When Christopher Pelkey was killed in a road rage incident in Arizona, his family was left not only to grieve but also to navigate how to represent him in court. As they prepared to confront his killer, Gabriel Horcasitas, during sentencing, they made an unusual and deeply controversial choice: to have Pelkey appear to speak from beyond the grave.
To do so, they turned to technology: An AI-generated video featuring a re-created voice and likeness of Pelkey was presented as a victim impact statement ahead of sentencing. The video showed a digitally resurrected Pelkey appearing to speak directly to the judge.
Of course, the statement wasnt truly Pelkeys. He couldnt have possibly said those wordshe died the day Horcasitas shot him. Yet the judge accepted the AI-generated message, even acknowledging its effect. You allowed Chris to speak from his heart as you saw it, the judge said. Horcasitas was sentenced to 10 and a half years in prison.
The extraordinary courtroom moment has sparked widespread discussion, not just for its emotional power but for the precedent it may set. Arizona’s victims rights laws allow the families of deceased victims to determine how their impact statements are delivered. But legal and AI experts warn that this precedent is far from harmless.
“I have sympathy for the family members who constructed the video,” says Eerke Boiten, a professor at De Montfort University in the U.K. specializing in AI. “Knowing Pelkey, they likely had a preconceived view of how he might have felt, and AI gave them a way of putting that across that many found attractive and convincing.”
Still, Boiten is uneasy about how the video has been interpreted by both the public and possibly the court. The video should be read as a statement of opinion from the family members, with AI providing a convincing presentation of that, he explains. Yet public reaction suggests it was taken as something more. The reactions show that it was taken as an almost factual contribution from Pelkey instead, Boiten says.
The victims’ rights attorney who represented Pelkeys family told 404 Media that at no point did anyone try to pass it off as Chriss own words. Yet the emotionally charged format of presenting a deepfaked version of the deceased gives those words far more weight than if they had simply been read aloud. And its worth emphasizing: Pelkey could never have written them himself.
Its an inappropriate use of AI which has no relevance and should have no role at sentencing, says Julian Roberts, emeritus professor of criminology at the University of Oxford and executive director of the Sentencing Academy. Data protection specialist Jon Baines of the firm Mishcon de Reya adds that the incident is profoundly troubling from an ethical standpoint.
Roberts argues that using an AI-generated likeness of a victim oversteps the purpose of a victim impact statement. The victim statement should inform the court about the impact of the crime on the victim and advise of any possible impact of the imposition of a community order, et cetera, he says. It is not an exercise in memorializing the victim. In his view, thats exactly what the Pelkey video did.
Roberts also criticized the content of the statement itself: The statement should contain information, not opinion or inventionhuman or AI-derived.
Still, a precedent has now been setat least in Arizona. One that blurs the line between mourning and manipulation. One that allows people to speak from beyond the graveand could, in the future, influence the length of prison sentences in ways that justice systems may not yet be prepared to handle.
An irony of mainstream corporate sustainability efforts is that they focus significantly on the power of consumption. H&M promotes its Conscious Collection that uses organic cotton or recycled polyester. Samsung’s Galaxy for the Planet showcases its use of recycled plastics in its devices and sustainable packaging.
When companies advertise their products as sustainable, consumers frequently assume they can buy new items more frequently, making such moves paradoxically self-defeating. But these marketing ploys typically only focus on a selective element of a products impact.
The problem is that while each individual product may have less of an impact than what came before it, the increase in overall consumption mitigates any environmental savings, and so inherently perpetuates the cycle of consumption thats a root cause of todays environmental problems.
Over the last half century and more, the environmental movement has gradually morphed into a consumer movement, with corporate messaging expertly shifting responsibility from systemic change to individual purchasing decisions.
Weve been led to believe that the solution to environmental catastrophe lies in meticulously examining product labels for terms like organic, sustainably produced, green, and other buzzwords often coined by corporations themselves. Millennials and Gen Z are portrayed as eco-conscious generations that will correct the poor environmental decisions of their parents.
But while many initiatives today tick corporate sustainability boxes and make individuals feel like their purchases are righteous, they fail to address the deeper systemic challenge: as long as companies prioritize endless growth, they will continue to push more consumptionand no amount of green products can offset that.
We need to come to grips with the fact that consumption isand will always beexceedingly hard to constrain, especially when companies are spending over $1 trillion a year to convince us to buy more. Any sustainability effort that relies solely on the purchase of more responsible goods will fail.
This challenge has only intensified in the current political landscape. Since returning to office, President Trump and his administration have relaxed standards for fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions for vehicles, and claimed that more drilling would bring down energy bills. Furthermore, the Department of Energy announced plans to pause efficiency standards for seven categories of appliances, while the Environmental Protection Agency began overhauling the WaterSense label program to prioritize effectiveness and consumer experience over efficiency.
These policy shifts effectively prioritize short-term economic growth and resource extraction over environmental stewardship, and they create a regulatory landscape that rewards consumption rather than conservation and regeneration. Given this, what can companies do to address the fundamental paradox of sustainable consumption?
Creating sustainable consumption opportunities starts before the purchase
A first step for companies interested in consumption being sustainable is to ensure that their entire supply chains are built on sustainable and equitable principles. Reducing the footprint and environmental impact of products in this way is a much more robust path to sustainable consumption than todays focus on telling consumers to buy products with green attributes.
For instance, beverage maker Guayakí Yerba Mate has developed a regenerative model that connects the dots between consumers purchasing its products and positive societal and environmental effects in its supply chains.
Ben Mand, CEO of Guayakí, told me that his company works in the Atlantic Forest communities in South America where yerba mate leaves from a tree in the holly family are grown. They work with smallholder producers to implement high environmental and social standards, and then ensure that the economic benefits of their work flow directly into the communities rather than being captured by intermediaries.
In other words, if companies can ensure their production and distribution create an overall positive benefit, the environmental problems that stem from the eventual consumption of their products are significantly reduced.
It may seem easy to dismiss strategies like these because theyre done by a company in a niche category. But Ive observed similar practices being scaled in many other prominent multinational firms across industries around the globe.
For instance, leading global coffee maker Illycaff created a regenerative coffee production system, focused on enhancing biodiversity, improving soil health, and fostering resilient farming communities. Illycaff collaborates directly with coffee farmers in South America and Africa to support agro-ecological practices that not only boost crop yields but also protect ecosystems. This approach ensures the long-term viability of coffee cultivationa crop under significant environmental threatwhile promoting fair trade and social equity.
Thus, one way to mitigate the paradox of consumption is by starting with materials and supply chains and fostering a model where each purchase directly delivers social and environmental benefits to the communities producing the raw materials.
The difference between H&M and Samsung versus Guayakí and Illycaff is subtle but important. H&M and Samsung spotlight isolated green featureslike recycled materialsto market select products. Guayakí and Illycaff, by contrast, embed sustainability throughout their supply chains, prioritizing the overall impact of their businesses rather than promoting individual eco-friendly attributes.
Helping consumers understand the extended life cycles of products
Moving up the value chain also highlights the importance of the design of production systems. Ikea, the worlds largest furniture retailer with more than 480 stores across 63 markets, offers another example of how a global corporation can fundamentally reimagine its relationship with consumption. In an industry where Americans discard more than 12 million tons of furniture annually, Ikea is working to break the take-make-dispose cycle that has defined furniture retail.
As Mardi Ditze, country sustainability manager for Ikea U.S., explained to me, a key initiative is the Buy Back & Resell program, launched in 2022, which allows customers to return an Ikea product they no longer want and then receive credits worth between 30% and 50% of the original price. Depending on the condition, items are either resold, refurbished, or recycled. This program is now operational in most U.S. stores and accepts nearly 3,000 products for resale. Each returned item undergoes a detailed evaluation process, prioritizing resale through their As-is section, with recycling as a last resort. Hege Sbjrnsen, Ikeas sustainability manager for the U.K. and Ireland, said the plan would help to promote Ikeas progress toward achieving its fully circular and climate positive goals by 2030.
In addition, Ikea has introduced the Ikea Preowned platform, which facilitates peer-to-peer sales of secondhand furniture. The program is currently being tested in Madrid and Oslo, with potential global expansion. The Swedish retailer already resells some 47 million products worldwide.
Companies like Patagonia and Eileen Fisher are also challenging throwaway culture by designing programs that extend product life cycles and reduce waste. Patagonias Worn Wear initiative repairs and resells used gearmore than 130,000 items in 2024 alonethereby encouraging shared responsibility between brand and customer. Eileen Fishers take-back program has reclaimed more than two million garments, transforming them into resale items, new clothing, or other goods, and built dedicated facilities to support this near-zero-waste model. Both companies demonstrate how brands can work to reshape purchasing habits and production systems to prioritize sustainability.
Conclusion
Theres no denying that people will want to keep buying new products. We must therefore move beyond current paradigms that place the onus on consumers to drive sustainability.
If we are to achieve legitimate sustainable consumption, businesses must redesign their value chains from the ground up and embed environmental and social responsibility into every decision from design, sourcing, and production to also how they communicate with consumers.
Since returning to office, the Trump administration has systematically dismantled environmental protections that could have incentivized more sustainable business practices. But the examples of Guayakí, Illy, Ikea, Patagonia, and Eileen Fisher point toward an alternative paradigmone where consumption isnt positioned as the solution to our environmental crisis, but rather as one element in a broader economic system designed primarily to serve people and planet.
Influencers often face more negativity than most people experience in a lifetimeand with that comes a significant mental health toll. Now, a new therapy service has been launched specifically for content creators.
CreatorCare, cofounded by digital creator Shira Lazar and backed by Creators 4 Mental Health and Revive Health Therapy, aims to break down both financial and systemic barriers to mental health care. While some creators earn millions of dollars, many struggle to make ends meet. To ensure therapy is accessible to all, CreatorCare offers sliding-scale rates starting at $60, with or without insurance.
Launched initially in California, with plans for national expansion, the program provides licensed and associate therapists in person and via telehealth. These professionals specialize in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR), acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), and mindfulness-based therapy.
With more than 200 million creators worldwide, the mental strain of this profession is often overlooked. Behind the scenes, creators deal with online abuse, constant pressure to stay relevant, and financial instabilitychallenges that rarely receive public sympathy. Discussions around burnout are frequently met with dismissive remarks urging influencers to get a real 9-to-5 job.
But the numbers tell a different story. A 2023 Awin & ShareASale Influencer Survey found that nearly 80% of creators reported burnout, and 66% said it directly impacted their mental health. Nearly half rely on alternative income streams to reduce the pressure.
Lazar, host of the talk show Whats Trending, is now helping to build a safety net for creators. The creator economy has exploded but the support systems havent kept up, she told Passionfruit. As more Gen Z step into this space professionally, we need to treat it like the real workplace it is. That means sustainable systems not just for monetization, but for mental health, too.
Amy Kelly, cofounder of CreatorCare and CEO of Revive Health Therapy, echoed that sentiment: Social media is not just a platformits a recruiter,” she said, noting that 57% of Gen Z teens in the U.S. say they would become influencers if given the chance. Were grooming teens into a digital workforce with proven mental health hazardsthe modern equivalent of sending kids into coal mines without protective gear.
CreatorCare isnt the only initiative addressing creators well-being. SAG-AFTRAs new influencer committee aims to expand labor protections, while the National Association of Broadcasters recently launched a Creator Council to amplify creators voices. The Creators Guild of America also released a contract rider to safeguard creators in brand partnerships.
Because, yes, content creation is a real job.
If someone driving a new version of a Subaru Forester crashes into a cyclist, an airbag will immediately inflate on the hood to help protect the person on the bike.
The SUV, which offers the feature only on vehicles sold in Japan, isnt the first Subaru to include an external airbag. The company started including pedestrian protection airbags on its Japanese cars nearly a decade ago. But the brand says the new design is the first in the world intended to also protect cyclists.
Its a basic, commonsense idea. Airbags have been proven to be effective to protect the occupants in a vehicle, says Ben Crowther, policy director for America Walks, a nonprofit focused on walkability and safety. And theres plenty of testing to show that the same is true for people outside vehicles.
The Foresters hood is also designed to have as few hard parts as possible, and to easily deform to help cushion the impact of a crash. But the bottom edge of the windshield and the pillars that go up to the roof have to stay rigid because theyre part of the frame. When a pedestrian is hit by a car, head injuries are most likely in those placesand thats where Subarus U-shaped airbag can help.
In a crash, the cyclist usually ends up higher on the windshield. That’s why the company redesigned its airbag to cover a larger area. The system deploys when sensors detect a certain amount of pressure on the front bumper.
The vehicle has a suite of other safety features. When a driver turns on the turn signal at a corner, for example, the headlights light up an area diagonally in front, making it easier to spot pedestrians or cyclists on the road. A set of three cameras and radar offer a wider-angle view than in the brand’s previous cars, so it’s more likely to spot other road users. The vehicle also aims to reduce blind spots in all directions. These are all efforts toward Subaru’s goal to have no traffic deaths involving its cars by 2030.
Of course, it’s possible to go even furtherone of the best ways to make vehicles safer is to make them smaller. Beyond car design, infrastructure also obviously matters: With separated bike lanes, for example, a crash is less likely in the first place. Speed limits are critical. If youre a pedestrian who gets hit by a car going 20 mph, one study found that you have a 5% chance of being killed. If the car is going 30 mph, that chance jumps to 45%. At 40 mph, the pedestrians chance of being killed is roughly 80%. (Japan has lower average speed limits than the U.S., along with other policies that support pedestrian safety, and much lower fatality rates for pedestrians and cyclists in traffic accidents.)
External airbags aren’t a panacea, but they can help. It’s probably unlikely, though, that they’ll show up in the U.S. anytime soon, especially as automakers are already struggling to deal with increased manufacturing costs because of tariffs.
And while the Biden administration was working on safety issues related to vehicle design, it’s not clear what will happen with policy now. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy “has certainly touted safety as something that his U.S. DOT wants to pursue,” Crowther says. “But there’s a lot of mixed messages, particularly through the reducing in staff at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.” The cuts at NHTSA made by the Department of Government Efficiency earlier this year disproportionately affected employees working on vehicle safety, according to reports.
Many brands take advantage of Mother’s Day to sell more products, like flowers and cupcakes. But 50 companies, including workwear label M.M. LaFleur, framing startup Framebridge, and stroller brand Bugaboo, are joining forces to draw attention to America’s lack of federal paid leave.
Across the country on Saturday, May 10, the nonprofit MomsRising, the Paid Leave for All campaign, and 50 brands are hosting pop-ups in New York City; Washington, D.C.; Philadelphia; Nashville; Hoboken, New Jersey; and Cleveland, offering more than $100,000 in donated goods and services. The idea is to help new moms by giving them things like formula, breast pumps, clothing, and strollers, while also giving them a little break with massages and food. For those who can’t attend in person, there is a nationwide giveaway that moms can enter or nominate fellow moms to receive things like care packages.
Ultimately, though, the goal is to show that this kind of mutual aid is not enough. What mothers and other caregivers need is paid time off after they give birth. The U.S. is one of the only countries in the world without a federal paid leave policy, and as a result nearly a quarter of mothers have returned to work within just two weeks of giving birth. (This can be unsafe: After a C-section, doctors recommend that women rest for at least six weeks as their scars heal.)
While some companies voluntarily offer workers parental leave, many don’t. For example, in Ohio and Tennessee, 72% of workers don’t have access to paid family leave; in Pennsylvania, that figure is 62%. And families lose $34 billion every year because women take unpaid time off.
As a global brand, based in the Netherlands, Bugaboo interacts with parents from around the world. Jeanelle Teves, the companys chief commercial officer, has seen the positive impact of paid leave in other countries. “Especially when you’re having your first child, giving birth and taking care of an infant can be overwhelming,” she says. “It makes such a difference when parents don’t also have to worry about their jobs during this period.”
She also points out that in the U.S., it is often wealthier people working at white-collar jobs who have access to paid time off from their employers. “In many other countries, there is this sense that all parents deserve this time to focus on their families for a while,” she says.
It takes a lot of flexibility to get a new life underway
Dawn Huckelbridge, founding director of Paid Leave for All, contends that this is not just a human rights issue; it’s also a business issue. Companies that have good family leave policies are better able to hire and retain workers. “A federal paid leave policy will ensure that companies have the resources they need to give workers time off,” she says.
Susan Tynan founded Framebridge a decade ago as the mother of small children. From the start, she wanted to ensure that all workers had paid time off. Today, the company has 600 employees, 500 of whom work in manufacturing or retail stores. All of these workers receive four months of paid time off after having a baby, and one month of flexibility as they return to work. The non-birthing parent also gets a month off. “It takes a lot of flexibility to get a new life underway,” Tynan says.
She points out that this kind of generous policy is much harder for a smaller, newer startup. Most small companies don’t have enough staff to fill in for the person who is on leave, so they might have to hire someone else, which is an added expense. “Even though we all know someone who has given birth should be on leave and should be supported, the company needs to continue to run,” says Tynan. “A [federal] paid leave policy would be better for the economy because it would allow businesses to thrive and help women stay in the workforce.”
Huckelbridge notes that this campaign occurs at a time when the country is dealing with many pressing political issues brought on by the new administration, including job cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency and deportations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But the goal of the campaign is to ensure that the fight for paid leave continueseven though this administration may not seem particularly amenable to itand perhaps more importantly, to provide hope that paid leave is possible. “The point of this campaign is to ensure that people feel seen,” says Huckelbridge. “We want them to know that we see their struggle and we’re fighting for a better future.”
A startup marketing to Gen Z on college campuses filed a lawsuit this week alleging that Instacart engaged in federal trademark infringement and unfair competition by naming its new group ordering app “Fizz.”
The plaintiffs, Fizz Social Corp., claim they have been operating their event planning platform under the FIZZ trademark and have become a well-known social platform used on more than 400 college campuses. The app, which requires users to sign up with a college email, features anonymous text posts, polls, photos, and the ability to send direct messages. The company has raised at least $41.5 million as of last summer, TechCrunch reported in 2024.
“This new Fizz App by Instacart and Partiful is a blatant attempt to misappropriate the goodwill that Plaintiff has painstakingly developed through its continuous use of the FIZZ Marks among the Gen-Z demographic,” attorneys for the social media app wrote in a complaint filed on Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
The lawsuit follows Instacart’s launch this week of a new stand-alone app also named Fizz, which allows groups to order snacks and drinks ahead of parties for a flat $5 delivery fee. Instacart also integrated the app with Partiful, a popular event planning platform, which is also named as a defendant in the suit.
“Plaintiff brings this action based on Defendants’ past, current, and planned use of the FIZZ trademark in connection with collaborative event promotion and planning, social discovery, and social networking services targeting the same Gen-Z consumer base that Plaintiff has served since at least January 2022,” the suit states.
Fizz, the social app, is demanding an immediate halt to Instacarts use of the Fizz name and is seeking damages. According to the lawsuit, Fizz has used the name since January 2022. However, it only filed for trademark registration in 2024, with applications still pending.
Still, Kevin J. Greene, the John J. Schumacher chair and professor at Southwestern Law School, says that while unfair competition claims are often throwaway claims that lawyers routinely include, the social media platform could have a strong case under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. Greene notes that this section protects unregistered marks and addresses likely confusion over similar names.
“I look at the case and think it would be a pretty strong case on their behalf,” he tells Fast Company.
Instacart has established itself as a major player in the gig economy. Since going public in 2023, its shares have risen more than 47%. Partiful, meanwhile, was named one of Fast Companys Most Innovative Companies of 2025, and reported a 600% increase in user activity in 2024.
Instacart and Partiful did not respond to Fast Companys requests for comment on the lawsuit.
After raising billions in funding, vertical farming companies have struggled. Plenty, a Silicon Valley-based startup backed by investors including Jeff Bezos and Eric Schmidt, filed for bankruptcy in March. Bowery, which was once valued at $2.3 billion, shut down last fall. Another startup, Fifth Season, shuttered its automated indoor farm in 2022. AeroFarms, a pioneer in the space, declared bankruptcy in 2023.
The basic business modelgrowing crops like leafy greens indoors on tall vertical towershasnt proven that it can work. But AeroFarms, which raised an undisclosed amount of money after its bankruptcy and found a new CEO, has managed to turn itself around. The company has now been profitable for the last two quarters as it sells microgreens at retailers like Whole Foods and Costco.
Despite the current skepticism, I think we’ve now demonstrated that vertical farming can be sustainable and profitable and deliver product at scale, says Molly Montgomery, who became CEO of AeroFarms in September 2023.
[Photo: AeroFarms]
Before joining the company, Montgomery studied it at the request of investors who wanted to know if it could be a viable business. I was extremely skeptical about vertical farms because I had never seen a profitable business model yet, says Montgomery. When they asked me, I was like, Im not sure that a vertical farm can be profitable. Montgomery, who also serves as board director for NatureSweet, a leader in greenhouse-grown tomatoes, previously led Landec Corp., a company that contracted with outdoor growers throughout the U.S. and Mexico to make salad kits and other packaged vegetable products.
But doing the due diligence on AeroFarms convinced her that it could actually succeed. She calculated that AeroFarmss technology could operate at the right production cost. And consumers liked the product, particularly its microgreens, tiny greens that are harvested when theyre 4 days old.
The missing ingredient was operational excellence, she says. There wasnt enough experience in the company on how to run a vegetable production facility.
[Photo: AeroFarms]
It was a tech company first, not a farming company. Montgomerys initial step was to focus: She shut down R&D facilities in New Jersey and Abu Dhabi, so all that was left was a 140,000-square-foot production facility in Virginia that had opened in 2022. Half of the staff was laid off. Everyone who was left was put on specific initiatives that I believed would enable us to get to farm profitability, she says. She also hired employees with deep expertise in food production.
The team went through several sprints on the basics, from food safety to training employees. Then it focused on operational issues like how to improve yield and how to maintain the robots that grow the crops. The companys automated system loads plants in the tall towers where they grow, monitors and harvests the crops, and packs up products for stores. (It runs 24/7 and has more than 2,000 spare parts, meaning that maintenance is a major task.)
Montgomery also chose to focus on microgreens, which have better margins than traditional leafy greens. The company grows a variety of crops, from kale and cabbage to bok choy and spicy wasabi mustard. The young greens are more nutritious than fully grown versions of the same crops. Its not something that was ever readily available from traditional farms. When they’re grown outside in soil (and often with pesticides), they have to be washed, which harms the dainty plants. “As soon as you wash them, they begin to decay,” she says. “So [they have] a very short shelf life. When you grow them aeroponically, we don’t use any pesticides and we only spray the roots. So we do not need to wash them.
That means, she says, that AeroFarmss greens have a shelf life that lasts as long as 24 days. The company currently supplies around 70% of the retail market for microgreens, and is seeing demand for more.
[Photo: AeroFarms]
The companys tech may have some advantages compared to other approaches. It grows plants aeroponically, without soil and without submerging plants in standing water, so the whole system is lighter than some others, and more plants can be stacked vertically, making better use of floor space. Misting the roots with water and nutrients speeds up the plants growth rate. Because the farms can be more productive than competitors, the company can use less energy per plant; energy is one of the biggest factors in the cost of running a vertical farm.
If vertical farming can work, there could be clear benefits. Right now, most greens in the U.S. come from drought-prone regions like Arizona and California; vertical farms use 90% less water than growing outside. As climate change makes farming more difficultespecially because of extreme heatindoor farming could theoretically help support the supply chain. And instead of shipping produce thousands of miles across the country, East Coast grocery stores could get more of it locally year-round.
The industry is still nascent, and two profitable quarters arent conclusive proof that vertical farming can succeed. Still, its a sign of hope fo a teetering field, and AeroFarms is once again planning for expansion.
For many families with young children in the U.S., the cost of childcare is prohibitively expensive, preventing some parents, especially mothers, from returning to the workforce. Thats why one California-based company recently introduced a new childcare initiative, vowing to pay up to $3,000 a month in childcare costs for eligible employees.
The cofounders of Cakes Body, 32-year-old twin sisters Casey Sarai and Taylor Capuano, say their own experiences as working mothers inspired the decision. Capuano recalls how, after having her first child, she made the difficult decision to return to work even though she had only $200 left each month after paying childcare costs.
This isnt some distant memory for us, Sarai says. We felt how much of a burden the astronomical childcare costs were to us and our families and what a big stressor that was.
The sisters launched Cakes Body, which makes silicone nipple covers, in 2022. Since then, they say the company has grown about 10 times year-over-year, netting just under a million dollars their first year in business to a current revenue forecast of $150 million.
They attribute that success largely to the team theyve created, which is why they view the childcare credit as an investment. Its a way to maintain the talent that we have and keep moms in the workforce if they want to be there, Sarai says.
Cakes Body has 30 employees nationwide and about 20% will qualify for the childcare credit, which was announced during a team meeting last Thursday. The companys TikTok account shared a video of the moment. According to the Department of Labors National Database of Childcare Prices, the median price range of childcare for one child in 2022 (the most recent year data is available) was $6,552 to $15,600, and families spent about 916% of their income on childcare.
Sarai, who has an 18-month-old son and an 8-year-old stepdaughter, and Capuano, who has a 15-month-old son and a 4-year-old daughter, say they arrived at the figure of $36,000 a year by looking at national averages of childcare costs, as well as their own expenses. Their employees will self-report their monthly childcare costs and the full amount, up to $3,000, will be added to their paychecks each month, Sarai says. Employees who have children under public-school age are eligible, and the funds can be used for babysitters and nannies, in addition to childcare facilities.
The childcare credit is part of Cakes Bodys overall work-life philosophy, which Sarai says has three pillars. The first is implementing a results-only work environment, or ROWE, which prioritizes flexibility and output over micromanaging and physical presence in an office. The second pillar is a synchronized quiet period, where the company takes an entire month off around the holidays. The new childcare credit is the third pillar.
Sarai says that while she and her sister were motivated to start a company because of their own desire for better work-life balance, they also believe their company will see real benefits because of the changes theyve implemented.
By offering a flexible work environment, we are able to tap into a completely under-leveraged demographic: working moms looking to get back into the workforce, Sarai says. Some of the women we have on our team, this was their first job back after being stay-at-home moms for a period of time, and I feel so lucky because they are some of the most efficient employees we have. A lot of the skills they have from being stay-at-home moms are very transferrableknowing how to multitask, knowing how to prioritize.
The founders hope that other companies see their childcare credit as inspiration. Match us, do better, go further, Capuano wrote on LinkedIn.
The U.S. is notoriously behind other wealthy, industrialized countries when it comes to support for young families. There is no federally mandated parental leave or universal childcare; tax credits and subsidies are limited; and even for families who can afford it, childcare is often difficult to obtain, as the industry faces persistent worker shortages, difficult-to-meet regulations, and shutdowns.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, mothers left the workforce in record numbers to take on caregiving responsibilities when schools closed. While the Department of Labor reports that the number of employed mothers has since returned and even exceeded pre-pandemic levels, the childcare crisis persists.
Some employers have aimed to bridge that gap by offering childcare benefits, from on-site childcare centers to childcare subsidies for parents. But its far from a perfect solution and even the best scenarios put parents at the mercy of their employers. For instance, last year, both Google and General Mills shuttered their on-site childcare centers.
Sarai and Capuano acknowledge that access to affordable childcare shouldnt fall solely on employers and that broader governmental support is essential. But until that happens, were committed to doing what we can to support our team and remove barriers that hold working parents back, Sarai says.
You dont wait for the sidewalk. You dont check an app to see if its working. You dont wonder if its meant for someone else. Sidewalks are just therealways available, always on. And when theyre well designed, you barely notice them. They quietly support everything: commerce, mobility, safety, health, and freedom of movement. Sidewalks dont require instructions. Theyre intuitive. Step on, move forward.
Thats the framing we need for local bus service. A well-run bus system is an express sidewalka piece of infrastructure that dramatically expands the number of destinations within walking distance.
Unfortunately, buses arent thought of that way. In most American cities, public transit is treated like a last-resort service, a social program for people who cant afford cars, something to be endured rather than embraced. And so theyre designed that way: infrequent, inconvenient, hard to use, and often stuck in traffic.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
The blueprint
If a bus system is going to function as a seamless extension of the sidewalk, it has to operate on the same principles:
Frequency. You dont plan your life around a sidewalks availability.
Convenience. Buses must go where people actually want to go, with direct routes that dont meander like a bureaucrats fantasy map.
Safety. Waiting at a stop should feel as safe and dignified as standing on a downtown corner.
Reliability. If you cant trust it to arrive when it says it will, its not infrastructureits a gamble.
If general purpose car traffic dominates the curb, buses will never scale, and walkingthe most ancient, equitable form of transportremains functionally capped. Dedicated transit lanes are the asphalt equivalent of pouring a continuous slab of concrete for pedestrians. Bus-only lanes ensure that the people choosing high-efficiency transportation arent punished for it. (As an added bonus, people can ride bikes in the bus lanes.)
Treat the bus like a sidewalk, and people will use it like one
Most Americans only experience a transit system that treats them like a priority when they travel overseas. It was amazing. We didnt even have to rent a car. Here in the U.S., weve been conditioned to expect low-frequency bus service with few shelters, unpredictable arrivals, and a cultural subtext that transit is a charity case for those people. But we dont build sidewalks out of pity. We build them because theyre essential infrastructure like plumbing or electricity.
If we want to cut congestion, reduce emissions, boost economic access, and improve quality of life, we already have the most elegant, human-scaled delivery system imaginable: walking. But to expand the range of walkability, we need a mobility system that functions like walking at scaleintuitive, frequent, and always ready. Thats what a local transit system could be.
The moment we stop treating the bus as a social program and start treating it like an express sidewalk, we unlock a public good that meets people where they are and moves them forward.
The bus cant be stuck in traffic
If the local bus is going to function as an express sidewalk, I cant overstate the importance of high-frequency, reliable service. That means it cant be stuck in traffic jams. On multilane roads, the obvious answer is dedicated transit lanes.
Transportation experts typically think of road reconfigurations as replacing general purpose lanes with bike lanes and a center bidirectional left-turn lane. But on a busy transit corridor, the road diet can just as easily be designed for express sidewalks.
DIY street design
You dont have to be a professional engineer or graphic artist to come up with renderings that illustrate before-and-after scenarios for a street in your community. Streetmix is a free web tool thats ridiculously easy to use. Its set up for drag-and-drop design so you can make a typical section that reflects your local conditions. Heres a short article with instructions to use Streetmix (free!) and Google Maps (free!) to design the future you want, instead of the one youve been told is inevitable.
A bus isnt charity, its concrete infrastructure that expands the reach of your feet. When we treat it like an express sidewalkbuilt for frequency, protected from gridlock, and trusted like any utilityit stops being a backup plan and starts being the backbone of a thriving city. We dont need to convince people to ride the bus. We just need to operate it like we mean it.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
When OpenAI pulled back its latest ChatGPT releaseone that apparently turned the helpful chatbot into a total suck-upthe company took the welcome step of explaining exactly what happened in a pair of blog posts. The response was a notable move and really pulled back the curtain on how much of what these systems do is shaped by language choices most people never see. A tweak in phrasing, a shift in tone, and suddenly the model behaves differently.
For journalists, this shouldnt be surprising. Many editorial meetings are spent agonizing over framing, tone, and headline language. But what is surprisingand maybe even a little disorientingis that the same editorial sensitivity now needs to be applied not just to headlines and pull quotes, but to algorithms, prompts, and workflows that live in the guts of newsroom technology.
Before we connect the dots to newsroom AI, a quick recap: OpenAIs latest update to GPT-4o involved an extensive process for testing the outputs, and it scored well on the factors the testers could measure: accuracy, safety, and helpfulness, among others. However, some evaluators doing more qualitative testing said the model felt off, but without more to go on, OpenAI released it anyway.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/03\/mediacopilot-logo-ss.png","headline":"Media CoPilot","description":"Want more about how AI is changing media? Never miss an update from Pete Pachal by signing up for Media CoPilot. To learn more visit mediacopilot.substack.com","substackDomain":"https:\/\/mediacopilot.substack.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
Within a day, it was clear the evaluators vibe-checks were onto something. Apparently the release had substantially increased sycophancy, or the models tendency to flatter and support the user, regardless of whether it was ultimately helpful. In its post announcing the rollback, OpenAI said it would refine ChatGPTs system promptthe invisible language that serves as kind of an umbrella instruction for every query and conversation with the public chatbot.
Lost in translation
The first thing that strikes you about this: Were talking about changes to language, not code. In reaction to the recall, a former OpenAI employee posted on X about a conversation he had with a senior colleague at the company about how the change of a single word in the system prompt induced ChatGPT to behave in different ways. And the only way to know this was to make the change and try it out.
If youre familiar with AI and prompting, this isnt a shock. But on a fundamental level, it kind of is. Im not saying the new release of GPT-4o was entirely about changing language in the system prompt, but the system prompt is a crucial elementaltering it was the only temporary fix OpenAI could implement before engaging in the careful process of rolling back the release.
For anyone in communications or journalism, this should be somewhat reassuring. Were in the business of words, after all. And words are no longer just the way we communicate about technologytheyre a crucial part of how these systems work.
An editorial and product hybrid
OpenAIs ordeal has two important takeaways for how the media deals with AI: First, that editorial staff have a vital role to play in building the AI systems that govern their operations. (Outside frontier labs, tool building often amounts to prompt engineering paired with automations.) And second, transparency is the path to preserving user trust.
On the first point, the way AI directly affects content, and the need for good prompting to do that well, has a consequence for how media companies are organized: Editorial and product teams are becoming more like each other. The more journalists incorporate AI into their process, the more they end up creating their own tools. Think custom GPTs for writing assistance, NotebookLM knowledge bases for analyzing documents, or even browser extensions for fact-checking on the fly.
On the product side, the idea that media technology today isnt just presenting content, but remixing and sometimes creating it is a massive change. To ensure those outputs adhere to journalistic principles, it doesnt just make sense to have writers and editors be a part of that processits necessary.
What results, then, is a journalist-product manager hybrid. These kinds of roles arent entirely new, but theyre generally senior leadership roles with words like newsroom innovation in the title. What AI does is encourage each side to adopt the skills of the other all the way down. Every reporter adopts a product mindset. Every product manager prioritizes brevity and accuracy.
Audience trust starts with transparency
The audience is the silent partner in this relationship, and OpenAIs incident also serves as an example of how to best include themthrough radical transparency. Its hard to think of a way OpenAI could have better restored trust with its users other than its decision to fully explain how the problems got by its review process, and what its doing to improve.
While its unusual among the major AI labs (can you imagine xAI or DeepSeek writing a similar note?), this isnt out of character for OpenAI. Sam Altman often shares on his X account announcements and behind-the-scenes observations from his vantage point as CEO, and while those are probably more calculated than they seem, theyve earned the company a certain amount of respect.
This approach provides a road map for how to publicly communicate about AI strategy, especially for the media. Typically, when a publication creates an AI media policy, the focus is on disclosures and guidelines. Those are great first steps, but without a clearer window into the specific process, indicators such as This article is AI assisted arent that helpful, and audiences will be inclined to assume the worst when something goes wrong.
Better to be transparent from the start. When CNET used AI writers in the early days of generative AI to disastrous results, it published a long explanation of what went wrong, but it didnt come until well after it had been called out. If the publication had been out front with what it was doingnot just saying it was using AI, but explaining how it was building, using, and evaluating itthings might have turned out differently.
Journalists can shape AIand should
In its second post about the sycophancy fiasco, OpenAI revealed that a big part of its concern was the surprising number of people who now use ChatGPT for personal advice, an activity that wasnt that significant a year ago. That growth is a testament to how fast the technology is improving and taking hold in various aspects of our lives. While its only just beginning to alter the media ecosystem, it could quickly become more deeply embedded than we had predicted.
Building AI systems that people trust starts with the people building them. By leveraging the natural talents of journalists on product teams, those systems will have the best chance of success. But when they screw upand they willpreserving that trust will depend on how clear the window is on how they were built. Best to start polishing it now.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/03\/mediacopilot-logo-ss.png","headline":"Media CoPilot","description":"Want more about how AI is changing media? Never miss an update from Pete Pachal by signing up for Media CoPilot. To learn more visit mediacopilot.substack.com","substackDomain":"https:\/\/mediacopilot.substack.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
