Author: Rockey Ramson

Judge Voids VOA Layoffs, Rules Kari Lake Unlawfully Ran US Media Agency
A federal judge on Saturday voided layoffs at Voice of America (VOA) while also ruling that the U.S. Agency for Global Media’s (USAGM) acting CEO, Kari Lake, unlawfully ran the independent federal agency.
U.S. District Court of Washington, D.C., Judge Royce Lamberth wrote that Lake oversaw the media agency in violation of the Constitution’s appointments clause and the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.
Lamberth’s ruling comes after VOA’s White House bureau chief Patsy Widakuswara filed the lawsuit last year.
President Trump nominated Lake to be senior adviser to acting CEO Victor Morales in February 2025. Morales designated Lake “to perform the functions and responsibilities specified” to 19 out of the 22 duties that the CEO assigns,” Lamberth wrote. By July, she was made acting CEO and “exercised control over the agency during the period relevant to the motions.”
Lamberth, a Reagan appointee, ruled that Lake’s actions after becoming acting CEO, including eliminating USAGM staff in August, are void. Morales’s actions for Lake to perform were also invalidated.
“The Court finds that these expansive delegations were an unlawful effort to transform Lake into the CEO of U.S. Agency for Global Media in all but name,” Lamberth wrote.
He noted that if Lake’s designation was “proper,” it “would require the Court to find that the President can fill a first assistantship at any time during a vacancy in a Senate-confirmed office … .”
Widakuswara and fellow plaintiffs Kate Neeper and Jessica Jerreat said they feel “vindicated and [are] deeply grateful.”
“The judge’s ruling that Kari Lake’s actions shall have no force or effect is a powerful step toward undoing the damage she has inflicted on this American institution that we love,” they said in a statement to Politico. “Even as we work through what this ruling means for colleagues harmed by her actions, it brings renewed hope and momentum to the next phase of our fight: restoring VOA’s global operations and ensuring we continue to produce journalism, not propaganda.”
Lake said she disagreed “strongly” with Lamberth’s ruling and will appeal it.
“The American people gave President Trump a mandate to cut bloated bureaucracy, eliminate waste, and restore accountability to government,” Lake said in a statement obtained by The Washington Post. “An activist judge is trying to stand in the way of those efforts at USAGM.”
Trump signed an executive order in March 2025 to gut the agency. Lake last summer defended the layoffs before a federal judge blocked them in December.
“Sometimes a lean, mean, team makes it easier to get things done,” she said of scaling down the staff by more than 500 employees.
The Saturday ruling comes one day after Ahmad Batebi, a prominent Iranian dissident, human rights activist and VOA journalist, was fired over efforts to limit coverage of Iran’s exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi.
March 7, 2026
Paramount Wins Bidding War for Warner Discovery After Netflix Backs Out
Paramount Global—now under the control of Skydance Media—has clinched a $81 billion deal to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery Inc., outbidding streaming behemoth Netflix Inc. after the latter bowed out, citing the escalated price as no longer viable. The victory for David Ellison’s Paramount caps a contentious takeover saga, uniting storied assets like HBO, CNN, and the DC Comics universe under one roof, while raising fresh antitrust alarms in an industry already grappling with consolidation and shifting viewer habits.
Netflix co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters announced the withdrawal in a statement late Thursday, hours after Warner’s board deemed Paramount’s revised $31-per-share all-cash offer superior to Netflix’s $27.75-per-share bid for the studios and HBO Max alone. “This transaction was always a ‘nice to have’ at the right price, not a ‘must have’ at any price,” they said, emphasizing fiscal discipline amid Wall Street’s scrutiny of Netflix’s ballooning content spend. The decision sent Netflix shares (NFLX) surging 10% in after-hours trading to $682.50, recouping some of the $170 billion market value erosion since rumors of its Warner pursuit surfaced in September 2025. Analysts at JPMorgan hailed the pullback as “prudent,” noting Netflix’s subscriber base hit 285 million in Q4, up 12% year-over-year, without the added debt burden.
For Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), the deal—pending regulatory nods—marks a lifeline under embattled CEO David Zaslav, whose cost-cutting regime has drawn ire but delivered hits like the Oscar-nominated “Sinners” and “One Battle After Another.” Zaslav, in a memo to staff, celebrated the merger as a value-maximizer for shareholders, projecting $6 billion in synergies through streamlined operations and shared IP like Harry Potter and Superman. “Once our Board votes to adopt the Paramount merger agreement, it will create tremendous value,” he stated. Warner shares dipped 0.35% to $10.85 in regular trading but climbed 2% after-hours on merger optimism.

Netflix Inc.
Netflix Inc.
Source: FactSet

Paramount’s path to victory was fraught. Ellison, son of Oracle founder Larry Ellison, prioritized Warner after Skydance’s $8.4 billion takeover of Paramount in August 2025, viewing the combo as essential to compete against Disney, Netflix, and Amazon in the $500 billion global entertainment market. Initial overtures were rebuffed, but Paramount’s hostile $30-per-share bid in December—escalating to $31 this week—prevailed. Key concessions included a $7 billion termination fee for regulatory failures and covering Warner’s $2.8 billion breakup payout to Netflix, plus an accelerated “ticking fee” of 25 cents per share quarterly starting September 30.
The merger creates a colossus: Paramount gains Warner’s film/TV studios, HBO Max (with 110 million subscribers), and cable nets like CNN, TNT, TBS, and Food Network—bolstering its Peacock and Paramount+ platforms amid a streaming wars projected to reach $240 billion by 2030, per PwC. Yet, hurdles loom. The Justice Department, already probing Netflix’s bid for anticompetitive practices, will scrutinize this tie-up, especially combining legacy studios and news outlets. Media watchdogs like Free Press’s Craig Aaron decried it as “unthinkable,” warning that folding CNN into CBS News could amplify biased coverage, particularly on sensitive issues like Israel’s actions in the Middle East—where consolidated ownership risks amplifying pro-Israel narratives at the expense of balanced reporting.
Ellison’s revamp of CBS News—installing Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief to target “center-left to center-right” audiences—has sparked concerns of editorial shifts, potentially tilting foreign policy discourse. CNN President Mark Thompson urged staff not to “jump to conclusions,” but the deal’s scale—creating a entity with $60 billion in annual revenue—invites FTC intervention, especially post-Trump antitrust relaxations.
Wall Street cheered the outcome: Paramount shares (PSKY) leaped 10.04% to $45.20, adding $12 billion to its market cap, while the S&P 500 Media Index rose 1.8%. “This is Ellison’s moonshot—scale to survive in streaming’s endgame,” said MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson, upgrading Paramount to Buy with a $55 target.
As regulators deliberate, the merger underscores Hollywood’s consolidation imperative amid cord-cutting and ad market volatility. For Netflix, the retreat preserves cash for originals like “Squid Game” sequels; for Paramount, it’s a bet on IP synergy to challenge Disney’s $200 billion empire. But in an era of media monopolies, questions linger: Will this super-studio foster innovation or stifle diverse voices, especially on global hotspots like Israel-Palestine?
February 26, 2026
Big Social Media Platforms Agree to Independent Teen Safety Ratings
Three leading social media companies have agreed to undergo independent assessments of how effectively they protect the mental health of teenage users, submitting to a battery of tests announced Tuesday by a coalition of advocacy organizations.
The platforms will be graded on whether they mandate breaks and provide options to turn off endless scrolling, among a host of other measures of their safety policies and transparency commitments. Companies that reviewers rate highly will receive a blue shield badge, while those that fair poorly will be branded as not able to block harmful content. Meta, which operates Facebook and Instagram, TikTok and Snap are first three companies to sign up for the process.
“I hope that by having this new set of standards and ratings it does improve teens’ mental health,” said Dan Reidenberg, managing director of the National Council for Suicide Prevention, who oversaw the development of the standards. “At the same time, I also really hope that it changes the technology companies: that it really helps shape how they design and they build and they implement their tools.”
Teenagers represent a coveted demographic for social media sites and the new standards come as the tech industry faces increasing pressure to better protect young users.
A wave of lawsuits alleges that leading firms have engineered their platforms to be addictive. Congress is weighing a suite of bills designed to protect children’s safety online. And state lawmakers have sought to impose age limits on social apps.
But those efforts have borne little fruit. Some legal experts argue teens and their families may face difficulty in court cases proving the connection between social media use and their struggles. Officials in Washington, meanwhile, have been unable to agree on how to regulate the industry and laws passed by the states have run into First Amendment challenges.

The voluntary standards represent an alternative approach. Reidenberg said in an interview that the ratings are not a substitute for legislation but will be a helpful way for teenagers and parents to decide how to engage with particular apps. The project is backed by the Mental Health Coalition, an advocacy group founded by fashion designer Kenneth Cole.

Cole said in a statement that the standards “recognize that technology and social media now play a central role in mental health — especially for young people — and they offer a clear path toward digital spaces that better support well-being.”
There is still no scientific consensus on whether social media is on the whole harmful for children and teenagers. While some research has found that the heaviest users have worse mental health, studies have also found that young people who are not online can also struggle. But teenagers themselves have reported becoming more uneasy about the time they spend online, with girls in particular telling pollsters at the Pew Research Center in 2024 that apps were affecting their self-confidence, sleep patterns and overall mental health.
Reidenberg said it’s clear that in some cases young people’s time online becomes problematic. He said the system was developed without funding from the tech industry, but companies will have to volunteer to participate.
Antigone Davis, Meta’s global head of safety, said the standards will “provide the public with a meaningful way to evaluate platform protections and hold companies accountable.” TikTok’s American arm said it looked forward to the ratings process. Snap called the Mental Health Coalition’s work “truly impactful.”
Organizers compared the process to how Hollywood assigns age ratings to movies or the government assesses the safety of new cars. Companies will submit internal polices and designs for review by outside experts who will develop their ratings. In all, the companies’ performance will be measured in about two dozen areas covering their policies, app design, internal oversight, user education and content.
Many of the standards specifically target users’ exposure to content about suicide and self harm. But one also targets the sheer length of time that some people spend scrolling, crediting platforms for offering either voluntary or mandatory “take-a-break” features.
The standards are being launched at an event in Washington on Tuesday. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Virginia) said in a statement that he welcomed the standards but they weren’t a substitute for regulatory action.
“Congress has a responsibility to put lasting, enforceable guardrails in place so that every platform is held accountable to the young people and families who use them,” he added.
February 10, 2026
Washington Post Publisher Will Lewis Steps Down After Major Layoffs
Washington Post publisher and CEO Will Lewis is leaving the newspaper, the company announced on Saturday after carrying out widespread layoffs this week.
“During my tenure, difficult decisions have been taken in order to ensure the sustainable future of The Post so it can for many years ahead publish high-quality nonpartisan news to millions of customers each day,” Lewis wrote in a message to staff that was shared online by the newspaper’s White House bureau chief, Matt Viser.
Lewis, a former Dow Jones chief executive and publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was appointed to the role at the Washington Post in 2023 as the newspaper was suffering steep financial losses. He took over from Fred Ryan, who had served as publisher and CEO for nearly a decade.
Jeff D’Onofrio, chief financial officer of the newspaper owned by Jeff Bezos, will serve as acting publisher and CEO, the Post said. He joined the newspaper last June after serving in various roles at Google and Yahoo, among other companies.
“Customer data will drive our decisions, sharpening our edge in delivering what is most valuable to our audiences,” D’Onofrio wrote on Saturday in an email to Post staffers.
The Washington Post is announcing Jeff D’Onofrio as its acting Publisher and CEO, effective immediately. pic.twitter.com/38eGFkSXjL
— Washington Post Communications (@WashPostComms) February 7, 2026

Unions representing Post employees said Lewis’ departure was necessary.
“Will Lewis’s exit is long overdue,” The Washington Post Guild said in a statement. “His legacy will be the attempted destruction of a great American journalism institution. But it’s not too late to save the Post. Jeff Bezos must immediately rescind these layoffs or sell the paper to someone willing to invest in its future.”
Bezos, who bought the newspaper in 2013, characterized the leadership change as an “extraordinary opportunity” for the newspaper.
“The Post has an essential journalistic mission and an extraordinary opportunity,” Bezos said, according to the Post. “Each and every day our readers give us a roadmap to success.”
The departure of Lewis came days after the Post cut about one-third of its employees in a move that affected all departments at the newspaper. He was criticized for his absence during the layoffs on Wednesday, which the newspaper’s former executive editor, Marty Baron, described as “among the darkest days” in the newspaper’s history.
During his time at the Post, Lewis oversaw waves of staff reductions and had to deal with the loss of hundreds of thousands of subscribers after the newspaper stopped endorsing U.S. presidential candidates and shifted its opinion section’s emphasis to a libertarian bent.
Lewis’ Post tenure was rocky even before the subscriber losses.
After a 2024 disagreement with then-executive editor Sally Buzbee led to her departure, Lewis faced a newsroom outcry over his attempt to hire British journalist and former colleague Robert Winnett, who was linked to a phone-hacking controversy that also involved Lewis. Meanwhile, Lewis’ most ballyhooed initiative, a so-called third newsroom, never came to fruition.
Former Wall Street Journal editor Matt Murray eventually was named the permanent replacement for Buzbee, who is now Reuters’ news editor for the United States and Canada.
February 8, 2026
SpaceX Pushes for Early Index Inclusion Ahead of Potential IPO
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is seeking an early boost for shares after the rocket-and-satellite business makes its stock market debut later this year.
Advisers for the company, which recently merged with xAI, have reached out to major index providers, including Nasdaq, to discuss how SpaceX and this year’s other hot startups might join key indexes sooner than normal, according to people familiar with the matter.
Companies typically must wait several months or a year after their public debut before gaining inclusion in a major index such as the S&P 500 or the Nasdaq 100. Inclusion unlocks access to retail and institutional capital from funds, particularly those mimicking the performance of indexes that have to hold the companies in the index.
The traditional waiting period is intended to give the companies time to demonstrate that they are stable and liquid enough to handle extensive buying from index funds.
SpaceX hopes to skirt traditional rules in an effort to bring liquidity to its shareholders sooner as part of its planned IPO. SpaceX advisers have sought index policy changes that would fast-track its entry into major indexes for the company and benefit other highly-valued private companies, the people said.
Last valued at $800 billion, SpaceX is targeting a valuation of more than $1 trillion, a listing that would become the largest-ever U.S. IPO.

Elon Musk. © Al Drago/Bloomberg
Investors and advisers to companies planning to go public this year are concerned not only about initial trading, but also that the standard six-month lockup period—which prevents early investors, executives and employees from selling their stock—might prompt significant selling that pressures shares. After Meta went public in 2012, shares sank when early investors unloaded all at once.
SpaceX is exploring ways to better balance supply and demand to avoid that outcome, some of the people said.
Advocates of index methodology changes have said that by allowing newly public companies earlier entry to key indexes, individual investors, who have famously missed out on the big gains in private markets, could secure earlier exposure via popular exchange-traded funds and index funds.
Earlier this week, the Nasdaq Stock Market shared proposals to update some of the Nasdaq 100 index methodology and asked for feedback from market participants.
Among the proposals is a potential “fast entry” process. Under this option, companies whose market capitalizations rank in the top 40 of the Nasdaq 100’s constituents could be added to the index after 15 trading days. Companies typically now must wait at least three months to be added to the index. At their current valuations, SpaceX, OpenAI and Anthropic would all qualify.
The S&P Total Market Index and MSCI indexes have fast-track options, which some advisers to SpaceX are also exploring in an effort to ensure the IPO trades well, some of the people familiar with the matter said.
The one index where there is now no fast-entry option is also one of the most important: The S&P 500. To join the index, a company must be U.S.-based, profitable and have a market capitalization of at least $22.7 billion. Joining gives it access to a steadier index-fund investor base.
OpenAI is laying the groundwork for a fourth-quarter IPO as it races rival Anthropic to list shares publicly. OpenAI is aiming to raise $100 billion before the IPO at a valuation of more than $800 billion, while Anthropic is raising billions more at a valuation of $350 billion.
February 4, 2026
BBC Rolls Out New Guidelines: Criticise Israeli Government, Not Zionists
The BBC’s new antisemitism training course says people who “have no intention to offend Jewish people” should not “criticise Zionists”.

The training, rolled out to BBC staff last week and seen by Middle East Eye, says: “Antisemites frequently use the word ‘Zionist’ (or worse, ‘Zio’), when they are in fact referring to Jews, whether in Israel or elsewhere.

“Those claiming to be ‘anti-Zionist, not antisemitic’, should do so in the knowledge that many Jewish people consider themselves to be Zionists.”

The training adds: “If these individuals mean only to criticise the policies of the government of Israel, and have no intention to offend Jewish people, they should criticise ‘the Israeli government’, and not ‘Zionists’.”

The course was made by the BBC Academy in conjunction with the Jewish Staff Network, the Antisemitism Policy Trust and the Community Security Trust (CST).
The CST, which monitors antisemitic hate crimes and works with the government and police, has previously claimed that pro-Palestine marches in London were “disrupting the peace and the basic rights of Jews” and called for them to end.

The BBC training also incorporates the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which the British government has adopted but which legal experts have warned could lead to a “curtailment of debate”.

The definition says that claiming that the existence of the state of Israel is a “racist endeavour” is an illustration of potential antisemitism.

Its critics say it conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism, or with criticism of policies that led to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes in modern-day Israel.
‘Against any form of discrimination’
Asked for comment, the BBC directed MEE to comments previously made by outgoing director general Tim Davie.

In an email to BBC staff on 4 December, Davie said that the “BBC is for everyone, and we are clear that everyone working here should feel they belong. As an organisation we stand united against any form of discrimination, prejudice, or intolerance”.

“In response to this, the BBC Academy has spent the last few months developing new anti-discrimination training. We’re starting with e-learning modules on antisemitism and Islamophobia, which we expect staff across the BBC to complete,” he added.

Davie said that the “module on antisemitism is available from today, while the Islamophobia module is just being finalised, to launch in February”.

Davie resigned last month amid a row over the broadcaster’s editing of a speech by US President Donald Trump on 6 January 2021 for the BBC’s Panorama show.

The public broadcaster has also been embroiled in several scandals over its coverage of Israel and Gaza.
MEE reported last month that the BBC’s online Middle East editor Raffi Berg said in 2020 that it was “wonderful” to be in a “circle of trust” with current and former Mossad agents while writing a book on the Israeli intelligence agency, and that the Mossad’s “fantastic operations” make him “tremendously proud”.

A study published in June by the Muslim Council of Britain-linked Centre for Media Monitoring (CFMM) claimed the BBC’s coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza is “systematically biased against Palestinians”, according to an analysis of over 35,000 pieces of content.

The study found that the BBC gives Israeli deaths 33 times more coverage than Palestinian ones, uses emotive terms four times as much for Israeli victims and applies “massacre” 18 times more to Israeli casualties than Palestinian ones.

The BBC pulled a documentary on children in Gaza, Gaza: How To Survive a Warzone, in February after it emerged that the boy who narrated the film, Abdullah al-Yazuri, was the son of a deputy minister in Gaza’s government.
This followed an intense campaign by pro-Israel groups and the Israeli embassy in London.

The BBC then came under fire in June for dropping a second film on Gaza, this one on doctors, after delaying its broadcast for months.

Officials at the broadcaster said that “broadcasting this material risked creating a perception of partiality that would not meet the high standards that the public rightly expect of the BBC”.

The film was aired instead by Channel 4 and other news organisations.
December 17, 2025
Outgoing BBC Boss Tim Davie Rolls Out Anti-Discrimination Training Post-Resignation
The BBC has ordered staff to complete mandatory anti-Semitism training following a series of scandals at the broadcaster.

Tim Davie, the outgoing director-general, has told staff they have six months to complete the new course, which aims to end “any form of discrimination, prejudice, or intolerance” at the corporation.
It follows the publication by The Telegraph last month of an internal memo which revealed anti-Israel bias in the BBC’s news coverage, and prompted Mr Davie to resign.

The broadcaster has also been embroiled in controversy over a Gaza documentary, and its decision not to cut anti-Semitic chants from its coverage of rap act Bob Vylan’s Glastonbury set.

The documentary, called Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone, prominently featured the son of a Hamas official, whose identity was not disclosed to viewers at the time. The revelation later led to it being pulled from the airwaves.

Abdullah al-Yazouri, the documentary’s teenage narrator, was revealed to be the son of a Hamas official

A Palestinian boy called Zakaria poses alongside a Hamas fighter in the BBC documentary
Meanwhile, BBC staff did not cut away from chants of “death, death to the IDF” during Bob Vylan’s set, and were criticised for allowing the broadcast to go ahead despite knowing it was “high risk”.

In a company-wide memo about the new discrimination training, staff have now been told that “anti-Semitism has no place at the BBC” and that the module “provides a framework of understanding for staff to spot and call out anti-Semitism”.
Staff have been told that the module involves “real world examples” of how anti-Semitism can appear in society, with a warning that this “understandably may be upsetting for some colleagues”.

Another module on Islamophobia will be made available to staff from February, they were told.

Mr Davie said: “The BBC is for everyone, and we are clear that everyone working here should feel they belong…the BBC Academy has spent the last few months developing new anti-discrimination training.”

The memo revealed that BBC’s Arabic news service chose to “minimise Israeli suffering” in the war in Gaza so it could “paint Israel as the aggressor”.

It also found that BBC Arabic had given a platform to journalists who had made extreme anti-Semitic comments, including one contributor who was featured 217 times despite describing a Palestinian who killed four Israeli citizens as a “hero” in 2022.

The announcement of the training was welcomed by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, whose president Phil Rosenberg said there was an “urgent need for change in both culture and content at the corporation”.

The BBC Academy course on anti-Semitism was made in conjunction with the Jewish Staff Network, the Anti-Semitism Policy Trust and the Community Security Trust (CST).

The Telegraph’s publication of the memo also led to the resignation of the broadcaster’s head of news, Deborah Turness.

Last year, Sir Michael Ellis, the former attorney general, told MPs that the BBC was “institutionally anti-Semitic”, and that its reporting of the Israel-Hamas war had contributed to attacks on British Jews.

In February, Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservatives, wrote to Mr Davie to complain about BBC Arabic’s coverage, describing it as a “platform for terrorists” that was promoting “appalling anti-Semitism” to millions of viewers.

In his email, sent to staff on Thursday, Mr Davie added: “I know that everyone will be committed to the training, ensuring the BBC is a role model as an inclusive and tolerant workplace.”
December 4, 2025
Coca-Cola to launch new version of Coke sweetened with U.S.-grown cane sugar
Coca-Cola said it will roll out a new version of its signature soft drink that will be sweetened with cane sugar instead of corn syrup — days after President Trump posted about it on social media.
“As part of its ongoing innovation agenda, this fall in the United States, the company plans to launch an offering made with US cane sugar to expand its Trademark Coca-Cola product range,” the company said in a Tuesday statement.
The Coke made with US cane sugar will complement the company’s existing product line, the Atlanta-based company added.
Coca-Cola produced for the US market is typically sweetened with corn syrup, while the company uses cane sugar in some other countries, including Mexico and various European countries.
The Tuesday announcement came days after President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social that he had “been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so.”
Trump — who is famously an avid consumer of Diet Coke — also said, “This will be a very good move by them — You’ll see. It’s just better!”
Coca-Cola initially stopped short of confirming Trump’s post. The company told NBC News last week that it appreciated Trump’s “enthusiasm for our iconic Coca-Cola brand” but that “details…will be shared soon.”
In the United States, Coca-Cola made with cane sugar is colloquially known as “Mexican Coke” as it’s often imported from the United States’ southern neighbor.
Coca-Cola CEO James Quincey discussed the coming product on an earnings call Tuesday morning, telling investors that the company already uses cane sugar in the company’s tea, lemonade, coffee and Vitamin Water offerings.
“I think that it will be an enduring option for consumers,” he said.
“We are definitely looking to use the whole toolkit of available sweetening options where there are consumer preferences.”
The Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” initiative, named for the social movement aligned with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has pushed food companies to alter their formulations to remove ingredients like artificial dyes.
But medical experts warn that health outcomes may not change with the switch in sweetener.
Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist and director of the Food is Medicine Institute at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, told NBC News that “both high fructose corn syrup and cane sugar are about 50% fructose, 50% glucose, and have identical metabolic effects.”
“That is, both can equally raise the risk for obesity, diabetes, high triglycerides and blood pressure,” he said, adding that “both provide the same number of calories, but the body processes them differently.”
The move to transition to cane sugar was also met with pushback from agricultural interests.
John Bode, the CEO of the Corn Refiners Association, said last week that “replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar doesn’t make sense” given Trump’s support of American farmers.
“Replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar would cost thousands of American food manufacturing jobs, depress farm income, and boost imports of foreign sugar, all with no nutritional benefit,” he added in a statement.
Sourcing could also be a factor. US cane sugar is primarily produced in Texas, Florida and Louisiana, according to the Agriculture Department. However, domestic production accounts for only 30% of total US sugar supply. The rest comes from sugar beets or is imported.
Trump has long tied himself publicly to Coca-Cola products. In 2012, he said on Twitter that Coke was not happy with him but “that’s ok, I’ll still keep drinking that garbage.”
Trump also wrote on social media the same year that drinking Diet Coke “makes you happy.”
In January, Quincey traveled to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and presented him with a custom bottle commemorating his upcoming inauguration.
“President Trump pledged to Make America Healthy Again, and that starts with what we eat and drink,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai told The NY Budgets.
“The Trump administration is committed to partnering with food and beverage companies to expand options for the American people.”
The NY Budgets has sought comment from HHS, Coca-Cola and the Corn Refiners Association.
July 22, 2025
PepsiCo Sales Grow Again Thanks to Weak Dollar. But There’s More to Worry About
PepsiCo Inc. (NASDAQ: PEP) shares climbed Thursday after the global food and beverage giant reported better-than-expected quarterly earnings, fueled in part by favorable currency movements. However, despite the upbeat report and a slight upward revision to its full-year outlook, analysts and investors are eyeing deeper concerns that could cloud the company’s future growth trajectory.
For the second quarter of 2025, PepsiCo reported revenue of $22.4 billion, up 4.1% year-over-year, and adjusted earnings per share (EPS) of $2.18, beating the Wall Street consensus estimate of $2.09. The company credited a combination of strong international demand for its snack brands and a weaker U.S. dollar, which boosted overseas sales when converted back to dollars.
“The continued strength of our international markets, coupled with productivity initiatives and pricing discipline, helped us deliver another quarter of solid performance,” said PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta in a statement.
The dollar’s recent softness—down nearly 3.4% against a basket of major currencies since April—played a significant role in lifting PepsiCo’s earnings, as more than 40% of its revenue comes from international operations.
Shares of PepsiCo rose 2.8% Thursday, closing at $184.67, marking the stock’s best single-day gain since March.
Full-Year Outlook Tweaked, but Not Significantly
PepsiCo modestly raised its full-year EPS guidance to a range of $8.15 to $8.25, up from the previous forecast of $8.10 to $8.20. The company also reaffirmed its revenue growth target of 4% to 6% on an organic basis.
Still, executives struck a cautious tone on consumer spending and rising input costs.
“We continue to see some softness in North American consumer purchasing behavior, particularly in value channels,” said CFO Hugh Johnston during Thursday’s earnings call. “Promotional sensitivity has returned, and the competitive landscape is intensifying.”
Growth Drivers: Snacks Outperform, Beverages Face Headwinds
PepsiCo’s Frito-Lay North America division posted another strong quarter, with 7% organic revenue growth, driven by demand for brands like Lay’s, Doritos, and Cheetos. Convenience foods remain a consistent winner for the company, especially amid evolving consumer snacking habits post-pandemic.
The beverage segment, however, was more mixed. While international beverage sales grew, North American volumes declined slightly, even as pricing remained firm. Sparkling water and energy drink brands like Bubly and Rockstar faced increasing competition from niche startups and premium-priced entrants.
Quaker Foods, often seen as a bellwether for shifting breakfast habits, delivered flat sales, with only modest gains in oatmeal and ready-to-eat cereals.
What the Market Is Watching: Inflation, Promotions, and Consumer Fatigue
PepsiCo, like many consumer staples companies, faces several emerging pressures:
- Inflation: While commodity prices such as corn, aluminum, and oil have come off their 2022–23 highs, they remain above historical averages. This continues to affect packaging, transportation, and ingredient costs.
- Consumer Fatigue: After two years of price hikes across its product lineup, consumers are increasingly shifting toward private-label brands or waiting for discounts. Retail scanner data from NielsenIQ shows that promotional volume in food and beverage is at its highest level since 2019.
- Geopolitical Exposure: With significant operations in Europe, Latin America, and Asia, PepsiCo remains vulnerable to geopolitical instability and regulatory challenges in emerging markets. The company exited its Russian operations in 2023 but still faces volatility in markets like Brazil and India.
Wall Street’s Take: Defensive but Priced for Perfection
Despite Thursday’s rally, some analysts remain cautious. PepsiCo is currently trading at a forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 25.3, above the S&P 500 average and at a premium to key competitors like Coca-Cola (KO) and Mondelez (MDLZ).
“PepsiCo remains a defensive play with reliable cash flow and global scale,” said Sarah Dawson, senior consumer goods analyst at Morgan & Helms. “But with valuations stretched, the market will need to see consistent execution and improved margin trends to justify further upside.”
Of the 25 analysts covering the stock, 14 rate it a “Buy,” 9 say “Hold,” and 2 recommend “Sell.” The average 12-month price target is $190, according to FactSet.
PepsiCo’s second-quarter results offered reassurance to investors, with sales growth buoyed by a weaker dollar and ongoing global demand for snacks. But behind the earnings beat lies a more complicated story: sluggish North American volumes, rising promotional pressures, and questions about pricing power.
As inflation moderates and consumers grow more cost-conscious, PepsiCo will need to prove that its brand strength and operational discipline can sustain growth in a shifting economic environment. The short-term looks stable—but the road ahead may not be as smooth.
July 18, 2025
Starbucks mandates four-day office return for employees, while CEO Brian Niccol keeps his remote work privilege
Starbucks will increase its return to work mandate for corporate employees to four days a week — even as CEO Brian Niccol is allowed to work remotely from his California home after getting hired last year.
The new policy, outlined in a companywide message from Niccol, will require corporate employees and managers to be on-site Monday through Thursday at the company’s Seattle and Toronto offices as well as at its North American regional hubs, beginning in January.
“To give partners time to adjust, this expectation will begin with the new fiscal year,” Niccol wrote in the memo.
“We’ll share more details before October, including our plans to ensure everyone has an assigned dedicated desk.”
The shift from three to four required days in the office marks the latest escalation in Starbucks’ broader “Back to Starbucks” turnaround strategy helmed by Niccol, whose main residence is in Newport Beach, Calif.
The company says Niccol’s “default” is to reside in Seattle when he isn’t traveling to the company’s coffeehouses worldwide.
When asked if Niccol works from his California residence, the company declined to comment.
The java giant also is expanding its relocation mandate, requiring all managers at its corporate locations to move to Seattle, Toronto or cities that host regional offices within the next 12 months — a policy that builds on a previous directive for vice presidents and above.
When Niccol was named CEO last year, Starbucks allowed him to remain in Newport Beach.
The company pays for a dedicated remote office near his home, provides a personal assistant and allows him to use a corporate jet to commute to Seattle, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Niccol was awarded roughly $96 million in total compensation after his first four months as Starbucks CEO, with about 94% of that coming from stock awards and an additional $5 million sign-on bonus, the filing showed.
His pay package also included more than $400,000 in perks such as housing, jet travel and security expenses. His annualized pay is estimated at $113 million, placing him among the highest-paid CEOs in the country.
Before tapping the former Chipotle boss, Starbucks was grappling with significant turmoil, including four CEOs in five years, declining sales, profit drops and operational inefficiencies like overcomplicated menus and slow service.
The company also faced labor unrest, legal challenges, and brand identity confusion, while external pressures such as inflation and rising competition further strained performance and investor confidence.
Starbucks has stated that while Niccol is permitted to work remotely, he is expected to spend a significant amount of time at the Seattle corporate headquarters and at company locations around the world.
A company spokesperson previously said that “Brian’s primary office and a majority of his time will be spent in our Seattle Support Centre or out visiting partners and customers in our stores, roasteries, roasting facilities and offices around the world.”
“His schedule will exceed the hybrid work guidelines and workplace expectations we have for all partners,” the spokesperson said.
In his message, Niccol emphasized that human connection remains a foundational value for Starbucks.
“We are reestablishing our in-office culture because we do our best work when we’re together,” he wrote.
“We share ideas more effectively, creatively solve hard problems, and move much faster.”
He acknowledged that not all employees would welcome the policy.
“We’ve listened and thought carefully,” he wrote. “But as a company built on human connection, and given the scale of the turnaround ahead, we believe this is the right path for Starbucks.”
Starbucks said it will offer a one-time voluntary exit package for employees who refuse to comply with the new policy.
“If you decide you want to leave Starbucks for any reason, we respect that,” Niccol wrote.
“To support those who decide to ‘opt out,’ we’re offering a one-time voluntary exit program with a cash payment for partners who make this choice.”
The internal changes come amid wider scrutiny over executive remote work arrangements.
A recent study by researchers at Boston College and Arizona State University, as cited in the Star Tribune, found that companies led by CEOs who live far from their corporate headquarters often see lower employee satisfaction and weaker financial performance.
The report, which examined nearly 1,000 firms between 2010 and 2019, concluded that so-called “fly-in CEOs” tend to be less informed about day-to-day operations and more focused on short-term gains.
The study noted that about 18% of companies surveyed had CEOs residing far from headquarters.
Geographic trends showed that remote CEOs were more common in colder, landlocked central US states. Despite its climate, Minnesota, for example, had one of the lowest rates of remote CEOs among its Fortune 500 firms.
Starbucks, for its part, maintains that its office return policy is necessary to drive collaboration and accelerate business recovery.
“As we work to turn the business around, all these things matter more than ever,” Niccol said in his memo.
“We’re driving significant change across the company while staying true to our core values.”
July 17, 2025
Trump is defending the interests of the oil giants concerning climate regulations in EU trade discussions
Former U.S. President Donald Trump is intervening in current transatlantic trade negotiations to bolster American oil giants by pressuring the European Union to relax its landmark climate regulations—moves that threaten to weaken global environmental commitments.
In recent trade discussions ahead of the July 9 deadline, Trump officials have floated proposals aimed at diluting the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and methane emissions mandates, both central to Brussels’ aggressive climate stance. These rules impose rigorous environmental and human rights oversight on companies and require verified methane caps for fossil fuel imports by 2030—a move the U.S. energy sector says could drive them out of the European market.
Executives from ExxonMobil, including CEO Darren Woods, explicitly lobbied Trump to use trade leverage against Brussels. Private sources confirm U.S. negotiators are now urging the EU to soften or delay these regulations in exchange for tariffs relief.
Trump has dangled a steep 50% tariff threat on EU exports if the EU doesn’t step back on its climate rules—a key tactic in forcing concessions. Meanwhile, Brussels, eager to avert a damaging tariff spike, is considering trade-off proposals such as increasing imports of U.S. LNG and adjusting methane oversight frameworks to qualify U.S. gas under equivalency schemes.
This duel underscores a broader conflict between climate ambition and trade power: Trump’s approach aims to fuse energy dominance with economic leverage, while the EU seeks to uphold its Green Deal principles.
Following reports of these contentious trade maneuvers, European carbon credit futures slipped approximately 1.2%, signaling investor anxiety over potential dilution of climate policy. Analysts caution that even talk of loosening methane or sustainability rules could erode confidence in the EU’s green market framework—while bolstering U.S. oil and gas margins temporarily.
Environmental groups have sounded the alarm, labeling the U.S. push “a direct attack on the Paris Agreement,” warning that any weakening of EU standards could unravel global climate governance.
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has reaffirmed the EU’s “sovereign right” to set its own environmental rules and cautioned against ceding core Green Deal elements just to avert U.S. tariffs.
Yet internal EU divisions bite: some leaders argue for flexibility to secure broader trade benefits, while others—like France’s Stéphanie Yon-Courtin—warn that concessions risk setting a dangerous precedent on environmental sovereignty.
EU negotiators will decide whether to carve out limited flexibilities—such as pragmatic methane measurement standards or delayed rollout of the CSDDD—to soften U.S. trade pressure. If no deal is struck, Brussels is reportedly readying retaliatory tariffs worth up to €95 billion. This clash may redefine transatlantic relations—showing whether trade imperatives outweigh climate leadership at a critical geopolitical juncture.
Trump’s alignment with Big Oil in EU trade talks reveals more than one-off bargaining—it spotlights a strategic confrontation over whether commercial leverage can override environmental clarity. The outcome will signal how far Washington and Brussels are willing to bend in balancing market access against the planet’s future.
June 27, 2025