SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " ethic " 464 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Hankamer School of Business to host large-scale worship event
“For us in particular, this event is a really good community event," Dr. Matt Quade, associate dean for values-based leadership and director of the Center for Christian Leadership and Ethics, said. "It allows us to gather together, not just with students, but faculty and staff, all gathering together. We can come together within the business school, just for an hour each semester, and spend some time together in prayer and worship."
Supreme Court adopts automated recusal software to avoid ethics conflicts
The Supreme Court said Tuesday that it will start using software to assist in justices’ decisions to recuse themselves from cases that present a potential conflict of interest.
The Sunshine Blog: Stemming The Flow Of Campaign Cash, Hawaiʻi Style
Short takes, outtakes, our takes and other stuff you should know about public information, government accountability and ethical leadership in Hawai‘i.
Weekend reads: CDC’s ‘unethical’ vaccine trial; The Lancet ‘refuses to retract’ letter; on the methods used to correct science
If your week flew by — we know ours did — catch up here with what you might have missed. The week at Retraction Watch featured: Journal tags ‘impossible’ case report with short erratum Guest post: …
Lindsey Vonn injury footage: How do sports broadcasters cover serious accidents?
When competitors suffer horrific, or even life-threatening, injuries, broadcasters are faced with making difficult ethical choices
New judicial ethics code says judges may speak out against ‘illegitimate’ attacks
Newly released ethics guidance for the federal judiciary makes clear that judges can speak out against “illegitimate forms of criticism and attacks.”
What science should learn from the Epstein files
The release of documents reveals an asymmetry in the support for ethical research funding
How business students learn to make ethical decisions by studying a soup kitchen in one of America’s toughest neighborhoods
For 50 years, St. Francis Inn in Philadelphia has served the poorest and most vulnerable people in Kensington.
How business students learn to make ethical decisions by studying a soup kitchen in one of America’s toughest neighborhoods
For 50 years, St. Francis Inn in Philadelphia has served the poorest and most vulnerable people in Kensington.
Drake University’s Zimpleman College of Business to Host 2026 “Business for Good” Summit
Event connects students, business leaders in exploring ethical leadership and social responsibility Driven by the belief that business should be more than a pursuit of profit, Drake University’s Zimpleman College of Business will host the 2026 Business for Good Summit on Feb. 27 from 8 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. in Drake’s Olmsted Center. The event...
Bar complaint filed over search of Washington Post reporter’s home
A press group says a prosecutor broke ethics rules by not flagging a law that limits searches for reporting materials.
Bar Complaint Filed Over Search of Washington Post Reporter’s Home
A press group says a prosecutor broke ethics rules by not flagging a law that limits searches for reporting materials.
Thai Reformist Politicians Face Lifetime Ban After Election Loss
More than three dozen former lawmakers of a pro-democracy party in Thailand face a lifetime ban from politics after the nation’s anti-graft agency found them in breach of ethical standards over a failed bid to amend the royal insult law.
Stop cyber threats! Learn to use artificial intelligence as your small business security ally
This session will focus on the security and privacy issues associated with artificial intelligence, providing a clear roadmap for integrating artificial intelligence tools ethically and effectively to stay one step ahead of sophisticated cyber threats.
Failure to Alert Judge to Press Law for Reporter Search Draws Ethical Scrutiny
The Justice Department may have violated a candor rule by not disclosing a 1980 law when seeking a warrant for a Washington Post reporter’s home.
Culture Council: Regulated Businesses: Approach Responsibility and Ethical Practices as a Revenue Strategy
There are ways for regulated companies to operate today that create a strong, future-proof infrastructure.
It's time to think about human reproduction in space, scientists urge
"If reproduction is ever to occur beyond Earth, it must do so with a clear commitment to safety, transparency and ethical integrity."
Ethics Opinion 1291: Participation in an Alternative Business Structure (ABS) - New York State Bar Association
Opinion 1291 (01/30/2026) Topic: Participation in an Alternative Business Structure (ABS) Digest: A New York lawyer may hold a financial interest in an ABS which renders legal services in a jurisdiction where such provision of legal services is permitted. A New York lawyer may have a contractual relationship with such an entity pursuant to which
On the Future of Species by Adrian Woolfson review – are we on the verge of creating synthetic life?
A genomic entrepreneur’s guide to the coming revolution in biology raises troubling questions about ethics and safety
Colts star Jonathan Taylor lauds Titans ‘electric’ rookie Pro Bowler
Jonathan Taylor isolated Chimere Dike’s years-long work ethic as what’s stood out in Dike’s road to being named a Pro Bowler in 2026 as a rookie.
The Review of Politics is pleased to welcome Thom Brooks to our editorial advisory board.
Professor Brooks serves as Principal of Collingwood College and holds a personal Chair in Law, Ethics and Government at Durham University, whe...
Business Leadership Week 2026 at Texas State University
Business Leadership Week will explore leadership, innovation, entrepreneurship and ethics through workshops, panel discussions, engaging sessions and networking opportunities.
Bridging the STEM Gap: Women, Science, and Why Prevention Starts with Equity
Women’s inclusion in STEM is critical for ethical AI, equitable health systems and social justice – data shows closing the gap transforms society.
“Existential risk” – Why scientists are racing to define consciousness
Scientists warn that rapid advances in AI and neurotechnology are outpacing our understanding of consciousness, creating serious ethical risks. New research argues that developing scientific tests for awareness could transform medicine, animal welfare, law, and AI development. But identifying consciousness in machines, brain organoids, or patients could also force society to rethink responsibility, rights, and moral boundaries. The question of what it means to be conscious has never been more urgent—or more unsettling.
Colorado House launches ethics review of Republican Rep. Ron Weinberg
The Colorado House will convene an ethics committee to review a complaint filed by Rep. Brandi Bradley, R-Roxborough Park, against fellow Republican Rep. Ron Weinberg, R-Loveland. It will be the first time since 2012 that the House has formed an ethics committee. The contents of Bradley’s complaint are confidential under House rules. Bradley has filed […]
Tiny mammals are sending warning signs scientists can finally read
Small mammals are early warning systems for environmental damage, but many species look almost identical, making them hard to track. Scientists have developed a new footprint-based method that can tell apart nearly indistinguishable species with remarkable accuracy. Tested on two types of sengi, the system correctly identified them up to 96% of the time. It offers a simple, ethical way to monitor ecosystems before they quietly unravel.
Mars Could Turn Green… And It’s No Longer Just Science Fiction
New research suggests making Mars green could be a real, testable goal, if we're ready to take the ethical leap.
Trump’s ‘pay-to-play’ politics fuel a ‘new gilded age’, experts say
Major donors reap influence and material benefits, ethics experts argue, as money and governance intertwine
A vaccine trial is called 'unethical' and a 'unique' opportunity. Is it on or off?
The U.S. is giving $1.6 million to researchers to study how the hepatitis B vaccine affects newborns in Guinea-Bissau. Local officials say the trial is suspended. U.S. officials say that's inaccurate.
Sports-Betting Scandals Are Ubiquitous. Whether Fans Will Care Is an Open Question.
Breaches of ethics in sports are almost as old as professional competitions. Here’s when they have affected the business — and when they haven’t.
New UC Merced major teaches how to tackle questions of ethics in science, tech
In a world where artificial intelligence, climate change, epidemics and more compete for our concern, the need for people who can weigh the technical and humanistic sides of an argument is crucial. A new UC Merced major addresses this need.
Board finds 'reasonable cause' Ferguson violated ethics law
An ethics investigation found "reasonable cause" to believe Gov. Bob Ferguson violated ethics rules in bringing former aide Mike Webb on a state plane.
Longtime Oregon lawmaker admits to ethics violation, but fails to disclose business client
The Heppner Republican agreed to a letter of education from the Oregon Government Ethics Commission over the violation.
Rep. Greg Smith admits ethics violation, fails to disclose business client
AROUND OREGON: A state legislator facing multiple ethics investigations in the past year agreed to a state sanction in a second case. State Rep. Greg Smith, R-Heppner, still has two other ethics cases pending at the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.
Liberal Arts Teaches The Business Skills AI Can't Replace
The less directly you prepare for business, the better equipped you may be — because empathy, synthesis, and ethical reasoning can't be learned from a spreadsheet.
Virginia business schools ramp up AI education
Virginia business schools are expanding AI programs, blending data science and business education to prepare students for data-driven careers and ethical AI use.
What if AI becomes conscious and we never know
A philosopher at the University of Cambridge says there’s no reliable way to know whether AI is conscious—and that may remain true for the foreseeable future. According to Dr. Tom McClelland, consciousness alone isn’t the ethical tipping point anyway; sentience, the capacity to feel good or bad, is what truly matters. He argues that claims of conscious AI are often more marketing than science, and that believing in machine minds too easily could cause real harm. The safest stance for now, he says, is honest uncertainty.
2025: AI and AR Transform Communication and Entertainment
In 2025, communication and entertainment sectors evolve through AI-driven personalization, immersive technologies like AR/VR, and interactive social platforms, fostering seamless hybrid experiences and authentic content. Challenges include privacy concerns and infrastructure needs. Ultimately, these innovations amplify human connections while demanding ethical adaptations.
Ethics investigations, scandals plague Colorado Capitol
Over the course of the year, a series of investigations, allegations and controversies emerged at the state Capitol, drawing scrutiny to the behavior of elected officials and, in some cases, overshadowing policy debates. Here are some of the notable investigations, stories and accusations to come out of Colorado’s latest legislative session. Sonya Jaquez Lewis In […]
Experts met to discuss the ethics of using organoids in research
Organoids are bits of neural tissue that model human brain development. Their use in science makes some uneasy, in part because the brain is so closely tied to our sense of self.
Dismissing politics as ‘dirty’ is wrong and self-defeating
I’m often struck by how often I meet people who think that all politics are dirty. They view politics as innately unethical, something they should avoid altogether. They stereotype politicians as dishonest and corrupt.
‘Kast’s victory is a political and ethical earthquake’
Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
A new era for sports communication at UNC Hussman | UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media
As director of UNC Hussman’s Sports Communication Focus Program, Distinguished Associate Professor of Sports Communication Livis Freeman is building on the work of the school’s legendary Distinguished Professor for Sports Communication John Sweeney. Sweeney, who retired last year, developed one of the most respected sports communication programs in the country. Freeman, now in his 12th year at the school, is launching an ambitious expansion of the program that is transforming how UNC prepares students for careers in sports media. The most visible change came this fall with a reimagining of “MEJO 377: Sports Communication.” Previously offered as two sections with 30 students each, the course expanded to 96 students and welcomed former UNC basketball star and NBA veteran Tyler Hansbrough as the co-instructor with Freeman, bringing real world professional experience directly into the classroom every week. The course has been a huge success. Students have participated in recording a podcast with Hansbrough and learned from an impressive lineup of guest speakers. Steve Kirschner, UNC’s senior associate director of athletics for communications, was the first in the course’s guest speaker series, followed by UNC Hussman alumni including Kaitlyn Schmidt ’23 from Bleacher Report, Deaton Bell ’90 from Turner Sports and Becca Royer ’19 from the Philadelphia 76ers. Travis Tygart, CEO of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, also shared his insights with the class. The highlight of the semester came when Roy Williams, who coached Hansbrough and the Tar Heels to a national championship in 2009, visited the classroom. Former UNC men’s basketball players Luke Maye and Marcus Ginyard showed up to support their former coach and Hansbrough, creating an unforgettable experience as Williams entertained students with stories and insights that captivated the room. Student demand has been overwhelming. The course reached capacity within two days of registration opening, with more than 40 students on the waitlist. “Students want to learn from people who have actually lived these experiences,” Freeman said. “Tyler shares insights into media relations, broadcast production and athlete communications that you simply can’t get from a textbook.” The model proved so successful that the school secured funding to continue it for the next five years, with a different former professional athlete co-teaching each fall. The school’s curriculum committee approved a proposal to expand the course to 150 to 200 students starting in fall 2026. This change will make it an introductory course accessible to students from across the University, transforming it into a showcase course for the entire campus. The course redesign represents just one piece of a broader sports communication program overhaul. This fall, the curriculum committee approved “MEJO 390: Sports Play by Play,” the first course of its kind at UNC. Limited to 10 advanced students, the course will be taught by Matt Krause, the current voice of UNC women’s basketball and an ACC Network broadcaster. Students will call actual games across multiple sports including women’s softball, soccer, volleyball, field hockey and lacrosse, as well as men’s soccer and lacrosse. They will also shadow broadcasts of men’s and women’s basketball games. “The sports broadcasting industry is exploding with streaming platforms and conference networks creating unprecedented demand,” Freeman said. The course emerged directly from student advocacy, led by Anna Laible ’26 and others who pushed for hands-on broadcasting experience. Professional equipment has been acquired, partnerships with UNC Athletics are in place and a soft launch began this semester with three experienced students calling games to test the system. The program’s growth extends into other specialized areas as well. Last spring, Stembler Professor Charlie Tuggle launched a new sports event management and hospitality course in partnership with On Location, a company that manages major sporting event experiences. The course provided students with opportunities to travel to the Super Bowl and NFL Draft, and Tuggle plans to take a group to the 2026 Milan Olympics this spring. Looking ahead to spring 2026, Associate Professor Ryan Thornburg will debut a sports data visualization course, adding another dimension to the program’s skill-building offerings. The curriculum expansion reflects the increasingly diverse career paths available in sports media, from traditional journalism and broadcasting to digital analytics and strategic communication. The program is also diving into one of college athletics’ most transformative developments: Name, Image and Likeness rights. Freeman’s “MEJO 466: Sports Marketing” class collaborated last spring with Associate Professor Gary Kayye’s “MEJO 371: Advertising Creative” class on a project with UNC’s Carolina NIL group to help rebrand their organization. That same semester, Kayye’s class envisioned Chapel Thrill, UNC football’s new pregame concert and entertainment experience. And Shaun Anderson, the school’s Knight Chair in Sports, Race and Media, continues to explore the broader implications of NIL through his research and teaching. These NIL-focused initiatives give students direct exposure to the business side of college athletics at a moment when the landscape is rapidly evolving. “Our students aren’t just learning about these changes,” Freeman said. “They’re actively helping shape how schools and athletes navigate them.” The transformation of UNC Hussman’s sports communication program reflects a broader philosophy about how to prepare students for careers in a rapidly changing industry. By bringing in professional practitioners like Hansbrough and Krause, partnering with industry leaders like On Location and ACC Network, and engaging with current issues like NIL, the program ensures students graduate with both theoretical knowledge and practical experience. For alumni who remember the foundations John Sweeney built, the expansion represents an evolution rather than a departure. The program still emphasizes strong reporting, strategic communication, ethical communication and critical thinking. But now it also offers students the chance to call live games, work on real NIL campaigns and learn directly from former professional athletes. “We’re not just teaching students about sports media,” Freeman said. “We’re giving them the tools, experiences and connections to actually build careers in it.” With new courses launching, professional partnerships deepening and enrollment expanding, UNC Hussman’s sports communication program is positioning itself as a national leader in preparing the next generation of sports media professionals. For current students, the message is clear: if you’re interested in sports communication, there’s never been a better time to be at UNC Hussman. And for the hundreds of students trying to get off waitlists and into these new courses, the school is working to create more opportunities. The program John Sweeney built is growing in ways that honor his legacy while meeting the demands of a new era in sports media.
WHO launches call for high-level experts to join the Science Council
The World Health Organization (WHO) is today soliciting the interest of internationally-renowned experts to serve on its Science Council, one of the Organization’s highest-level advisory bodies to the WHO Director-General.
Hacker hijacks Amazon accounts via Kindle ebook
An ethical hacker has warned Kindle users against downloading ebooks from third-party sites after discovering flaws that can expose credit cards
Ethics commission investigates progressive Portland city councilors over August retreat
Oregon ethics officials will investigate whether six Portland city councilors violated public meetings law when they met for a private August retreat.
2025 Was The Year True Crime Entertainment Went Too Far
Netflix's 2025 true crime documentary The Perfect Neighbor raises serious ethical questions and concerns when it comes to true crime media in general.
Policies | Business Conduct and Decisions
Abbott's transparent policies and standards guide our business decisions, ethical conduct and commitment to the environment.
Inside the 2025 UVA Conference on Ethical AI in Business
The University of Virginia convened faculty, technologists, economists and even fiction writers at The Forum Hotel on the Darden School of Business Grounds to explore “minding the gap” between AI’s promise and shortcomings.
The New WHO Pandemic Treaty and Global Health Governance: Incorporating Common but Differentiated Responsibilities into PABS - Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
On May 20, 2025, the World Health Assembly unanimously adopted the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic Agreement, an international treaty designed to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The product of three years of arduous negotiations, the treaty marks a new era of global cooperation in public health. However, core aspects of the agreement remain unresolved—notably the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) System, which is intended to ensure equitable access to pandemic-related materials and benefits. To support the successful implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” should be formally incorporated into the negotiating agenda of the PABS annex. Introduction For the first time, an international treaty has enshrined the principle of “One Health,” the compelling idea that the health of animals, humans, and the environment all contribute to pandemic risks. SARS (2003), H1N1 (2009–10), Ebola (2014–16), and COVID-19 all emerged through zoonotic spillover from animal hosts—respectively, civets, hogs, and bats. Together, they underscore the need for a coordinated, cross-sectoral approach. The Pandemic Agreement responds to this call, requiring state parties to acknowledge the ecological interplay and commit to a comprehensive “One Health” strategy. Specifically, Article 5 charges governments to address “the drivers of pandemics and the emergence and re-emergence of infectious disease at the human-animal-environment interface,” including wild animal markets, deforestation, and antibiotic overuse. Yet the effectiveness of this “One Health” vision depends equally on the free flow of scientific information and data among countries and institutions. Just as environmental and animal health factors have been neglected in past global frameworks, so too has data sharing been marginalized, despite its centrality to timely detection and response. The Pandemic Agreement takes an important step by requiring governments to enhance data collection and cooperate with the World Health Organization (WHO). However, these provisions will remain aspirational without a robust Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) annex. The PABS system will determine whether countries and researchers can rapidly exchange pathogen samples and genetic data while ensuring equitable access to resulting research and development, including diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Without such mechanisms, the treaty’s promise to operationalize “One Health” and strengthen global preparedness will risk becoming largely symbolic, echoing earlier failures to translate shared principles into coordinated action. Equity Concerns When the 2025 Health Assembly adopted the Pandemic Agreement, it left the difficult question of access to pathogens and the sharing of resulting benefits to be addressed in a separate agreement. Negotiations on this separate agreement, PABS, are now underway in Geneva. Yet governments remain divided over fundamental questions of equity between the countries that primarily contribute to the system and those that primarily draw from it—and consequently benefit. For example, wildlife in countries bordering the equator is likely to produce PABS materials, but companies in Europe are likely to use them to develop lucrative products. The most likely contributor countries are likely to be those biodiverse countries around the equator, such as Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Indonesia, where the number of human-mammalian viral host interactions is large. Conversely, countries most likely to benefit from this material are those with the technology, investors, and infrastructure to capitalize on genomic data, such as the United States, EU member states, and Japan. This imbalance reflects a broader pattern seen in prior international frameworks. Now, as in the past, the wealthiest countries in the world (a useful heuristic is membership of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)) disproportionately benefit from systems in which pathogens and genomic sequencing data are contributed to a common source. Under the International Agreement on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (the “Plant Treaty” or “Seed Treaty”) and the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework, companies from Europe and North America disproportionately withdraw biological samples and data for development into lucrative medical products. Their governments and companies have both statutory and contractual claims to the products that those companies correspondingly produce. PABS appears poised to follow the same pattern. The text calls for strong language on access to pathogens and associated data, but the corresponding benefits that should flow to poorer countries are couched in equivocal or non-binding language. Common but Differentiated Responsibilities To address these inequities, the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” should be formally incorporated into the negotiating agenda of the PABS annex. Common but differentiated responsibilities are often a feature of climate change negotiations. The basic principle is that, even though all countries should reduce carbon emissions, governments that became rich and powerful through massive carbon emissions (e.g., France, the United Kingdom, the United States) should have a greater obligation to address the resulting crises. Applied to PABS, it would require that governments hosting and supporting companies developing lucrative products carry greater obligations toward the cost of running the PABS system; share benefits or final medical products; and transfer technology to help countries worldwide develop their own capacities to innovate and manufacture vaccines during an emergency. For example, an annex could mandate that any company based in an OECD country that withdraws PABS material would be obligated to donate the resulting diagnostics, therapeutics, or vaccines to the WHO during a public health emergency or pandemic. Questions remain about how robust those donations would be, but the principle is that they should deliver highly significant lifesaving benefits to be equitably shared. Theoretically, this approach mirrors the PIP Framework, in which companies withdrawing influenza samples are required to pay half of the operating costs. In practice, however, the framework has fallen short. The PIP Framework Secretariat has struggled to secure payments from companies, with companies often disagreeing over how much is owed. Additionally, without another pandemic influenza to test the strength of the agreement during a public health emergency, corporate compliance with sharing mechanisms remains unknown. Even if these limitations did not characterize the PIP Framework, partially paying for operating expenses does not address the inequity in access to genetic data and pathogen samples that left less developed countries last in line for COVID-19 vaccines (and, before them, H1N1). Common but differentiated responsibilities would go further, addressing governments’ legitimate grievances regarding information sharing. It would make withdrawals of PABS material and resulting products more transparent, building trust across the board. Enforcement and Enduring Success A key implication of this approach is that the governing mechanism of the PABS must have real enforcement authority. The WHO Pandemic Agreement delegates its core governance responsibilities to a Conference of the Parties (COP)—a governing body composed of one representative from each participating government, similar to those established under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement COP is charged with oversight functions but ultimately possesses no real authority to compel a government to take any action it does not wish to take. The text does not give the COP the ability to, for example, sanction a party that does not comply with either textual obligations or PABS provisions. In other words, there are no effective mechanisms in place to ensure compliance. Perhaps just as significant, establishing a meaningful enforcement mechanism within the PABS system would strengthen the WHO’s credibility and its ability to ensure compliance across global health governance. By setting a precedent for accountability, such a mechanism could enhance the organization’s authority not only within the Pandemic Agreement but also in enforcing the revised International Health Regulations and other frameworks for public health emergencies. Conclusion The PABS annex can—and should—be different. It should establish clear responsibilities for funding as well as for sharing the diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines that result from contributions to the system. The system, in turn, must include a dedicated body empowered to hold governments and the corporations they sponsor accountable for their responsibilities before, during, and after pandemics. Doing so would restore trust in the broader agreement, which was eroded as commitments were repeatedly diluted while parties scrambled to meet their own self-imposed deadlines during the Pandemic Agreement negotiations. A robust PABS Annex would cement a grand social bargain. Wealthier countries and their corporations would gain unimpeded access to scientific information essential for developing and manufacturing lifesaving medical products. As such, they would stand to gain considerable economic benefit. Yet that privilege must be matched with responsibility. The grand bargain must include not only the right to innovate, but also the duty to ensure that innovation serves all. As medical products are developed and produced through collective contributions, every person must have equal access. All human beings deserve an equitable chance to survive—to save their own life, the lives of their families, and the well-being of their communities. … Sam Halabi, JD, MPhil, is the Bette Jacobs Endowed Professor at Georgetown University’s School of Health and the Director of the Center for Transformational Health Law at Georgetown Law. He serves as the co-lead for the WHO’s Working Group on Regulatory Consideration on AI and Health’s training workstream. He earned his JD from Harvard, his MPhil from Oxford, and undergraduate degrees from Kansas State University. Lawrence Gostin, LLD (Hon.), JD, BA, is University Distinguished Professor and Founding Director and Timothy and Linda O’Neill Professor of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law. He is the author of Global Health Security: A Blueprint for the Future (Harvard University Press, 2021); Global Health Law (Harvard University Press, 2014); Public Health Law: Power, Duty, Restraint (University of California Press, 3rd ed., 2016); Public Health Law and Ethics: A Reader (University of California Press, 3rd ed., 2018); Law and the Health System (Foundation Press, 2014); Principles of Mental Health Law & Practice (Oxford University Press, 2010). He also directs the WHO Collaborating Center at Georgetown University. Image Credit: United States Mission Geneva, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Mini brains, big questions: science is racing ahead of ethics
Brain organoids are revolutionising research, but their growing complexity raises unsettling ethical questions.
FIFA accused of breaking ethics rules after giving Peace Prize to Trump
FIFA's ethics committee has been asked to investigate Gianni Infantino, claiming he broke the governing body's rules on political neutrality.
Discuss ethical issues in the world of sports | CWRU Newsroom | Case Western Reserve University
Members of the Case Western Reserve University community are invited to enroll in Siegal Lifelong Learning Program’s “Fair Play: The Ethics of Spo...
Column: The Golden Globes' ethics are worse than ever, and no one seems to care
The Golden Globes came back from the brink of scandal. But the awards' suspect ethics haven't really changed, our columnist writes.
U. professor appointed co-editor-in-chief of 'Business Ethics Quarterly'
Danielle Warren, professor of management and global business at Rutgers Business School, was recently appointed co-editor-in-chief of "Business Ethics Quarterly," according to a press release.
Anduril's Palmer Luckey makes an ethical case for using AI in war: 'There is no moral high ground in using inferior technology'
For "life and death decision-making," Anduril cofounder Palmer Luckey says it's "too critical" to not use the most advanced technology.
Olivia Nuzzi to leave Vanity Fair amid troubled book rollout
The former New York Magazine journalist has been ostracized in Washington since her allegedly unethical dalliance with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
UK IVF couples use legal loophole to rank embryos based on potential IQ, height and health
British fertility clinics raise scientific and ethical objections over patients sending embryos’ genetic data abroad for analysis
Expansive prescribed fire research project brings Montana scientists together
The SMART FIRES project combines smoke and fire science, smart sensors, sociology, artificial intelligence, ethics and more in the context of prescribed fires.
Science journal retracts study on safety of Monsanto’s Roundup: ‘serious ethical concerns’
Paper published in 2000 found glyphosate was not harmful, while internal emails later revealed company’s influence
Team of Penn State Smeal seniors win Business with Integrity Case Competition
Students explored the ethical challenges of the wellness industry in the 2025 Business with Integrity Case Competition. Every fall, the Tarriff Center for Business Ethics and Social Responsibility hosts the competition where students examine the role of ethics in business and put their ethical frameworks to the test.
Alex Karp says Palantir is 'highly ethical' but doesn't need you to believe him
Alex Karp says his data analytics company is "highly ethical" and that Trump has "performed" on immigration policies.
Science must move from materialism to mystery
Theoretical physicist and neuroscientist Àlex Gómez-Marín argues that modern science has become trapped in a framework that mistakes matter for the whole of reality. In this wide-ranging interview, Gómez-Marín challenges the foundations of materialism, defends the scientific study of near-death experiences, and calls for a new type of science grounded in mystery and a renewed sense of the sacred. He suggests that abandoning materialism could open the door to a deeper understanding of consciousness, death, and the purpose of human existence. Simon Custer: You are both a theoretical physicist and a neuroscientist, and you have also been fiercely critical of materialist theories of mind and consciousness. What do you think the ultimate nature of reality is?Àlex Gómez-Marín: I don't know what the ultimate nature of reality is, but what I try to first assess is whether the stories that they [mainstream science] have told us about it are right, or maybe whether there are other alternatives. That's why I've been a fierce critic of materialism. As a scientist, I realized that they had sold us this idea that to be a good scientist you also had to subscribe to many other -isms, like materialism, reductionism, and even secularism. And so first I think one needs to unmount these -isms, and then, as is happening today in consciousness studies, we have a huge landscape where there isn't only one game in town, the idea that matter is the only thing that really exists. But because we are studying the hard problem of consciousness, it may be the case that other views of reality, like idealism, or even dualism, or other theories like dual aspect monism... these are philosophical ideas that now, I think, have room in science to be taken seriously. How does something like materialism relate to dualism or idealism? What is materialism in the first place?Well, materialism is the philosophical position that matter is the only really ‘real’ thing in the universe. And I think that worked kind of well because science started 400 years ago and Galileo made that split, I call it the foundational wound. It was a great business move.He said, let's start doing science on that portion of reality that lends itself more easily to mathematization and measurement. So, for some reason, the solidity of this table or the movement of planets lend themselves very well to this foundational idea of science. But as time went on, 400 years later, we realized that we had forgotten the other side, which is what really matters.What really matters is pain, is love, is feelings, sensation, consciousness, which is very hard to define, but very intimate. We all know what it is. It's that thing that disappears when we go into deep sleep and comes back in the morning. SUGGESTED VIEWING On the edges of knowledge With Michael Shermer, Rupert Sheldrake, Güneş Taylor It's what it is like to be, as Nagel said. It's the feeling of being alive. So, materialism is good to study certain things, but then when it ossifies into this ideology and then is dressed like science, now it's preventing us from understanding these key questions that are really that everybody wants to know.Why are we here? Why do we feel reality? Where do we go when we die? And so we need other ways. We need pluralism. I'm only asking for having more options on the table and taking them seriously. Why does materialism fail to explain consciousness? For example, if you were to lobotomize me, I would not be a functional human being. What do you say to someone who might think that materialism adequately explains the mind?Well, here we could speak about different things. We could talk about physics or about neuroscience. I happen to have training with both.For instance, for neuroscientists, 99% of them, I'm not included in that portion, believe that the brain can only be a productive organ. It's an organ that somehow, somewhere, consciousness emerges. It's like a lamp. And then something happens, magic happens, and then consciousness emerges.That's the position you need to be if you're a materialist because if the only really ‘real’ thing is matter, then you need to say, just give us some more time and money and we'll figure out how mind emerges or is produced from matter. There are many philosophically sophisticated ways of criticizing this.Now there's another option, which is the brain as a permissive organ. This was said by William James more than 100 years ago.Now then the brain wouldn't be like this machine, like for instance, a heat engine whose smoke is consciousness, which is what we would have in the first big model, the productive model. But in the permissive model, the brain would be a kind of a filter. And so the brain would still have a very important role in consciousness, but it wouldn't be a productive role.It would be permissive, much like a filter or much like a prism which would receive light. And - I'm speaking metaphorically - it would receive the light of the mind and then it could reflect it and refract it.Now, with these two big options on the table, I think we can make progress into what I call the edges of consciousness, which are all these experiences, weird experiences that many people have, but we don't talk about enough, like near-death experiences, precognitive dreams, synchronicities. These experiences are very important for humans and they have a place in the permissive hypothesis and they are literally impossible in the productive hypothesis. So that's yet one more reason to explore alternatives to materialism. There may be anecdotal evidence for near-death experiences, but is there robust evidence that would be accepted by the majority of scientists who subscribe to the scientific method?Sure. And the plural of anecdotes, someone said, is data.And there's a lot of data. Actually, this year is the 50th anniversary, half a century, since Dr. Raymond Moody realized that we have two ears and one mouth and started listening to what his patients had to say about their experiences while they were clinically dead.The heart had stopped, breathing had stopped in these patients. These patients would come back and tell him these amazing stories that some people may say are hallucinations, but for the patients were hyper-real, like seeing light at the end of the tunnels, seeing deceased family members waiting for them, feeling bliss.___I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain.___And so he and others started taking them seriously and writing their accounts down. And then you can do a science based on that material of experience that people have. Now, on the more objective side, more recently people have started to measure what's going on in the brain when people are clinically dead and brought back. This has opened a proper field of study, which is near-death studies.Evidence is a difficult word, because sometimes people think that when you say evidence, this is just the final proof. Evidence is like in a jury. You bring testimony, you bring pieces of data that point in one direction or another.I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain. When brains are broken or shut off, there can still be mind going on. And that's revolutionary.That would entail that when we die, it's not game over, which, by the way, is the thesis of materialism. If consciousness survives, materialism dies. It's game over for materialism if something of us continues after we die. Do you think that there is mental continuity after death?Well, I think so, and I believe so, and I could also say I may have experienced it myself, because four years ago I had a near-death experience. I was in the hospital, I lost a lot of blood, and I saw those beings at the end of the tunnel, three beings, and there was yellow light. I was in a well, I was looking upwards, and I hadn't read about NDEs by then, but when I came back from this experience, I decided I would try to integrate this also in my professional life. Not just my personal life, of course, but my professional life as a physicist and as a neuroscientist. So I may have had the experience of glimpses of what an afterlife would be, and I'm not ashamed to say it in this way, and then one can do science of it, and then one can do philosophy of it.One can think about what -isms we were discussing, what views on reality would allow those experiences to be really ‘real,’ as opposed to, well, poor guy, the brain was kind of broken, it must have been a hallucination. Do you have a view about whether individuality or “the ego” persists after death, or whether we sort of merge into some sort of cosmic consciousness instead?I don't know, but my view would be along those lines you're suggesting. I think we could speak about a kind of universal mind, and then the problem is not how we emerge from matter, but how we fragment from a more holistic consciousness into these individual eddies and then when we die, this kind of dissipates.But I'm not sure. For instance, idealism would promote that view, but then what would survive of us after these eddies just vanish and become again the big Consciousness, I'm not sure what that would be. I don't know for sure, but I would tell you I believe something of us survives.And there are other lines of research, not just near-death experience, that can address this really hard question of survival. For instance, there are children who remember previous lives. This was studied by Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia for more than 50 years.___Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.___It's amazing research. He went all over the world, especially in the East, and collected all these case studies, all these stories. In plural, these were data of kids, very young age, who would describe up to 40 items that then he could go and verify.There was no internet. There was really no way the kid could know. Why would the kid say that when I was living in this other body and I was a woman and that's how my house would look like or that's how I would die, right? Again, there is evidence, not proof, but there's evidence not only that something weird and interesting is happening as we cross the threshold, but also when we come back to this life.Scientists should not be afraid of studying this, but they are because there's stigma. There's usually stigma upon the enigma, and this is so unfortunate. And one of the reasons is because of the ideology of materialism, because those things cannot be possible. What is wrong with the politics of science such that they have generated this stigma?So many things. Science is a human activity to begin with.So it falls prey to all our passions and ego and greed. That's one thing. Science is a job for the good and for the bad.You need to get a salary. You need to get grants. Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.And then, we didn't have time to unpack this, but science for many years become entangled, as I was suggesting before, to other -isms, materialism, secularism. So anything that smells like the afterlife, people may think has to do with God, and then they freak out.Anything that suggests that there's something about the mind that may not need a physical material substrate to exist, it smells like non-materialism. So, all these -isms are ideologically blocking that kind of research, and then there are all these sociopolitical constraints as to what should be studied and what shouldn't be studied.I call it the backstage of science. Sometimes we scientists or science communicators seem to speak as if the data is the only thing that matters. We say, well, data and theory.But then there's a third leg of this stool, which is all the politics that goes behind the scenes. And we often don't speak about this, and it's quite vicious and petty, and it's very real. Why is materialism so attractive to most scientists?Well, an easy answer is because we've grown up with it.It's what the educational system promotes, and that's what you hear when you go to university. So it's like growing in a culture. It feels like the air in which you breathe.So it's very hard to begin with to detect, well, maybe there's another alternative. Maybe there are other ways of doing science, other environments in which one could do science. That's one reason.And other reasons maybe are more profound, and I'm not qualified to explain them, but I could say, looking at this 400-year history of science, since it started around 1623 with Galileo's book The Assayer, that science went and coupled with all what's going on in the West.And so the fall of religion, you could say, and science presented us this new alternative that then could be coupled very well with other -isms, and this idea of growth, and then science losing its good twin brother, which was philosophy. There's a whole natural history of science starting as philosophy, kind of emancipating or breaking out from philosophy, and then marrying technology, and then marrying other social systems.From that point of view, materialism is a very convenient idea to propose. There were attempts, like the German idealists tried to do a more romantic science. But no, the idea prevailed, like Francis Bacon said: You should pursue nature through all her corners, he said, and make her spill her secrets.Our attitude towards nature in the science that dominates is very much reflecting how we treat nature in our society, in our culture, like a resource to extract secrets by force and then dominate it. How is materialism related to the notions of growth and progress? What's wrong with having a productive citizenry?This is another very interesting and very difficult question to answer.But there's this recent book coming out by Paul Kingsnorth. In it, he explains this idea of the machine and this idea of progress. And this, again, this conflation of more is better, of we need to go forward always, and convincing us that the way to do that is to continually extract more from nature. But because we don't have the religious context anymore, because God is dead, then what do we have? We have what we can do as humans with our own gadgets.It's kind of the story of the Promethean fire. We will just build anything to make ourselves God.A good example today is transhumanism. Transhumanism is this pseudo-religion dressed in technoscientific language whose goal is very religious. They promise immortality, they promise redemption, they promise transformation of the entire natural world, but it's done by human means through technology. Are you suggesting that we can't have ethics without religion?Well, we should have ethics with or without religion. That's another pruning that has happened in science. We say, forget about aesthetics, although some physicists still think that beautiful means probably true, and forget about politics. We pretend there's no backstage of science, and even let's forget about ethics.___Science needs to be in the service of mankind.___Scientists, when they become more like engineers, they're just thinking how to make things work so that they can go to the moon, go to Mars, make machines that think, but they don't think whether that's a good idea.And also consider metaphysics. Many scientists for a long time pretended, and maybe that comes from the stream of positivisms, that really one doesn't need metaphysics at all, except that materialism is always the metaphysics running the system.You see, it's not just ethics. It's the pruning of all of these, you could say, five main legs of philosophy that just makes a kind of unconscious science, a science that doesn't really know what it's doing. It's doing it very well locally, but it just doesn't know what it's doing globally. Do you think science has to have an ultimate vision and purpose behind it for it to be effective or for it to be meaningful and transformative?Yes, a way I would say that is that science needs to be in the service of mankind. And it hasn't been that. And we can see it through, you know, when we discovered the secrets of the atom, and all of a sudden, the Manhattan Project, and then we create nuclear weapons.And now we're trying to crack how machines may think, and now we're creating this mess, right? So science needs to be in service of mankind, not in service of a few ideas that maybe want to make more money or just dominate upon nature. What about planes, trains, automobiles, and modern medicine? Hasn't science served mankind by helping us develop those technologies?Yes and no. I see where you're going, and it's fair.I came here by plane, and it's a blessing. When I almost died, the surgeons did their job, and they saved my life. But these two forced choices between Luddites and Silicon Valley types, I think, of course, it's a false dichotomy.Progress, in a way, it's good, but we often don't speak about the dark side of the moon. We say the great things that progress has brought, and we don't speak about the disasters, the side effects that it has come with, and the same when we promise new technologies. We tend to think that any technology is great, that email is going to save us so much time because we don't need to write letters and send them anymore.Is that true? I spend so many hours a week writing emails. Let's just say there are great things about it and bad things about it. People like Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, for example, argue that we've made moral progress over time because of the Enlightenment. Do you think that's totally wrong-headed?I think he's emphasizing a side of the moon, and he does that very well, and you can find tons of plots where there's a slope going up and say it's great. But I think he should also tell the not-so-friendly story.But if your ideology is just to resist and continue to explain that the Enlightenment is the best thing ever and reason is the best thing ever… this feels to me like you're worshipping these abstractions.I'm very critical of it and also of these, again, science communicators and scientists that say, Oh, science says, in the name of science, experts say. It's like, come on, let's be careful because we can shoot ourselves in the foot by putting forth to the people an image of science that we know is not really true. Recently there's been a resurgence of spirituality and of people who say that they're spiritual but not religious, especially in the United States. If materialism is going away, what is going to fill that gap? Are we going to return to traditional religion? Do you see that being connected with the rise of the political right?I'm not a fortune teller, so I don't know what's going to happen. But, yeah, we could say we're in this post-materialist age and even post-secular age. One cannot come back to the past, but maybe just to contact with the roots is a good idea.What do I mean by that? I think we need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method. We need to do so in a culture where we realize humans cannot thrive in a vacuum where there's this idea that the sacred has to be removed.Now, how do we do that without bringing in back all the vices of religion? I don't know. I'm from a Catholic country.Here we are in England, so there are differences and interreligious dialogue has always been a challenge. But I think maybe a way of putting it is: after all these conflicts and branchings I was quickly alluding to, science from philosophy and then also from religion, now there's a time of reconciliation perhaps and maybe debates in the proper sense, like exchange of ideas in service of learning and getting into something higher than both poles. We need science to talk to religious people and it's interesting when people say they're spiritual and not religious.I think this is just a way of saying, no, I don't want to go back, I want to go forward. But at the end of the day, religions have offered us practices and grounding that we now desperately need. Everybody can and should just meditate or pray or do whatever they want, but we're in a crisis and it's time for reconciliation. What do you say to critics that say you are merely projecting our need for meaning onto a fundamentally indifferent universe?Yeah, I know that the typical science communicator says something like this. But we're not projecting. Human beings feed on meaning.It's the other way around. If you're a materialist, because the only thing that there is is matter, all that comes next, free will, consciousness, meaning, this is a kind of illusion that we need to explain.They're just craving for meaning, but there isn't really for them. I would also like to remind my materialist friends that for decades, if not centuries, they've said in the name of science, we know that this and this and this doesn't really exist. I think now they sense they're forced to say, well, actually, we don't know. We've been saying, for instance, that there's nothing after you die, and now probably they need to admit that they don't know the answer.___We need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method.___So it's a moment to open up possibilities and also to gently but fiercely critique these claims that I think harm society. If you say in the name of science, get on with it, when your father dies, you'll never see him again. Well, what the F do you know about it? You haven't studied the literature, you haven't had any of those experiences, and basically what you're doing is you're just doing marketing on ideology. This needs to stop. Do you think that it's scarier for some people to entertain the thought that there might be life after death, compared to a materialist worldview where you just die, given that there might be consequences for unsavory behaviour?Well, death and dying is scary. It's maybe the ultimate ending. It's a limit on life, and when we're in this conquest mode, we don't like limits.And it also has, there's a shockwave backwards, so I think if you change your notion of what death is or may be, you live differently. It also has consequences, as you're saying, for the future because this is not our only goal here and we come back in whatever form. And again, different religions would say different things. I the East, they are more happy with the idea of reincarnation, and here in the West, there are other preferences. But in any case, it changes how we live, and that's really what matters.It's not about just projecting or imagining what we'll be after, but how we live now and also how we treat those who are dying. So it goes from the individual to the families, to the hospitals.Now in the near-death research I do, this has ramifications at all these levels, all the way to society.But our society is thanatophobic. It has a phobia of death. We don't want to hear about death, and this is another thing we need to put on the table and be willing to talk about it. Do you think that we might get closer to answering ultimate questions like why is there anything at all if we jettison materialism?That’s an excellent question, Simon. Two things: we should stop treating reality, I believe, as a great sudoku, as an enigma, as something that with intelligence, money, and time that we will crack and instead treat reality more like a mystery. And what you do for in front of a mystery is not to be the clever guy in a class and say “I’ll solve you” but more like “I will bow and you will transform me.”I know this sounds a bit like a scientist speaking like a mystic. But I think this reorientation is needed. In the end, we won’t crack the big questions, but they will transform us. If we free ourselves from this prison of materialism, the way we will explore these questions will be freer, more creative, and in service of mankind. Do you think exploring mystery is the reason why we are here?I think we are here because, and this pseudo-theological argument I’m making off the cuff, But the One, the Absolute, if there is such a thing, had everything except limitation. We are that absolute experiencing that contingency. It’s like an act of divine proprioception. It’s a wonderful adventure, it’s just incredible to be alive. Perhaps we have forgotten why we are here and the whole point is to experience the flesh.Let me end by saying this. I criticize materialism harshly. I bang on this dead horse, because I think it’s dead. But matter is a great mystery. So maybe my invitation is as follows: hey materialist friends, come here, let’s work on materialism 2.0! Consciousness is a mystery, but matter is also a mystery. The fact that we can have an intersubjective experience consensus, the fact that we can apply mathematics, that we can measure things... the physical world we take for granted, but it is a great mystery too.Maybe that’s related to your last question: why are we here? Why did spirit decide to incarnate? Being in the flesh may be a great thing if spirit decided to do so.Àlex Gómez-Marín, thank you very much.My pleasure.
Cities put science in the spotlight
When three European cities launch an initiative next year to boost scientific excellence and collaboration, much of the action is likely to take place in public spaces rather than in the laboratory.That is welcome news for Ana Marušić. A medical doctor and professor at the University of Split Medical School in Croatia, Marušić champions close connections between “town and gown” to encourage citizen involvement in research, raise public health awareness and ignite young people’s interest in science. “Responsible research and innovation cannot be done in an ivory tower, answering only the questions that are relevant for scientists,” explains Marušić, who chairs the Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health and leads the Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. “The role of the university is to be a medium for transferring new discoveries in science to society, but also to listen to society about what is important and what is needed.”Three cities united by scienceMarušić’s efforts stand to gain traction through Science Comes to Town (SCTT), a new European project to highlight science’s role in society and strengthen cross-border collaboration in research, innovation and sustainability. With funding from the European Commission, three cities—Split, Brest (in France) and Kiel (in Germany)—plan more than 1,000 public events, workshops and competitions for citizens of all ages, researchers, businesses and policymakers. The year-long project kicks off in Spilt on 20 January with a conference involving partner institutions, community representatives and European policymakers. The three cities may be geographically far apart, but they share much in common. All are located on coasts and are home to top regional research institutions that are part of SCTT. Among the project's partners, the University of Western Brittany in Brest, Kiel University and the University of Split belong to the SEA-EU university alliance, uniting nine European coastal academic institutions to advance research, student exchanges and sustainable development. “These universities have a very strong connection between gown and town,” explains Marušić, who is one of Split’s SCTT ambassadors. “It's very important that these universities are there for the community so that we can learn from each other and grow together.”Tackling Europe’s STEM shortagesSCTT will also reinforce efforts to address Europe’s widening gap in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Studies show that nearly eight out of ten small- and medium-sized businesses cannot find enough workers with the skills required in advanced computing and artificial intelligence (AI)—hindering initiatives to boost European innovation and competitiveness. In healthcare, the European Commission has estimated a shortfall in medical professionals of 1.2 million, due to fewer young people joining the field and an ageing population that needs more care.Strengthening knowledge and dialogue can also help build trust between scientists and the public at time when disruptive technologies are reshaping research and clinical practice, but are also sparking questions about ethics and accuracy. With experience in the classroom and in clinical epidemiology—a discipline involving monitoring and controlling public health problems—Marušić sees the potential risks of over-reliance on AI and chatbot answers for both research and learning. “AI is a very good tool, but one has to be very critical about it,” she adds. “Delegating brain activities will definitely diminish your neural capacities because you are not developing the circuitry that is important for higher-level cognitive engagement.” She stresses the importance of critical thinking and encourages students to use AI as a researcher’s tool to reinforce rather than supplant human discretion and brainpower.The power of outreachSplit’s experience in bringing scientists and the public together has provided a platform for discussing research ethics and explaining science in simple terms. Local efforts to expand health literacy and awareness have helped reduce cardiovascular disease among women, according to Marušić’s research. The city’s university also hosts events to introduce schoolchildren to science, using hands-on experiments to spark curiosity.Marušić’s own love of science began with an interest in studying molecular biology. “But my parents told me, why don't you study medicine?” she recalls. “I said, OK, why not? And that was the best decision that I made.” Marušić is not a practicing physician, but teaches anatomy and public health. She also co-edits ST-OPEN, an overlay university journal that works on capacity building for research publishing among students and their supervisors. Balancing teaching, research and editorial work, she is a strong advocate for medical studies, urging high school students to consider medicine “because later on it gives you a really wide perspective about human life and about society” as well as many career opportunities.As SCTT prepares to bring science into daily life in 2026, Marušić hopes that it will build permanent bridges between scientists and citizens across Europe. “We can be a showcase for making collaboration with the community stronger to share knowledge, attract young talent and integrate critical and scientific thinking into everyday life,” she explains, adding that "collaborating with businesses to improve cities and communities is also an important aspect of this project."Science|Business, which connects policymakers, academics and industry through its news reporting, analysis and events, is an SCTT partner.