Showing posts sorted by date for query Flanagan. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Flanagan. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, August 04, 2026

 

Canada’s Enbridge postpones plans for second phase of Mainline oil pipeline expansion





Photo courtesy of Enbridge.

Canadian pipeline operator Enbridge has postponed the 250,000-barrel-per-day second phase of its Mainline crude pipeline network, it said on Friday, partly because Canadian oil producers have not committed to significant output increases.

The Mainline pipeline is Canada’s largest crude oil export pipeline and can already move 3 million barrels per day of crude from Western Canada to markets in Eastern Canada and the U.S. Midwest.

The second phase would have increased exports of Canadian crude to U.S. refineries.

But Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel said the company will focus first on its 100,000 bpd Flanagan South Expansion and its 50,000 bpd Southern Access Extension, which are smaller projects in scope.

They will add capacity to two secondary pipelines that connect to the Mainline in Illinois and transport crude to multiple U.S. refining centers and the Gulf Coast.


Enbridge is soliciting contracted volumes for the two pipelines through commercial open season processes.

Growing Canadian oil output

Canadian oil production is growing and hit a record high of 5.1 million bpd on average last year.

Expectations of further growth have in recent months spurred multiple proposals for additional export pipeline projects, including by South Bow and Bridger Pipeline to revive parts of the former Keystone XL project.

Enbridge has already committed to a first-phase Mainline expansion project, which would add 150,000 bpd of capacity and be placed into service by 2027. The company had previously projected the second phase could be in-service as early as 2028.

Ebel said Canada has a generational opportunity to expand its oil output as a result of federal government policy changes over the past year and the rollback of some environmental rules.

He also said that although agreements between the federal government and Alberta aimed at accelerating oil sands growth could have a major impact, most of the proposed changes remain non-binding and have yet to be enshrined into law.

Enbridge does not expect Canadian oil sands companies to meaningfully boost production until there is more policy and regulatory certainty, said Colin Gruending, the company’s president of liquids pipelines.

“Nor do we expect producers to be making binding FID-able commitments to new pipelines until then,” Gruending said, referring to final investment decisions.

He said Enbridge may have been too quick to propose the Mainline phase two project, but that the company was confident the project will eventually be needed.


Earlier this month, Alberta and the federal government announced plans for a potential 1 million bpd oil pipeline to Canada’s British Columbia coast, but no decisions have been made to go ahead with either that project or the South Bow-Bridger proposal.

(Reporting by Amanda Stephenson in Calgary; Editing by Rod Nickel and Barbara Lewis)

Friday, July 31, 2026

Ms. Rachel Signals Support for El-Sayed, Jackson, McKinney, and Other Candidates Who ‘Care About All Kids’

“I think all kids and people should have medical care, I don’t think anyone needs a billion dollars ever, I think all kids should be safe from violence, I think parents should be able to afford high-quality childcare if they want it.”


Rachel Accurso, better known as Ms. Rachel, poses for a portrait in front of the United States Capitol on June 9, 2026, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Maxine Wallace/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
Jul 31, 2026

The online child educator known as Ms. Rachel on Friday used her massive platform on Instagram to promote a dozen progressive Democrats running for seats in the US Senate and House of Representatives.

“These are the folks I believe care about all kids,” wrote Rachel Accurso, whose wildly popular videos are designed to encourage language development. She asked her more than 5 million followers to share “which candidates you’re voting for and why.”
.

Accurso is supporting:
Becca Balint in Vermont’s At-Large Congressional District;
Cori Bush in Missouri’s 1st Congressional District;
Abdul El-Sayed for US Senate in Michigan;
Peggy Flanagan for US Senate in Minnesota;
Troy Jackson for US Senate in Maine;
Jarrett Keohokalole in Hawaii’s 1st Congressional District;
Oliver Larkin in Florida’s 25th Congressional District;
William Lawrence in Michigan’s 7th Congressional District;
Elijah Manley in Florida’s 20th Congressional District;
Donavan McKinney in Michigan’s 13th Congressional District;
Angie Nixon for US Senate in Florida; and
Justin Pearson in Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District.

“I think politicians shouldn’t attack each other and I don’t think big groups should be able to use millions to attack candidates,” Accurso asserted. From her home state of Maine to Michigan, super political action committees (PACs) and billionaires have spent big to boost “moderate” Democrats and Republicans amid a recent series of progressive primary victories.

“I’m for peace and kindness always but that doesn’t mean not telling the truth and not standing up against injustice,” said the educator, who has outraged right-wingers for speaking out against Israel’s assault on Palestinian children in the Gaza Strip.

Accurso wrote that “I’m for the kids, I’m for the people—I think all kids and people should have medical care, I don’t think anyone needs a billion dollars ever, I think all kids should be safe from violence, I think parents should be able to afford high-quality childcare if they want it/a parent should be able to stay home if they want to.”

“I think everyone should be able to feed their kids and have high-quality schools without stress—I just love literally everyone,” she added.



Balint is seeking a third term in the House. As the presumptive Democratic nominee, she is expected to face the Republican who wins the August 11 primary—likely Gerald Malloy, an Army veteran and defense contractor who previously ran for Senate, according to recent polling.

Bush—who was previously part of the progressive “Squad” in Congress—is hoping to reclaim the seat she lost last cycle to Democratic Rep. Wesley Bell, who was financially backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s super PAC, the United Democracy Project (UDP). Their primary is August 4.

During this cycle, UDP is targeting El-Sayed, who is facing Congresswoman Haley Stevens in Michigan’s August 4 Democratic primary. After Accurso contributed $3,000 to El-Sayed, Samantha Cantrell, a spokesperson for the National Republican Senatorial Committee told the New York Post last Saturday that “Abdul El-Sayed and Ms. Rachel are one and the same, forcing their socialist, they/them, anti-America agenda on our children, and parents should be worried when they head to the ballot box.”



Flanagan, Minnesota’s lieutenant governor, is running to replace Democratic Sen. Tina Smith, who decided not to seek reelection and is supporting the progressive. Polling conducted in the lead-up to the August 11 primary for the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party shows Flanagan ahead of Congresswoman Angie Craig.

Maine Democrats last weekend nominated Jackson, a former state Senate president and logger, to challenge longtime Republican Sen. Susan Collins in November. He replaced Graham Platner, who stepped aside after sexual assault allegations, which he denied. Platner’s surge in popularity and series of scandals have drawn national attention to the race.

Keohokalole is running to oust incumbent Democratic Rep. Ed Case, who is currently leading in polls. According to Hawaii Public Radio, the state senator “decided to run for Congress after seeing how Case reacted to immigration agents holding teachers at gunpoint on Maui.” Their primary is August 8.

Larkin is challenging another Democratic incumbent: Florida Congressman Jared Moskowitz. As the South Florida Sun Sentinel reported Friday, Larkin is “a democratic socialist inspired to get involved in politics by progressive icon US Sen. Bernie Sanders,” a Vermont Independent. Their primary is August 18.

Lawrence, a co-founder of the youth-led climate organization Sunrise Movement, is hoping to beat former Navy SEAL Matt Maasdam and Bridget Brink, who was previously US ambassador to Slovakia and Ukraine, in Michigan’s primary on August 4.

Manley aims to represent a Florida district impacted by Republicans’ mid-decade map-rigging at the request of President Donald Trump. Longtime Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has faced criticism for opting to run in this primary, scheduled for August 18.

Backed by progressives in Congress including Sanders and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), McKinney is running to unseat Democratic Michigan Congressman Shri Thanedar, who has support from key party leaders in the House. The pair faces off in the August 4 primary.



Nixon “is running an unapologetically progressive campaign” against Alex Vindman, a retired US Army lieutenant colonel who was a key witness in Trump’s first impeachment trial. The winner of the August 18 primary will face Republican Sen. Ashley Moody, who was appointed last year and is now seeking a full term.

Pearson, known nationally for being expelled from the Tennessee House of Representatives by Republicans over his protest for stricter gun laws, is running in the Memphis district targeted by GOP gerrymandering efforts. After the redistricting, Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen opted to retire. The primary is August 6.

Monday, July 27, 2026

Opinion

Faith is back in Democratic politics

(RNS) — After decades of watching Democrats dodge the God question, I think they finally have an answer.

Supporters of Texas state Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate, react as results come in during a primary election watch party Tuesday, March 3, 2026, in Austin, Texas. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

(RNS) — I recently found a years-old copy of a national political magazine with a cover story I had written, titled “Will Democrats Ever Get Religion?” It built off the subtitle of one of my books, “God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It.” I smiled as I looked at this piece from over 20 years ago asking the same question I still find myself wondering even now.

For decades now in America, the Republican Party has claimed to own religion and religious values. They proceed to use, abuse, co-opt and reduce religion for their own political agenda. Faith should stay private, they say, except in the cases of “moral values” issues like abortion and gay marriage. Of course, that is bad theology. It is unbiblical theology, ignoring the more than 2,000 verses in the Bible that focus on the poor and oppressed. But Republicans want to command religion in America.

That is made easier by the Democratic Party, which tends to ignore, dismiss or even discredit religion. Part of the reason why Democrats don’t talk much about faith is that they struggle to know how to express it without sounding like they are proselytizing or imposing their religion upon a pluralistic society.

I cannot count the number of times that Democratic senators and members of Congress — many of them names you’d recognize — have asked me privately how to talk about their faith. They don’t want to “wear it on my sleeve,” as they say, or make people feel uncomfortable, or offend those of other faiths or no faith at all. They have concerns around expressing their own religion alongside their strong commitment to the separation of church and state. And while all of that is understandable, the reluctance to speak about faith has ceded religion to the Republicans.

This is despite the fact that Black women, the strongest and most consistent Democratic voting group across any racial or gender demographic group, are also the most religious group across any racial or gender breakdown.



The other factor is what I call secular fundamentalism. I have been fighting religious fundamentalism most of my life, with the public description of being an alternative to the religious right, which gets tiresome. But there is a bias against religion per se in some parts of the political and cultural left, which is just as irrational and openly prejudiced as religious fundamentalism is.

All this makes many Christians committed to social justice often feeling without a party’s support, and sometimes even politically homeless.

I strongly believe that faith communities should be morally independent of party politics, and their values should both help challenge and shape both political parties. But an amazing thing seems to be happening.

An increasing number of Democratic office holders and candidates in upcoming elections are no longer apologetic about their personal faith. Indeed, they want to apply their own devout faith to the social arena where so much is at stake for justice and the common good, beyond the individualism of private religion.

I spoke to Sen. Tim Kaine from Virginia, who coined a new phrase, “faith-forward democrats.”

For Kaine, his Catholic faith and, in particular, serving as a young Jesuit volunteer alongside poor people and families in Honduras shaped the rest of his life and career as a civil rights lawyer and now a U.S. senator.

We had a very encouraging discussion about a new group of Democrats who are not afraid to put their faith forward, while being deeply committed to a pluralistic country of people with many faiths and no faith whatsoever. Together, they can all work for the common good — a core goal of Catholic social teaching.

Kaine is close with other faith-forward Democratic senators, including Chris Coons of Delaware, who attended Yale Divinity School alongside Yale Law School. Then there’s the Rev. Raphael Warnock of Georgia who, despite serving in the Senate, is still pastor of the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the home congregation of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Sen. Cory Booker was also forthright about his Christian faith during his historic 25-hour speech on the Senate floor, where he and Coons had a long discussion about what we are called to do by Scripture.

The electoral landscape is changing, too. A new generation of candidates is speaking openly about faith as a guiding force in their campaigns. Now running for the Senate is Methodist clergyman Adam Hamilton from Kansas, who leads a diverse political church of 24,000 members. Presbyterian seminarian James Talarico is running in Texas and has given faith and politics a fresh face. Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, a devout Catholic and Indigenous leader, is also running for the Senate as a former community organizer who is close to the ground in people’s lives.

Running for the House of Representatives is the Rev. Frederick Douglass Haynes III, pastor of Friendship-West Baptist Church in Dallas, and is perhaps the leading Black revival preacher in the country. And a new Iowa House candidate and Lutheran minister is the Rev. Sarah Trone Garriott. If these candidates win, they will join other leaders of deep faith in Congress like pastor and Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II, the former mayor of Kansas City, among others.

This is a striking shift in American politics — especially in a moment when religion is being dangerously manipulated and weaponized by Christian nationalists for their own political agenda.

These Democrats are reclaiming religion not as a partisan weapon, but as a moral framework for public service. Many of them meet regularly with Republican colleagues of faith at a weekly prayer breakfast for senators. Conversation about the moral values of public life are taking place, before, after and maybe even during prayer times.

We are seeing a dynamic that is finally changing. These “faith-forward Democrats,” as Kaine calls them, are showing that faith can be spoken in the language of compassion and justice, dignity, religious freedom, human solidarity and service to the neighbor. For the first time in a generation, Democrats are learning to speak of faith with authenticity instead of apology.

They do not want to use faith to impose beliefs on others or to hide their faith in private. Instead, they hope to let it shape their conscience, judgments and decisions in public life.

Faith may be our last line of defense in saving, and then restoring, our democracy.

Kaine talks honestly and powerfully about privileged people needing to take risks in the trajectory to dictatorship. Are we up to this test of our faith in God and belief in democracy?

Decades after I first asked whether Democrats would ever get religion, I think I finally have an answer: A group of Democrats are ready to meet their Republican colleagues in the space where faith and democracy meet.

(The Rev. Jim Wallis is Archbishop Desmond Tutu Chair and director of Georgetown University’s Center on Faith and Justice and is the author, most recently, of “The False White Gospel: Rejecting Christian Nationalism, Reclaiming True Faith, and Refounding Democracy.” A version of this commentary appeared on the Substack God’s Politics with Jim Wallis. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of RNS.)

Sunday, May 17, 2026

‘Building a Movement for the Future,’ Bernie Sanders Endorses 61 State and Local Progressives

“Our political revolution is a multiracial, multigenerational working-class movement built from the ground up,” ready to “fight for the kind of changes our country desperately needs,” the senator said.



US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) brought his Fighting Oligarchy Tour to Mumford High School in Detroit, Michigan on May 3, 2026, appearing with Senate candidate Dr. Abdul El-Sayed.
(Photo by Sarah Rice/Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
May 15, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday announced his endorsement of more than five dozen progressives running for local and state political offices across the country, from Arizona and Missouri to Georgia and New Jersey.

“In this pivotal and dangerous moment in our country’s history, we need leaders at every level of government who are prepared to take on the billionaire class and fight for working families. We need bold solutions to the crises we face, not tinkering around the edges,” Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement.

The 84-year-old caucuses with Democrats in the Senate and twice sought the party’s presidential nomination, in 2016 and 2020. During those campaigns and since—particularly with the Fighting Oligarchy Tour he launched shortly after Republican President Donald Trump returned to office last year—he has encouraged Americans, especially younger people, to get involved in US politics.

“In the last 15 months, we have recruited over 8,500 Americans to run for office, many of whom are Independents,” the senator noted. “Our political revolution is a multiracial, multigenerational working-class movement built from the ground up.”

“Today, I am proud to endorse 61 progressives running for state and local office across America,” said Sanders. “They will fight for the kind of changes our country desperately needs.”

In Arizona, Sanders is supporting Bobby Nichols for Tempe City Council, Analise Ortiz for state Senate District 24, Mariana Sandoval for state House District 23, Brian Garcia for state House District 8, and two candidates for state House District 9: Lorena Austin and Jacob Martinez.

In California, he is backing four state Assembly candidates: Jessie Lopez for District 68, Ada Briceño for District 67, Fatima Iqbal-Zubair for District 65, and Sandra Celedon for District 31. He’s also endorsing Joz Sida for Fontana mayor, Marissa Roy for Los Angeles city attorney, and multiple people running for LA City Council: Hugo Soto-Martinez for District 13, Faizah Malik for District 11, Estuardo Mazariegos for District 9, and Eunisses Hernandez for District 1.

In Colorado, he is endorsing Chela Garcia Irlando for state Senate District 34, Gabriel Cervantes for state House District 31, and Tyler Quick for Adams County Commission. In Delaware, Sanders is backing Shay Frisby for state Senate District 5, Adriana Leela Bohm for state Senate District 1, and Rae Krantz for state House District 6.




In Florida, he is supporting Kyandra Darling for state House District 62, and in Georgia, he is backing Ruwa Romman for state Senate District 7. In Iowa, the senator is endorsing India May for state House District 58, Leila Staton for state House District 54, and three Johnson County supervisor candidates: V. Fixmer-Oraiz, Jon Green, and Mandi Remington.

Sanders is also supporting Scott Houldieson for Indiana Senate District 1, Frank Henderson for Kansas House District 6, Robert LeVertis Bell for Kentucky House District 43, Eboni Taylor for Michigan Senate District 3, Justice Horn for the 1st District in Missouri’s Jackson County Legislature, Tick Segerblom for Nevada’s Clark County Commission, Ali Aljarrah for New Jersey’s Passaic County Commission, and Daisy Maldonado for New Mexico’s Doña Ana County Commission.

In New York, where Sanders was notably an early supporter of democratic socialist NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, he is now endorsing three state Senate candidates—Yuh-Line Niou for District 27, Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas for District 13, and, Aber Kawas for District 12—as well as several state Assembly hopefuls: Adam Bojak for District 149, Maurice Brown for District 129, Dan Livingston for District 123, Conrad Blackburn for District 70, Eli Northup for District 69, Illapa Sairitupac for state Assembly District 65, Eon Huntley for District 56, Christian Celeste-Tate for District 54, David Orkin for District 38, Samantha Kattan for District 37, Diana Moreno for District 36, and Shamsul Haque for District 30.

In Pennsylvania, the senator is supporting Mark Pinsley for state Senate District 16, Sierra McNeil for state House District 195, and Brad Chambers for State House District 41. He’s also backing David Morales for mayor of Providence, Rhode Island; Julio Salinas for Texas House District 41; and Jaelynn Scott for Washington House District 37. In West Virginia, he’s endorsing three state House candidates: Olivia Miller for District 80, Cody Cumpston for District 6, and Dave Cantrell for District 3.

Sanders had previously announced his support for US Senate candidates Peggy Flanagan in Minnesota, Dr. Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, and Graham Platner in Maine, as well as multiple progressives running for the House of Representatives, including Dr. Adam Hamawy in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District earlier this month.

“We’re building a movement for the future,” Sanders told The New York Times, which first reported on his new endorsements Friday.

“Our effort is to lead a national movement against Trump’s authoritarianism and kleptocracy and unnecessary wars and his contempt for the Constitution,” he explained. “But equally important, the American people need an alternative to the Democratic establishment, which is significantly dominated by big-money interests.”

Friday, May 08, 2026

‘Shame! Shame! Shame!’: Local Residents Furious After Shark Tank Billionaire’s Data Center Approved in Utah

The project, which residents were informed of just last week, is expected to more than double Utah’s electricity usage, hike its carbon footprint by 50%, and potentially drain more water from the depleted Great Salt Lake.


Protesters react as the Box Elder County commission announces approval of a large data center on May 4, 2026 in Tremonton, Utah.
(Photo by Natalie Behring/Getty Images)


Stephen Prager
May 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

County commissioners in Box Elder County, Utah, were deluged with chants of “Shame! Shame! Shame!” from a crowd of hundreds on Monday night as they voted unanimously to move forward with a sprawling “hyperscale” artificial intelligence data center project that many residents fear will cause energy prices to soar and imperil water access.

The project, known by state officials as “Stratos,” was proposed by the celebrity venture capitalist Kevin O’Leary and has been rushed along by Utah’s Military Installation Development Authority, which recently approved a gigantic energy tax break for the program to help “lure” the billionaire “Shark Tank” investor.



Citing ‘Irreversible Harm,’ 100+ Groups Urge Congress to Reject Rushed Data Center Approvals


The development, dubbed “Wonder Valley” after O’Leary’s “Mr. Wonderful” TV persona, would span more than 40,000 acres of northern Utah—more than two and a half times the size of Manhattan—and would consume more than twice the electricity currently used by the entire state if approved, according to Axios.

CBS 2 KUTV called it “the biggest thing in the region since the completion of the first transcontinental railroad.” And yet Utahns say they’ve been given little information about the plan and few opportunities to voice their concerns.



Residents were given short notice before Box Elder commissioners gathered at the county fairgrounds on Monday for a “special” meeting to vote on the project, but an estimated 500 still showed up to voice their displeasure.

They raised fears that they’d have to endure the same dramatic energy price spikes as other states with high concentrations of data centers. Residential utility costs have jumped 13-20% year over year in Virginia, Illinois, Ohio, and New Jersey, a trend attributed to the rollout of data centers in these states.

The developers of the Utah project have emphasized that it will be powered by an on-site natural gas plant, which they claim would limit the impact on utility bills.

However, that still leaves the massive environmental concern, especially since natural gas is almost entirely made of methane, one of the worst planet-heating pollutants.

Kevin Perry, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Utah, has said that the estimated nine gigawatts of power the center would require, “would increase the carbon dioxide emissions for the state of Utah by more than 50%,” meaning “there’s a huge climate footprint associated with that proposal.”

Environmental advocates also warn that the facility will further drain water from the Great Salt Lake amid an already severe drought.

The Salt Lake Tribune has found that Utah’s dozens of other data centers consume wildly different amounts of water depending on the technology they use.

The developers of the Box Elder facility have claimed the project will use “zero water turbine” technology that allows it to recycle water, resulting in “net zero” consumption.

But Samantha Hawkins, the communications director for Grow the Flow Utah, a group dedicated to protecting the Great Salt Lake, said it’s impossible to know if the developers are telling the truth when they say their facility is designed to limit water usage.

“So far, there’s no publicly available hydrologic analysis or independent review to support those claims,” she said, “and there haven’t been any manufacturers, technologies, or contracts cited in relation to the ‘zero water turbine’ technology.”

Even if the centers limit water use, they still need to remain cool, which the Tribune said often requires more energy.


Many of the Utahns who showed up to protest Monday’s vote felt they were being kept in the dark about the facility’s potential harms and that the plans for the facility, which were not made public until last week, were being kept from them.

“I’m outraged,” said Colleen Flanagan, a resident of Sandy who spoke with Fox 13 Salt Lake. “I am absolutely angry that there was no studies done—it just came up out of the community. Nobody knew about it.”

Mitchell Tousley, who drove more than an hour from Draper to protest the decision, said, “A project of this scale just absolutely requires public input, and there really hasn’t been.”

Deals to build these facilities have often been made in secret, with contract details hidden from the public by nondisclosure agreements that stifle dissent until the project has already been approved. Despite this, these projects have often drawn fearsome backlash from the communities where they are planned. In some cases—like in Virginia late last month, where a 2,100-acre center was set to be built—it has led developers to pull out.

But the commissioners in Box Elder County, who said they’d reviewed more than 2,500 public comments on the proposal, appeared unmoved by the outpouring of public concern on Monday night. They said water and air quality issues were not factors in their vote and that the water rights were held by the private landowners.

As the crowd jeered, with chants of “cowards” and “people over profits,” Commissioner Boyd Bingham, a Republican, shouted them down.

“For hell’s sakes, grow up,” he yelled. “This is beyond a joke.” The commissioners then left the room and addressed the crowd via a virtual meeting.


In a video response to Monday night’s protest, O’Leary said: “I’m the only developer of data centers on Earth that graduated from environmental studies. I’m pretty aware of what these concerns are. They are around air, water use, heat, noise pollution. So sustainability is at the heart of what we do in terms of all these proposals.”

He claimed without evidence that 90% of the opponents of the data center project were “being bused in” from out of state. He also claimed that the facility would be powered in part by “solar, wind, and batteries,” when it is actually powered entirely by natural gas.

Opponents continue to characterize Stratos as a billionaire vanity project to loot Utah’s vast natural resources with little consideration for how it will affect residents.

Utah State University physics professor Robert Davies told Fox 13 that the Great Salt Lake “is occupied by amazing living systems” and that “projects like this go into environments like this and scrape the living systems right off the face of the Earth.”

He said, “This is a private enterprise that is coming in to extract from our natural wealth and pipe it out of the state… and leave us with a few crumbs.”

Friday, May 01, 2026

How Serbia's government controls much of the media

Sanja Kljajic in Novi Sad
DW
April 30, 2026

Since Serbia's ruling SNS party came to power, it has tightened its grip on the media. With an election expected soon, experts fear that authorities will try to eliminate the last pockets of independent reporting.

Aleksandar Vucic on the cover of two tabloid newspapers

Image: Rüdiger Rossig/DW


"Backsliding," "pressure," "political influence over editorial policy" — this is how numerous international reports describe the state of the media in Serbia.

Year after year, the international diagnosis of the health of Serbia’s media landscape remains the same: While the space for professional independent media is shrinking, the government's propaganda tools are becoming more developed and sophisticated.

"The main goal of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) after coming to power in 2012 was to place the entire media landscape under firm control. And they did this very systematically," journalist and media analyst Nedim Sejdinovic told DW.

The model, he says, was simple: Media outlets willing to cooperate with the authorities received financial and institutional support, while those that refused faced economic and political isolation.
Takeover of local and provincial outlets

One of the first steps was the takeover of the provincial public broadcaster in Vojvodina, where the entire management, along with editors and presenters of news programs, was replaced after the SNS came to power in the region.
Thousands of Serbs gathered outside the premises of Serbia's public broadcaster RTS in Belgrade in January 2025 to demand objective reporting
Image: Filip Stevanovic/Anadolu/picture alliance

"But one of the most important elements of this media engineering was the purchase of media outlets, especially at the local level, by people who are part of the ruling elite, such as the family of (minister) Bratislav Gasic, or tycoons like Radojica Milosavljevic," said Sejdinovic.

"The result is that around 90% of media outlets are directly or indirectly linked to Aleksandar Vucic's regime," he added.

The role of public funding

Sejdinovic says that these media are sustained by public money, which is provided through several parallel channels. This has been confirmed by numerous watchdog reports.

The first channel is project co-financing, where public funds are allocated to media outlets through competitive calls to support media content that serves the public interest. According to analyses by BIRN and the Center for Sustainable Communities, around €120 million ($140 million) has been spent on this at the local, regional and state level over the past decade, with the majority going to media outlets that openly support the government.

The second, much larger and less transparent channel is state advertising, which analyses show is also largely directed toward the same pro-government outlets.

A third form of pressure comes from the market. "An atmosphere has been created in which even large private companies avoid advertising in independent media, so as not to damage their relationship with the authorities, and in a deregulated political and economic environment, that is necessary for doing business," said Sejdinovic.

The line between journalism and propaganda


In such a system, the line between journalism and propaganda is almost erased.

Critical voices are delegitimized and demonized, while scandals are reported without context and framed solely through the lens of government officials.

At the same time, the public space is saturated with the presence of President Vucic. His addresses are often broadcast live, interrupting regular TV and radio programs, while party rallies are aired simultaneously across national, regional and local TV stations.

President Aleksandar Vucic is a constant presence on television: His addresses are broadcast live, interrupting regular TV and radio programs
Image: N. Rujevic/DW

Viewers switching channels often encounter the same content: the same face, the same message.

The scale of control was also visible during the 2017 presidential campaign, when almost all daily newspapers carried front-page advertisements for then-Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic — an unprecedented development in Serbia's modern political history.

The opposition rarely features in regular reporting, and dissenting voices are frequently labeled as "traitors," "foreign mercenaries" or "enemies of the state."

In this environment, the targeting and discrediting of government opponents have become routine.

From loyalists to 'super-loyalists'

Sejdinovic says that as the political crisis deepens, particularly following waves of protests over the past 18 months, control over the media is entering a new phase.

"SNS loyalists are now being replaced with super-loyalists," he explains.

Some pro-government media, he notes, previously limited themselves to positive coverage of the government and ignoring critical voices, but that was obviously not enough.

"Now the goal is to turn all media into a kind of primitive political weapon that will spread the most blatant lies, defame people, use crude language and create an atmosphere of deep political divisions in society," he told DW.
New outlets springing up

This trend is also reflected in the rapid emergence of new media outlets. The Association of Independent Electronic Media (ANEM) in Serbia has noted the registration of 78 new outlets since the beginning of 2026 alone.

During the 2017 presidential campaign, almost all daily newspapers carried front-page advertisements for then-Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic
Image: Sanja Kljajic

"This is an expansion of the media machinery for spreading government propaganda," said Bojan Cvejic of ANEM. "Their texts are unsigned and almost identical, making them more like pamphlets than journalistic content, used for campaigns against critics," he told DW.
Serbia drops in the rankings

According to the latest World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders, Serbia has dropped to 104th place and is now classified among countries with a "difficult situation" for media freedom.

The report highlights that despite some previous fluctuations in ranking, the overall environment for journalists in Serbia continues to deteriorate, marked by increasing political pressure, limited media pluralism and worsening conditions for independent reporting.

President Vucic is expected to call a parliamentary election soon, with many speculating that a poll could be held sometime between June and the end of the year.

Sejdinovic warns that the situation could deteriorate further, with the next phase potentially involving stronger pressure on the digital sphere, following patterns observed in other authoritarian systems.

"The problem of media freedom in Serbia is a political problem," concludes Sejdinovic. "It is difficult to resolve without a change of government, because this government, by its very nature, is essentially an opponent of professional journalism."

Edited by: Aingeal Flanagan

Sanja Kljajic Correspondent for DW's Serbian Service based in Novi Sad, Serbia

Iran war expands press crackdown, leaving information vacuum

Daniel Ameri
DW
01/05/2026

For many journalists in Iran, the truth is increasingly being treated as a security threat. Authorities are tightening an already repressive reporting environment, where information is strictly controlled.



The Iranian regime tightly controls the domestic narrative of the war
Image: AO/Middle East Images/IMAGO

Iran has long ranked among the world's most repressive countries for press freedom. In the 2026 World Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders placed Iran 177th out of 180 countries, below Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, which ranked 175th.

But journalists and media watchdogs say the US-Israel war with Iran has pushed reporting conditions to an even more dangerous point.

Authorities in Iran have long tried to control the public narrative during moments of crisis. But according to journalists inside the country, wartime conditions have made that grip even tighter.

One journalist working for a well-known Iranian outlet told DW that the publication is now being more closely monitored and that editorial instructions are being passed down from above on how coverage should be handled.

According to this journalist, who asked to remain anonymous, the newspaper's website cannot be accessed from outside Iran. Only a limited number of outlets close to the security establishment appear to have reliable access to the global internet.

That account fits a broader pattern described by press freedom groups.

In March, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) reported that journalists in Iran were facing an information blackout at the same time as they were trying to report under dangerous wartime conditions. The group also said some reporters had received threatening phone calls from state-linked institutions.

RSF said access to information inside Iran has been "severely restricted," with reporters working under bombardment while also facing pressure from state institutions.


Selective internet access


The pressure on journalists has unfolded alongside severe internet restrictions that have sharply limited the flow of information out of Iran.

Reuters news agency reported on April 28 that Iran had entered the third month of an internet blackout, with the authorities introducing limited access for some businesses under a temporary scheme known as "Internet Pro."

According to the report, the blackout first began on January 8, briefly eased in February, and was reimposed after the war began on February 28.

In practice, that has created a two-tier information system. While much of the population has faced little or no normal access to the global internet, some journalists say a small number of media actors and institutions have been given exceptions.

Another Iranian journalist told DW that some colleagues had tried to collect names for access to so-called "white SIM cards," which reportedly allow freer access to the international internet for people approved by security agencies.

She said she refused, believing the arrangement was discriminatory and politically compromising. In her view, the expectation behind such privileges is clear: those who receive access are expected to stay within the boundaries of the state narrative.

Fear, censorship and propaganda


Journalists inside Iran say the pressure extends far beyond internet access. Some describe a climate in which even routine reporting has become risky, especially around sensitive sites or politically charged events.



A journalist based in Tehran told DW that independent reporting has become nearly impossible. In his account, even some credentialed reporters who tried to cover strike locations were briefly detained and had their footage deleted.

DW could not independently verify each of those individual cases, but the broader pattern matches what press freedom groups have described: a wartime environment in which access to information is narrowing and the cost of reporting is rising.

At the same time, state media have continued to frame unauthorized reporting as harmful to national security.

Journalists say domestic outlets are effectively confined to the official version of events and avoid publishing sensitive details from the ground, including the public mood and the full human impact of the war.

Yet some analysts argue that the state's propaganda effort is failing to convince much of the public. Behrouz Turani, a media expert and journalism trainer who has worked with several international outlets, said the Iranian regime's "media propaganda during this war has failed."

Turani told DW the messaging has often appeared clumsy and disconnected from people's lived reality. Rather than persuading the public, he argued, it has exposed the growing gap between official narratives and what many Iranians are experiencing.
Pressure on Iran's diaspora journalists

The crackdown has also extended to exiled journalists and political activists. Reuters reported on March 9 that Tehran had warned Iranians abroad who publicly backed the US and Israel that they could face legal consequences, including the confiscation of their property in Iran.

The report said the warning came from the prosecutor general's office and was directed at members of the diaspora who had expressed support online for the attacks on Iran.



That threat was reinforced later in March, when Iran's judiciary said people accused of spying, cooperating with "hostile states" or helping enemy targeting could face the death penalty and the confiscation of all assets under a law strengthened during the war.

Iranian authorities said the law could also apply to some media-related activity, including sharing images or videos deemed useful to hostile forces.
Iran's information vacuum

Iran's judiciary and security apparatus have for years pursued journalists, media outlets and ordinary citizens over reporting and public commentary. What many reporters describe now is not an entirely new system, but a much harsher version of an old one, leading to an information vacuum.

As independent reporting becomes harder and internet access remains restricted, the space for verified journalism shrinks.

That gives the state more room to promote its own version of events while making it harder for citizens, reporters and the outside world to understand what is really happening on the ground.

Edited by: Wesley Rahn