A new startup is leaning on the power of recommendations to spread the word about indie films.
Olyn offers a direct-to-consumer platform for film and video distribution, enabling filmmakers to retain up to 90% of their revenue. Billed as Shopify for filmmakers, Olyn removes the platform as a middleman, eliminating ads and algorithm-driven recommendations. This allows movies to shine based on their own merits and be monetized directly through viewership.
Ana Maria Jipa, cofounder and CEO of Olyn, told TechCrunch that the filmmakers are responsible for the movies promotion, while Olyn handles the rest. We provide all the tech that implies: from DRM, 4K streaming, casting, a full landing page that presents the film in the same way that it might appear on Netflix or Apple TV, plus all the other tools such as geo-targeting, analytics, and audience data, she said. They promote their movie with PR, journalists, bloggers, film critics, etc.
The idea is that while filmmakers may not have access to the big marketing budgets of streaming giants, a recommendation from someone a user knows and trusts carries far more weight than a suggestion by a platform algorithm. On Olyn, filmmakers can rely on influencers, film critics, and content creators as distribution partners with purchase links appearing across their content, blogs, and social media.
Olyn also provides filmmakers with detailed analytics on viewership, including the locations where their movie is performing well, total minutes watched, and a database of users who have viewed the film. This allows filmmakers to better understand their audience and use that information to inform and improve future projects.
Jipa says Olyns global reach can also help battle piracysomething thats been an issue for film studios since the advent of the internet. If someone can pay for a movie and watch it instantly without the hassle of trawling the internet just to settle for a sketchy stream littered with ads, theyre much more likely to do so.
And if you’re after a recommendation, the recent Brian Epstein biopic Midas Man, a film about the manager of the Beatles, just dropped on the platform.
Nike is making a major play for female consumers and the athleisure market with its Skims partnership for a new womens brand called NikeSkims.
Set to debut this spring, the line will include apparel, footwear, and accessories. The two companies are marketing it as a blend of what each brand is best known forNike for its innovation, sports science, and athlete insights, and Skims for its style and body-inclusive design.
Over the past five years, Skims has redefined the intimates and casual apparel landscape, championing inclusivity and confidence,” Skims CEO and cofounder Jens Grede said in a statement. “Now, by partnering with Nike, the undisputed leader in athletic performance and innovation, were poised to create a new standard in the activewear market.”
[Photo: Nike]
What makes NikeSkims unique
The partnership marks the first time in Nike history it’s launched a new brand with an outside company.
NikeSkims represents one of the most mass-market collaborations yet for Skims, which has partnered in recent years with the NBA, the North Face, and Dolce & Gabbana. It also solidifies the underwear and shapewear brands deeper push into sports apparel. Skims launched its men’s line with pro athletes Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Nick Bosa, and Neymar Jr., and became the official underwear brand of the NBA, WNBA, and USA Basketball. NikeSkims indicated it isn’t ruling out apparel for men down the line.
For Nike, it’s a chance to play catch-up in the athleisure space where it’s been lapped by competitors like Lululemon, Hoka, and On. Those brands early investment in comfortable activewear has paid off as the category has continued to grow in popularity since the pandemic. While Nike has traditionally anchored its entire design language in performance innovation, the Skims partnership offers the company a wider lane. Heidi ONeill, president of consumer, product, and brand at Nike, says NikeSkims will serve women so they can feel strong and sexy.
Nike keeps charting its comeback
The NikeSkims announcement is the latest step in the storied sports apparel brand’s attempt to right the ship, and a sign that Nike sees women and girls as key to regaining its footing. Nike aired its first Super Bowl ad in 27 years (starring an all-female cast of athletes including basketball star Caitlin Clark and U.S. track and field Olympian Sha’Carri Richardson), and its newest signature shoe, with Las Vegas Aces center Aja Wilson, was announced this month.
“No footwear or apparel brand delivers the level of support Nike provides to womens sport and movement,” Amy Montagne, Nike Women’s VP and general manager, said in a statement. With NikeSkims, “were deepening that support.”
By partnering with Skims, Nike is betting on the cultural cachet of a hip, younger brand, and the power of teamwork as it plots its comeback.
The term polar vortex usually refers to the gigantic circular upper air weather pattern in the Arctic region. It is a normal pattern that is stronger in the winter and keeps some of the coldest weather bottled up near the North Pole.
But at times, some of the vortex can break off or move south, bringing unusually cold weather south and permitting warmer weather to creep up north.
This week, parts of the U.S. are experiencing the 10th and coldest polar vortex event this season. Weather forces in the Arctic are combining to push the chilly air into the U.S. and Europe.
With record snow in New Orleans last month and drought and destructive wildfires in Southern California, this winter has not been normal.
The latest projected cold outbreak will bring bone-chilling temperatures to the Northern and Central Plains for several days, starting Sunday.
Wind chills dropped to minus 60 Fahrenheit (minus 51 Celsius) in parts of North Dakota Monday and minus 50 F (minus 46 C) in parts of Montana. Wind chills were expected to dip even lower Tuesday morning.
Frostbite and hypothermia will occur if unprotected skin is exposed to these temperatures. An extended period of freezing temperatures could cause ruptured water pipes, the NWS warned Monday.
Meteorologists expect strong winds to make the cold feel even worse. Every U.S. state but Hawaii, California, and Florida have some or all parts forecast to have a good chance of windchills of 20 degrees or below sometime next week, the National Weather Service predicted.
Some experts say disruptions to polar vortexes are happening more frequently because of a warming world. A warmer Artic gives more energy to atmospheric waves that can drive weather patterns, making the waves more likely to disrupt the vortex and move colder air south into lower latitudes.
Despite the unusually cold winter across the U.S., the world remains in an overall warming pattern. Earths average overall temperature set yet another monthly heat record in January. It was the 18th month of the last 19 that the world hit or passed the internationally agreed upon warming limit of 1.5 C (2.7 F) above preindustrial times.
Over the past month, as Elon Musk began to chaotically dismantle government agencies through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), federal workers started to mobilize to fight back. One step is happening today, February 19: In a national day of action, workers will be protesting in front of federal buildings and Tesla dealerships, along with citizens who want to show support for the work that federal agencies do, from consumer protection to cancer research.
The message is that we need to save our public services from billionaires who want to defund them, says Mark Smith, an occupational therapist at the VA hospital in San Francisco who is president of the local chapter of the National Federation of Federal Employees, a union that represents more than 100,000 workers and is part of the Federal Unionists Network, a movement of rank-and-file workers thats independent from union affiliations and has been quickly growing since Musk got to D.C.
At a protest in front of the Tesla showroom in San Francisco, federal workers will be joined by citizens who benefit from federal servicesincluding veterans who get healthcare from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA); tenants who get housing from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); consumers who get the benefit of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which Musk has all but gutted; and people who appreciate the clean air and water provided by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
All of us will be out there just trying to show that were not going to be quiet, Smith says. Were going to stand up and were going to fight back.
Though some of the protests are happening in front of Tesla stores, Smith emphasizes that they stand in solidarity with workers at Tesla factories. “What Musk is doing to us right now is the same thing he has done to Tesla workers in the factories in California,” he says. “In 2017, he tried to lay off a bunch of Tesla workers and say that it was for performance so they could get around the California rules around layoffs,” he says. “That’s a playbook he’s well-versed in.”
DOGE plans to access Department of Labor (DOL) data, though unions fought against it. The DOL previously had 17 open investigations into Tesla and SpaceX. OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, has fined Musk multiple times for safety violations. (OSHA, which has a database containing whistleblower information, is yet another agency DOGE is reportedly targeting.) “I think it behooves all of us to stand up together and say that we’re not going to let Musk drag us back to the 19th century in terms of working conditions,” Smith says.
The group also wants to help the public understand that federal employees aren’t just bureaucrats pushing paper. Federal workers are park rangers. Federal workers are VA nurses. Federal workers are the folks who get your social security checks out on time, says Smith. Federal workers are wildland firefighters putting out the massive fires in California and wherever else. Federal workers are scientists and researchers looking at cancer.
Many different unions represent different groups of federal workers. Those unions have also been growingSmith says that his own union has seen more sign-ups in the past two weeks than over the past six months. Federal unions have multiple lawsuits underway against DOGE’s work. But the informal Federal Unionist Network, also known as FUN, is helping connect workers across agencies, and educating workers who are new to unions, about how to take collective action.
Already, as DOGE has paralyzed agencies like USAID and the CFPB, it’s led to real-world consequences. (In one of many examples, tens of millions of dollars’ worth of emergency food aid, grown by U.S. farmers, sat in ports and warehouses last week waiting to spoil after DOGE virtually shut down USAID.) Some federal employees who have already left, particularly at higher levels of management, have taken valuable institutional knowledge with them that can’t easily be replaced. Many in the newest generation of federal workers, who’ve faced layoffs, have likely decided to find work in the private sector instead.
It’s understandable, of course, for federal workers to be afraid of DOGE and feel powerless. But Smith says that they need to recognize the strength of working together. “Our national unions and other groups are doing the hard work of lobbying and filing lawsuits, but at the end of the day, workers acting together is really how we can exercise our power,” he says.
One of President Donald Trumps major promises during the 2024 presidential campaign was to launch mass deportations of immigrants living in the U.S. without legal authorization.
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has said that, since January 2025, it is detaining and planning to deport 600 to 1,100 immigrants a day. That marks an increase from the average 282 immigration arrests that happened each day in September 2024 under the Biden administration.
The current trend would place the Trump administration on track to apprehend 25,000 immigrants in Trumps first month in office. On an annual basis, this is about 300,000far from the millions and millions of immigrants Trump promised to deport.
A lack of funding, immigration officers, immigration detention centers, and other resources has reportedly impeded the administrations deportation work.
The Trump administration is seeking $175 billion from Congress to use for the next four years on immigration enforcement, Axios reported on February 11, 2025.
If Trump does make good on his promise of mass deportations, our research shows that removing millions of immigrants would be costly for everyone in the U.S., including American citizens and businesses.
Food costs will increase
One important factor is that mass deportations would weaken key industries in the U.S. that rely on immigrant workers, including those living in the U.S. illegally.
Overall, immigrants without legal authorization make up about 5% of the total U.S. workforce.
But that overall percentage doesnt reflect these immigrants concentrated presence within various industries. Approximately half of U.S. farmworkers are living in the country without legal authorization, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Some of these immigrant farmworkers are skilled supervisors who make decisions about planting and harvesting. Others know how to use and maintain tractors, loaders, diggers, rakers, fertilizer sprayers, irrigation systems, and other machines crucial to farm operations.
If those workers were to be suddenly removed from the country, Americans would see an increase in food costs, including what they spend on groceries and at restaurants.
With fewer available workers to pick fruits and vegetables and prepare the food for shipment and distribution, the domestic production of food could decrease, leading to higher costs and more imports.
National estimates of the restaurant and food preparation workforce, meanwhile, indicate that between 10% and 15% of those workers are immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.
Past state-level immigration enforcement policies offer an idea of what could happen at the national level if Trump were to carry out widespread deportations.
For example, a 2011 Alabama law called HB-56 directed local police officers to investigate the immigration status of drivers stopped for speeding. It also prohibited landlords from renting properties to immigrants who do not have legal authorization to work or live in the country. That law and its resulting effects prompted some Alabama-based immigrant workers to leave the state following workplace raids.
Their departure wound up costing the state an estimated $2.3 billion to $10.8 billion loss in Alabamas annual gross domestic product due to the loss of workers and economic output.
Other industries that rely on immigrants
Part of the challenge of mass deportations for industries like construction, nearly a quarter of whose workers are living without legal authorization, is that their workforce is highly skilled and not easily replaced. Immigrant workers are particularly involved in home construction and specialize in such tasks as ceiling and flooring installation as well as roofing and drywall work.
Fewer available workers would mean slower home construction, which in turn would make housing more expensive, further compounding existing problems of housing supply and affordability.
Shocks from deportations would also slow commercial and public infrastructure construction. Six construction workers, for example, died in April 2024 in the sudden collapse of the Baltimore Key Bridge in Maryland. All of them were Latino immigrants living in the U.S. without legal documentation.
Examining the arguments
Trump administration officials and other politicians have argued that deporting large numbers of immigrants would help the country save money, since fewer people will use federal and state funds by attending public schools or receiving temporary shelter.
Trump said in November 2024 that there is no price tag for large-scale deportations.
Its not a question of price tag, Trump said. We have no choice. When people have killed and murdered, when drug lords have destroyed countries, and now theyre going to go back to those countries because theyre not staying here, Trump told NBC News.
Trump and his supporters also argue that deporting immigrants would mean more jobs for American workers.
But there is compelling evidence to the contrary.
First, immigrants are filling labor shortages and doing jobs that many Americans dont want to do, ones that might be unsafe or poorly paid.
Even if Americans were willing to do those jobs, there simply arent enough Americans in the workforce to fill existing labor vacuums, let alone an enlarged one following deportations.
Second, for employers, having fewer workers in the country translates into higher wages, which in turn means less capital to adapt and grow. For businesses based on consumer debt (think mortgages, car loans, and credit cards) deportations would disrupt the financial sector by removing responsible borrowers who make consistent payments.
Third, immigrants living without legal documentation in the U.S. pay more than $96 billion in federal, state, and local taxes per year and consume fewer public benefits than citizens.
Immigrants without legal authorization are not eligible for Social Security benefits and cant enroll in Medicare or many other safety net programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
The bottom line
In other words, people who are living and working in the U.S. without legal authorization are helping to pay, through taxes, the costs of caring for Americans as they age and begin to draw on the nations retirement and healthcare programs.
The burden from recent inflation notwithstanding, an economy supported by immigrants living illegally in the U.S. protects Americans.
The U.S. would be unable to dodge the economic shocks and high costs that mass deportations would bring about.
Francisco I. Pedraza is a professor of political science at Arizona State University.
Jason L. Morín is a professor of political science at California State University, Northridge.
Loren Collingwood is an associate professor of political science at the University of New Mexico.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The return-to-office (RTO) pendulum continues to swing toward the wants of CEOs, and we expect this trend to continue. A 2024 survey of CEOs by KPMG found that 79% believe employees will be back in the office five days a week within three yearsa dramatic increase from 2023s survey. For many leaders, the workplace remains a vital tool for reinforcing company values and driving strategic alignment across teams.
Yet, while employers prioritize a return to the collaboration, culture, and innovation that the office fosters, employees say they enjoy the autonomy and flexibility theyve gained working remotely. If leaders dont act consistently and communicate a RTO strategy effectively, theyll further erode employee trust.
As a designer and workplace strategist, Ive been reflecting on how to design offices that encourage in-office collaboration, and engaging in deep conversations with clients about how they are implementing RTO policies.
“Trust begins with leading by example, Jon Martin told me recently. Martin is the North American CEO of AEW Capital Management, one of the worlds largest global real-estate investment managers. AEW is a client of my firm Elkus Manfredi Architects, and we helped them reimagine their headquarters in Boston.
AEW currently doesnt have a mandate for how many days a week its employees are expected to work out of its office. But its leadership teamlike many othershas been explicit about its desire to promote a predominately in-office culture. To encourage employees to be in the office more often, AEWs senior management team works in-person nearly full-time. If you have a return-to-office policy, whatever it may be, and it is not upheld by leadership, you will lose credibility quickly, says Martin.
Success begins with transparency
RTO policies often fail because inconsistent actions erode trust among employees, making it essential to align leadership actions with transparent communication. Employees often ask: “Are our leaders considering our needs? Are they asking for our insights? Will these mandates truly increase efficiency and purpose?
These are valid concerns that can be addressed through a thoughtfully designed process to maintain organizational trust.
I know from experience that listening to and engaging with the people for whom you are designing is immensely important for creating solutions and ensuring buy-in. Research shows involving employees in policy development enhances their commitment to change initiatives.
Best practices for company leaders to take include:
Establish a shared vision before seeking feedback. Frame discussions around organizational goals to align responses with achieving these objectives rather than focusing solely on personal preferences.
Ask for input within a structured framework. Provide context and priorities to guide decision-making rather than posing open-ended questions like, Do you prefer working at the office or at home?
Be transparent about trade-offs. Set expectations early, acknowledging theyre unlikely to meet everyones needs perfectly, and balance individual preferences with broader organizational priorities.
Incorporate feedback thoughtfully and communicate decisions clearly. Asking for input and then failing to address itor worse, ignoring it entirelycan erode trust. Even if not all suggestions are implemented, explain decisions and how feedback shaped them.
Mutual trust = a balanced solution
When leadership demonstrates its trust in employees, staff are increasingly willing to collaborate on changes within their organizations. In fact, research finds that creating internal structures for feedback makes employees feel more included in organizational decisions and has downstream benefits on productivity and profitability.
Leaders should also encourage employees to consider the broader impact of decisions on the business, fostering a sense of shared investment in a company’s path. Insights on team dynamics and performance can help leaders communicate the workplace strategies that support both individual and collective success.
From intangible to innovative
Crafting a successful return-to-office strategy is much like effective workplace design: Both transform intangible inputsemotions, interests, and individual experiencesinto solutions that benefit everyone.
Martin sums up the stakes: If your return to the office policy feels administrative, is inconsistently applied across your organization, or lacks support from leadership, it will be nearly impossible to have a shared vision and achieve success.
U.S. consumers often pay more for gluten-free products, yet these items typically provide less protein and more sugar and calories compared with gluten-containing alternatives. That is the key finding of my new study, published in the journal Plant Foods for Human Nutrition.
This study compared gluten-free products with their gluten-containing counterparts, and the findings suggested that many perceived benefits of gluten-free productssuch as weight control and diabetes managementare exaggerated.
Currently, many gluten-free products lack dietary fiber, protein, and essential nutrients. Manufacturers often add supplements to compensate, but the incorporation of dietary fibers during processing can hinder protein digestion.
In addition, gluten-free products generally contain higher sugar levels compared with other products containing gluten. Long-term adherence to a gluten-free diet has been associated with increased body mass index, or BMI, and nutritional deficiencies.
Gluten-free productsdefined in the U.S. as those that contain less than or equal to 20 parts per million of glutenlargely lack wheat, rye, barley, and sometimes oats, all rich sources of arabinoxylan, a crucial nonstarch polysaccharide. Arabinoxylan provides several health benefits, including promoting beneficial gut bacteria, enhancing digestion, regulating blood sugar levels, and supporting a balanced gut microbiota.
Our study also pointed out that it is difficult to find a gluten-free product that excels in all nutritional areas, such as high protein and fiber content with low carbohydrates and sugar.
On the other hand, gluten-free seeded bread contains significantly more fiber38.24 grams per 100 gramsthan its gluten-containing counterparts. This is likely due to efforts by manufacturers to address fiber deficiencies by using ingredients such as pseudo-cereals, such as amaranth and quinoa hydrocolloids (water-soluble macromolecules used in gluten-free baked goods made with quinoa flour).
These improvements, however, vary by manufacturer and region. For example, gluten-free products in Spain tend to have lower fiber content than their gluten-containing counterparts.
Why it matters
The term gluten-free diet has become a buzzword, much like organic, and is now a part of everyday life for many people, often without a full understanding of its actual benefits. While a gluten-free diet is a medical necessity for people who are sensitive to gluten, a condition called celiac disease, or for those with wheat allergies, others adopt a gluten-free diet due to perceived health benefits or because its a trend.
In 2024, the global gluten-free product market was valued at $7.28 billion and projected to reach $13.81 billion by 2032. The U.S. market share is estimated to be $5.9 billiona little less than half of the global figure.
Approximately 25% of the U.S. population consumes gluten-free products. This figure is far higher than the the roughly 6% of people with non-celiac wheat sensitivity, 1% of people with celiac disease and even lower percentages of people with wheat allergies.
This suggests that many people adopt gluten-free diets for reasons other than medical necessity, which may not offer health or financial benefits.
Whats next
Investment in research and development is essential to create more nutritionally balanced gluten-free products using locally available ingredients. This will require human feeding trials with different formulations of gluten-free products to ensure that these products meet nutritional needs without adverse effects.
Collaborations between governments could help secure subsidies, which would reduce production costs and make these products more affordable. Although the initial costs of research and maintaining a gluten-free production line are high, using local ingredients and financial incentives can make these products more cost-competitive compared with their gluten-containing counterparts.
Public education is also important to keep people informed about the pros and cons associated with a gluten-free diet.
Sachin Rustgi is an associate professor of molecular breeding at Clemson University.
The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Fast Company Impact Council is a private membership community of influential leaders, experts, executives, and entrepreneurs who share their insights with our audience. Members pay annual membership dues for access to peer learning and thought leadership opportunities, events and more.
Customer experience is at a tipping point. Companies are struggling to see results from AI, digital transformation, and personalization. But lets be real: Most companies arent connecting the dots. Consumers want seamless, human-like engagement, but too often theyre met with fragmented systems and half-baked AI solutions.
The good news? The gap between what customers expect and what brands deliver is finally starting to closebut only for the companies willing to do the hard work. This isnt about throwing bots at every problem or chasing shiny new tools. Its about integrating the right technologies, driving measurable outcomes, and putting the customer experience at the center of every decision.
If youre ready to leave “good enough” behind and turn customer experience (CX) into your strongest competitive advantage, heres are five trends you need to know.
Trend 1: Bridge the AI perception gap
Over the last two years, consumer attitudes toward AI have markedly shifted. Research from LivePerson shows that in 2023, only 50% of consumers felt positive about using AI to interact with brands, compared to 90% of brands that embraced it. By 2024, consumer sentiment rose to 63%, signaling a closing gap.
This evolution represents more than a shift in sentimentits a window of opportunity. Brands that effectively integrate AI to enhance, rather than replace, human interactions are succeeding in building trust and delivering value. To capitalize, leaders must focus on using AI to create meaningful customer outcomes, like personalization at scale, proactive engagement, and actionable insights. The takeaway is clear: AI adoption should not just be about cutting costs; if the CX is right, it should be efficient while enhancing consumer experiences.
Trend 2: Move from systems of record to systems of action
Traditional CX platforms served as data repositoriessystems of record that lacked the capability to drive real-time actions. In 2025, the paradigm has shifted. Systems of actionintegrated frameworks that unify AI and human capabilities to orchestrate, automate, and personalize customer interactions across all touchpointsenable businesses to translate data into insights and transform insights into immediate, measurable actions.
These capabilities allow brands to go beyond passive data collection, using AI-driven analytics and automation to anticipate customer needs and deliver proactive engagement. For instance, integrating data streams across CRM, voice, email, and chat creates a unified view of the customer journey, breaking down organizational silos to serve customers more effectively.
The key is interoperability. Brands must avoid rip and replace approaches that disrupt existing systems. Instead, investing in platforms that integrate seamlessly with legacy tools can create a cohesive ecosystem, driving efficiency and better customer outcomes.
Trend 3: Personalization at scale
The demand for hyperpersonalized experiences is transforming CX strategies. Consumers no longer tolerate fragmented interactionsthey expect seamless, consistent engagement across all touchpoints. And meeting their expectations is worth it: At LivePerson, we find that brands that effectively leverage AI to blend automation with human empathy (through use of solutions such as proactive messaging or intelligent routing) report higher satisfaction scores and increased loyalty.
To achieve this, brands must:
Connect digital and human interactions cohesively.
Use AI-powered tools to predict customer needs and recommend next best actions.
Embed personalization deeply into every stage of the customer journey, from acquisition to retention.
Trend 4: CX as a strategic growth driver
CX has outgrown its traditional role as a support function. Its now a strategic lever for achieving business outcomes, from revenue growth to operational efficiency. Leaders must reframe CX as a company-wide capability that drives differentiation and long-term loyalty.
This involves:
Customer-first metrics: Shift from siloed departmental key performance indicators to metrics like customer lifetime value and satisfaction across the entire journey.
Reimagined cost centers: Transform support functions into profit centers through smart automation and efficient self-service options.
Cross-functional alignment: Enable seamless collaboration between marketing, sales, and service teams by integrating shared data and insights.
Trend 5: Find true AI partnerships
In a crowded AI vendor market, its essential to choose partners that deliver real ROI. Avoid overpromises like building a billion bots or replacing humans entirely. Instead, prioritize partnerships that:
Offer proven use cases and measurable results.
Focus on enhancing human and machine collaboration.
Provide flexibility and openness to integrate with your existing systems. For example, brands using LivePerson Copilot benefit from tools that amplify agent productivity and enable real-time, data-informed customer engagement.
The path forward
2025 is a pivotal year for CX. As the lines between digital and human interactions blur, brands that embrace the following principles will lead the pack:
Be human-centric: Let AI augment, not replace, human connections.
Integrate relentlessly: Invest in platforms that bridge legacy systems and new capabilities.
Focus on outcomes: Use CX to drive measurable business impactnot just operational efficiency.
By focusing on these strategies, businesses can not only meet, but exceed customer expectations, turning CX into their most powerful competitive advantage.
John Sabino is CEO of LivePerson.
U.S. personal injury law firm Morgan & Morgan sent an urgent email this month to its more than 1,000 lawyers: Artificial intelligence can invent fake case law, and using made-up information in a court filing could get you fired.
A federal judge in Wyoming had just threatened to sanction two lawyers at the firm who included fictitious case citations in a lawsuit against Walmart. One of the lawyers admitted in court filings last week that he used an AI program that “hallucinated” the cases and apologized for what he called an inadvertent mistake.
AI’s penchant for generating legal fiction in case filings has led courts around the country to question or discipline lawyers in at least seven cases over the past two years, and created a new high-tech headache for litigants and judges, Reuters found.
The Walmart case stands out because it involves a well-known law firm and a big corporate defendant. But examples like it have cropped up in all kinds of lawsuits since chatbots like ChatGPT ushered in the AI era, highlighting a new litigation risk.
A Morgan & Morgan spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. Walmart declined to comment. The judge has not yet ruled whether to discipline the lawyers in the Walmart case, which involved an allegedly defective hoverboard toy.
Advances in generative AI are helping reduce the time lawyers need to research and draft legal briefs, leading many law firms to contract with AI vendors or build their own AI tools. Sixty-three percent of lawyers surveyed by Reuters’ parent company Thomson Reuters last year said they have used AI for work, and 12% said they use it regularly.
Generative AI, however, is known to confidently make up facts, and lawyers who use it must take caution, legal experts said. AI sometimes produces false information, known as “hallucinations” in the industry, because the models generate responses based on statistical patterns learned from large datasets rather than by verifying facts in those datasets.
Attorney ethics rules require lawyers to vet and stand by their court filings or risk being disciplined. The American Bar Association told its 400,000 members last year that those obligations extend to “even an unintentional misstatement” produced through AI.
The consequences have not changed just because legal research tools have evolved, said Andrew Perlman, dean of Suffolk University’s law school and an advocate of using AI to enhance legal work.
“When lawyers are caught using ChatGPT or any generative AI tool to create citations without checking them, that’s incompetence, just pure and simple,” Perlman said.
‘Lack of AI literacy’
In one of the earliest court rebukes over attorneys’ use of AI, a federal judge in Manhattan in June 2023 fined two New York lawyers $5,000 for citing cases that were invented by AI in a personal injury case against an airline.
A different New York federal judge last year considered imposing sanctions in a case involving Michael Cohen, the former lawyer and fixer for Donald Trump, who said he mistakenly gave his own attorney fake case citations that the attorney submitted in Cohen’s criminal tax and campaign finance case.
Cohen, who used Google’s AI chatbot Bard, and his lawyer were not sanctioned, but the judge called the episode “embarrassing.”
In November, a Texas federal judge ordered a lawyer who cited nonexistent cases and quotations in a wrongful termination lawsuit to pay a $2,000 penalty and attend a course about generative AI in the legal field.
A federal judge in Minnesota last month said a misinformation expert had destroyed his credibility with the court after he admitted to unintentionally citing fake, AI-generated citations in a case involving a “deepfake” parody of Vice President Kamala Harris.
Harry Surden, a law professor at the University of Colorado’s law school who studies AI and the law, said he recommends lawyers spend time learning “the strengths and weaknesses of the tools.” He said the mounting examples show a “lack of AI literacy” in the profession, but the technology itself is not the problem.
“Lawyers have always made mistakes in their filings before AI,” he said. “This is not new.”
Sara Merken, Reuters
Since the moment the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was first proposed, Elon Musks critics have warned that the worlds richest man was at risk of making decisions that could be a conflict of interest, given his multiple business operations. With recent cuts at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), those fears are increasing.
Roughly 20 employees of the FDAs office of neurological and physical medicine devices were let go over the weekend, part of a larger series of cuts. Among those were workers overseeing the review of Musks Neuralink brain implant company (as well as its competitors). Reuters, which first reported the layoffs, says its sources do not believe the employees were specifically targeted due to their work on Neuralink.
The FDA and Neuralink did not reply to a request from Fast Company for comment about the layoffs.
The layoffs at the FDA were overseen by DOGE, Reuters reports. Reviewers who were terminated received letters saying they were being let go for performance reasons, though many had just received high rankings in the past several weeks. Supervisors of the cut employees were reportedly not consulted before the layoffs and found out about them when their direct reports contacted them.
Musk announced the first brain implant, which enables paralyzed people to access digital devices via thought, in a human subject about a year ago. Earlier this month, he said the company has upgraded the devices with more electrodes, higher bandwidth, and longer battery life. Additionally, Neuralink is working on a separate implant, which it hopes will restore vision for sight-impaired people.
To date, Neuralink has announced three patients who have received the brain implant and said the company hopes to implant the devices in as many as 30 more people this year. The loss of review workers could slow that larger rollout, however. (Neuralink also did not comment on whether the staff reductions at the FDA office would impact its timeline.)
Industry watchdogs warn that the cuts to the FDA staff could lessen oversight of such devices, which could potentially put patients at risk. Thats particularly worrisome given the early controversy with Neuralink implants, where monkeys used in trials have reportedly died grisly deaths.
Neuralink has a well-documented history of conducting unnecessary, sloppy experiments in monkeys, pigs, sheep, and other animals that raise serious concerns about the safety of its device, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine told Fast Company. A significant number of medical devices approved for clinical trials fail to ever make it to the market. As such, the public should continue to be skeptical of the safety and functionality of any device produced by Neuralink.
The group instead suggested Musk explore noninvasive methods.
Musk denied that any monkeys died due the implants, saying instead that they were terminally ill.” That prompted lawmakers to ask the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to investigate whether those statements constituted securities fraud by misleading investors about the safety of the implants.
The SEC has not brought any charges against Musk for the statement but did send him a letter last December saying the Commission had reopened an investigation into the company. With the resignation of former SEC head Gary Gensler and Trump assuming office, its unclear if the investigation will yield any penalties for Musk, if it’s even still open.
This is not the first time DOGE actions have an impact that some might consider a potential conflict of interest (although the White House, on Tuesday, claimed Musk is not the administrator for DOGE, contradicting public evidence to the contrary). On Monday, Musk said SpaceX would review the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)s systems following job cuts at the FAA. And on February 7, Musk celebrated the all-but-complete shutdown of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, posting, CFPB RIP on X. That came as X is working to roll out a financial services unit that would have been regulated by the CFPB under expanded oversight powers over mobile payment apps, which were finalized last year.
The Trump administration has since agreed to pause layoffs and funding cuts at the CFPB, following a federal judges order last Friday.
