With Project 2025 calling for the criminalization of porn and age-verification laws already on the books in multiple states, The Onion examines the pros and cons of banning pornographic material.
This Week’s Most Viral News: September 08, 2023
PRO: Could switch to cheaper Wi-Fi plan.
CON: Might find partner attractive again.
PRO: Really plays into denial kink.
CON: Could set back the MILF’s rights movement more than 50 years.
PRO: ’Tis a sin to possess a lustful heart.
CON: Will have to find other diversion to get through car wash.
PRO: Plenty of fetishes obscure enough to fly under radar.
CON: Our cam girls will surely be bereft without our charming commentary.
PRO: Hard to be the ‘pro porn’ guy in Congress.
CON: Our parents are coming home soon. We really shouldn’t be doing this.
METHUEN — The city will be getting more than $600,000 for a host of projects and groups along with millions in general funding from the state’s $57 billion budget.
Methuen will be receiving at least $665,000 for various projects as part of the state’s fiscal 2025 budget. The city will also be getting $6.6 million in generalized state aid, according to a news release from state Sen. Pavel Payano, D-Lawrence.
The school district, which relies heavily on state aid, will be receiving $68.6 million in Chapter 70 funding. Although the funding represents a 6% increase over last year, it’s a smaller increase than the previous year and has forced officials to cut as many as 41 positions from the district, though almost entirely through unfilled positions.
The Greater Lawrence Health clinic will be getting a good chunk of the project money with $250,000 to expand its mobile health program. The center recently launched a new mobile health clinic with the help of a donation from the Arbella Insurance Foundation.
While the nonprofit MAN Inc will get $150,000 to “enhance entrepreneurial opportunities in the Methuen Arlington neighborhood.” The nonprofit offers programs to low and moderate income families in the area, including art therapy, yoga, karate, movies and crafts, a homework center and summer programming.
“With the FY25 budget now officially signed, I am particularly proud of the investments we have secured for Methuen,” Payano said. “This budget not only addresses the immediate needs of our community but also lays a foundation for future growth.
“From significant funding for education and workforce development to critical support for healthcare and housing, these allocations will have a lasting impact on our residents.”
The city will be getting another $50,000 to purchase Care Solace, a software that serves to help people access mental health resources, according to the group’s website.
“It will allow every resident to access a licensed mental health professional within 72 hours, allowing Methuen to lead the way when it comes to helping citizens secure quality mental health resources,” Rep. Ryan Hamilton, D-Methuen, said.
The budget also includes $20,000 for the Methuen Youth Basketball Summer league.
“Our support for the Methuen Youth Basketball Association’s summer tournament highlights our belief in our young people’s potential. These earmarks aren’t just funding allocations; they’re a promise to safeguard our community’s well-being, drive economic growth, and ensure everyone has access to the resources they need to thrive,” Rep. Francisco Paulino, D-Methuen, said.
The Merrimack Valley Prevention and Substance Abuse Project will also be getting $25,000.
Other funding includes:
$75,000 for Youth Development Organization for STEM, arts, and leadership development.
$50,000 for Merrimack Volleyball Academy for youth sports activities.
$20,000 for Olive In July Inc. to support disabled children, young adults, and low to moderate- income families in Lawrence and Methuen.
$25,000 for the Methuen Senior Activity Center.
“This budget exemplifies our legislative delegation’s commitment to ensuring Methuen remains a vibrant and equitable place for all its citizens,” Payano said.
“I am grateful for the collaborative efforts of my legislative colleagues, and together we will continue to champion the needs of our district.”
Prospective home buyers leave a property for sale during an Open House in a neighborhood in Clarksburg, Maryland on September 3, 2023.
Roberto Schmidt | AFP | Getty Images
It’s no secret that the housing market looks far different than it did a few years ago.
While surging mortgage rates and housing prices have taken away consumers’ purchasing power, low supply has kept the market competitive. As a result, affordability has tumbled dramatically from the early days of the pandemic.
These six charts help explain what this unique moment looks like — and what it means for you:
The 30-year mortgage rate, a popular option for home buyers utilizing financing, is key to understanding the market. This rate is essentially the borrowing costs tied to purchasing a home with financing. A higher rate, in reality, results in more interest due on a home loan.
For the past several months, this rate has hovered around the 7% level. While it has cooled after touching 8% late last year, it’s still far higher the sub-3% rates consumers could lock in during the first years of the pandemic.
Housing prices are also central to the equation for everyday Americans decision how much, or if, they can afford to spend. The Case-Shiller national home price index, which is calculated by S&P Dow Jones Indices, has notched record highs this year.
High prices can elicit different feelings by group. For hopeful homeowners, it can raise red flags that they are planning to buy at the wrong time. But current owners can see reason to celebrate, as it likely means their own property’s value has risen.
With both mortgages and prices up, it’s not surprising that affordability is down compared with the early innings of the pandemic.
There’s a few different readings of affordability painting a similar picture. One from the National Association of Realtors found affordability tumbled more than 33% between 2021 and 2023 alone.
The Atlanta Federal Reserve’s gauge showed the economic feasibility of home ownership plummeted more than 36% when comparing April to the pandemic high seen in summer 2020.
Another way the Atlanta Fed tracks this is through the share of income needed by the typical American to afford the median home. Nationally, it last required 43% of their pay, well above the 30% marker considered the threshold for affordability. It has been considered unaffordable, or above 30%, since mid 2021.
The Atlanta Fed also breaks out what’s driving the current lack of affordability. While significant pay increases in recent years have helped line wallets, the bank found that the negative impact of higher rates and list prices have more than outweighed the benefits of a bigger paycheck.
While the current mortgage rates are high, a team at the Federal Housing Finance Agency found a very small proportion of borrowers are actually locked in at these lofty levels.
Just shy of 98% of mortgages were below the average rate seen in the fourth quarter of last year, the FHFA found. Nearly 69% had a rate that was a whopping 3 percentage points below that average.
There’s two major reasons for why such a small share are paying current rates. The most obvious is that the housing market got hot when rates were low, but cooled significantly in the current period of higher borrowing costs.
The other answer is the race to refinance when rates were below or near 3% early in the pandemic. That allowed people who were already homeowners to take advantage of these relatively low levels.
Huge crowd on a Saturday afternoon in Taksim, Beyoglu District of Istanbul.
Ayhan Altun | Moment | Getty Images
The world population is on course to peak earlier than expected this century as some of the world’s largest countries face declining birth rates, according to the United Nations.
The UN in 2022 had estimated the world population would peak at 10.4 billion by the 2080s.
“In some countries, the birth rate is now even lower than previously anticipated, and we are also seeing slightly faster declines in some high-fertility regions,” UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, Li Junhua, said in a statement.
“The earlier and lower peak is a hopeful sign. This could mean reduced environmental pressures from human impacts due to lower aggregate consumption,” Li added.
Globally on average, women are having one child fewer than they did in 1990. In over half of all countries, the average number of live births per woman has fallen below 2.1, which marks the level required for a population to maintain a consistent size without migration. The UN cited that countries such as China, South Korea, Spain and Italy have “ultra-low” fertility rates.
As of 2024, the population has already peaked in 63 countries including China, Germany, Japan and Russia. The total population of these countries is stipulated to fall by 14% over the next 30 years.
However, in nine countries including Niger, Somalia, the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of Congo, “very rapid growth” is projected where total population of this group is set to double between 2024 and 2054.
For 126 countries including the United States, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, population is expected to peak in the second half of the century or later.
Demonstrators take part in a rally against the far right following the announcement of the results of the first round of the French parliamentary elections at Place de la Republique in Paris on June 30, 2024.
Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images
“We’re scared of what might happen,” Amel, 34, told CNBC ahead of the final round of voting in France’s snap election this weekend.
The vote is being closely watched by all quarters of French society to see if the nationalist, anti-immigration National Rally (RN) builds on its initial win in the first round of voting, or whether centrist and leftwing parties have been able to thwart the party’s chances of entering government.
“It’s a very, very tense time. And it’s the first time that the far right is winning at the first turn [the first round of the ballot]. So it’s a very big deal,” Amel, a therapist who said she will vote for the leftwing New Popular Front, added.
“We are very anxious and we are trying to get everyone to vote, trying to tell people who don’t vote to go and vote, and to try to convince people who vote for the extreme right that they are not a good answer [to France’s problems].”
France’s far-right RN rejects the “extremist” label, saying it stands up for French values, culture and citizens at a time when many are fed up with France’s political establishment that’s been led by President Emmanuel Macron since 2017.
But RN’s opponents and critics warn France is on the brink of a political catastrophe if an overtly anti-immigration, nationalist and euroskeptic party wins a majority in this snap election called by Macron after his party lost heavily against the hard-right in European Parliament elections in June. Prime Minister Gabriel Attal has said French voters now have a “moral duty” to halt the party’s advance.
For young, left-leaning voters like Amel, RN’s surge in voter polls, and the fact it won the most votes in the first round of the election last weekend, are worrying developments that make them fear for France’s societal cohesion.
“I am worried about the country’s future. I think it’s getting worse and worse,” Amel, who preferred to only give her first name due to the sensitive nature of the situation, said. “It’s going be like a kind of civil war. I hope it will not reach that, but people will just not mix anymore and will be scared of each other. And this is very scary.”
The snap election has thrown the country’s political polarization into sharp relief as polls ahead of the final round of voting on Sunday imply a deeply divided nation.
The first round of the election resulted in the far-right RN winning 33% of the vote, with the leftwing New Popular Front (NFP) garnering 28% and the coalition of parties supporting Macron (Ensemble, or Together) winning 20% of the vote.
Left wing supporters react as the results of the first round of French parliamentary elections are announced in Nantes, western France on June 30, 2024.
Sebastien Salom-gomis | Afp | Getty Images
Since the results of the first ballot, parties on the center-right and left have gone all-out to prevent RN’s advance in the second ballot, aiming to prevent a parliamentary majority for the party at all costs. Joining forces in a so-called “Republican Front,” centrists and leftwing parties have withdrawn candidates in many constituencies where one of their candidates was better placed to beat the RN.
By offering voters a starker choice and fewer options, the anti far-right front hopes that the electorate will vote for the non-RN candidate. Whether it will work remains to be seen and analysts point out that French voters might not take kindly to being directed how to vote, or who to vote for.
The final result on Sunday evening — the outcome of a snap election Macron did not need to call — will show just how hard it could be to find a consensus in national politics and government going forward.
How the nation will react to the result is also uncertain. France is no stranger to civil unrest given the widespread “Yellow Vest” anti-government movement of recent years, and street protests since the first round of voting on June 30.
France’s Interior Ministry appears to be preparing for more trouble after Sunday’s poll, reportedly ready to deploy around 30,000 officers across France on Sunday night amid fears of violence after polls close. Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin is reported to have said 5,000 police would be on duty in Paris and its surrounding areas to “ensure that the radical right and radical left do not take advantage of the situation to cause mayhem.”
Tension rises as demonstrators gather in Place de la Republique, to protest against the rising right-wing movement after the Rassemblement National’s victory in the first round of early general elections in Paris, France on June 30, 2024.
Anadolu | Anadolu | Getty Images
A member of the gendarmerie, France’s military force in charge of law enforcement and public order, told CNBC that the “French elections are a mess” and that the “public divide has rarely been so flagrant in France.”
“People’s opinions are becoming more and more divided and this is felt in everyday life,” the gendarme, who asked to remain anonymous due to the nature of his job, told CNBC.
The officer — a father of three who’s in his 40s, and a right-leaning voter — said the polarization in French society was “very worrying, but unfortunately normal with the ‘diversity’ of our society.”
“More and more people with different values and educations are being forced to co-exist, and this clearly doesn’t work,” the officer, who works in Bordeaux in southwestern France, said.
“I am worried about the country’s future, because we are too generous to people who aren’t willing to integrate and contribute to our society, this can not last.”
The police officer said he expected civil unrest after the vote, whichever party gained the most votes.
“There will be civil unrest whoever is elected, this is France and the people speak their mind.”
Political experts agree that the current febrile atmosphere of French politics, and antagonism between the main bodies of voters, are the ingredients for further civil unrest.
“You’ve got here all the recipe for a super-polarized political scene and that, of course, translates into civil society as a whole,” Philippe Marlière, professor of French and European politics at University College London, told CNBC.
“If you’ve got only 33-34% of people voting for the far-right it means the rest is wary of that, or completely opposed to it, so that will translate on every level of politics — institutional politics, party politics, the National Assembly, but also in society. You will have a very polarized society in which younger people, ethnic minorities, women, and in particular feminists, would be very worried,” he said.
Marlière did not discount the possibility of violence on the streets if a far-right party was elected to government. “We’re not there yet. But if there are very unpopular, very antagonizing and very hostile policies to some groups, there will be demonstrations on a scale that you have unrest in the street,” he said.
Like other hard-right parties in Europe, the National Rally has tapped into voter insecurities regarding crime, immigration, national identity and economic insecurity. RN’s 28-year-old leader Jordan Bardella has told voters he will “restore order,” curb immigration and tackle delinquency but he and party figurehead Marine Le Pen have rowed back on some of their more strident promises and rhetoric, back-pedaling over taking France out of NATO, for example, and moderating the party’s traditionally pro-Russian stance.
Bardella said he would still support the sending of arms to Ukraine but not the deployment of ground troops, as Macron suggested was a possibility.
Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella at the final rally before the June 9 European Parliament election, held at Le Dôme de Paris – Palais des Sports, on June 2, 2024.
Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images
It’s uncertain how many of National Rally’s policies would be enacted even if the party made it into government. The “Republican Front” also appears confident ahead of the second round of voting that its strategy to hurt the RN’s vote share is working.
An opinion poll published by Ifop on July 3 suggested voters might tend toward a centrist pro-Macron or leftwing candidate rather than the RN candidate if that is the choice they are presented with on the ballot paper on Sunday. If the choice was between a far-left and far-right candidate, however, the picture was more nuanced, showing a split vote.
Analysts predict that RN is less likely to be able to achieve an absolute majority of 289 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly, but is still likely to gather the most votes, creating a hung parliament scenario and headache for Macron and uncertainty for France’s political and economic outlook.
“The political landscape is in turmoil and can’t really work any longer, at least not by the old rules,” Ipsos analyst Mathieu Doiret told CNBC Thursday.
“We are in a situation so far from our traditions and political habitus that it’s very difficult to adapt to this new situation for every stakeholder.”
BOSTON — After state officials quietly restored state-funded food benefits for legally present immigrants last winter, advocates and lawmakers celebrated the decision, but the money set aside for benefits quickly ran out.
In December, the Legislature and Gov. Maura Healey agreed on a policy tucked into a large spending bill to expand Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits to all legal immigrants who met the program’s income requirements.
Advocates said the $6 million injection would last seven months — ending right around the start of the new fiscal year when they hoped lawmakers and Healey would make the program permanent by putting it into the annual state budget.
But the program ran out of money by the end of April, only two months after it got up and running. Now, Rep. Antonio Cabral is looking to revive the benefit.
“It was like a tease,” said Lina Tabar, director of organizing and policy at La Colaborativa. “To not have the opportunity to provide decent food for your family, then having the opportunity for two months, then guess what? You don’t have it any more. It’s a bit cruel.”
La Colaborativa runs a twice-weekly food pantry under the Tobin Bridge, which sees about 10,000 people every week who line up for food. Advocates say that number has increased significantly in the past year, as the number of new immigrants in Massachusetts has grown.
“We have never experienced running out of food so quickly as we do now,” Tabar said.
Slipping through a patchwork
The SNAP benefit expansion was intended to capture certain people who slip through the patchwork of immigration laws.
About 95 percent of the new arrivals coming into Massachusetts are from Haiti, said Massachusetts Law Reform Institute senior policy advocate Pat Baker. Haitians granted humanitarian parole or who have a pending application for asylum are eligible for federal benefits under a longstanding federal law.
These are also largely the immigrants who are seeking or using the state’s Emergency Assistance family shelter system, which has grown rapidly since 2022, hit a “capacity limit” set by the governor and has a long and growing list of families hoping to get in.
These families whose immigration status grants them access to federal benefits and the state’s emergency assistance shelters are largely not the same group who the expanded SNAP benefits were intended to target, Baker said.
Those who received state-funded SNAP do not get money from the federal government to pay for food, and are usually living with host families or doubled up in living spaces. Many of them have work authorizations but due to language barriers they work in extremely low-wage jobs, where their American coworkers are eligible for SNAP.
“I feel like there’s a misunderstanding between the immigrants who have been here for a long time and never received government support, and the recent migrant crisis. They think they’re helping the same population, but it’s not,” Tabar said. “We’re talking about workers that have been putting long hours in to support our economy and that are filing taxes, and they have a social security number. But they still don’t have access to these benefits.”
Benefits resurrected
Massachusetts used to be one of six states that offered state SNAP benefits to all legal immigrants who met the program’s income requirements, before the state halted the program after five years in 2002.
By signing a supplemental budget in December, Healey resurrected those benefits.
The program was funded at $6 million on Dec. 4, after which the Department of Transitional Assistance took about two months to make system changes and identify who was legally present but ineligible for federal dollars.
It rolled out in mid-February, delivering SNAP dollars to eligible households retroactive to early December. But by April, Baker said, the state realized it didn’t have enough to continue funding the program and terminated it on April 30.
Baker shared cases of people who quickly gained and lost the extra money to help supplement their food purchases:
• A Salvadoran immigrant, legally present with a work authorization and working a low wage job, who has been in the U.S. for over 30 years;
• A family of four from Venezuela with humanitarian parole, approved for state benefits, who didn’t qualify for federal SNAP;
• An individual from Uganda with a pending asylum case and in treatment for cancer, which impacted their earnings and they could no longer afford food on top of rent;
• A parent of two children pending asylum and awaiting work authorization documents, who cannot yet legally work in the U.S. to support their family and qualified for, then lost, about $400 per month in SNAP to pay for the family’s food.
“These are families who will get back on their feet if given the tools to do so,” Baker said. “For people whose relationship to their own governments, in their own countries, may already be fractured, to then work with a community partner to get what they need to feed their families — to have that suddenly end is really confusing, and it does worsen trust in communities to get what they need.”
Seeking opportunities
Cabral and Sen. Sal DiDomenico filed amendments to include those benefits in fiscal year 2025 annual budgets, but neither the House nor the Senate agreed to to revive the program.
At the time of the House budget debate, tax collections were coming in below expectations and budget writers were hesitant about adding spending to their bottom line, Cabral said.
The New Bedford Democrat, who championed the original SNAP benefit expansion policy in the 1990s, said he is looking for new opportunities to get the funding.
He’s eyeing an amendment, he said, that would re-establish the program for children in these immigrant families with the long-term hope of expanding it to adults eventually.
“The amount of dollars we need, if it was just for kids, I think would be a number that probably could get support. So we’re trying to figure it out,” Cabral said. “I know the speaker and chairman of Ways and Means have been very supportive of this in the past … Sometimes it’s a matter of dollars and cents.”
Support, opposition voiced
When the expansion was approved in December, Senate President Karen Spilka voiced her support for the program.
“Massachusetts is better off when the most vulnerable in our communities are cared for,” Spilka said. “Access to food is a priority, no matter where you come from or what part of the Commonwealth you live in, and I was happy to see aid for that purpose included in the supplemental budget.”
Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance warned that the funding was “unsustainable.”
“It’s not a long-term solution to have an open southern border, broken immigration system, and very generous welfare SNAP program funded by Massachusetts taxpayers for newly arriving immigrants,” he said. “This latest taxpayer benefit will attract more immigrants, and Massachusetts will continue to be a magnet. It may sound noble to some but it’s unsustainable for the taxpayers.”
ANDOVER — Literacy is a top priority for HopeWell, a non-profit foster care provider in the Merrimack Valley and beyond.
The organization has long offered comprehensive foster care throughout the state, with its Andover location supporting approximately 45 children and 25 families a year in the region.
In 2022, HopeWell started supporting its students in a new way through a program called RISE which stands for readiness, inquiry, scholarship, and education. RISE was created to improve the literacy of foster children in kindergarten through third grade with the help of tutors.
“What we know about young people experiencing foster care is that they are our nation’s most marginalized group of young people, and their literacy rates are far below their non-foster peers,” Shaheer Mustafa, president and CEO of HopeWell, said.
The program is almost completely supported by philanthropic contributions, and recently received a major boost in the form of a three-year, $100,000 grant from the Cummings Foundation, something key to allowing RISE to continue operating.
“We’re really grateful to foundations like Cummings that believe in trying to help change the outcomes and new programs like this,” Lisa Crane, HopeWell’s Senior Director of Development said.
The program confronts a glaring issue, the literacy gap that affects foster children from a young age, according to the National Library of Medicine.
“Up to 50% of children in foster care entering kindergarten are at-risk for later reading difficulties,” the National Library of Medicine said.
A major factor that contributes to the gap is the frequency that foster children change their living situation according to Mustafa.
“We provide high-impact tutoring that is delivered in the young person’s home because that’s one of the challenges that youth experiencing foster care faces, they bounce around from place to place. So, about six months of academic progress is lost every time they change their placement,” Mustafa said.
To accommodate children in the program, RISE accounts for any possible moves and allows their tutor to remain consistent.
“What our tutors do is they follow them no matter where they could go. So, if they change from one placement to another, the tutors will continue to provide literacy support,” Mustafa said.
Currently, RISE is only being offered to children in Boston, but with more experience and funding like the grant, it could be offered throughout the state.
“Funding like this plays a critical part in being able to pave the way for a broader expansion,” Mustafa said.
In the meantime, the one of a kind program will continue to support children with the help of the Cummings grant.
“There’s really no other program like RISE anywhere in the country that’s focused specifically for early literacy for kids in foster care. We’re just super thrilled that the foundation believes in the possibility and power of the program,” Crane said.
BEVERLY — A man who was serving a life sentence for a 1987 execution-style murder in Salem has been granted parole, despite the objections of the victim’s family and the Essex District Attorney’s office.
Charles “Chucky” Doucette, who pleaded guilty to the second-degree murder of Raymond Bufalino, was granted parole by the state parole board on May 13.
Doucette, who is now 64, shot Bufalino twice in the head as they were sitting in Bufalino’s car near Harmony Grove Cemetery on the Salem-Peabody line in 1987. He was also convicted of two violent home invasions while on bail awaiting trial, and was arrested when he was out on parole on two previous occasions.
In its unanimous decision, the parole board said Doucette “has demonstrated a level of rehabilitation that would make his release compatible with the welfare of society.”
In testimony before the parole board in March, Bufalino’s wife, Shauna O’Sullivan, pleaded with the board not to release Doucette.
“With his tendency for violence I fear that he will reoffend,” she said in a video of the hearing. “I would hate to hear of another person having to live through the anguish and emotional turmoil that I went through. I believe he made his choice all those years ago and that he should be held accountable for his crimes.”
O’Sullivan said her son was 9½ months old at the time his father was murdered.
“I’m not angry or bitter,” she told the board. “I’m past that now, some 38 years later.
“I feel I owe it to my husband’s memory to say something.”
Bufalino’s sister and brother also spoke against giving Doucette parole. In a statement read by a victim service advocate at the parole hearing, Suzanne Maynard and Anthony Bufalino called Doucette a “menace to society and a true threat to society.
“Look at what happened the first time he got paroled,” they said. “Nothing but trouble. So tell me, since being back in prison has he changed? I doubt it.”
Essex County Assistant District Attorney Kayla Burns also spoke against parole, saying Doucette has continued to minimize his culpability and deflect blame.
“He puts the blame on other people being in his life,” Burns said.
During the hearing, Doucette, who has lived in Beverly and Peabody, said he has changed in his years in prison thanks to counseling and programs on subjects such as domestic violence and anger management.
“I’ve always been bigger and stronger than most people. I always got my way through intimidation and being a total ass,” he told the parole board. “I’m not that person today. I have children. I have grandchildren. I have great-grandchildren. I don’t want them to make the mistakes I made. I want them to learn from the mistakes I made.”
Doucette’s mother and sister spoke in favor of his release. His sister, Kim Malick, said Doucette has remained close to her children, who are now in their 20s.
“He met my oldest daughter when she fit into the palm of his hand in prison,” Malik said. “I would love for him to have the opportunity to come home and see her.”
Doucette had been granted parole twice previously and was arrested both times — once on a rape charge that was later dropped, and another on a domestic assault charge of which he was acquitted — and sent back to prison.
In total, Doucette was serving seven life sentences for the murder, two counts of home invasion, two counts of armed robbery, and two counts of stealing by confining or putting a person in fear.
He was denied parole in his last three attempts before the board granted parole in May.
According to the board’s decision, Doucette has invested in his rehabilitation, including participating in domestic violence programs and counseling, and working and volunteering in the prison law library. “He has strong vocational skills and work ethic,” the board said.
Doucette has maintained stable relationships with his family and has been sober since 1990, according to the board.
He told the board he wanted to get his commercial driving license and move to Texas to be near his family.
Bufalino, of Salem, worked for Doucette’s father at a Salem gas station and was considering a lawsuit after getting injured while working. Doucette was also angry that Bufalino owed him money, according to the parole board’s statement of the case.
While seated together in Bufalino’s car, Doucette shot him once behind the right ear and once in the mouth. Bufalino’s body was found by his wife, who had gone to search for him. He was 30 years old.
At the hearing, Doucette apologized to Bufalino’s family. At one point he broke down crying when he said that his own daughter no longer talks to him.
“I know how bad it hurt me with my own daughter not being part of my life,” Doucette said. “I can’t put into words what I must have cost Ray’s family and his son especially.”
After gaining parole, Doucette was scheduled to be released to a long-term residential program. Conditions included a 10 p.m. curfew, electronic monitoring at the parole officer’s discretion, a substance abuse treatment plan, domestic violence counseling, counseling for intimate partner/co-dependence relations, and no contact with the victim’s family.
Staff Writer Paul Leighton can be reached at 978-338-2535, by email at pleighton@salemnews.com, or on Twitter at @heardinbeverly.
NEWBURYPORT — Anna Jaques Hospital will award $100,000 in grant money over the next two years to 10 community-based organizations serving the health needs of area residents.
The grants are part of the hospital’s Community Benefits Program to support programs that address community health priorities and help those facing the greatest health inequities within the hospital’s service area, according to a release from Anna Jaques.
Residents of Newburyport, Amesbury, Haverhill, Salisbury and Merrimac will benefit from the funding. Anna Jaques is part of Beth Israel Lahey Health.
The selection criteria for the grants included four major health priorities affecting the community that were identified during the hospital’s most recent Community Health Needs Assessment, completed in 2022: equitable access to care, social determinants of health, mental health and substance use, and chronic/complex conditions.
“By supporting and investing in local organizations that share our goal in addressing the health needs of our region, we improve the quality of life for local residents while strengthening the communities that we serve,” Glenn Focht, M.D., the hospital’s president, said in the release.
“We are proud to support these local organizations and the important work they do to reduce health disparities and inequities throughout our region,” he added.
The following 10 nonprofit organizations will receive two-year grants of $5,000 per year, for a total of $10,000:
Common Ground Ministries: This program provides basic services aimed at alleviating hunger and homelessness while being an advocate for those in need. The grant will help 90 to 100 people who the program serves each day.
Mitch’s Place, Emmaus, Inc.: This temporary overnight emergency shelter provides adults with a bed, meals, and housing search and employment assistance along with help securing permanent housing and health and social services. The money will help the shelter serve the 400 people it assists annually.
McKinney-Vento Program, Haverhill Public Schools: The grant will fund food programs, including food closets and a food pantry program, for families whose children attend Haverhill Public Schools and are experiencing homelessness. The program seeks to help an additional 40 students and up to 15% more families.
Jeanne Geiger Crisis Center, Youth Empowerment Series: This series provides violence prevention programs that teach students of all ages to lead conversations on healthy relationships and to make positive decisions. The money will fund expansion of the series into Newburyport, allowing the program to serve an additional 100 to 150 participants.
Link House: Children and Teen Center for Help (CATCH): CATCH seeks to empower and support those ages 5 to 18 and their families across the region to understand and nurture their mental well-being. The funding will help to increase the number of young people served by 10%.
Northern Essex Elder Transport (NEET): This volunteer driver program provides adults age 60 and older across the region with no-cost transportation to medical appointments. The funding will support the 4,000 rides provided to 500 people annually.
Nourishing the Northshore: VEGOUT program: This program provides free fresh, locally grown produce to food pantries and senior centers across the region from June to October. The money will help provide 280,000 servings of food — a 55% increase from 2023.
Our Neighbors’ Table: Wednesday Meal Program: The grant will assist this weekly community program based in Amesbury, which provides a hot, three-course meal served by volunteers or as carry-out orders to 300 people each Wednesday.
The Pettengill House: Behavioral Event and Substance Support Team (BESST): The money will provide a social worker and support for people and families with mental health and substance abuse needs in Merrimac, Salisbury, Amesbury and Newburyport. The program assisted 462 people in 321 households in 2023.
Sarah’s Place Adult Health Center: This senior adult day health program offers outreach and education to assist people in remaining healthy and independent in their own homes. The funding will help enroll an additional 25 to 50 participants in the program.
The House Ethics Committee, which has a long-running investigation into the conduct of Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), announced it is now also considering allegations of sexual misconduct and illicit drug use in addition to previous claims that he accepted improper gifts and sought to obstruct government investigations. What do you think?
“I’m appalled that my tax dollars are being used to pay the salaries of an Ethics committee.”
Gloria Dupree, Brakes Cutter
Nation’s White Liberals Announce They Have Successfully Completed Listening
“I’m sure this was caused by peer pressure from all his teenage friends.”
Najeem Wolff, Bedding Critic
“At least give him a chance to pay off the committee members.”
BOSTON — Beacon Hill leaders have rolled out a new public education campaign taking aim at pregnancy crisis centers, which have emerged as the latest battleground in abortion access following the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling overturning federal protections.
The state Department of Public Health said Monday that it has partnered with the advocacy group Reproductive Equity Now Foundation on a new campaign to educate the public about the “dangers and potential harm” of anti-abortion centers that advocates say are providing misleading information to women.
The campaign, which is funded by $1 million carved out in a fiscal 2023 supplemental budget, will appear on social media platforms, billboards, radio and transit, officials said.
Gov. Maura Healey, who approved the funding, said the goal is to help protect access to “safe and legal” abortions. She said crisis pregnancy centers outnumber women’s reproductive health clinics by more than 2-1 and use “deceptive and dangerous tactics.”
“This campaign is an important way to provide accurate information so residents can make informed decisions about reproductive care that are right for them,” Healey said in remarks Monday.
The centers, which advertise free services and counseling for women struggling with unplanned pregnancies, have proliferated in the wake of the high court’s 2022 decision overturning the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.
But women’s reproductive rights groups argue the facilities are funded by anti-abortion groups with the sole intention of blocking women from getting abortions.
Some communities have moved to limit or ban the centers amid complaints that they are using deceptive advertising and providing misinformation.
“Information is power, and today, Massachusetts is putting power in the hands of our communities by alerting them to the dangers of deceptive anti-abortion centers,” Rebecca Hart Holder, the foundation’s president, said in a statement. “Together, we can combat anti-abortion centers’ predatory practices and ensure every person in Massachusetts has access to the health care they want and need, without deception or delay.”
Despite the claims by Healey and other state leaders, anti-abortion groups say the centers are providing options to women other than abortions and being unfairly targeted by a “smear campaign” by proponents of the procedure.
The conservative Massachusetts Family institute says it has documented acts of vandalism and intimidation at pregnancy centers across the state.
The Pregnancy Care Alliance of Massachusetts said the network of pregnancy care centers in the state “provides millions of dollars in no-cost support and care for thousands of women annually who face planned and unplanned pregnancies, with services ranging from pregnancy confirmation services, parenting education, and community referrals to material goods like diapers and formula.”
The group accused Healey and other state leaders of “furthering their extreme abortion agenda by using a taxpayer-funded campaign to discredit our centers.”
“This politically motivated campaign will negatively impact women the most, specifically the many women who want to parent and rely on the free assistance we provide,” the group said in a statement.
Abortion is legal in Massachusetts under a 2020 law, but advocates say the state has become a destination for women coming from other states that banned the procedure or tightened their laws following the Supreme Court’s ruling.
State leaders took steps to shield providers and patients from potential lawsuits filed by groups of other states where abortion is now restricted.
But advocates are pressuring the state to intervene to prevent crisis pregnancy centers from proliferating as more women come to Massachusetts seeking abortions. They’ve been pushing for funding for the public education campaign for several years.
In 2022, then-Gov. Charlie Baker vetoed $1 million for the campaign from the economic development bill shortly before he left office. Baker said the spending was unnecessary because the state already posts public information about legitimate family planning services operating in the state.
His rejection of the proposal prompted terse statements from women’s reproductive advocacy groups, which accused the pro-choice Republican of being “wildly out of touch” with his constituents, while it was praised by anti-abortion groups, which say the pregnancy centers are being unfairly targeted.
Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.
President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump 2024.
Kevin Lamarque | Jay Paul | Reuters
Former President Donald Trump on Saturday recognized that the price of insulin is lower under President Joe Biden, but he still wants voters to credit his own administration.
“Low INSULIN PRICING was gotten for millions of Americans by me, and the Trump Administration, not by Crooked Joe Biden. He had NOTHING to do with it,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “It was all done long before he so sadly entered office. All he does is try to take credit for things done by others, in this case, ME!”
The comment comes as Trump lags Biden on the issue of health care, a top voter priority as the November election nears.
For example, a May survey from KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research group, found Biden with an 11-point lead over Trump on the question of ensuring access to affordable health insurance.
Biden led on several other health-care-related topics in the poll, though the candidates were relatively split on addressing high health-care costs. The poll surveyed 1,479 U.S. adults from April 23 to May 1 and the margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points.
The two candidates are expected to have their first face-to-face presidential debate on June 27.
Insulin price caps have become a central piece of evidence for Biden’s broader economic argument on the campaign trail against Trump.
Under the Inflation Reduction Act, Biden issued a host of provisions aimed at bringing down the price of medicine for seniors, including capping the price of insulin at $35 per month for Medicare recipients. The president has continued to push for a more universal insulin cap that would cover younger people as well.
“Instead of paying $400 a month for insulin, seniors with diabetes only have to pay $35 a month!” Biden said at his State of the Union address in March. “And now I want to cap the cost of insulin at $35 a month for every American who needs it!”
The Democratic incumbent is trying to use lower insulin costs as proof that he has helped lower consumer costs despite the stubbornly high levels of inflation that have loomed over the U.S. economy’s post-pandemic recovery.
For Trump’s part, the former president signed an executive order in the last year of his administration to issue his own $35 price cap on insulin. Biden later paused that policy when he took office as part of a larger freeze to allow his administration to review new regulations set to go into effect.
But the memory of Trump-era health-care policies has still dimmed some voters’ views on the track record of the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. A CNBC All-America Economic survey issued in December found that Biden was ahead by 19 points against Trump on health care.
Trump unsuccessfully spent most of his presidential term trying to repeal the Obama-era Affordable Care Act without offering a viable alternative health-care option. The ACA provides roughly 45 million Americans wit health insurance, according to a March estimate from the White House.
Trump has doubled down on the promise to replace Obamacare on the 2024 campaign trail, though he has still not outlined what that replacement would look like.
“I’m not running to terminate the ACA as Crooked Joe Biden says all over the place,” Trump said in a video posted to his Truth Social account in April. “We’re going to make the ACA much better than it is right now and much less expensive for you.”
According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, migrants crossing the border into the United States illegally are now required to find a lawyer to represent their case within four hours of crossing if they want to argue their exemption from the asylum restrictions enacted by President Biden on Tuesday. What do you think?
“That’s why the Statue of Liberty is engraved with that 800 number.”
Rizwan Oneill, Inflation Predictor
Biden Announces Plans For Extra PlayStation 5 Controller In Case Someone Visits Nation
“Introducing them to convoluted bureaucracy early on will help them assimilate faster.”
John Smart, Road Manager
“It’s barbaric that we’re asking them to interact with lawyers.”
Doctor Who, like all science fiction, has always rooted its storytelling in allegory—raising ideas to challenge its contemporary audience through stories of the past, the future, of monsters, and running down hallways. It always makes the moments the show wants to step away from an allegorical message and explicitly discuss a societal agenda tricky to navigate: what can be left to audience interpretation, what has to be made clear, what is the moment to make your break and be explicit about your message?
Would Peter Capaldi Return to Doctor Who?
“Dot and Bubble” is an episode that thinks about this a lot—but whether it’s an episode that really succeeds in effectively conveying its real message makes for what is one of the most difficult episodes to talk about the series has done in a very long time.
So why is “Dot and Bubble” so difficult to discuss? It’s an episode that is, ostensibly, about one allegory—the influence of social media on our lives, filtered through a society of futuristic Not-TikTok (the title is in fact the device/platform, a holographic bubble that projects a hemisphere of social media screens around a user’s head) influencers in a seemingly idyllic community called Finetime. But what the episode actually is, like “73 Yards” was before it, is a mystery box, structured around a final-scene reveal that radically realigns the rest of the episode you’ve just been served for 40 minutes.
What you are served, on the surface, is a perhaps well meaning, but clunky warning about the perils of social media usage. “Dot and Bubble” largely follows the story of Lindy Pepper-Bean (Callie Cooke, a guest star in a role that, as we’ll get into, becomes incredibly fraught), one of Finetime’s ditzy inhabitants. Endlessly scrolling through video feeds of her friends from the moment she gets up, Lindy is a walking, talking embodiment of the worse kind of assumptions people make about chronically online social media addicts—airheaded, rude, young, and inexperienced with the reality of the world beyond her metaphorical and literal bubble. All her screen friends are the same: loud, garish, petulantly ignorant, and annoying, and all Lindy does is natter back at them from her own screen, complaining how hard it is that they have to work doing mindless data inputting for two hours a day before they can get back to endlessly scrolling through videos of vapid person after vapid person, regurgitating endless, empty content back at each other.
Image: BBC/Disney
So when it turns out that Finetime is actually being attacked by an army of giant alien slugs—picking off one resident after the next, devouring them because they’re so controlled and addicted to their Dot and Bubbles they can’t see the threat staring them in the face until it’s eating them alive—Lindy, at the behest of the Doctor and Ruby digitally sliding into her social feed to warn her of the threat to her life, becomes our increasingly unlikeable protagonist. Barely stumbling her way through our actual heroes’ advice, she tries to escape the giant slugs that, push comes to shove, you ultimately begin to feel like should actually get to eat her. Meanwhile, the Doctor and Ruby try to figure out just how Finetime has turned into a Giant Slug Buffet. And if this was what “Dot and Bubble” was actually about, it would perhaps be fine, if a little rote—a heavy handed admonishment of the kids these days with their apps and their viral videos, but one that plays with Doctor Who’s messages of empathy and understanding to have us, and the Doctor and Ruby, support a distinctly unlikable protagonist as they face certain doom. Maybe there’s a version of “Dot and Bubble” where Lindy learns to touch grass or use social media for good instead of just endless sycophancy, and the day is saved, and we all move on to the next adventure.
But “Dot and Bubble” isn’t that episode at all. In its final moments—after Lindy has managed to survive and make her way out of Finetime, after cruelly and casually sacrificing a fellow resident and her social media idol, faux-internet celebrity Ricky September (Tom Rhys Harries)—the episode reveals its actual intent and the nature of Finetime’s society. Now that she’s finally met the Doctor and Ruby outside of her Bubble’s feed, Lindy and her fellow survivors are offered a safe way off world on the TARDIS—but they reject the Doctor, choosing to go beyond Finetime’s protective shielding and attempt to adapt to the wild on their own, because the Doctor is a Black man. “You, sir, are not one of us,” Lindy spits at him, admonishing the Doctor for daring to make in-person contact with her. Another survivor tells her to step back from him, lest they be “contaminated.” Finetime’s society is not just a social media-driven nightmare, it turns out, it is a white supremacist, colonial structure, dropped down onto an alien world by its presumably similarly racist home civilization to create what it envisions as mono-race haven for young, rich, white people who believe they have a god-given right to do whatever they want because of their race.
Image: BBC/Disney
In the moment, it’s horrifying and hits you like a ton of bricks. Ncuti Gatwa delivers an incredible, tortured performance in just a single, brief scene, howling at first in baffled confusion, and then rage, that Finetime’s survivors are so catastrophically bigoted they’d choose certain death over being saved by a Black person. The episode ends in this moment of clarity, as Lindy and her racist friends go off in one direction, and the Doctor and Ruby, in tears, walk back towards the TARDIS. But for as effectively jarring as it is as a twist, this one single, final scene—a handful of minutes’ runtime at the very end of the episode—it’s also a moment that takes an incredibly serious message, and fumbles making it because instead of it being the dramatic crux of the episode, it is exactly that: a last-minute twist.
Treating the existence of white supremacy as a “gotcha” in this manner is an incredibly fraught idea, and it’s a topic that needs to be more than a revelation in the final minutes of an episode if Doctor Who is actually going to tackle it as a direct idea, rather than through layers of allegory. “Dot and Bubble” is structured in such a way that it can never do that, and support the bite of its final scene. Lindy is a caricature of an unlikable character even before just how vile she is becomes explicit in the final scene, but “Dot and Bubble” still asks you to root for her for the vast majority of its episode—even at what initially appears to be the depths of her selfish cruelty when she deliberately gets Ricky killed so she can escape—because the vast majority of the episode is not really directly about Finetime being “Planet of the Racist TikTokers,” and Doctor Who is a TV series that makes asking us to be empathetic without judgment one of its key values. Even when the character is, on the surface, extremely annoying as Lindy appears to be, Doctor Who wants us to have empathy for its focal perspectives, because that is what the Doctor would do. You can’t just take that idea, and then twist it by going “Whoops, it was a racist all along!”
Image: BBC/Disney
You can’t ever watch “Dot and Bubble” again for the first time. You can’t watch any mystery or plot-twist driven narrative again the way you did for the first time—every viewing after that is fundamentally altered by your knowledge of whatever the mystery or reveal actually is. Every further engagement with the text after that becomes about being able to examine and identify clues with in its structure, to see how effectively that reveal is built towards. “Dot and Bubble” is no exception to this, but it is both an episode that is completely, radically reformed on re-watch by the knowledge the final scene lays out, and also one that has its crucial flaws exposed in doing so. In being set up in service of a mystery with a last-minute twist, everything about the episode’s actual intended allegory—the evils of white supremacy in our society and in online spaces, not just the idea that kids on social media are rotting their brains for non-racist reasons—is left up to the broad interpretation of what is likely a majority-white audience.
There are indeed plenty of “clues” throughout “Dot and Bubble” that click into place with the final reveal. It’s there in Lindy’s ceaseless annoyance whenever the Doctor tries to help her, but can grin and bear it when it’s Ruby that tells her what to do to escape the slugs instead. It’s there, too, in the background realization you make that everyone on the screens in Lindy’s bubble, everyone walking around Finetime, every glimpse we get of its administration, is a white face—that the Doctor is the only person of color in the entire episode. That last point, in particular, is the authorial intent that writer Russell T Davies hangs the episode’s “mystery” on. “What we can’t tell is how many people will have worked that out before the ending,” Davies notes in an interview for Doctor Who Unleashed, the BBC’s behind-the-scenes support series released after each episode of the series, “because they’ve seen white person after white person after white person [in the episode]… I wonder, will you be 10 minutes into it? Will you be 15? Will you be 20, before you start to think ‘everyone in this community is white,’ and if you don’t think that, why didn’t you?”
Image: BBC/Disney
But leaving that realization up to the assumption of a predominantly white audience to solve as a clue, rather than making it something explicitly addressed and engaged with by the narrative of the episode before its final scene, is not only an extremely neoliberal approach to handling the topic of white supremacy—that recognizing that it exists is the thing that should be rewarded, instead of actually saying or doing something about it, especially in the context of a series like Doctor Who, which has a 60-year record of predominantly casting white people in major and supporting roles—it also weakens what the episode itself can say about the evils of this ideology. The structure of the episode is designed as such is that the intent is you are keeping the reveal that Finetime is a bigoted enclave a secret until the final minutes of the episode. This is a struggle that the current season of Doctor Who has faced multiple times already—that its episodes leave, intentionally or otherwise, gaps in logic or exposition to ask of its audience their own interpretation for why something is the way it is in the story, for better or worse. That’s something you can do with, say, how the supernatural abilities of “73 Yards” and its time loop paradox works, or the computer logic that leads to the creation of the Boogeyman creature in “Space Babies.” It’s not something that should be done when what you want to ask the audience to interpret is the existence of white supremacy and its horrors: that is something you have to reckon with clearly in the text itself.
So let’s come back to that final scene with the Doctor and Lindy then, and examine how “Dot and Bubble” actually approaches being a story about the evils of white supremacy as its ending reveals. Isolating its choice to be explicit until its final minutes—and leaving every hint that Finetime is a racist society up to the audience divining it as a clue before the reveal—means that, structurally, “Dot and Bubble” can never give the Doctor a chance to be mindful of, or even address, the repeated microaggressions and discrimination he faces trying to find out what’s going on in Finetime, until he is explicitly told to his face that the reason Lindy and the survivors don’t want his help is because he is Black. He’s never given a chance to be frustrated about the fact that Lindy and the other Bubble users won’t listen to him, even as he’s trying to help them avoid being devoured alive, but will listen to Ruby—every moment of frustration along the way that he feels has to be made vague enough that it looks like he’s just annoyed that Lindy is unlikable and selfish, and for so many other reasons, because the episode is structurally treating her bigotry as a secret to be revealed later. “Dot and Bubble” wants its audience to interrogate the world of Finetime, and see how long it takes them to notice its structural racism, which means the Doctor himself is never allowed to comment on it along the way.
Image: BBC/Disney
For all the clues to pick up along the way, “Dot and Bubble” is not structured to allow itself to be “The Episode Where the Doctor Experiences White Supremacy as a Black Person” until its final scene—and in a scene that’s a handful of minutes long, that’s nowhere near enough time to unpack what the episode would possibly intend to say about what it means that the Doctor, who, for the vast majority of the series’ history, has been able to barge into any room and get what he wants from complete strangers because he is in the form of a heteronormative white man, to be confronted with a scenario where his physical form of a different minority background. There’s perhaps a comparison here to “The Witchfinders,” the rare episode of Jodie Whittaker’s run on Doctor Who that engages with the fact that the Doctor is presenting as female during its narrative. Was it a good episode? Not really, but at the very least it allowed the Doctor to realize that she was being discriminated against because of sexist ideology, and made it the crux of its dramatic conflict, because it allowed that moment of conflict to be revealed earlier than the final minutes of the episode.
Doctor Who can and should use the meta-narrative of it breaking boundaries with diverse casting to, within its text, comment on real world issues of prejudice and discrimination that can be confronted by making those casting choices: casting female Doctors, casting non-white Doctors, casting queer Doctors, and so on. Not only is that an important agenda for a series that is about a hero who prides themselves on empathy and understanding of the wide universe around them, it also opens Doctor Who up to more storytelling opportunities, to tell more stories about more kinds of people that have, historically up to this point, not been represented by having the Doctor’s default form from one incarnation to the other be that of a white man, and even have people from those backgrounds tell those stories, too. But when you choose to do so, you also have to reckon with the question of what it means to not just be treating the Doctor as “the Doctor” in that kind of story, but also explicitly treating them as a person existing in the body of a minority, and examining that minorities’ struggles in the real world—and what you then ask of the audience represented on screen to examine of those struggles in turn.
Image: BBC/Disney
That in and of itself becomes an issue in the final scene of “Dot and Bubble”, because part of the point of the Doctor’s anguished horror when Lindy and the other survivors reject his help is that his empathy—he practically begs them to let him save them from certain doom—does not work. The Doctor is allowed to be shocked at the revelation of Finetime’s white supremacist underpinnings, but his ultimate response is not about white supremacy’s existence in this society, but the grief that he cannot overcome that hateful ideology and save the people beholden to that ideology. Like we said, Doctor Who is a series about empathy—but in this moment the Doctor, in the body of a Black man, is asked to empathize for people who hate his very existence because of his skin color. The Doctor isn’t allowed to tell Lindy and her racist friends to fuck off and get eaten by giant slugs, for all he cares, because he’s the Doctor. He has to care about saving people, even when they are blinded to his help by their horrifyingly evil beliefs.
That’s an incredibly fraught message for Doctor Who to have to try and convey to its audience—either the assumptive broader white audience it has left clues for throughout “Dot and Bubble,” or the audience of people of color watching and seeing themselves in Ncuti Gatwa’s Doctor. And even then, in this final moment, with “Dot and Bubble” and its intention to leave so much of it open to the interpretation of its audience, we never get to see Lindy and the other survivors face comeuppance for their racism. The episode ends with the exposure of white supremacy’s existence, and then can’t say or do anything more beyond that, because it’s saved that exposure for a handful of minutes before the end credits. Sure, it can be implied that after the credits roll, Lindy and her bigoted friends get into a boat to sail off into the wilds beyond Finetime and immediately die excruciating deaths, because they’re stupid bigots who have spent their entire lives up to that point living in the bubble of faux-TikTok, but the episode never actually tells us that that’s the case. It can never make the explicit jump that these people will face hubristic death for their racism, because it chooses to end on them sailing away and the Doctor leaving in tears. If anything, by leaving so much of the intended message of “Dot and Bubble” up to the audience to divine and interpret themselves, you make enough space for some of that audience to assume that Lindy and the others go on to survive and even thrive beyond Finetime’s boarders. After all, for most of the episode we see Lindy learned and adapt long enough to escape the slugs—there are as many clues that she could survive as there are clues to Finetime’s supremacist racial structure!
Image: BBC/Disney
I’m sure a series as progressively minded as Doctor Who doesn’t want any part of its audience to have a chance of thinking “well, did the racists come out okay, actually.” But if you don’t want that to be your message, you have to be crystal clear about your message, even if it’s one that on the surface is as simple as “white supremacy exists and is bad.” “Dot and Bubble” falters because it is structurally unequipped to be clear about that message until its final scene—and the point is that it is unclear about this, because its intent is to maintain the aspect of its twist ending for the majority of its audience. And even then, there’s is just not enough time for it to unpack and discuss the incredibly real topic it hopes to lay out to that audience. There is a version of “Dot and Bubble” that brings its racial allegory into the light much earlier, and much more explicitly, and makes it the crux of its story rather than the mystery of just what is happening in Finetime in the first place—and in turn, has the time to be much more full throated about the evils of white supremacy, instead of simply acknowledging that it still exists. Maybe that is, even, a story told by a writer of color, too.
But we are left to wonder all that, and what that episode might have been, for good or ill. Because whatever it might have ended up being, it was most certainly not the episode we ultimately got.
WASHINGTON—In an effort to respond to rising concerns about immigration, President Joe Biden signed an executive order Monday to deport all 340 million Americans and start the country over from scratch. “Effective immediately, I am ordering the swift removal of all men, women, and children from American soil to give this nation a much-needed blank slate,” the president said upon signing the action, which instructs the Department of Homeland Security to swiftly round up and expel every U.S. citizen, beginning with the reporters and public servants in attendance at the press conference. “After centuries of ethnic and racial strife, we are simply in too deep to salvage a path forward for our great nation. The time has come to wipe the whole place clean and start anew. Today, I urge my fellow Americans to surrender themselves as soon as possible to an ICE agent for a safe and speedy deportation to Guatemala or Mexico. Once there, you can feel free to apply for citizenship again. I should note, though, that this could take years given that everyone working in immigration will soon be deported too.” Biden added that he envisioned a strong path forward for America as an entirely Filipino ethnostate.
Biden Announces Nation Can Stay Up Till 9:30 Tonight
Pope Francis has apologized for using a derogatory term about gay men in a discussion with Italian bishops during which he reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s ban on gay priests, a policy that stands at odds with previous statements that there is room for everyone in the Catholic church. What do you think?
“Well, you have to expect some locker room talk when hanging out with bishops.”
Korben Porter, Financial Distiller
Pope Francis Declares Nothing Wrong With Guy Giving Buddy Tug Job After Few Drinks
“Even the Catholic Church can make the occasional LGBTQ misstep.”
Leanna Rowe, Ham Slicer
“I kind of like the romance of being dehumanized in Italian.”
The seal of the US Department of Justice in Washington, DC on March 21, 2024.
Mandel Ngan | Afp | Getty Images
A global malware network responsible for the theft of $5.9 billion in Covid relief funds and tied to other crimes like child exploitation and bomb threats has been shut down, Department of Justice officials announced Wednesday.
The DOJ arrested 35-year-old YunHe Wang, a Chinese national who was charged with creating the “botnet,” a kind of malware that connects a network of hacked devices, which criminals can then use remotely to launch cyberattacks.
Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Christopher Wray said it is “likely the world’s largest botnet ever.”
From 2014 to 2022, Wang launched and operated the botnet, called “911 S5,” from roughly 150 servers worldwide, including some in the U.S., according to the indictment. 911 S5 hacked into over 19 million IP addresses in nearly 200 countries, about 614,000 of which were in the U.S., according to the DOJ.
The FBI released a how-to guide for users to identify if their devices had been targets of a 911 S5 attack and if so, how to remove the malware.
Wang allegedly sold access to the compromised IP addresses to cybercriminals and amassed at least $99 million, which he used to buy luxury cars, watches and property around the world.
911 S5 was also used for fraud, stalking, harassment, illegal exportation of goods and other crimes, the DOJ said. In particular, the botnet targeted Covid relief programs and filed an estimated 560,000 false unemployment insurance claims, stealing $5.9 billion.
“The conduct alleged here reads like it’s ripped from a screenplay,” said Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement Matthew S. Axelrod of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security.
“What they don’t show in the movies though is the painstaking work it takes by domestic and international law enforcement, working closely with industry partners, to take down such a brazen scheme and make an arrest like this happen,” Axelrod added in his statement.
The DOJ partnered with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies internationally to dismantle the botnet and arrest Wang.
The arrest comes a day after Treasury Department sanctioned Wang and two others for their alleged involvement with 911 S5. Treasury also imposed sanctions on three companies that Wang owned or controlled: Spicy Code Company Limited, Tulip Biz Pattaya Group Company Limited, and Lily Suites Company Limited.
Wang is facing a maximum 65-year prison sentence with four criminal counts: conspiracy to commit computer fraud, substantive computer fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The charges come as U.S. law enforcement agencies try to update protocols to keep up with more sophisticated cybersecurity threats.
In recent years, the U.S. has expressed particular concern for China-backed hackers looking to subvert American infrastructure.
In January, the FBI announced that it had dismantled the Chinese “Volt Typhoon” hacking group, which had been targeting U.S. water plants, electric grids and more.
“Today, and literally every day, they’re actively attacking our economic security, engaging in wholesale theft of our innovation, and our personal and corporate data,” Wray said at a January hearing.
Workers who are injured on the job are at higher risk for fatal opioid-related overdoses, according to a new study, which calls for renewed efforts to reduce the stigma of drug addiction.
The report, released Thursday by the state Department of Public Health, found that working-age Massachusetts residents who died between 2011 and 2020 were 35% more likely to have died of an opioid-related overdose if they had previously been injured at work.
DPH researchers compiled information about individuals’ employment and work-related injury status from their workers’ compensation claims and linked it with data from their death certificates.
Researchers reviewed the details of 4,304 working-age adults who died between 2011 and 2020 and found at least 17.2% had at least one workplace injury claim and died of an opioid-related overdose, according to the study.
Public health officials say the study is the first linking the impact of work-related injuries to opioid-related overdose deaths.
“Occupational injuries can take both a physical and mental toll, and those who suffer injuries at work may be discouraged from seeking help because of stigmatization and fear of losing their jobs,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kate Walsh said in a prepared statement. “Avoiding or delaying care can lead to a preventable overdose death.”
She called for stepped-up efforts to “eliminate the stigma that accompanies substance use disorder in all sectors of society, including the workplace.”
The release of the report comes as opioid overdose deaths remain devastatingly high in the Bay State, despite a slight decrease over the past year.
There were 2,323 confirmed or suspected opioid-related deaths in Massachusetts from Oct. 1, 2022 to Sept. 30, 2023 — eight fewer than the same period in 2021, according to a report released in December by the health department.
Health officials attributed the persistently high death rates to the effects of an “increasingly poisoned drug supply,” primarily with the powerful synthetic opioid fentanyl.
Fentanyl was present in 93% of the overdose deaths where a toxicology report was available, state officials noted.
Curbing opioid addiction has been a major focus on Beacon Hill for a number of years with hundreds of millions of dollars being devoted to expanding treatment and prevention efforts.
The state has set some of the strictest opioid prescribing laws in the nation, including a cap on new prescriptions in a seven-day period and a requirement that doctors consult a state prescription monitoring database before prescribing an addictive opioid.
The Opioid Recovery and Remediation Fund, created by the state Legislature in 2020, has received more than $101 million from settlements with drug makers and distributors over their alleged role in the opioid crisis, according to the Executive Office of Health and Human Services.
More than 25,000 people have died from opioid-related overdoses in Massachusetts since 2011, according to state records.
Nationally, fatal drug overdoses fell by roughly 3% in 2023, according data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
But the toll from fatal overdoses in 2023 remained high, claiming 107,543 lives, the federal agency said.
Fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were responsible for about 70% of lives lost, while methamphetamine and other synthetic stimulants are responsible for about 30% of deaths, the CDC said.
“The shift from plant-based drugs, like heroin and cocaine, to synthetic, chemical-based drugs, like fentanyl and methamphetamine, has resulted in the most dangerous and deadly drug crisis the United States has ever faced,” Anne Milgram, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, said in a recent statement.
The DEA points to Mexican drug cartels, who it says are smuggling large quantities of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs manufactured in China into the country, along the southern border.
“The suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, and money launderers all play a role in the web of deliberate and calculated treachery orchestrated by these cartels,” she said.
Workers who are injured on the job are at higher risk for fatal opioid-related overdoses, according to a new study, which calls for renewed efforts to reduce the stigma of drug addiction.
The report, released Thursday by the state Department of Public Health, found that working-age Massachusetts residents who died between 2011 and 2020 were 35% more likely to have died of an opioid-related overdose if they had previously been injured at work.
DPH researchers compiled information about individuals’ employment and work-related injury status from their workers’ compensation claims and linked it to data from their death certificates.
Researchers reviewed the details of 4,304 working-age adults who died between 2011 and 2020 and found at least 17.2% had at least one workplace injury claim and died of an opioid-related overdose, according to the study.
Public health officials say the study is the first linking the impact of work-related injuries to opioid-related overdose deaths.
“Occupational injuries can take both a physical and mental toll, and those who suffer injuries at work may be discouraged from seeking help because of stigmatization and fear of losing their jobs,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kate Walsh said in a statement. “Avoiding or delaying care can lead to a preventable overdose death.”
Walsh called for stepped-up efforts to “eliminate the stigma that accompanies substance use disorder in all sectors of society, including the workplace.”
The release of the report comes as opioid overdose deaths remain devastatingly high in the Bay State, despite a slight decrease over the past year.
There were 2,323 confirmed or suspected opioid-related deaths in Massachusetts from Oct. 1, 2022, to Sept. 30, 2023 — eight fewer than the same period in 2021, according to a report released in December by the health department.
Health officials attributed the persistently high death rates to the effects of an “increasingly poisoned drug supply,” primarily with the powerful synthetic opioid fentanyl.
Fentanyl was present in 93% of the overdose deaths where a toxicology report was available, state officials noted.
Curbing opioid addiction has been a major focus on Beacon Hill for a number of years with hundreds of millions of dollars being devoted to expanding treatment and prevention efforts.
The state has set some of the strictest opioid-prescribing laws in the nation, including a cap on new prescriptions in a seven-day period and a requirement that doctors consult a state prescription monitoring database before prescribing an addictive opioid.
The Opioid Recovery and Remediation Fund, created by the state Legislature in 2020, has received more than $101 million from settlements with drug makers and distributors over their alleged role in the opioid crisis, according to the Executive Office of Health and Human Services.
More than 25,000 people have died from opioid-related overdoses in Massachusetts since 2011, according to state records.
Nationally, fatal drug overdoses fell by roughly 3% in 2023, according data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
But the toll from fatal overdoses in 2023 remained high, claiming 107,543 lives, the federal agency said.
Fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were responsible for approximately 70% of lives lost, while methamphetamine and other synthetic stimulants are responsible for approximately 30% of deaths, the CDC said.
“The shift from plant-based drugs, like heroin and cocaine, to synthetic, chemical-based drugs, like fentanyl and methamphetamine, has resulted in the most dangerous and deadly drug crisis the United States has ever faced,” Anne Milgram, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, said in a recent statement.
The DEA points to Mexican drug cartels, who it says are smuggling large quantities of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs manufactured in China into the country along the southern border.
“The suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, and money launderers all play a role in the web of deliberate and calculated treachery orchestrated by these cartels,” she said.
Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.
WASHINGTON—Shedding light on the possible reasons for a dip in such news coverage, a report released Friday found that school shootings were either way down or too depressing for the media to cover.“Really, there are two possibilities here: It could be that there’s been some remarkable progress on getting guns out of the hands of potential school shooters, or it might be that journalists and editors all collectively decided the problem was too painful and intractable and turned away entirely,” read the report, which confirmed that the general sense of there being less live footage of parents weeping in school parking lots recently could certainly be because of a sea change in the rate of such tragedies in America, although it was equally likely that most media outlets had simply ceased paying attention for the benefit of their viewers’ mental health. “It’s funny, because I can’t think of the last time I heard the words ‘the following footage may be disturbing to some viewers’ uttered on national news, especially above the chyron ‘School Under Lockdown’ or alongside the name of some small town that will never be the same again. Possibly, that means something has changed for the better in this country. Or maybe the problem has gotten so bad that even contemplating it would completely rob viewers of whatever hope they had left. Kind of unclear at this point.” The report went on to speculate on a third possibility: that such stories were still being covered, but that the American populace had gotten so disillusioned at this point that such imagery no longer even registered.
