it is accurate that specific retailers like Amazon and Temu have developed business models substantially dependent on the de minimis rule, gaining a competitive edge over those retailers obliged to pay tariffs on bigger consignments. However, abolishing the de minimis exception rectifies the competitive landscape incorrectly. Rather than increasing tariffs on smaller shipments, the Administration should instead reduce duties on larger ones. The elimination of the de minimis rule is projected to lead to increased bureaucratic difficulties and elevated costs, without providing equivalent advantages to local industries or achieving significant deficit reduction. Furthermore, retaining the de minimis exception represents only an initial stride towards sensible policy; lawmakers should reverse existing tariffs to enable Americans to enjoy the reduced prices and broader selections available through international commerce.

Typically, crime dramas, especially in today's fast-paced world, introduce their central crimes early, often with a murder occurring within the first five minutes. This is one of the unspoken conventions that HBO’s Task, premiering on Sept. 7, intentionally deviates from. The series, from Mare of Easttown creator Brad Ingelsby, commences with a sequence of ordinary moments depicting the lives of two individuals. A fatigued Tom Brandis (Mark Ruffalo) is shown in prayer, submerging his face in cold water, and taking Advil while driving. Meanwhile, a robust Robbie Prendergrast (Tom Pelphrey) carries his sleeping son to bed, prepares a large cup of coffee, and reacts to a dating app advertisement on the radio. These sensitive, parallel depictions serve to introduce the characters, whose similar situations and contrasting decisions constitute the series’ primary focus, rather than any homicide or enigma. Resembling Mare of Easttown, yet with a somewhat more sophisticated narrative structure, Task employs the framework of a detective story and the particularity of its rural Pennsylvania backdrop to delve into fundamental human dilemmas. While the earlier series highlighted the numerous ways women bear the burden of holding families and communities together (a theme also present in this new series), Ingelsby’s newest work meticulously examines themes of guilt, vengeance, and absolution. The two main characters of Task operate on different sides of the legal system. Robbie, still grieving a year after his wife departed, leaving him with their two children, is employed in sanitation alongside his close friend, Cliff (Raúl Castillo). Lately, they and another friend have been rendezvousing at night to commit robberies at trap houses. To prevent recognition by their targets, primarily members of a biker gang known as the Dark Hearts, the men wear Halloween masks; they display firearms but refrain from using violence. In the spectrum of felonies, the non-lethal armed robbery of drug dealers initially appears to be a lesser offense—until one victim manages to catch a glimpse of an attacker's face. At that moment, Robbie and his associates unexpectedly become involved in a murder. Tom, an experienced FBI agent assigned to recruitment fairs following the death of his wife, is selected to lead a specialized unit tasked with investigating these offenses. (This explains the series' uninspired name.) His team, assembled from various local law-enforcement agencies, comprises largely inexperienced members. Anthony (Fabien Frankel) engages in pleasant conversation, while Aleah (The Underground Railroad star Thuso Mbedu, deserving of more roles like this) maintains a serious, professional demeanor. Lizzie (Alison Oliver), a recently divorced young woman, appears to be struggling. Concurrently, Tom’s adopted son, Ethan (Andrew Russel), is incarcerated awaiting trial; Tom and his teenage daughter, Emily (Silvia Dionicio), who is Ethan’s biological sister, face the difficult choice of whether to stand by him in court despite the profound anguish he has inflicted upon their family. Although numerous parallels between Tom’s and Robbie’s lives become increasingly evident throughout the series, their most significant connections are discernible from the outset. Both individuals are devoted fathers who deeply cherish their children but have become somewhat adrift since the loss of their wives. (Tom’s coping mechanism involves excessive drinking, contrasting with Robbie’s criminal actions.) Contradicting their apparent tough personas, both also possess an unusual degree of gentleness, thoughtfulness, and vulnerability. The way these conflicting traits merge into credible characters is a testament to the performances of Ruffalo and particularly Pelphrey, whose poignant rendition of phrases such as “I need a life companion” possesses the power to deeply move the viewer. Occasionally, Task may excessively underscore the parallels between its two central figures, though Ingelsby’s thoughtful considerations never undermine a narrative that thrives primarily due to its intricately developed characters. This is not presented as a simple dichotomy of heroes against villains. While antagonists certainly materialize, the true, more uncommon, and less foreseeable conflicts arise from the internal battles of individuals whose commendable intentions collide with dire circumstances. This approach frees the series from the conventional crime-investigation-arrest narrative arc common to the genre, without diminishing its suspense. Instead, episodes are driven by escalating tensions surrounding the difficult decisions characters are compelled to make. It is straightforward to act virtuouslyuntil one is wronged. How does an upright individual react when those they hold dear are harmed? It is noteworthy that in a series extensively exploring male responsibilities and relationships, a considerable number of the richly complex characters are female. Similar to Mare of Easttown, young women are often compelled to mature prematurely due to the choices made by the men in their lives. Robbie has taken residence in the home of his deceased brother, whose 21-year-old daughter, Maeve (portrayed excellently by Emilia Jones), would depart the town immediately if her family were not dependent on the exhaustive domestic duties she carries out. Emily finds herself conflicted between the sense of obligation she feels towards Tom for adopting her and her loyalty to Ethan. Both Lizzie and Aleah possess greater depth than initially presented (though a more extensive exploration of Aleah’s personal life outside of her profession would have been welcome in Task). Task defies conventional expectations without adopting a judgmental tone. It recognizes that individuals who commit violent crimes can possess benevolent natures, that figures in law enforcement leadership may be as morally compromised as leaders of biker gangs, and that on occasion, following a tragic event, simply penalizing the individual ostensibly responsible does not always equate to true justice. In a nuanced yet profound declaration, particularly in an era where many Americans instinctively categorize strangers based on political affiliations, the series refrains from stereotyping its characters according to their social group. Tom, a former priest turned FBI agent, is portrayed as far from a perfect individual; indeed, such a depiction would render him uninteresting. The program’s focus on leniency, rather than justice as prescribed by an imperfect legal framework, aligns with Tom’s spiritual beliefs and the compassion it extends to every character. Even if characters cannot escape the repercussions of their most regrettable choices, they are able to strive to prevent those decisions from ultimately defining who they are.

Japanese politics, traditionally stable, have seen the center-right Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) govern nearly uninterrupted since 1955. However, the LDP's hold on power appears to be weakening, as Japan increasingly shows vulnerability to the populist trends observed in most other affluent countries. Last week, LDP officials convened to deliberate internal matters, coinciding with increasing demands for the incumbent Prime Minister's resignation. Momentum for his removal escalated after last month's Upper House elections for the national Diet, where the LDP faced challenges amidst significant gains by Sanseitō, a right-wing "Japanese First" party disseminating conspiracy theories. Sanseitō is spearheaded by Kamiya Sohei, a 47-year-old provocateur who describes himself as a "mini-Donald Trump." He has championed an agenda centered on anti-globalization and xenophobia—topics previously unpoliticized in a nation that greatly prospered from the post-war liberal international order and maintains a largely homogenous society. Saya, a singer-turned-Sanseitō candidate, advocated for mandatory conscription and the development of nuclear weapons—proposals typically anathema in a country deeply affected by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. She asserted, "Nuclear armament is one of the most inexpensive and effective measures to ensure safety," before the election. While such statements would have once been political suicide in pacifist Japan, her rallies were well-attended, and party volunteers actively distributed flyers and engaged with the public. Her campaign demonstrated an unparalleled level of grassroots mobilization. Sanseitō, which emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic, secured 7.4 million votes last month, making it the third-highest-polling party—significantly surpassing Komeito, the LDP's coalition partner, which received 5.2 million votes. Despite this, the party garnered a comparatively modest 15 seats in the Upper House and three in the more influential Lower House. This rapid five-year ascent is remarkable and suggests further growth may be anticipated. This rise is partly attributable to Kamiya's ability to capitalize on widespread discontent in Japan, particularly among those under 50 who are dissatisfied with the current state of affairs. A significant portion of the workforce remains in precarious, low-wage irregular employment, while wages have stagnated, and inflation has driven up prices due to Japan's substantial reliance on imports. These conditions have created an environment conducive to blaming foreigners, who now constitute approximately 3% of the population. While this percentage is relatively low for an affluent nation, it has increased considerably over the last decade, coinciding with a record surge in tourism in 2024. This occurs in a society where foreign presence was uncommon until recently. Against this backdrop, numerous younger Japanese express growing resentment over contributing high taxes to fund pensions and healthcare for the comparatively affluent older generation. This grievance has steered them towards proponents of change rather than the established mainstream parties. Certainly, traditional parties secured far more seats than this new entrant; however, all political factions are now hurrying to define their stances on immigration, largely in reaction to Sanseitō's rise. Within the LDP, some attribute the party's challenges to Ishiba's perceived moderation, suggesting it alienated right-wing voters and pushed them towards Sanseitō. Indeed, Sanseitō is an ultra-right party characterized by a stern ethno-nationalism. Nevertheless, a key asset for Sanseitō is Kamiya himself, who effectively connects with voters emotionally and seems to genuinely heed and address their concerns, unlike many other politicians. While some of his supporters may not fully endorse his extensive hard-right platform, they are drawn to his vibrant personality and have found a political home in his burgeoning party. Concurrently, Sanseitō and Kamiya are facing intensified media examination, and competing parties could easily enhance their own strategies. Earlier this month, a widely shared satirical piece severely ridiculing Sanseitō indicated a potential for curbing its growth. Furthermore, the LDP has a history of adopting positions from opposition parties. Sanseitō also confronts significant hurdles in establishing and maintaining a national movement, including Kamiya’s unpredictable and authoritarian leadership style. Some party members have voiced apprehension regarding its conspiracy theories and revisionist interpretations of Imperial Japan’s wartime past. Although the recent populist wave first gained traction in the U.S. and Europe, Japan largely maintained its centrist political stability, which many considered uneventful. However, the phenomenon of populism has now emerged in Japan, marking an irreversible change. A period characterized by increased division and confrontation appears imminent. The previous era of stability now seems far more appealing.

Kyiv's E.U. Mission and British Council premises sustained damage on Thursday following a lethal drone and missile assault by Russia on the Ukrainian capital. Tymur Tkachenko, the head of Kyiv’s Administration, reported that these strikes resulted in the deaths of at least 15 individuals, among them four children. U.K. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer condemned the "senseless" attacks, alleging that Russia was "sabotaging hopes of peace." He pleaded, "Putin is killing children and civilians... the bloodshed must cease." U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy reiterated Starmer's position and confirmed that they "have summoned the Russian Ambassador." Ursula von der Leyen, President of the E.U. Commission, denounced the attacks, which marked the first time the E.U. delegation had been hit. She stated, confirming the safety of E.U. mission staff, "Another night of Russia’s ceaseless bombardments targeted civilian infrastructure and claimed innocent lives... Russia must immediately halt its indiscriminate attacks on civilian infrastructure and engage in negotiations for a fair and enduring peace." António Costa, President of the European Council, expressed his "horror" at the assault and firmly stated that the "E.U. will not be intimidated." He pledged, "Russia's aggression only reinforces our commitment to stand in solidarity with Ukraine and its people." It was confirmed that its offices had "suffered considerable damage" due to the strikes and would remain closed indefinitely.  TIME requested additional comments from the British Council. An update released on Thursday morning indicated that Russia launched approximately 598 strike drones into Ukraine overnight into the early hours, alongside 31 missiles of various types from launch sites including Kursk and other areas. Tkachenko reported "significant damage to residential buildings in the Darnytsia and Dnipro districts," specifically mentioning a five-story residential block in Darnytsia that was "directly hit" and destroyed. Search and rescue efforts are ongoing in the Darnytsia district, located in the city's west. Following the volley of strikes, Ukrainian President reiterated his appeals for more stringent sanctions against Russia. He declared, "It is now imperative that the world reacts decisively. Russia must cease this war it initiated and persists with. Given its rejection of a cease-fire and continuous efforts to evade negotiations, new robust sanctions are essential." The Russian Ministry of Defence stated that it had targeted sites "within Ukraine's military-industrial complex" and that "all designated objectives were struck." The Ministry also reported intercepting and destroying 102 Ukrainian drones within Russian territory overnight. Yury Slyusar, acting Governor of the Rostov Region, indicated that 21 drones were neutralized in the Samara and Rostov regions, leading to the reported evacuation of 89 residents due to the "threat of detonation." Russia's intense attacks on Ukraine follow a " " summit earlier this month in Alaska between U.S. President Donald Trump and Putin.  This meeting, the first direct encounter between Trump and Putin, aimed to facilitate discussions on a potential cease-fire, but concluded prematurely and, significantly, without any agreement. Subsequently, Trump met with Zelensky and prominent European leaders, including Starmer, at the White House to deliberate on potential next steps. Concurrently, Zelensky’s European allies are prepared to "escalate pressure" on Russia. Starmer stated in mid-August, "We are indeed ready to increase pressure on Russia, especially on its economy, through sanctions and broader measures as deemed necessary." He added, "It's vital that we all persist in collaborating with Presidents Trump and Zelensky for a just and lasting peace in Ukraine."

Today marks the unveiling of TIME's third annual TIME100 AI roster, spotlighting the one hundred most impactful individuals in the field of artificial intelligence. The 2025 TIME100 AI edition features a global cover, showcasing a unique photo illustration crafted by artist and list honoree, Refik Anadol. For this cover, TIME provided Anadol with over 5,000 historical TIME covers, enabling his AI to envision a new cover specifically for the TIME100 AI issue. The resultant abstract visual encapsulates the AI "dreaming" through a century of TIME's visual heritage, as Anadol conveyed to TIME. Explore TIME's discussion with Anadol regarding his creative methodology. Accompanying the TIME100 AI are extensive profiles and conversations with prominent figures such as Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince, Asteria Film Co. co-founder Natasha Lyonne, OpenAI Head of model behavior Joanne Jang, and IASEAI co-founder Stuart Russell. –View the complete 2025 TIME100 AI list: –Discover the TIME100 AI cover, featuring the photo illustration by Refik Anadol: In compiling this prestigious list, TIME’s editorial and reporting teams dedicated several months to researching potential candidates, gathering input from industry leaders and numerous expert sources. This meticulous process culminated in a selection of 100 leaders, innovators, architects, and visionaries actively shaping our AI-driven future. Access the full TIME100 AI list here: ‘TIME100 IMPACT DINNER’ TO CELEBRATE LEADERS ADVANCING THE FUTURE OF AI**: On October 13th in San Francisco, TIME will host the *TIME100 Impact Dinner: Leaders Shaping the Future of AI*. This event aims to celebrate leaders, innovators, and forward-thinkers who are influencing the future of artificial intelligence, including those recognized on the 2025 TIME100 AI list. The evening will include discussions exploring AI’s influence across various industries and society, featuring list members who are instrumental in guiding this transformative technology. The *TIME100 Impact Dinner: Leaders Shaping the Future of AI* is proudly presented by Premier Partner PepsiCo, with additional support from Signature Partners Cognizant, General Catalyst, and Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.. ###

This year's TIME cover was created by artist Refik Anadol, who is also featured on the TIME100 AI list. Anadol trained his studio's AI using TIME's archive of over 5,000 covers from the past century. The resulting abstract artwork, with Anadol's signature flowing, molecular style, depicts the AI's "dream" of TIME's visual history, according to Anadol. Anadol and his team developed a modular multimodal AI system, the "Archive Dream," through extensive research and collaboration. Anadol's studio states that the model was trained on a large, ethically sourced dataset of the natural world, incorporating over half a billion images from organizations like the National Geographic Society, the Smithsonian Institution, and London's Natural History Museum, along with data from 16 rainforests. Anadol, whose work has been shown at MoMA in New York, London's Serpentine Galleries, and the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, collaborated with tech companies Nvidia and Google Cloud, which provided computing resources. Models like Meta's Llama and Google's Gemini also play roles in the system. The AI model analyzed each TIME cover, extracting thematic and historical data, which was then used as a prompt. Anadol explained that they operated the system in two modes: "future cover" and "archive dream." The first mode aimed to use "the patterns of the past hundred years to generate pathways to hopeful futures," envisioning hypothetical covers featuring future heroes who might use AI to solve historical problems. Some covers featured people in jobs that don't yet exist, such as a "symbiotic architect" or a "chief memory curator." Anadol asks, "Can we use AI to dream new jobs? Can we use AI to find solutions to problems we created?" While these imagined futures influenced the project's concept, the final cover was created using the "archive dream" mode, representing a synthesis of TIME's archive filtered through Anadol's artistic vision. The core image was AI-generated, while details like the text, gallery context, and Anadol's silhouette were human-directed, creating a "true human-machine collaboration," he says. The cover can be viewed as a looping video online. Although the work is reminiscent of his 2022 exhibit, "Unsupervised," at MoMA, which attracted nearly three million visitors, Anadol states that the conceptual and technical foundations of each project are different, representing different approaches to machine-driven creativity. The goal for MoMA was for the system to develop its own aesthetic logic. For TIME, Anadol wanted his naturalist system to respond to human history. "Ultimately, this project is an invitation. The future is not a fixed destination to be afraid of, but a fluid reality we can actually shape," he says. In 2023, "Unsupervised" became the first artwork tokenized on blockchain to be added to MoMA's permanent collection. Anadol views his feature on TIME's cover—an "iconic canvas"—as another significant moment, suggesting that "the TIME cover can be another museum." ```

Historically, disasters were often viewed as divine acts—their destructive outcomes seen as tragically unavoidable. Then came Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and the world observed the unfolding of a man-made catastrophe. While the storm itself was a natural phenomenon, its wide-ranging impacts—including destroying or severely damaging over 1 million homes, displacing a vast number of people, and resulting in at least 986 incidents in Louisiana—were not. Nevertheless, New Orleans, against significant odds, shows potential to lead in innovative, cross-sectoral solutions for climate resilience, even as the federal government's disaster management approach appears to be receding. August 29 marks two decades since Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast. In light of this, my team and I have been assessing resilience in the New Orleans metro area, reflecting on twenty years of recovery and progress following Hurricane Katrina. New Orleans has achieved significant advancements in reorganizing its institutions and cultivating a more varied and entrepreneurial economy. The metropolitan region has allocated resources to upgraded levees and modifications to its flood control and other municipal water infrastructure, thereby lessening flood risks for numerous communities. Furthermore, the city has substantially boosted secondary education enrollment and internet access to align with national averages, while also nurturing the growth of new sectors like health care and the performing arts. Collectively, these enhancements have contributed to strengthening New Orleans' resilience, both as a city and as a community. Key Insights from Hurricane Katrina This is not to suggest that the region is without considerable challenges. New Orleans is far from perfect—specifically, the metro area remains neither affordable nor entirely safe for everyone. Poverty rates significantly surpass the national average, job and wage growth have been sluggish, many residents continue to bear health burdens from petrochemical refinement, and wealth inequality across racial and income lines is still conspicuous. Importantly, these issues should not be viewed as a lost cause; instead, they represent an opportunity to engage with residents in re-imagining how the metropolitan area can enable communities to thrive in an unstable climate. Nonetheless, in contrast to 2005, our country's response to recent calamities is causing us to regress, thereby making Americans less secure. While Hurricane Katrina prompted substantial changes in our national disaster management framework, raising the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to a cabinet-level position and prioritizing social vulnerability in disaster response, the Trump Administration’s policies have entailed reduced access to weather and climate data, meteorologists, and fewer resources for building resilience. We are perilously close to reverting to the old, pre-Katrina narrative: that disasters are a tragic yet routine reality, and mitigating their effects is an individual duty rather than a governmental responsibility. Today, as in 2005, the manufactured nature of disasters is unmistakable: FEMA initially denied disaster declarations in St. Louis after tornadoes devastated low-income, Black-majority neighborhoods; officials reportedly ignored calls from survivors when floods surged through Central Texas; and the focus on water access disputes, rather than the immediate needs of survivors, took precedence following the Los Angeles fires. It appears we have neglected to grasp Hurricane Katrina's paramount lesson. While Katrina originated as a natural event, its consequences were decidedly unnatural. The most severe repercussions of the storm were not exclusively experienced by residents directly in its path, but disproportionately by those already burdened by existing social and economic hardships, including the uninsured, individuals facing housing insecurity, impoverished families, and those in poor health. These compounding factors intensified the disaster’s effects and prolonged the recovery period. Strategies for Fostering Resilience In many respects, our study of metropolitan New Orleans offers a case study for fostering resilience in both urban and rural communities nationwide. Over the past two decades, the climate has undergone a literal transformation. Consequently, a greater number of communities in an expanding array of regions are now more vulnerable than they have ever been previously. Furthermore, these communities are predominantly more susceptible socially and economically. At a macroeconomic level, income inequality has widened, poverty and rental insecurity have risen, and advancement on racial equity indicators, such as the Black-white wealth gap, has regressed. Resilience represents a crucial concept that communities nationwide should strive for in these increasingly volatile times. Its fundamental principle is precisely what one would anticipate: the capacity of a family or community to recover following a disruption like a hurricane or an economic downturn. However, the concept extends further. Resilience encompasses systems and their interconnections—including local economies and job markets, community organizations and civic support networks, and even natural ecosystems like wetlands. The interplay among these systems—and whether their effects are mutually reinforcing—is what establishes a region’s resilience by building a series of safeguards. Crucially, the most vital element of resilience is the capability for continuous learning and transformative change. A genuinely resilient community actively promotes the capacity to permanently mitigate disaster risks, rather than merely facilitating a return to the identical pre-disaster condition. Attaining such adaptation necessitates systemic alterations, including the formulation of new social and economic policies designed to lower family expenses and bolster access to vital services. The repercussions of Hurricane Katrina were profoundly uneven, on a scale unprecedented in previous tragedies, vividly illustrating how systemic inequities, including those based on race and income, magnify disaster impacts and influence the subsequent response and recovery processes. New Orleans' post-Katrina investments in resilience can serve as a crucial reminder for other disaster-prone U.S. cities on how to prepare for the extreme weather events and disasters that climate change is intensifying.

Today marks the publication of the third annual edition of the , our comprehensive overview of the most influential individuals in artificial intelligence. This list was first introduced in 2023, following OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT, a pivotal moment when many recognized AI’s capacity to rival and surpass human abilities. Our objective was to demonstrate that AI's future trajectory would be shaped by people—innovators, advocates, artists, and all those invested in this technology’s evolution—rather than by machines alone. TIME's goal is to serve as your reliable guide throughout this transformative period. This year’s list further underscores our focus on people. A major AI narrative in 2025 has been the fierce competition for talent. Investors have channeled hundreds of millions into startups, reflecting the perceived worth of founders, and leaders of major tech companies, such as Meta’s , have reportedly extended nine-figure offers to recruit highly sought-after technologists. These hires, often accompanied by intense rumors, have transformed the previously niche competition for AI researchers into something akin to professional sports free agency. The stakes in this race are so high that leading researchers are courted much like NBA All-Stars. (Notably, two of Zuckerberg’s significant hires, , are also featured on the 2025 TIME100 AI alongside him.) Since the launch of the TIME100 AI, spending on AI-related technologies has surged, making it a critical engine of the global economy. While it's too early to determine if this trend is beneficial or detrimental, investment in computer-processing equipment is currently expanding at nearly four times the rate of GDP. A computer scientist and 2025 honoree estimates that the projected expenditure could be 25 times the amount spent on the Manhattan Project, even when adjusted for inflation. This represents an unprecedented deployment of capital, and the decisions regarding its allocation are being made by many individuals who are part of this year's TIME100 AI community, including Softbank CEO , OpenAI CEO , xAI founder , the White House AI Czar , and the E.U.’s . Also in this issue, we highlight how the decisions made by these individuals are transforming not only the technology industry but also our daily lives and potentially the strategies for future conflicts. Justin Worland and photographer Elliot Ross journeyed to Atlanta to illustrate how physical spaces, such as data centers, which enable AI, are . Meanwhile, Billy Perrigo reports from Paris on the significant implications and inherent risks associated with the intense pursuit of artificial general intelligence. Behind the Cover: The AI industry is evolving at a rapid pace. (Only 16 of the TIME100 AI honorees have appeared on previous lists, which were overseen by Ayesha Javed.) As AI becomes more integrated into our lives, the number of voices cautioning about its developments has also grown. These critical voices are recognized on this year’s list, including , researcher , and French Minister . The list also features artists who are pushing the boundaries of what's possible and exploring the synergy between humans and AI, such as , who designed this issue’s cover image, and actor . "I understand the excitement that AI ignites in people. Life is daunting," Lyonne shared with TIME. "The reality is, it's upon us. I believe it's best we embrace it." TIME is also actively embracing this evolution. In addition to fostering the TIME100 AI community, we are expanding our team of reporters dedicated to covering the individuals and concepts driving AI. Some of their work can be found in a new newsletter, "[Newsletter Name]," authored by Perrigo and Andrew R. Chow. We are also exploring how AI can enhance the distribution of TIME’s coverage. Our collaborations with AI companies like OpenAI have helped establish TIME as one of the most frequently cited sources of information on platforms such as ChatGPT. Furthermore, this summer, in partnership with Scale AI, we introduced our first AI audio briefings. We are eagerly anticipating the debut of the TIME AI Agent soon, which is designed to deliver the most interactive and personalized reading experience ever for TIME’s trusted reporting.